{"took":159,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":95,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6613487","_score":16.628563,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I refinanced with Rocket Mortgage and they admittedly miscalculated a payoff amount and entered the wrong payoff on my closing disclosure. They sent a payoff to my existing mortgage company that was roughly {$700.00} short and every day interest is accruing on that remaining balance. Rocket Mortgage wants me to be solely responsible for their error in incorrectly entering a payoff amount on my closing disclosure when they had the correct payoff amount from my former mortgage company the whole time. They are saying that the compliance agreement I signed at closing protects them from any liability in errors they make or for money they fail collect at closing. However the agreement does not cover my specific situation, nor does it itemize incorrectly disclosed figures on the closing disclosure. Rocket mortgage offered to pay some of the payoff shortage ( less than half ) but this is not an error that I should be responsible for. I read over my closing disclosure and trusted that it was accurate. I trusted Rocket Mortgage to handle my refinance with care ; however, I am extremely disappointed and worried about the consumer harm I will experience if they do not correct this issue. Interest is accruing daily and this is resulting in a larger remaining balance on the mortgage that I refinanced through Rocket Mortgage.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-02-24T18:01:10.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"368XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6613487","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Rocket Mortgage, LLC","date_received":"2023-02-24T17:40:12.000Z","state":"AL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Rocket Mortgage wants me to be solely responsible for their error in incorrectly entering a payoff amount on my <em>closing</em> disclosure when they had the correct payoff amount from my former mortgage company the whole time. They are saying that the <em>compliance</em> agreement I <em>signed</em> at <em>closing</em> <em>protects</em> <em>them</em> from any liability in errors they make or for money they fail collect at <em>closing</em>."],"issue":["<em>Closing</em> on a mortgage"]},"sort":[16.628563,"6613487"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4350181","_score":12.27617,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I rescinded a my mortgage loan after the lender refused to remedy material disclosures ( the fees associated with my mortgage XXXX they above what the law allows, in the timeframe allowed to them by law. \nThere were several Truth In Lending Act violations regarding the material disclosures associated with my mortgage.\n\nThese material disclosures were in sections A and B of both the Loan Estimate ( s ) and the Closing Disclosure ( s ).\n\nThe Truth In Lending Act requires a lender review and cure all tolerance violations within 60 days of consummation of the loan. Further, law requires the lender cure any Truth In Lending Act tolerance violations prior to the borrower bringing it to their attention. \nThis lender 's first tolerance cure check, left uncashed, was issued 492 days after consummation of the transaction, as defined by signing of the binding agreement ( s ). \nThis lender 's second tolerance cure check, left uncashed, was issued 787 days after the consummation of the transaction, as defined by signing of the binding agreement ( s ). \nI rescinded the loan after the lender 's first unlawful cure attempt and before their second unlawful cure attempt. \nThere is no mortgage, yet this lender has filed for foreclosure on my home with the intent to sell it. The lender did not unwind the transaction, rather they hired a law firm to entice me into a settlement agreement. When that failed, they hired another law firm to foreclose on my home. \nBoth law firms were advised of the rescission delivered to this lender in XX/XX/XXXX. \nIt is unlawful to collect on a debt that doesn't exist. \nThis is my 3rd complaint to the CFBP about this lender, in each phase of the progression of the issue. Once complaining about the origination the loan. The second complained about servicing of the loan. And finally this last complaint about collecting a debt that does not exist. I know the Truth In Lending Act very well. I know the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act very well. I know the Truth In Lending Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Integrated Disclosure ( TRID ) rules very well. And, while this transaction was originated in the Optional Compliance phase between the XXXX implementation and XXXX compliance dates, the material disclosures would have been out of compliance for both. \nThis final straw of recording a default letter on my home, and attempting to move forward with a non-judicial foreclosure, is CFPB complaint worthy. I will have to take them to court for all of this and am nearly ready to file in Federal Court. \nIt is a shame that, as a consumer, I have taken every step available within these agencies that have been set up to \" Protect '' consumers. Both on the State Level as well as the National Level.\n\nNext will be Federal Court and filing a complaint with my local Attorney General. \n\nTo the Lender : You have been given EVERY opportunity to do the right thing. You have not acted in good faith and are the reason that portals like this one even exist. Please take a moment to reflect and make the lawful decision this time.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-05-04T21:58:22.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"84094","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4350181","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"VERITAS FUNDING, LLC","date_received":"2021-05-04T21:23:03.000Z","state":"UT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Seized or attempted to seize your property"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["And, while this transaction was originated in the Optional <em>Compliance</em> phase between the XXXX implementation and XXXX <em>compliance</em> dates, the material disclosures would have been out of <em>compliance</em> for both. \nThis final straw of recording a default letter on my home, and attempting to move forward with a non-judicial foreclosure, is CFPB complaint worthy. I will have to take <em>them</em> to court for all of this and am nearly ready to file in Federal Court."]},"sort":[12.27617,"4350181"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"1891071","_score":11.985827,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"My mortgage is with Nationstar Mortgage Company. Upon closing, I signed a PMI Disclosure form saying that I have the right to request PMI removal at 80 % LTV, and that it will be automatically terminated at 78 % LTV. Upon trying to clarify these terms with Nationstar, I 've been told by them that I can not get PMI removed until my loan is at 75 % LTV since it is less than XXXX years old. I have gone back and forth with them several times ( and have produced the signed PMI disclosure form for their review ) and have maintained that if that were the case, then it would 've been disclosed on the form along with all of the other disclosures The form simply stated that I have the right to request PMI removal at 80 % ( not 75 %, not 75 % within a certain timeframe ... 80 % ) and while there are some loans that require different terms for cancellation, my loan is not XXXX of them. I requested to be transferred to their legal department and was told by a rep that \" they do n't have a legal department ''. I am not gaining any traction with Nationstar - responses are not timely, intelligent, knowledgeable or helpful. The responses I 've received from their Customer Service Department do not address my questions, have not produced any signed agreements ( between myself and them ) or documentation that back up their claims and often are scattered with grammatical errors combined with poor professionalism which make me question the competence of the Customer Service \" Specialists '' handling these mortgages altogether. I requested to be transferred out of the Customer Service Department to a superior in the company who I could escalate a complaint to and the Customer Service Rep refused to give me any contact information. At the advice of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - Banking Division I escalated the matter and wrote directly to the Compliance Officer at Nationstar Mortgage, XXXX XXXX, and attached all of my correspondence, documentation and expressed my frustration & stress in dealing with the Customer Service Specialists who have not been adequately addressing the situation. He simply forwarded my letter BACK to the Customer Service Department and I received a letter back from them saying ( again ) that they wo n't remove it until 75 %. Their PMI Cancellation Form is extremely vague and says that while I can request removal it is not guaranteed ( and seems to be at their discretion, at the end of the day ). I have not applied for cancellation yet as my home is not yet at 80 % LTV, but I suspect it will be upon a new appraisal. I am trying to get my ducks in a row for when that time comes and Nationstar, I feel, is violating my rights as a banking consumer and is not appropriately responding to my multiple attempts at sorting this out. It was always my understanding that the Homeowners Protection XXXX of 1998 was enacted specifically to protect consumers from banks doing exactly this. I am at my wits end and do n't know how else to proceed. I will attach my signed PMI Disclosure form, and multiple ( dated ) correspondences to and from Nationstar as well as my reference log of activity.","date_sent_to_company":"2016-04-21T16:04:24.000Z","issue":"Loan servicing, payments, escrow account","sub_product":"Conventional fixed mortgage","zip_code":"028XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"1891071","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC","date_received":"2016-04-21T16:04:23.000Z","state":"RI","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Upon <em>closing</em>, I <em>signed</em> a PMI Disclosure form saying that I have the right to request PMI removal at 80 % LTV, and that it will be automatically terminated at 78 % LTV. Upon trying to clarify these terms with Nationstar, I 've been told by <em>them</em> that I can not get PMI removed until my loan is at 75 % LTV since it is less than XXXX years old."]},"sort":[11.985827,"1891071"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6504437","_score":11.704248,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"As per standard, secure business practices and as posted on Ally 's website, I sent a signed, written account closure request via USPS to Ally on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX in response to a notice received from them via email that same day stating that a phone number would be required for security verification purposes to access my accounts going forward ; email would no longer be offered as an option for account authentication. I do not consent to the use of my phone number for security verification purposes or to my calls being recorded or voiceprint captured, therefore I immediately requested the closure of my two Ally accounts without complaint. \n\nThis request was received by Ally on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX per USPS tracking after being re-routed to a different zip code. This prompted me to send via USPS a second signed, written closure request to the customer correspondence address as given on Ally 's website. Ally did not process my first request or acknowledge it until XXXX XX/XX/XXXX and offered only contradictory information and no instructions/specific requirements regarding the process for closing the accounts at that time. When I challenged the information I was given and asked for explanations, I was ignored and forced to submit a third account closure request via email to Ally on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. This third request was not acknowledged until XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. I appreciate part of the delay was due to the holidays which is XXXX reason why I didn't delay in submitting the third request, but it was a *third* request at this point. ( The second signed, written closure request was received by Ally on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX per USPS tracking. ) I received helpful, thorough information at that time from an Ally representative and was pleased to note I had already begun exercising the necessary steps to get the accounts in compliance for closure. On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, my accounts were in compliance for closure ( zeroed-out and fees paid ) and I notified the Ally representative of this and reiterated the need for the accounts to be closed immediately and written confirmation of closure to be remitted. My accounts, however, were not closed and I received no word from Ally until XXXX XX/XX/XXXX at which time the representative informed me that between the time I notified Ally of my accounts being in compliance and the time at which they chose to acknowledge that, interest had accrued and must be withdrawn before the accounts could be closed. By this time, the phone number requirement had been put in place so I could no longer access my Ally accounts to make the withdrawal. I was told the amounts could be written off but that write-off requests could only be handled verbally by phone. I explained, once again, phone was not an option and asked for the documentation detailing this requirement. This information has not been received as of the time of this writing. \n\nAt no time has Ally offered to simply mail a check for the credit balance ( s ) as is customary with most bank account closures in my experience. I also noted that it was due to Ally 's delay that interest had been able to accrue on accounts that had otherwise been compliant for closure. ( Ally 's case generator states representatives will respond within 1-2 business days. I received no response or acknowledgement of compliance from Ally for 5 business days including XXXX XXXX. ) After numerous requests for documentation and explanations regarding their insistence this was for \" security purposes '', no one has offered an explanation for how it is more secure or in the client 's best interest for Ally to ignore signed, written requests for account closure, nor has Ally acknowledged its delays in reponding to these requests, nor has it taken accountability for the contradictory information relayed by its agents, sometimes unsigned.\n\nI have offered to mail to them a notarized verification of identity to the specific address of someone who would receive it and process my account ( XXXX ) closure. Given the delays I've already experienced and the fact that my initial closure request was re-routed, I would hope that Ally might understand and even appreciate why I would only mail such a document directly to a specific, authorized individual at Ally. \n\nTo date, my accounts remain open while I am shut-out of accessing them. This certainly does not speak to my security. I feel Ally has engaged in stalling tactics in order to XXXX me into capturing my phone number via Caller ID and/or my voiceprint which I have stated repeatedly I do not consent to. I acted in good faith in requesting my accounts be closed, in writing, via certified mail, the very day that I received notice on XX/XX/XXXX of the upcoming phone requirement from Ally. In return, Ally refuses to let me protect my own personal information, to act in my best interest in respecting my need to conduct business with an online-only entity in writing, to acknowledge my concerns, to put me in contact with someone at Ally with whom I can work with directly as I've requested multiple times, and continues to hold my PII hostage and deny me access to my accounts or close them as requested over a month ago. This puts me at risk for identity theft and worse since my credit union information is tied to my Ally accounts. \n\nHad Ally closed my accounts when and as requested without apparent misinformation or delay, there would've been no issues and we'd have concluded our business on good terms. Ally definitely has not earned enough of my trust to receive any more information from me than that which it already possesses, and it is clear they are simply stalling in order to force me to cave out of frustration. If they can open and maintain my accounts, including the numerous monetary transactions through my credit union over the life of the accounts, with the information they already have, they can close the accounts with that same information, as well.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-01-31T00:17:31.000Z","issue":"Closing an account","sub_product":"Other banking product or service","zip_code":"870XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6504437","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ALLY FINANCIAL INC.","date_received":"2023-01-31T00:10:13.000Z","state":"NM","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Can't close your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In return, Ally refuses to let me <em>protect</em> my own personal information, to act in my best interest in respecting my need to conduct business with an online-only entity in writing, to acknowledge my concerns, to put me in contact with someone at Ally with whom I can work with directly as I've requested multiple times, and continues to hold my PII hostage and deny me access to my accounts or <em>close</em> <em>them</em> as requested over a month ago."],"issue":["<em>Closing</em> an account"],"sub_issue":["Can't <em>close</em> your account"]},"sort":[11.704248,"6504437"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3361054","_score":11.407394,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/2018, I received a mortgage pre-approval letter from VanDyk Mortgage Corporation for {$270000.00}. The actual final sales price of my home was {$470000.00}. With closing cost/etc., I needed {$210000.00} to close, which I had in cash in my bank account. I was set to close on XX/XX/2018. ( See Documents 1A :  Pre-approval letter ; Documents 1B-1K : XXXX XXXX XXXX Statements for XX/XX/2018 & XX/XX/2018 ; Documents 1L-1N : Sources of funds, coinciding with deposits to XXXX XXXX XXXX account in XXXX & XXXX ; Document 7A : Settlement Statement ). \n\nXX/XX/2018, my realtor called to see if I had heard from my loan officer, as she had not. She was concerned because closing was only five days away. I had not heard from him so we both agreed to try to reach him. XX/XX/XXXX, I spoke with the loan officer, who said the closing was not on his calendar. He told the realtor the same thing. The loan officer rushed my file to the underwriter, who approved me for a mortgage of {$150000.00}, substantially lower than the {$270000.00} stated on the original pre-approval letter. \n\nI asked the loan officer how I could be approved for two substantially different loan amounts using the exact same information. Without qualifying his statement, he said that I had made errors in reporting my income, a claim he could not substantiate, but said if I wanted the $ XXXX loan I needed to come up with additional monthly income of {$1800.00}. I told him I only had my 401K, which was included in the documentation I had provided for the initial $ XXXX pre-approval. He told me to call my 401K plan administrator and ask them to set-up a monthly distribution of {$1800.00} and that would suffice. I called the plan administrator and they said no such option exists. They said I could pull down {$1800.00} per month at my own discretion. The underwriter said that would not qualify as monthly income. For that reason, the XX/XX/XXXX closing had to be cancelled. \n\nThe Purchase and Sales Agreement, which I signed, imposed a closing cancellation fee of {$150.00} per day until the loan closed. As well, I was at risk of losing my earnest and options money, totaling over $ XXXX, if I couldnt come up with the additional money to close my loan. ( See Doc 2A-2N : Purchase & Sales Agreement ; Doc 3A & 3B : Earnest/Options Money ; Doc 4A-4D ). \nAlthough not formally part of the purchase agreement, I was financially obligated to XXXX XXXX, with whom I had signed an agreement to put in a pool and complete concrete and tile work in my courtyard. The total cost was {$44000.00} with a non-refundable down-payment of {$3000.00}. ( See Documents 4E and 4F : Contract and copy of cancelled check ). \nWith the loan amount reduced to $ XXXX, I now needed {$300000.00} to close my loan. Based on the initial approved amount of $ XXXX, I would have only needed {$210000.00}. The reduced loan amount created a cash shortfall of almost $ XXXX. To allow time to secure the shortfall, my realtor worked with the loan officer and builder ( seller ) to get the closing date moved to XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/2018, I withdrew $ XXXX from my XXXX XXXX 401K to cover the shortfall. ( See Documents 6A/6B :  Itemized Fee Worksheet ; Documents 6C-6G : XXXX XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/2018 bank statement ). \n\nXX/XX/2018 ( XXXX XXXX ), I received a text from the loan officer stating that I was cleared to close. I responded, \" So there is nothing more that I need to do, such as signing updated docs, etc.? \". The loan officer responded, \" No we are completed ''. Later the same day at XXXX XXXX, I received notice from the loan officer that VanDyk Compliance informed him that I had not eSigned the documents they sent me XX/XX/XXXX, which were the documents that had not been updated, which was the reason I sought clarification in the XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) text. I specifically asked if I needed to sign updated docs or do anything else. The loan officer replied, No, we are completed. ( See Docs 5E 5G : Notification of loan clearance ; Docs 5A-5D : Timeline that led to cancellation ). \n\nThat error, as well as the required 3-Day Right of Rescission, forced the cancellation of the XX/XX/XXXX closing. This was the second time the closing date had to be cancelled due to lender error and/or negligence. As a result, I stood to lose, at minimum, $ XXXX ( {$35000.00} in earnest & options + {$3000.00} in down-payment for the pool + {$150.00} per day in delayed closing fees ) if I didnt purchase the house. \n\nFurther, the cancelled closing also posed a new challenge. My apartment lease was expiring in XX/XX/2018. \n\nNever once did the loan officer apologize or admit to any wrongdoing for the ongoing and extremely costly mistakes he made at my expense. In fact, he blamed me for both cancelled closings and even became vile, returning calls at his convenience, as well as falsely accusing my realtor and I of calling him out of him name. It was a devastating experience. No reasonable person would continue to do business with or expose his or herself to any further calamity with such a lender. For the stated reasons, as well as an expiring rental lease, I reluctantly pulled another {$150000.00} from my 401K to close on my home. This would afford me to protect all the assets I stood to lose and do a cash closing. ( See Document 6C-6G : XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2018 bank statement ). \n\nDue to the loan officers errors, I pulled {$360000.00} from my 401K. Based on the initial pre-approved loan amount of $ XXXX, I would not have had to withdraw any funds from my 401K. I finally did a 100 % cash closing XX/XX/XXXX. ( See Documents 6C-6G : XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/2018 bank statement ; Document 7A : Settlement Statement ). \n\nAs a result of having to draw down {$360000.00} from my 401K, my 2018 annual income increased XXXX, as did my tax burden. For 2018 I paid a total of {$130000.00} in income taxes ( three-times my annual income of $ XXXX ) for monies withdrawn from my 401K. $ XXXX was withheld by the plan administrator and I paid an additional $ XXXX when I filed my 2018 tax returns. ( See Documents 8A-8B : Forms 1099-R ; Document 8C-8D :  Additional 2018 taxes paid ). \n\nI sought properties and signed a purchase agreement based on a loan amount of $ XXXX for which the lender said I was qualified. I am seeking full financial restitution for the adverse monetary tax impact resulting from lender errors, as well as any and all remedies for which I might be entitled by law.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-08-31T15:29:02.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"30188","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3361054","timely":"No","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"VANDYK MORTGAGE CORPORATION","date_received":"2019-08-31T14:55:39.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company believes the complaint is the result of a misunderstanding","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I responded, \" So there is nothing more that I need to do, such as <em>signing</em> updated docs, etc.? \". The loan officer responded, \" No we are completed ''. Later the same day at XXXX XXXX, I received notice from the loan officer that VanDyk <em>Compliance</em> informed him that I had not e<em>Signed</em> the documents they sent me XX/XX/XXXX, which were the documents that had not been updated, which was the reason I sought clarification in the XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) text."],"issue":["<em>Closing</em> on a mortgage"]},"sort":[11.407394,"3361054"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19043234","_score":11.222387,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"The following was sent to XXXX -- -- - XX/XX/year> - Truist was informed that a phone scam was performed by someone impersonating a Police Officer. At this point I was told by an Truist customer services agent that I needed to let the funds settle and to call back when it is complete. In a distraught and vulnerable state I agreed unawareif this is Truist 's documented procedure. The funds were pending for multiple days then settlement posted, backdated to XX/XX/year>. Impersonating a Police Officer is a state felony according toStatute : O.C.G.A. 16-10-23. \n\nAt this point it is unclear if Truist actually attempted to stop payment or recover funds. \n\nXX/XX/year> - Full documentation of the scam was emailed to XXXX containing notes, a narrative, and potential suspect. \n\nXX/XX/year> - The police case number was provided along with a resend of the documented information of the scam. Again, someone is impersonating a Police Officer.The call came in from what my phone stated as the XXXX XXXX ' XXXX XXXX. \n\nXX/XX/year> - The case mentioned above was closed without proper communication to me. The details of the fraud analyst were explained me that simply \" because the funds were not successfully recovered '' and only that reason, the dispute claim was denied. \n\nXX/XX/year> - I received a notification from Truist that additional documents were required along with an signed affidavit requested by XXXX of what happened. This was promptly emailed back at XXXXXXXX XXXX  EST. \n\nNo further communication from Truist was ever peroemed to me to confrim receipt. \n\nXX/XX/year> -- I called to where a Truist representative informed me they did not receive the XXXX affidavit, which is untrue. I have proof of this. Being such I resent the XXXX Affidavit. \n\nXX/XX/year> - I again called Truist and a representative could not confirm or deny receipt of the document. \n\nThere is an investigative discrepancy between the sending request for additional documentation, the XXXX affidavit, and the time Truist mailed out the request for it. I received the letter via USPS postal mail on XX/XX/year>, Assuming processing time, transit time, and receipt, this letter was sent out prior to closing the case on XX/XX/year>. Being such, the claim was closed out prior to receiving additional signed affidavit and a resend of supporting documentation. This is unaaceptable in terms of an investigation. Why would you close out a dispute claim beforereceiving the requested documentation? This does not appear to be correct investigative procedure. \n\nBeing that no traction has been made to reopen the case, I am forced to contact the Regulatory Body, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to notify them of this potential compliance issue and poor investigative process. Additionally, a copy of this will be emailed to local media. \n\nThus, Regulation E of Regulatory Law is intended to protect me from being intimidated and coerced by an individual impersonating a Police Officer. As such, this transfer of {$3000.00} is \" unauthorized '' under 12 CFR 1005.2 ( m ) .The Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( Regulation E ). \n\nI am appealing and request the investigation continue. I request that this be provided to a capable analyst, your corporate compliance team, and legal counsel. A copy of this email will be sent to the State of Georgia 's Attorney General, local media, and the CFPB.\n\nAll communication regarding this appeal is to be performed via email to establish a complete audit trail. \n\n- XXXX XXXX -- -- end email -- - Police report case number is : XXXX. Report was also filed with the FBI via IC3.gov","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-27T18:15:59.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"30030","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19043234","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2026-01-27T17:56:22.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Being that no traction has been made to reopen the case, I am forced to contact the Regulatory Body, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to notify <em>them</em> of this potential <em>compliance</em> issue and poor investigative process. Additionally, a copy of this will be emailed to local media. \n\nThus, Regulation E of Regulatory Law is intended to <em>protect</em> me from being intimidated and coerced by an individual impersonating a Police Officer."]},"sort":[11.222387,"19043234"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21211205","_score":11.189812,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"LVNV Account # XXXX I am formally rejecting Resurgent Capital Services response and demand the CFPB take further action. Their response is a deliberate deflection that violates my consumer rights under federal law. \nSPECIFIC VIOLATIONS AND FAILURES : 1. WILLFUL REFUSAL TO VALIDATE DEBT ( FDCPA 809 ) : Resurgent openly admitted they will not provide a purchase and sale agreement. This is not optional I have a federal right to know who legally owns this debt and to see proof of that ownership. Their refusal is a direct violation of my debt validation rights and should be treated as such.\n\n2. UNVERIFIED CREDIT REPORTING ( FCRA 623 ) : Resurgent claims this account is being reported accurately and as disputed but provided ZERO documentation to support this claim. Furnishing inaccurate or unverified information to credit bureaus is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. I am demanding the CFPB require them to prove compliance.\n\n3. NO CHAIN OF TITLE PROVIDED : LVNV Funding LLC claims ownership of a WebBank ac\ncount. I have never received proof of a valid, unbroken chain of ownership from WebBank to LVNV. Without this, LVNV has no legal standing to collect or report this debt.\n\n4. SHAM INVESTIGATION : Resurgent claims they found no evidence of mishandlings without explaining what they investigated, what records they reviewed, or how their conclusion was reached. This is not a good-faith response it is a form letter designed to close complaints without resolution.\n\nWHAT I AM DEMANDING : Full debt validation including original signed credit agreement with WebBank Complete account payment history Documented proof of chain of ownership from WebBank to LVNV Funding LLC Written proof this account is marked disputed with XXXX XXXX and XXXX Immediate cessation of all collection activity until full validation is provided The CFPB exists to protect consumers from exactly this kind of evasion. I am requesting escalated review of this complaint and a formal investigation into Resurgent Capital Services and LVNV Funding LLCs practices.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-14T03:09:12.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"76106","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21211205","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","date_received":"2026-04-14T02:58:41.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This is not a good-faith response it is a form letter designed to <em>close</em> complaints without resolution."]},"sort":[11.189812,"21211205"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4582459","_score":11.1265955,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing you today because of all my concerns about the documents we were required to sign during the closing of our VA IRRL ( Interest Rate Reduction Loan ) REFINANCING WITH NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION ( NFCU ) on XX/XX/XXXX. Our original loan ( VA Loan # XXXX ) with NFCU was originated in XXXX with a VA 30-Year FIXED TERM mortgage at 3.75 % for the amount {$170000.00}. Through the years that we had our loan with NFCU, we never faltered in our monthly payments. Our monthly payment was automatically deducted from our bank account with NFCU. We decided to refinance our mortgage with our existing lender ( NFCU ) on XX/XX/XXXX to lower our monthly payments. We also plan to pay additional amount every month towards the principal in order to pay off the loan more quickly. It took NFCU to process our application for refinancing from XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX from start to closing. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, an Agent from XXXX XXXX called to schedule the date and time for the closing of our refinancing. We agreed to schedule the closing on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX pm be done inside the NFCU -XXXX XXXX XXXX. Even during the process of our application for this refinancing, I have repeatedly made clear to the loan closing need to have the closing done inside the bank and that documents need to be provided ahead of time so we could review the documents before going to the closing table. Agent said she will arrange the schedule with the bank and that she will let us know. Still with no advance copy of the closing documents I followed up on it. I was informed that the only document they can send in advance is just the Closing Disclosure ( Settlement Disclosure ) and that the other documents will only be provided to us only on the the closing date and time as scheduled. I called on XX/XX/XXXX to follow-up the status of our closing and the settlement agent informed us that we were scheduled to sign the closing documents at XXXX XXXX  and that he will send the Notary Service to our house. I was then informed that NFCU-XXXX XXXX  can not accommodate the closing process due to covid restrictions. That same day around XXXX XXXX, we received an email from the settlement agent containing the UNSECURED AND UNENCRYPTED 142-PAGE LOAN DISCLOSURES DOCUMENTS. I then called the Closing agent, XXXX, to reschedule the closing appointment because we did not have the chance to review them and that I repeatedly requested to have the documents sent to us ahead of time. Again, I was told that they can only provide those documents only on the closing date and that the only documents we can sign are the ones that are handcarried by the Notary Service. WE wanted to cancel the appointment but I was informed that if we cancel our appointment and because notary service is already on her way, we will be charged additional fees. Since we dont have any option, I then requested to move the closing time at XXXX XXXX  on the same day, XX/XX/XXXX. We just entrusted that Navy Federal Credit Union will do the right thing for us. \n\nThe Notary Service, XXXX XXXX, came in the house at around XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX with all the documents not ready for signing. She was collating the documents while she required us to sign as she compiled the documents. We were rushed to sign the documents because according to her she has to mail the documents before XXXX closes for the end of the day and that she also has an appointment for a choir practice. She was rushing and we felt that we were under duress during the signing of documents. As soon as the documents were signed, she collectedthe signed documents and then left us the the other documents and head out the door. She did not agree to our request to have the documents sealed inside the envelope infront of us. I just FROZE looking at her going out the door with all our signed documents. \n\nConsidering that we are just streamlining an existing mortgage loan with the same lender ( NFCU ), we trusted them that they will process our refinance application more quickly with honesty, integrity, less closing costs involved, and less complications. \n\nAfter the closing process, I read and compared it with the documents of our previous mortgage with them and Ive encountered lots of RED FLAGS that bothered me for the past few weeks. AND YES! IVE BEEN CALLING EVERYDAY BECAUSE THERE WERE NO SUPERVISORS NOT EVEN THE PROCESSOR TO RETURN MY CALLS TO CLARIFY MY CONCERNS, NOT EVEN NFCUs 24- REPRESENTATIVES I SPOKE WITH SINCE WE SIGNED THE DOCUMENTS CAN NOT ANSWER MY CONCERNS. REPS STATED THAT THEY WILL RELAY THE MESSAGE TO A SUPERVISOR OR ANYONE FROM THE PROCESSORS TEAM WHO WILL RETURN MY CALL.\n\nI just want to know if these are the standard procedures when securing a 30-YEAR FIXED VA IRRL MORTGAGE LOAN WITH THE SAME LENDER? And the documents that we were required to sign for closing were those prepared by NFCU ( the lender ) or Navy Federal Title Services ( NFTS ) or is it Champion Title Services ( their settlement agent ).\n\nRED FLAG 1 : On the NOTE ( Please Refer to ATTACHMENT 1 ), why are there 2 UNIFORMED STATEMENT DISCLOSURES with different terms added to the original verbiage that NFCU added//slithered. We did not apply for cash out nor 2nd mortgage nor reverse mortgage. We applied for VA IRRL Refinancing with NFCU AS THE HOLDER OF OUR PREVIOUS LOAN THAT WE ACQUIRED FROM NFCU IN XX/XX/XXXX-TO XX/XX/XXXX.\n\nRED FLAG 2 : On the OWNERS AFFIDAVIT ( Ref : ATTACHMENT # 2 ) from XXXX XXXX and Title Company. Notice on the title of the document OWNERS AFFIDAVIT Revised XX/XX/XXXX the File Number ( they used the Escrow account number ) and the property address shows on the form. Borrowers/Owners name ( XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and Loan Number are not specified on the document as the Loan Identifiers instead processor or settlement agent used the Escrow Account Number of Current Loan # XXXX ) Again, we never applied for Home Equity Loan, 2nd Mortgage Loan nor Reverse Mortgage Loan. We requested to have the previous loan with NFCU refinanced for a 30 year fixed term VA IRRL. On the Owners Affidavit, we were not allowed to to make any remarks ( N/A ) on the block that is highlighted as you see below. \nThere are open spaces with lines on paragraphs 23 and 24. On page 3 of this OWNERS AFFIDAVIT was an additional open space and the signature lines dont designate the names of borrowers/owners of property. We were NOT allowed to write the date of signing the form. To date, we have not receive the satisfaction of Mortgage from the old loan that NFTS settled on XX/XX/XXXX.\n\nRED FLAG 3 : On the TITLE AFFIDAVIT ( Ref : ATTACHMENT # 3 ), address of the property was not typed in and was left blank, incomplete information and the clause on # 13 was shady.\n\nRED FLAG 4 : On the UNIFORM RESIDENTAL APPLICATION FORM, source of xxxx Equity of the property/ and xxxxxx left unended/incomplete. ( REFER TO ATACHMENT # 4 ) RED FLAG 5 : On the CLOSING DISCLOSURE ( page 4 of 5 ) ( Ref : ATTACHMENT # 5 ), There were TWO CLOSING DISCLOSURES THAT WE WERE REQUIRED TO SIGN THAT ARE IDENTICAL BUT ONE HAS LOAN # XXXX AND OTHER HAS LOAN # XXXX, ( which I just noticed those numbers after the closing ), part of the disclosure read Lender may hold PARTIAL PAYMENTS IN A SEPARATE ACCOUNT UNTIL YOU PAY THE REST OF THE PAYMENT, AND THEN APPLY THE FULL PAYMENT TO THE LOAN. I also noticed on the bottom right corner the new loan account number with an added ( -1 ). Does this mean we have first and second mortgage with the same exact loan amount? Please, I need clarification on this too. We requested to have our Escrow account handled by us, the borrowers/owners, but NFCU stated that they dont allow us to handle our own Escrow Account. We have very good standing on our accounts with NFCU as a proof that we are responsible account and loan holders. Is this the standard rule of the NFTS ( Title Company ) or NFCU ( mortgage lender ) or is it the CHAMPION TITLE ( Settlement Agency )? Did NFCU sold the mortgage and the property to NFTS and affiliates? This is making me more nervous because some of their documents designates as as BUYER. BUYER???? \n\nRED FLAG 6 : On the same page 4 OF 5 of the CLOSING DISCLOSURE under ESCROW, note that the INITIAL ESCROW PAYMENT AMOUNT indicates {$2500.00}, from which this designates the sum total of {$2600.00} + {$800.00} ( less aggregate adjustment of {$960.00} ) under the sub heading DISCLOSURE, Closing Cost Details under Prepaids, {$1900.00} was added for the 12 months Homeowners Insurance Premium for XXXX. Granting that the effective date on the Hazard/Homeowners Insurance is XX/XX/XXXX, then why is it that the amount specified on Initial Escrow Amount is only for {$2500.00}. I INFORMED NFCU ABOUT THE ERROR ON THE HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE EFFECTIVE DATE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN XX/XX/XXXX AND NOT XX/XX/XXXX ( refer to ATTACHMENT # 6 ) AND THAT AAA HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE INSURANCE PAYMENT THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISBURSED FROM THE LOAN AMOUNT NOT FROM PREVIOUS ESCROW OR CURRENT ACCOUNT. I was told by processor that they will correct the typographical error and pay the Homeowners Insurance after we close. On the CLOSING DISCLOSURES, HOME OWNERS INSURANCE ( XX/XX/XXXX ) WAS ADDED TO THE LOAN ( Refer to page 2 of 5 of CLOSING DISCLOSURES, Closing Cost Details Item ( G ) -Initial Escrow Payment at closing on ATTACHMENT # 5. Also refer to INITIAL ESCROW ACCOUNT DISCLOSURE STATEMENT, ATTACHMENT # 6 provided for your reference. Please note that to this date, XX/XX/XXXX, Home Owners Insurance payment was not yet received by XXXX Home Insurance. Amount of {$1900.00} was added to the closing cost for the full years payment of our Home Insurance. AND TO THIS DATE, NFCU HAVE NOT REFUNDED OUR ESCROW NOR THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTING OF ESCROW AS REQUIRED BY RESPA despite of repeated requests. \n\nRED FLAG 7 : On Attachment # 7, NFCU TAX AND INSURANCE INFORMATION SHEET, Processor or Settlement Agent indicated on LOAN PRODUCT TYPE : 30 Year VA ( Escrowed )??? Some documents specify LOAN PRODUCTS TYPE : IRRL. Any taxes due at closing will be paid by the PREVIOUS LENDER. NOTE THAT THE POLICY XXXX EFFECTIVE DATE SHOULD BE XX/XX/XXXX. The payment for this Insurance was already collected and was supposed to be paid after closing BY SETTLEMENT AGENT TO XXXX XXXX. Our previous Homeowners Insurance ( XXXX  XXXX XXXX ) coverage for the old loan with NFCU ( XXXX ) was supposed to end on XX/XX/XXXX and was fully paid for the XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. I called the loan processor and specified the wrong effective date of coverage for XXXX and I was told that that was just a typographical error. ON THE SAME FORM PLEASE NOTICE THE DISCLOSURE, ANY TAXES DUE AT CLOSING WILL BE PAID BY PREVIOUS LENDER??? FUNDS FOR TAXES WAS ADDED TO THE LOAN AND TAX FUNDS IS NOW HELD BY THE SETTLEMENT AGENT. FUNDS ARE IN THE POSSESSION OF XXXX XXXX XXXX ( SETTLEMENT AGENT ). Please REFER TO TAX AND INSURANCE INFORMATION SHEET ATTACHMENT # 7.\n\nAND what is this Escrowed Loan??? Again, we only applied for one Loan and that is the VA IRRL Loan # XXXX. \n\nRED FLAG 8 : On a separate form XXXX ( Ref : ATTACHMENT # 8 ), ESTIMATED TAX PAYMENT DISCLOSURE ( FROM XXXX XXXX XXXX, Settlement Agency that NFCU and Navy Federal Title Services are affiliated with ) RE : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX FL XXXX N/A OUR FILE # : XXXX NOTICE THAT NAME OF BORROWERS/OWNERS ( XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX. ) AND LOAN NUMBER WERE NOT INCLUDED INSTEAD THEY TYPED N/A. XXXX XXXX XXXX also have disclosure on paragraph 2 of same document regarding tax bill collected on the HUD 1 SETTLEMENT STATEMENT. WHY IS THERE AN HUD SETTLEMENT STATEMENT? IS THIS REQUIRED FOR A VA IRRL LOAN? \n\nRED FLAG 9 : On the PAYOFF ACKNOWLEGEMENT AND AUTHORIZATION FORM ( Ref : ATTACHMENT # 9 ), File Number XXXX ( Escrow Number is specified as file number ) BUT NOT THE OLD Loan Account # XXXX nor Borrowers Names are not on the document, but our signatures were required and notary service stated we can not write the date nor make any marks. Then what Account and whose account are they paying off if the loan number and our names are not on the document. Those documents look like they were just normal payoff disclosures but reading on the disclosures after the process, NFCU OR NFTS and/or affiliates added or slithered somewhat questionable clauses that we did not recognize during the signing process. \n\n\nRED FLAG 10 : On Navy Federal Credit Union CASH DISBURSED VOUCHER FILE COPY ( Ref : ATTACHMENT # 10 ), PAID TO : was left blank ; ADDRESS : was left blank ; CHECK NO. ( blank ) NUMBER : XXXX date ; XX/XX/XXXX DESCRIPTION : SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS FOR : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX NFCU ACCOUNT # XXXX??? WE DONT HAVE ANY ACCOUNT W/ NFCU WITH THIS ACCOUNT NUMBER. What proceeds are they referring to? We did not receive any proceeds NOR the FULL left over escrow from the old account WAS NOT RECEIVED TODATE. \n\nRED FLAG 11 : On the BORROWER/BUYER AND SELLER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, ACCEPTANCE AND CERTIFICATION OF SETTLEMENT DOCUMENTS Is this document required for us to sign for VA IRRL Refinancing? ( Ref : ATTACHMENT # 11 ).\n\nRED FLAG 12 : On the INDEMNITY & UNDERTAKING AGREEMENT ( GAP ) ( Refer to ATTACHMENT # 12 ), Navy Federal Title Services, LLC as the agent ; Title No. XXXX ( thats the Escrow Number ), Again, name our names as borrowers/owners of the Property Address : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, FL XXXX are not included on the first nor second page of this document. Instead, the third page where our signatures are required are on one separate page and not included with the body of the document.\n\nRED FLAG 13 : On the HOMESTEAD AFFIDAVIT ( Ref : ATTACHMENT # 13 ), item # 4 Affiant intend to maintain the Propertys homestead status until the completion of the closing of the current sale or refinance of the Property. We did not sell our house, we are just refinancing and should not to end the Homestead Tax Exemption.\n\nRED FLAG 14 : EMAIL SENT BY XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) on XX/XX/XXXX, regarding LOAN # XXXX EXECUTED BUYER CLOSING DOCUMENTS AND ANOTHER ONE TITLED LOAN XXXX SECURE : EXECUTED REFI CLOSING DOCUMENTS. Whats the difference? Are there 2 loans associated under our name and property?\n\nWhen I called NFTS for clarification, I was given the run around Call the loan processor!! then I call loan processor but to no avail. Are these documents standard for aVA IRRL REFINANCING?\n\nHomestead Status on our property even after closing of the refinance. Why cant NFTS be specific that this loan is for VA IRRL and why did they mention on this form CURRENT SALE? There were no cash out involved with this refinancing. Is this form legitimate for a VA IRRL REFINANCING?\n\nWe never doubted nor or had any second thought of signing the documents with NFCU not until I read the articles on the Consumer Protection Booklet after the closing documents were submitted. It made me more aware and paid attention to the details of the contract.\n\nHow can we protect our records from being used by any unscrupulous loan applicant using our information that Champion Title and Navy Federal Credit Union and their so called affiliates that they already have on hand and on file, as well as the documents/signed sheets that were deliberately separated from the main body of the loan documents such as Rider VA Guaranteed Loan and Assumption Policy with Guaranty, one Loan Mortgage Loan CONDITIONAL APPROVAL and one Mortgage Loan UNCONDITIONAL APPROVAL, Lien Affidavit, Compliance Affidavit, Mortgage Loan Price Commitment Agreement and its addendum, Note ( signature block was separated from the body of document ), FINAL ALTA Settlement Disclosure, Closing Disclosure, Homestead Affidavit, Affidavit of Identity, Mortgage or Fixed Equity Loan Easy Pay Authorization, Consent to the Use of Tax Information form, Borrowers Affidavit, Borrower/Buyer and Seller Acknowledgement, Acceptance, And Certification of Settlement Documents, Proceed Disbursement Sheet, Title Affidavit, Owners Residential Survey Affidavit, Owners Affidavit, Indemnity & Undertaking Agreement ( GAP ), another INDEMNITY AGREEMENT??, Loan Forbearance Affidavit, Florida Insurance Premium Disclosure & Settlement Agent Certification ( in which their Settlement Agent, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have separated is signatory block from the body of the document, they dont have their address nor phone number on the form itself ), Estimated Tax Payment Disclosures, Payoff Acknowledgement and Authorization, Errors and Ommissions Agreement, Uniform Residential Loan Application, HUD/VA ADDENDUM TO UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL LOAN APPLICATION, IVES Request for Transcript of Tax Return, Marital Affidavit, MORTGAGE, NOTE, are just to name a few of those documents we were required to sign. PLEASE BE AWARE THAT ALL THESE CLOSING DOCUMENTS AND DISCLOSURES WERE E-MAILED TO US UNSECURED AND UNENCRYPTED AT 1321 HRS OF THE CLOSING DATE, XXXX, ONLY A FEW HOURS BEFORE THE ARRIVAL OF THE NOTARY SERVICE PERSON SCHEDULED AT XXXX HOURS. WE REQUESTED THESE CLOSING DOCUMENTS AND DISCLOSURES THREE WEEKS BEFORE XX/XX/XXXX, AND AGAIN SENT A FOLLOW-UP REQUEST A WEEK BEFORE THAT DATE. ARE ALL THOSE DOCUMENTS REQUIRED FOR A VA IRRL 30 YEAR FIXED LOAN? \n\nALL OUR PRIVATE INFORMATION ARE MISHANDLED, COMPROMISED, UNSECURE AND NOW BEING DISTRIBUTED TO THEIR MARKETING PARTNERS ( PER PRIVACY NFCU/NFTS STATEMENT ) WE ARE VERY WORRIED THAT THOSE DOCUMENTS WILL BE FRAUDULENTLY USED BY THE HANDLERS OF THE DOCUMENTS FOR WHAT EVER PURPOSE THEY WILL NEED AT ANYTIME OR ANYWHERE. OUR PROPERTY AND OUR PERSONAL IDENTITIES ARE AT STAKE!!! \n\nWE ARE JUST PRAYING THAT THESE DOCUMENTS ARE IN GOOD HANDS. CAN WE REQUEST THE DOCUMENTS BE NULLED AND VOIDED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SINCE NFCU/NFTS HAS ALREADY CLOSED ON THE ACCOUNT # XXXX. PLEASE HELP US!!! \n\nTHESE ARE JUST FEW OF THE RED FLAGS WERE SENDING YOU FOR YOUR INFORMATION. THERE ARE MORE ON OUR LIST TO COME. \n\nREQUEST TO INVESTIGATE AND VERIFY NFCU and NFTS and/or affiliates, ACCOUNT NUMBERS VERSUS VA CASE NUMBERS, ESCROW ACCOUNT NUMBER ( AKA AS THEIR FILE NUMBER ) THAT NFCU/NFTS OR CHAMPION TITLE ARE DELIBERATELY MIXING UP ALL THESE NUMBERS FOR WHATEVER PURPOSE THESE MIGHT SERVE NFCU OR NFTS AND THEIR AFFILIATES. \n\nALSO, WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THE REST OF THE COPIES OF THE OFFICIAL CLOSING DOCUMENTS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED ON THE 106-PAGE EXECUTED FILE DOCUMENTS THAT NFCU SENT US VIA SECURED EMAIL AFTER THE CLOSING. WE ORIGINALLY RECEIVED VIA E-MAIL, UNSECURED/UNENCRYPTED 142 PAGES OF DOCUMENTS FROM THE SETTLEMENT AGENCY, XXXX XXXX XXXX ON CLOSING DAY. We also request them to provide us with the accounting of escrow funds from our previous loan as required by RESPA. \n\nIf there are any documents or any other information related to this case/complain you might need concerning this, please let us know. \n\nTHANK YOU FOR YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER. WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND HELP. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, FL XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX ATTACHMENTS 1- 14 : 1. NOTE ( NOTICE : This loan is not assumable without the approval of the VA ), pgs 1-4 2. OWNERS AFFIDAVIT, pgs 5-6 3. TITLE AFFIDAVIT, pgs 7-8 4. UNIFORM RESIDENTAL APPLICATION FORM, pgs 9-11 5. CLOSING DISCLOSURE, pgs 12-14 6. INITIAL ESCROW ACCOUNT DISCLOSURE STATEMENT, pg 15 7. NFCU TAX AND INSURANCE INFORMATION SHEET, pg 16 8. ESTIMATED TAX PAYMENT DISCLOSURE, pg 17 9. PAYOFF ACKNOWLEGEMENT AND AUTHORIZATION FORM, pgs 18-19 10. NFCU CASH DISBURSED VOUCHER, PGS 20-22 11. BORROWER/BUYER AND SELLER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, ACCEPTANCE, pg 23 12. INDEMNITY & UNDERTAKING AGREEMENT ( GAP ), pgs 24-26 13. HOMESTEAD AFFIDAVIT, pg 27 14. EMAIL SENT BY XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) on XX/XX/XXXX, regarding LOAN # XXXX EXECUTED BUYER CLOSING DOCUMENTS","date_sent_to_company":"2021-07-28T20:03:02.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"VA mortgage","zip_code":"33544","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4582459","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2021-07-28T19:33:29.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Considering that we are just streamlining an existing mortgage loan with the same lender ( NFCU ), we trusted <em>them</em> that they will process our refinance application more quickly with honesty, integrity, less <em>closing</em> costs involved, and less complications. \n\nAfter the <em>closing</em> process, I read and compared it with the documents of our previous mortgage with <em>them</em> and Ive encountered lots of RED FLAGS that bothered me for the past few weeks. AND YES!"],"issue":["<em>Closing</em> on a mortgage"]},"sort":[11.1265955,"4582459"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3196498","_score":10.985849,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX, an FHA Insured house that was sold in a Pre Foreclosure Sale accepted by GMFS Mortgage Company. The house was sold \" as-is '' due to Surchargeable flood damage as defined by FHA. Although the legal closing disclosure used by the closing agent, Attorney XXXX XXXX. is a HUD-1 Settlement Statement, flood insurance claim funds in the amount of {$81000.00} that were being held in a restricted escrow account for the borrowers were not disclosed on this document. However, the mortgage company has claimed to apply those funds to eliminate outstanding debt after the application of the PFS sales proceeds which legally satisfy all outstanding debt if full. \n\n\nAlthough my initial attempts to deal with this issue with the mortgage company focused on FHA Non-compliance for how they justified keeping the funds towards indebtedness that legally no longer exists, I now recognize how not having this transaction disclosed on the HUD-1 Settlement Statement is the key issue that keeps the money hidden from FHA compliance reviews. The concern for fraud is further increased as this also creates the appearance of us corroborating the absence of the money by signing the settle statement to the best of our knowledge as well as if we had accepted their multiple attempts to convince us that we voluntarily agreed to forfeit or relinquish the funds although we knowingly did not and have maintained our efforts for since XX/XX/XXXX to have the {$81000.00} that is rightfully ours released to us. \n\n\nIn addition to this non-compliance of closing disclosure in our PFS, there are several other concerns we have come to understand through further research of the FHA Handbook that are not compliant with FHA or other federal policies including : 1 ) inaccurate figures on our 1098 and 1099-C federal tax documents that have complicated the timely filing of our XXXX income taxes because the mortgage company has claimed they would only address the issues with \" qualified '' written requests as if my previous phone calls and emails to them did not warrant their attention to the matter of potential errors on federal tax documents that they prepared. \n2 ) unnecessary delay in our initial application for mortgage relief options that originally began XX/XX/XXXX under a previous servicer and which we believe has been intentionally muddled given our situation of both the financial hardship due to reduction of income that began in XX/XX/XXXX and the natural disaster hardship that subsequently occurred XX/XX/XXXX. \n3 ) confusion regarding necessary measures to protect the mortgagees interest in the property or prevent insurance fraud by homeowners after the flood that did not contradict their FHA required assistance to help borrowers recover from disasters as their responsibility for Surchargeable damage to properties in the case of defaults. \n4 ) the wrongful filing of a foreclosure lawsuit in XX/XX/XXXX and initiation of Sheriffs seizure and sale although we had accepted the contingent approval to participate in a PFS  and engaged a real estate agent on XX/XX/XXXX which we were told would pause and/or prevent further foreclosure activities ; as well as a motion to appoint curator to locate and notify us of legal foreclosure action on XX/XX/XXXX although we were in ongoing contact with the mortgage company for the current PFS. \n\n\nThe additional steps I have taken the resolve this issue since XX/XX/XXXX include : 1 )  Phone and email correspondence with GMFS executives and multiple and repeated phone transfers between departments of XXXX XXXX XXXX such as Executive Services, Customer Service, Loss Draft, Loss Mitigation, Retention, Short Sale, Short Sale Liquidation, High Risk Resolution, Consumer Escalations, and Customer Resolution. \n2 ) A complaint filed with the Louisiana Office of Financial Institutions on XX/XX/XXXX who concluded that the have to defer final determination of FHA compliance to the HUD OIG ; although they simultaneously stated an opinion in agreement with GMFS 's justification that could presumably deflate the confidence of our complaint for non-compliance on GMFS 's part. \n3 ) Calls to the HUD National Servicing Center ( on XX/XX/XXXX and again on XX/XX/XXXX ) as well as the FHA Resource Center ( on XX/XX/XXXX ). I then submitted a hotline report for suspected fraud with the HUD OIG on XX/XX/XXXX which was given a ticket # XXXX. HUD has not concluded whether or not GMFS was non-compliant in this matter although I was advised that a different agency would have to handle the matter including either FEMA because they issued the flood insurance funds ( although FHA Handbook policies determine how a mortgage handles insurance funds regardless of the insurance company or agency ) and the CFPB because RESPA covers the escrow matter ( although this is not the closing disclosure/servicing of an escrow account to pay taxes or insurance premiums from ongoing mortgage payments but it is the dispute over the application of insurance funds held in escrow according to FHA policies after a PFS closing pays the account in full ). \n4 ) Inquiries to the closing agent about this matter including : ( a ) the day of the closing when I expressing confusion and frustration with the mortgage company handling the funds although to the best of my knowledge, I did not know they should have been disclosed on the settlement statement ; ( b ) emails in XX/XX/XXXX seeking advice and clarification of their representation of our interest in possible civil litigation or criminal investigation of the mortgage company ; ( c ) follow-up on the public filing of legal documents regarding the cancellation of the mortgage and a motion by GMFSs attorneys to withdraw the foreclosure and sheriff sale seizure ; and ( d ) a direct inquiry to address the inaccurate HUD-1 Settlement Statement approved by his office that does not disclose the transaction of the mortgage company applying held insurance funds to debt that no longer legally exists by the terms of the PFS paying it in full. \n5 ) On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted a follow-up hotline report to the HUD OIG with clarification and emphasis on the non-compliant HUD-1 Settlement Statement as the alleged fraudulent document that enables the mortgage company to possibly hide its action from a HUD compliance review of our FHA mortgage. Having heard no response as of XX/XX/XXXX, I have prepared this complaint to the CFPB.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-03-30T18:53:03.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3196498","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"GMFS, LLC","date_received":"2019-03-30T16:14:41.000Z","state":"LA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Although my initial attempts to deal with this issue with the mortgage company focused on FHA Non-<em>compliance</em> for how they justified keeping the funds towards indebtedness that legally no longer exists, I now recognize how not having this transaction disclosed on the HUD-1 Settlement Statement is the key issue that keeps the money hidden from FHA <em>compliance</em> reviews."],"issue":["<em>Closing</em> on a mortgage"]},"sort":[10.985849,"3196498"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6383249","_score":9.642252,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"For over 6 months RE : Dispute - Bay Area Receivables Original creditor YOUR DOCS IN, and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Maryland XXXX, under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), failed validate the alleged debt request has been over 6 months. I am aware that there is a debt from Bay Area Receivables, Debt does not include a breakdown of any fees or validation of debt. Additionally, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ( HIPAA ) to protect my privacy and medical records from third parties. I do not recall giving permission to Bay Area Receivables, YOUR DOCS IN or XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX for them to release my medical information to a third party. I am aware that the HIPAA does allow for limited information about me but anything more is to only be revealed with the patients authorization. Therefore, I requested twofold validation of debt and HIPAA authorization which you have failed to provide. The FTC has noted that providing a copy of a printout, bill, or alleged account documents does not constitute validation. Mere itemization of what you already have does not accomplish my requested debt validation Bay Area Receivables have failed to include Method of verification under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 7 ). This should have included the following : * The How with which you verified the information *The name of the person handled your request and provided proof of ownership of Debt through physical verification * The address * Which documents you obtained to verify Ownership of Debt. If none are satisfied under federal law, you must delete file/ tradeline * Provided breakdown of fees including any collection costs and medical charges and physical proof from original debt. *Provided a copy of my signature with the provider of service to release my medical information to Bay Area Receivables or any other third party. * to Verify- through physical verification of the original signed consumer * Cease any credit bureau reporting until the debt has been validated. Bay Area Receivables failed to provide me with copies of all documentation associated with these Debts bearing this information in my credit report with my authorization of release bearing my signature. To be in full compliance with the FCRA laws and guidelines, all information listed needs to be immediately deleted from the credit file you maintain under my social security number, date of birth, and /or address. Be further advised that I am closely monitoring my credit file. Per the Federal Law, you have failed in 30 days to complete this investigation as outlined per the Fair Credit Reporting Act 623 ( a ) ( 3 ). You failed Per the Federal Credit Reporting Act. Section 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( a ). you are required by Federal law to Verify- through physical verification of the original signed consumer - all accounts and public information that you post on anyones credit report. Otherwise, any paying for your reporting services could fax, mail, email in fraudulent and erroneous account information. As Such, if this unauthorized public record information is not deleted from my credit report within the next 30 days, I have already filed a complaint with the Federal Trade commission and will follow with a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Claim if you failed to respond within 30 days of receipt of this dispute with any valid documents. This letter and the several before served as a formal debt validation request, which under the FDCPA. Please note that withholding the information you received from any medical provider in an attempt to be HIPAA compliant can be a violation of the FDCPA because you will be deceiving me after my written request. I request full documentation of what you received from the provider of service in connection with this alleged debt and must prove ownership. Should you continue in your non-compliance, the law is very clear as to the civil liability and the remedy available to me for negligent non-compliance. I am maintaining a careful record of my communications with you for the purpose of filing a complaint seeking relief and monetary damages under FCRA Sections 616 and 617. Your non-compliance with my request will also be construed as an absolute waiver of all claims to enforce the debt against me and your implied agreement to compensate me for court costs and attorney fees. Additionally, any reporting of this debt to the credit bureaus with out validation it is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which can allow me to seek damages from a collection agent. Because you are in violation, this account must be removed from my credit file. Please send me an updated credit report with the information removed. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2022-12-31T16:04:05.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"501XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6383249","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Bay Area Receivables, Inc","date_received":"2022-12-31T16:01:15.000Z","state":"IA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ( HIPAA ) to <em>protect</em> my privacy and medical records from third parties. I do not recall giving permission to Bay Area Receivables, YOUR DOCS IN or XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX for <em>them</em> to release my medical information to a third party. I am aware that the HIPAA does allow for limited information about me but anything more is to only be revealed with the patients authorization."]},"sort":[9.642252,"6383249"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6335011","_score":9.642252,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"dispute -Equifax over 6 months no validation of debt RE : Dispute - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), failed validate the alleged debt. I am aware that there is a debt from XXXX XXXX XXXX Debt does not include a breakdown of any fees or validation of debt. Additionally, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ( HIPAA ) to protect my privacy and medical records from third parties. I do not recall giving permission to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for them to release my medical information to a third party. I am aware that the XXXX does allow for limited information about me but anything more is to only be revealed with the patients authorization. Therefore, I requested twofold validation of debt and XXXX authorization which you have failed to provide. The FTC has noted that providing a copy of a printout, bill, or alleged account documents does not constitute validation. Mere itemization of what you already have does not accomplish my requested debt validation XXXX XXXX XXXX have failed to include Method of verification under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 7 ). This should have included the following : * The How with which you verified the information *The name of the person handled your request and provided proof of ownership of Debt through physical verification * The address * Which documents you obtained to verify Ownership of Debt. If none are satisfied under federal law, you must delete file/ tradeline * Provided breakdown of fees including any collection costs and medical charges and physical proof from original debt. \n*Provided a copy of my signature with the provider of service to release my medical information to XXXX XXXX XXXX or any other third party. \n* to Verify- through physical verification of the original signed consumer * Cease any credit bureau XXXX until the debt has been validated. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX failed to provide me with copies of all documentation associated with these Debts bearing this information in my credit report with my authorization of release bearing my signature. To be in full compliance with the FCRA laws and guidelines, all information listed needs to be immediately deleted from the credit file you maintain under my social security number, date of birth, and /or address. Be further advised that I am closely monitoring my credit file. Per the Federal Law, you have failed in 30 days to complete this investigation as outlined per the Fair Credit Reporting Act 623 ( a ) ( 3 ).\n\nYou failed Per the Federal Credit Reporting Act. Section 609 ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( a ). you are required by Federal law to Verify- through physical verification of the original signed consumer - all accounts and public information that you post on anyones credit report. Otherwise, any paying for your reporting services could fax, mail, email in fraudulent and erroneous account information. As Such, if this unauthorized public record information is not deleted from my credit report within the next 30 days, I have already filed a complaint with the Federal Trade commission and will follow with a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Claim if you failed to respond within 30 days of receipt of this dispute with any valid documents. \nThis letter and the several before served as a formal debt validation request, which under the FDCPA. Please note that withholding the information you received from any medical provider in an attempt to be XXXX compliant can be a violation of the FDCPA because you will be deceiving me after my written request. I request full documentation of what you received from the provider of service in connection with this alleged debt and must prove ownership. Should you continue in your non-compliance, the law is very clear as to the civil liability and the remedy available to me for negligent non-compliance. I am maintaining a careful record of my communications with you for the purpose of filing a complaint seeking relief and monetary damages under FCRA Sections 616 and 617. Your non-compliance with my request will also be construed as an absolute waiver of all claims to enforce the debt against me and your implied agreement to compensate me for court costs and attorney fees. \nAdditionally, any reporting of this debt to the credit bureaus with out validation it is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which can allow me to seek damages from a collection agent. Because you are in violation, this account must be removed from my credit file. Please send me an updated credit report with the information removed.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-12-18T22:55:33.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"501XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6335011","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2022-12-18T22:50:54.000Z","state":"IA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ( HIPAA ) to <em>protect</em> my privacy and medical records from third parties. I do not recall giving permission to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for <em>them</em> to release my medical information to a third party. I am aware that the XXXX does allow for limited information about me but anything more is to only be revealed with the patients authorization."]},"sort":[9.642252,"6335011"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6383417","_score":9.625855,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"For over 6 months RE : Dispute - Bay Area Receivables Original creditor YOUR DOCS IN, and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Maryland XXXX, under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), failed validate the alleged debt request has been over 6 months. I am aware that there is a debt from Bay Area Receivables, Debt does not include a breakdown of any fees or validation of debt. Additionally, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ( HIPAA ) to protect my privacy and medical records from third parties. I do not recall giving permission to Bay Area Receivables, YOUR DOCS IN or XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for them to release my medical information to a third party. I am aware that the HIPAA does allow for limited information about me but anything more is to only be revealed with the patients authorization. Therefore, I requested twofold validation of debt and HIPAA authorization which you have failed to provide. The FTC has noted that providing a copy of a printout, bill, or alleged account documents does not constitute validation. Mere itemization of what you already have does not accomplish my requested debt validation Bay Area Receivables have failed to include Method of verification under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 7 ). This should have included the following : * The How with which you verified the information *The name of the person handled your request and provided proof of ownership of Debt through physical verification * The address * Which documents you obtained to verify Ownership of Debt. If none are satisfied under federal law, you must delete file/ tradeline * Provided breakdown of fees including any collection costs and medical charges and physical proof from original debt. *Provided a copy of my signature with the provider of service to release my medical information to Bay Area Receivables or any other third party. * to Verify- through physical verification of the original signed consumer * Cease any credit bureau reporting until the debt has been validated. Bay Area Receivables failed to provide me with copies of all documentation associated with these Debts bearing this information in my credit report with my authorization of release bearing my signature. To be in full compliance with the FCRA laws and guidelines, all information listed needs to be immediately deleted from the credit file you maintain under my social security number, date of birth, and /or address. Be further advised that I am closely monitoring my credit file. Per the Federal Law, you have failed in 30 days to complete this investigation as outlined per the Fair Credit Reporting Act 623 ( a ) ( 3 ). You failed Per the Federal Credit Reporting Act. Section 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( a ). you are required by Federal law to Verify- through physical verification of the original signed consumer - all accounts and public information that you post on anyones credit report. Otherwise, any paying for your reporting services could fax, mail, email in fraudulent and erroneous account information. As Such, if this unauthorized public record information is not deleted from my credit report within the next 30 days, I have already filed a complaint with the Federal Trade commission and will follow with a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Claim if you failed to respond within 30 days of receipt of this dispute with any valid documents. This letter and the several before served as a formal debt validation request, which under the FDCPA. Please note that withholding the information you received from any medical provider in an attempt to be HIPAA compliant can be a violation of the FDCPA because you will be deceiving me after my written request. I request full documentation of what you received from the provider of service in connection with this alleged debt and must prove ownership. Should you continue in your non-compliance, the law is very clear as to the civil liability and the remedy available to me for negligent non-compliance. I am maintaining a careful record of my communications with you for the purpose of filing a complaint seeking relief and monetary damages under FCRA Sections 616 and 617. Your non-compliance with my request will also be construed as an absolute waiver of all claims to enforce the debt against me and your implied agreement to compensate me for court costs and attorney fees. Additionally, any reporting of this debt to the credit bureaus with out validation it is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which can allow me to seek damages from a collection agent. Because you are in violation, this account must be removed from my credit file. Please send me an updated credit report with the information removed. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2022-12-31T16:00:28.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Medical debt","zip_code":"501XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6383417","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Bay Area Receivables, Inc","date_received":"2022-12-31T15:57:49.000Z","state":"IA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ( HIPAA ) to <em>protect</em> my privacy and medical records from third parties. I do not recall giving permission to Bay Area Receivables, YOUR DOCS IN or XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for <em>them</em> to release my medical information to a third party. I am aware that the HIPAA does allow for limited information about me but anything more is to only be revealed with the patients authorization."]},"sort":[9.625855,"6383417"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6335137","_score":9.625855,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"For over 6 months RE : Dispute - Bay Area Receivables Original creditor XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), failed validate the alleged debt request has been over 6 months. I am aware that there is a debt from Bay Area Receivables, Debt does not include a breakdown of any fees or validation of debt. Additionally, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ( HIPAA ) to protect my privacy and medical records from third parties. I do not recall giving permission to Bay Area Receivables, XXXX XXXX XXXX  or XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for them to release my medical information to a third party. I am aware that the HIPAA does allow for limited information about me but anything more is to only be revealed with the patients authorization. Therefore, I requested twofold validation of debt and HIPAA authorization which you have failed to provide. The FTC has noted that providing a copy of a printout, bill, or alleged account documents does not constitute validation. Mere itemization of what you already have does not accomplish my requested debt validation Bay Area Receivables have failed to include Method of verification under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 7 ). This should have included the following : * The How with which you verified the information *The name of the person handled your request and provided proof of ownership of Debt through physical verification * The address * Which documents you obtained to verify Ownership of Debt. If none are satisfied under federal law, you must delete file/ tradeline * Provided breakdown of fees including any collection costs and medical charges and physical proof from original debt. \n*Provided a copy of my signature with the provider of service to release my medical information to Bay Area Receivables or any other third party. \n* to Verify- through physical verification of the original signed consumer * Cease any credit bureau reporting until the debt has been validated. \nBay Area Receivables failed to provide me with copies of all documentation associated with these Debts bearing this information in my credit report with my authorization of release bearing my signature. To be in full compliance with the FCRA laws and guidelines, all information listed needs to be immediately deleted from the credit file you maintain under my social security number, date of birth, and /or address. Be further advised that I am closely monitoring my credit file. Per the Federal Law, you have failed in 30 days to complete this investigation as outlined per the Fair Credit Reporting Act 623 ( a ) ( 3 ).\n\nYou failed Per the Federal Credit Reporting Act. Section 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( a ). you are required by Federal law to Verify- through physical verification of the original signed consumer - all accounts and public information that you post on anyones credit report. Otherwise, any paying for your reporting services could fax, mail, email in fraudulent and erroneous account information. As Such, if this unauthorized public record information is not deleted from my credit report within the next 30 days, I have already filed a complaint with the Federal Trade commission and will follow with a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Claim if you failed to respond within 30 days of receipt of this dispute with any valid documents.\n\nThis letter and the several before served as a formal debt validation request, which under the FDCPA. Please note that withholding the information you received from any medical provider in an attempt to be HIPAA compliant can be a violation of the FDCPA because you will be deceiving me after my written request. I request full documentation of what you received from the provider of service in connection with this alleged debt and must prove ownership. Should you continue in your non-compliance, the law is very clear as to the civil liability and the remedy available to me for negligent non-compliance. I am maintaining a careful record of my communications with you for the purpose of filing a complaint seeking relief and monetary damages under FCRA Sections 616 and 617. Your non-compliance with my request will also be construed as an absolute waiver of all claims to enforce the debt against me and your implied agreement to compensate me for court costs and attorney fees. \nAdditionally, any reporting of this debt to the credit bureaus with out validation it is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which can allow me to seek damages from a collection agent. Because you are in violation, this account must be removed from my credit file. Please send me an updated credit report with the information removed. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-01-11T21:23:06.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Medical debt","zip_code":"501XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6335137","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Bay Area Receivables, Inc","date_received":"2022-12-18T21:59:08.000Z","state":"IA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ( HIPAA ) to <em>protect</em> my privacy and medical records from third parties. I do not recall giving permission to Bay Area Receivables, XXXX XXXX XXXX  or XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for <em>them</em> to release my medical information to a third party. I am aware that the HIPAA does allow for limited information about me but anything more is to only be revealed with the patients authorization."]},"sort":[9.625855,"6335137"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12108078","_score":9.535846,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX, I closed on an XXXX XXXX loan with Mortgage One Inc. During this process, multiple red flags were downplayed, ignored by, or misrepresented by those who owed a fiduciary duty. As a result, I was misled and ultimately pressured into proceeding with a loan that was not in my best interest. The key concerns include : XXXX. XXXX XXXX and XXXX : My real estate agent pressured me into moving forward with the purchase without a certified home inspection, even after the XXXX & XXXX inspection revealed imminent failure and required full replacement. My agent also insisted that I use Mortgage One Inc. as my lender. The reasoning provided was : - That \" shopping around '' for a lender would negatively impact my credit score. \n- That a local lender could expedite the process. \n- I was repeatedly assured that the home was in good condition, despite later discovering major health and safety hazards. \nMy agent maintained regular and inappropriate communication with the lender regarding my financial status and loan qualification. The lender and my agent worked together to structure a high-dollar loan, despite the home being unsafe and unlivable in its actual condition. There is also potential collusion with my agent and the selling agent, as my original offer appears to have been accepted ( XXXX data shows pending date of XX/XX/XXXX ) despite ongoing negotiations for 2 days before going under contract. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX and XXXX on the condition of the property. Despite the disclosure indicating the house had no issues, multiple defects were uncovered after closing, such as : - Evidence of flooding & mold throughout the crawl space, and lack of proper vapor barrier/insulation - Evidence of recent repairs to the structure done incorrectly, contributing to further structural decline - Multiple ongoing active water leaks throughout the home, contributing to further mold in the living areas ( kitchen, bathrooms, subfloors, behind walls ) - Structural decay to the extent the back side of the home is caving in and windows are no longer sealed from the outside elements due to wood rot - Rodent infestation - Property sits on a high water table and experiences flooding during wet times of the year XXXX. Septic System Replacement Issue - The lender nor the XXXX ever mentioned the required septic system replacement, despite it being a requirement in the sales contract. \n- My agent assured me that funds would be held in escrow if the work wasn't completed, but this never happened. \n- The lender, seller, and agents failed to verify that the work was completed as required. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX Concerns - My agent admitted in passing that the lender \" picked the XXXX himself '', which suggests a conflict of interest in the appraisal process. \n- The XXXX assigned an \" as-is '' value of {$370000.00} despite the following major health and safety issues discovered immediately after closing on XX/XX/XXXX : - Rodent infestation throughout the home. \n- Multiple active water leaks. \n- Mold contamination in the crawl space, under the kitchen sink, and throughout the primary bathroom. \n- Improper grading around the foundation and high water table issues. \n- Severely deteriorated supporting joists in the crawl space due to long-term moisture exposure. \n- XXXX with wood rot, failing to seal properly, creating energy inefficiency and additional water intrusion. \n- Despite these clear structural and safety issues, some of which are evident in the appraisal photos, the XXXX falsely reported that the home was \" well maintained '' and determined its effective age to be only 20 years. \n\nXXXX. Loan Interest Rate and Closing Fees Issues- My Loan Estimate ( XX/XX/XXXX ) stated an interest rate of 6.99 %, but this was shortly thereafter ( XX/XX/XXXX ) increased to 7.125 % without a clear explanation. \n- I paid over {$2000.00} in points at closing, yet my interest rate was not reduced nor were these fees explained to me. \n- Closing fees were so close to the maximum allowable amount that the lender had to apply a credit to keep the loan within regulatory limitsresulting in a mere {$5.00} credit. \n- Given my high Debt-to-Income ( DTI ) ratio, the lender failed to conduct adequate due diligence to ensure I could sustain the payments or that the home met FHAs minimum property standards. \n\nXXXX. Manipulation of Appraisal Dispute Process When I received the appraisal report, I was only given XXXX options : - Walk away from the deal. \n- Work with the sellers agent to challenge the price and increase the appraisal value. \n- At no point was I informed that I could challenge the appraisal to lower the valuation based on the homes condition. \n\nXXXX. Questionable Loan Documentation and HUD Compliance Issues - After reviewing the closing documents post-closing, I found that I had signed a blank XXXX form ( Direct Endorsement Approval for FHA XXXX ). \n- On XXXX XXXX XXXX certification ; the section requiring the CEOs signature was instead signed by the loan originator, which is improper. \n- When I recently called to request clarification, Mortgage One Inc. dismissed my concerns and refused to provide corrected copies, stating that \" this was normal. '' XXXX. Post-Closing Lender and Servicer Failures- After closing, I reached out to my loan XXXX regarding the homes unlivable condition and was told that nothing could be done. \nXXXX Mortgage One Inc. has seemingly failed to self-report defects that, under HUDs defect taxonomy, require lender disclosure and correction. \n- The loan servicer ( XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX multiple errors, including : - Paying my property taxes twice, which disrupted my escrow account. \n- Failing to renew my homeowners insurance, despite having the correct information and receiving the renewal. \n- Force-placing insurance on my home, which provides no personal coverage, only protecting the structure for the lenders benefit. \n\nXXXX. Severe Financial Harm and Foreclosure Risk Due to Lender and Servicer Negligence - Due in part to escrow mismanagement, unexpected repair costs, and ongoing legal expenses, I experienced a period of loan default, placing me at risk of foreclosure. \n- The estimated cost of necessary repairs has exceeded {$100000.00}, and though some of the repairs have been completed, I am not able to complete them all as my regular mortgage payment exceeds 60 % of my net income. \n- The servicers failure to properly manage escrow, including the double tax payment and failure to renew my homeowners insurance, further destabilized my financial position. \n- Despite my efforts to remain in good standing, the cumulative financial burden caused by these negligent actions has placed my home at risk.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-17T17:20:10.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"48162","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12108078","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"MORTGAGE 1 INCORPORATION","date_received":"2025-02-17T17:07:55.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Closing disclosure or other related disclosures"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Questionable Loan Documentation and HUD <em>Compliance</em> Issues - After reviewing the <em>closing</em> documents post-<em>closing</em>, I found that I had <em>signed</em> a blank XXXX form ( Direct Endorsement Approval for FHA XXXX ). \n- On XXXX XXXX XXXX certification ; the section requiring the CEOs signature was instead <em>signed</em> by the loan originator, which is improper."],"issue":["<em>Closing</em> on a mortgage"],"sub_issue":["<em>Closing</em> disclosure or other related disclosures"]},"sort":[9.535846,"12108078"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18050568","_score":9.517252,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint concerns XXXX XXXX XXXX, a third-party debt collection agency, and its continued attempts to collect an alleged debt in the amount of {$91.00} ( XXXX Account XXXX. XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX ). \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, I sent AssetCare a written dispute and request for validation under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ). The United States Postal Service confirms that this dispute was delivered to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/year>. \n\nDespite receipt of my dispute, XXXX failed to provide the legally required validation. Instead, XXXX continued collection activity by sending a new demand letter dated XX/XX/year>, which constitutes continued collection activity after a timely dispute. \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, I sent XXXX a second certified letter formally notifying them of their failure to validate and documenting their continued violations. That second letter was sent via USPS Certified Mail and was delivered to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nTo date, XXXX has not provided any of the documentation required to validate the alleged debt, including but not limited to : An original signed contract or intake agreement bearing my signature A complete assignment or purchase agreement establishing XXXX legal authority to collect A full itemization of charges, payments, and adjustments Proof of HIPAA-compliant authorization or permissible disclosure, despite the alleged debt involving medical billing information Proof that the alleged debt is within XXXX XXXX of limitations XXXX continued collection activity without providing validation violates multiple provisions of federal law, including : FDCPA 1692g ( b ) continuing collection activity after receipt of a dispute without providing validation FDCPA 1692e false or misleading representations regarding the legal status of an alleged debt FDCPA 1692f unfair or unconscionable collection practices FCRA 1681s-2 furnishing or attempting to furnish unverified or inaccurate information Because the alleged debt involves medical billing information, XXXX failure to demonstrate HIPAA-compliant authorization for the transfer or use of protected health information raises additional compliance concerns. \n\nXXXX was expressly advised in writing that failure to validate would result in regulatory complaints. Nevertheless, XXXX has not cured its violations, has not provided lawful validation, and has continued to pursue collection activity. \n\nI am filing this complaint to request CFPB intervention to require XXXX XXXX XXXX to cease all collection activity, delete any related credit reporting, close the alleged account, and take any additional corrective or enforcement action the CFPB deems appropriate, including the assessment of civil penalties for willful noncompliance.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-15T19:58:25.000Z","issue":"False statements or representation","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"52405","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18050568","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Capio Partners, LLC","date_received":"2025-12-15T19:55:44.000Z","state":"IA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Attempted to collect wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["health information raises additional <em>compliance</em> concerns."]},"sort":[9.517252,"18050568"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10774561","_score":9.091652,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"This is in regard to Capital One 's actions, that I am in an active civil federal claim ( case XXXX ) with them for unjustly closing 2 of my accounts when I owe them no debt and have 100 % payment history. Now, I dont have much time to explain the whole case because I shouldn't because it would be causing me more harm. But I will attach documents from the federal case so you can get details and exhibits to show the evidence of what I am saying it true. I have tried to confer or discuss with Capital One 's counsel as they have acted in bad faith and dont rebut it or dispute it when I tell them they are either. They have closed my accounts because I requested documents that I am entitled to under 15 usc 1681g, they are willfully violating these and other laws that protect me and my rights which is also under 15 usc 1681n. Like I said, I am going to be going through this quickly because I truly dont have the time as my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  for some reason and they only thing I can think of which I am pretty sure is because I am at my desk nonstop dealing with holding people harming me accountable. Which is sad. I am writing this because I have requested from my first notices before I issued them a default for their non-compliance. They had 100 % acknowledgement which you will see in the attached documents that they chose not to send me the requested documents because this whole federal case they have done everything they could to not have to provide these documents. I am going to attach my motion to compel that didnt get granted only because the judge thought it was premature and because she has ordered them to respond to provide my Rule 34 production of documents request from the federal rules of civil procedures. I have formally requested a statement under penalty of perjury that Capital One has not sold nor traded my nonpublic personal information ( XXXX ) under 15 usc 6801 the Gramm Leach Bliley Act, the safeguarding of my privacy and data protection. They have yet to provide me such statement or documentation to prove it, and even tried to get me to sign a confidentiality agreement when they cant even tell prove to me the protection of my XXXX  I am writing this because they even have Consent Orders on these exact things, and it seems like they can careless about if they violate them or not. I can honestly make a statement under penalty of perjury saying that because it is the Gods honest truth of what I believe from the way they have been treated me and the harm they continue causing me including physical harm due to my XXXX XXXX  which doctors dont know what it is with me going to the XXXX XXXX 2 times in 1 month. Before the civil claim, which you will see in the attached documents that I have requested documents, they failed to comply, so I gave an opportunity to cure, they failed to comply once again with me having a tacit agreement that they could have stopped but they chose not to. Even valuing the initial applications at {$100000.00} unless they rebutted it by providing the requested documents to prove otherwise, they still failed to comply. After me issuing them a default, I went to another alternative dispute resolution going on here the CFPB to show their non-compliance with them choosing to not comply when they have full acknowledgment. Then after I made a first CFPB complaint I seen on my credit report monitor app that they have made unauthorized disputes claiming I requested them which will be in the evidence as well, because they is false, so they fabricated disputes which you will see that you can see even going to look at the finally alleged decision, there is nothing there. So, I had to make another CFPB complaint being the second. After that complaint I even went to another alternative dispute resolution, being the XXXX mediation submission, I did which they didnt acknowledge either. I have done everything to show my good faith and trying to resolve this issue which they documents I am entitled to by law, which I still yet seen and only seen them delay continue to cause more harm. This whole time has been willful, and they still till this day can not state why they closed my accounts. I even have evidence of them stating that their closing my accounts was not from something I did but from a business concern which you will see in the evidence. Then when I believe it can get worse, I see on my credit monitor app which is XXXX XXXX ( one of them ), that they made 2 hard inquiries in my name, its states that it was loans like I filled out 2 applications for loans or credit card, but because I still have not been able to get these documents that the judge Ordered them to provided on XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, which we will see what they try in come up this time, I have not been able to get evidence that I need to fully have a fair discovery, they are prejudicing my discovery this whole time, willfully doing so. This was longer than I have time to explain, so please see attached documents and you will see more details. I will upload a few things that should show enough of them willfully violating the law, federal/state, etc. I will also submit the affidavit I submitted with the motion to compel. I believe all regulatory bodies need to really look at this case as this is truly sad the way they have done me when I have never missed a payment nor owed them or no financial institution money. They still not providing me the documents or a statement under perjury regarding my XXXX with the safeguarding of my data protection is insane. The number of compensations for the harm they have done can not even put a price on it when it comes to the compensation part. My XXXX is priceless as everyone I believe would agree with that. I will upload the documents for you to get insight as this is nothing compared to really the depth of whats going on. I thank you for your time. Please have any regulatory bodies you can get or anything to help this situation as it is not only harming me, if they are doing this to me when I owe them no debt, I couldnt imagine what they do to others as well. The fair resolution will be in attached documents. CFPB has full consent to look at if for some reason they didnt, and anyone they think should see it as well. If Capital One says they need 60 days to deal with this issue it will be taken that they are willfully knowing they are delaying once again and causing more harm which they admit to the CFPB and FTC and all regulatory bodies that they have willfully violated all consent orders and all laws that protect consumers which needs immediate attention.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-12T05:42:31.000Z","issue":"Closing your account","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"32796","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10774561","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2024-11-12T03:45:51.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Company closed your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["After me issuing <em>them</em> a default, I went to another alternative dispute resolution going on here the CFPB to show their non-<em>compliance</em> with <em>them</em> choosing to not comply when they have full acknowledgment."],"issue":["<em>Closing</em> your account"]},"sort":[9.091652,"10774561"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16150367","_score":8.584326,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"The issue at hand reflects a serious conflict between the consumer, XXXX XXXX, and Experian, one of the major credit reporting agencies, concerning the handling of her credit information and the accuracy of the data being reported. At the core of the dispute, XXXX raised multiple concerns regarding inaccurate late-payment notations and unauthorized credit inquiries that, according to her, directly violated federal consumer protection laws such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and provisions under 15 U.S. Code. She specifically pointed out that her XXXX mortgage account, identified under account number XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, had been consistently paid on time and in full, yet Experian reported multiple late payments on the account. XXXX emphasized that this was a direct violation of 15 U.S. Code 1666B, which governs the fair handling of billing errors, and also a breach of the FCRAs strict standards for accuracy. Furthermore, she highlighted that the reported information failed to meet Metro 2 compliance standards, which serve as the industry benchmark for accurate and consistent credit reporting across all bureaus. The tables provided in her dispute demonstrated clear discrepancies between Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion with respect to balances, monthly payments, and dates of account openings, reinforcing her argument that Experians records were unreliable and harmful to her credit profile. \n\nIn addition to the inaccurate mortgage reporting, XXXX strongly objected to two unauthorized hard credit inquiries from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that appeared on her report on XX/XX/year>, and XX/XX/year>. She argued that these inquiries were conducted without her knowledge or consent, making them violations of Section 604 of the FCRA, which requires a permissible purpose before any consumer report may be accessed. XXXX demanded immediate deletion of these inquiries and requested supporting documentation, including any signed applications, to justify their presence. Her insistence stemmed from the principle that no creditor has the right to access consumer information without explicit authorization, and Experians failure to remove or justify the entries constituted yet another infringement on her rights as a consumer. \n\nEqually concerning was XXXX accusation that Experian engaged in improper delays when processing her disputes. In her communications, she referenced 15 U.S. Code 1681i, which mandates that consumer reporting agencies must investigate disputes in a timely manner and without bias. She underscored that Experian appeared to be disregarding this obligation by issuing standardized template responses and by delaying investigations on the assumption that her disputes may have been prepared with third-party assistance, such as through a credit repair company. XXXX clarified that regardless of whether she sought advice or assistance, she retained full knowledge and consent of the letters submitted, and any delay based on this assumption was unlawful and a deliberate violation of her rights. She warned that such actions demonstrated willful non-compliance and would be grounds for litigation if not rectified. \n\nThroughout her letters, XXXX maintained a firm and resolute tone, making it clear that she would not tolerate inaccuracies that damaged her financial standing. She demanded the immediate deletion of all false late-payment remarks on her XXXX account, the removal of the unauthorized hard inquiries, and full written confirmation of these deletions within the statutory 30-day timeframe provided under the FCRA. She also expressed her disappointment with Experians lack of diligence, calling their practices both unprofessional and illegal. XXXX further noted that the discrepancies in account balances, monthly payment amounts, and reporting dates not only violated compliance standards but also introduced inconsistencies that could mislead potential lenders, thereby negatively impacting her ability to secure future credit. \n\nIn closing, XXXX issued strong warnings that failure to correct these issues promptly would result in legal escalation, including forwarding the matter to her attorney for litigation. She reminded Experian that as a consumer, she has the right to fair, accurate, and verifiable reporting, and any deviation from these obligations constitutes a violation of federal law. Her position underscored the broader principle that consumer rights must be respected and that credit reporting agencies bear a legal and ethical responsibility to ensure that all information reported is truthful, consistent, and properly substantiated. This case, therefore, illustrates not only an individuals determination to protect her financial integrity but also highlights systemic problems in how disputes are often mishandled by credit bureaus, making it a matter of potential interest for oversight by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ).","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-24T19:46:21.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"78224","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16150367","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-09-24T19:45:52.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["She argued that these inquiries were conducted without her knowledge or consent, making <em>them</em> violations of Section 604 of the FCRA, which requires a permissible purpose before any consumer report may be accessed. XXXX demanded immediate deletion of these inquiries and requested supporting documentation, including any <em>signed</em> applications, to justify their presence."]},"sort":[8.584326,"16150367"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16150366","_score":8.584326,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"The issue at hand reflects a serious conflict between the consumer, XXXX XXXX, and Experian, one of the major credit reporting agencies, concerning the handling of her credit information and the accuracy of the data being reported. At the core of the dispute, XXXX raised multiple concerns regarding inaccurate late-payment notations and unauthorized credit inquiries that, according to her, directly violated federal consumer protection laws such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and provisions under 15 U.S. Code. She specifically pointed out that her XXXX mortgage account, identified under account number XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, had been consistently paid on time and in full, yet Experian reported multiple late payments on the account. XXXX emphasized that this was a direct violation of 15 U.S. Code 1666B, which governs the fair handling of billing errors, and also a breach of the FCRAs strict standards for accuracy. Furthermore, she highlighted that the reported information failed to meet Metro 2 compliance standards, which serve as the industry benchmark for accurate and consistent credit reporting across all bureaus. The tables provided in her dispute demonstrated clear discrepancies between Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion with respect to balances, monthly payments, and dates of account openings, reinforcing her argument that Experians records were unreliable and harmful to her credit profile. \n\nIn addition to the inaccurate mortgage reporting, XXXX strongly objected to two unauthorized hard credit inquiries from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that appeared on her report on XX/XX/year>, and XX/XX/year>. She argued that these inquiries were conducted without her knowledge or consent, making them violations of Section 604 of the FCRA, which requires a permissible purpose before any consumer report may be accessed. XXXX demanded immediate deletion of these inquiries and requested supporting documentation, including any signed applications, to justify their presence. Her insistence stemmed from the principle that no creditor has the right to access consumer information without explicit authorization, and Experians failure to remove or justify the entries constituted yet another infringement on her rights as a consumer. \n\nEqually concerning was XXXX accusation that Experian engaged in improper delays when processing her disputes. In her communications, she referenced 15 U.S. Code 1681i, which mandates that consumer reporting agencies must investigate disputes in a timely manner and without bias. She underscored that Experian appeared to be disregarding this obligation by issuing standardized template responses and by delaying investigations on the assumption that her disputes may have been prepared with third-party assistance, such as through a credit repair company. XXXX clarified that regardless of whether she sought advice or assistance, she retained full knowledge and consent of the letters submitted, and any delay based on this assumption was unlawful and a deliberate violation of her rights. She warned that such actions demonstrated willful non-compliance and would be grounds for litigation if not rectified. \n\nThroughout her letters, XXXX maintained a firm and resolute tone, making it clear that she would not tolerate inaccuracies that damaged her financial standing. She demanded the immediate deletion of all false late-payment remarks on her XXXX account, the removal of the unauthorized hard inquiries, and full written confirmation of these deletions within the statutory 30-day timeframe provided under the FCRA. She also expressed her disappointment with Experians lack of diligence, calling their practices both unprofessional and illegal. XXXX further noted that the discrepancies in account balances, monthly payment amounts, and reporting dates not only violated compliance standards but also introduced inconsistencies that could mislead potential lenders, thereby negatively impacting her ability to secure future credit. \n\nIn closing, XXXX issued strong warnings that failure to correct these issues promptly would result in legal escalation, including forwarding the matter to her attorney for litigation. She reminded Experian that as a consumer, she has the right to fair, accurate, and verifiable reporting, and any deviation from these obligations constitutes a violation of federal law. Her position underscored the broader principle that consumer rights must be respected and that credit reporting agencies bear a legal and ethical responsibility to ensure that all information reported is truthful, consistent, and properly substantiated. This case, therefore, illustrates not only an individuals determination to protect her financial integrity but also highlights systemic problems in how disputes are often mishandled by credit bureaus, making it a matter of potential interest for oversight by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ).","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-24T19:46:20.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"78224","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16150366","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-09-24T19:45:52.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["She argued that these inquiries were conducted without her knowledge or consent, making <em>them</em> violations of Section 604 of the FCRA, which requires a permissible purpose before any consumer report may be accessed. XXXX demanded immediate deletion of these inquiries and requested supporting documentation, including any <em>signed</em> applications, to justify their presence."]},"sort":[8.584326,"16150366"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16140312","_score":8.56781,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"The issue at hand reflects a serious conflict between the consumer, XXXX XXXX, and Experian, one of the major credit reporting agencies, concerning the handling of her credit information and the accuracy of the data being reported. At the core of the dispute, XXXX raised multiple concerns regarding inaccurate late-payment notations and unauthorized credit inquiries that, according to her, directly violated federal consumer protection laws such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and provisions under 15 U.S. Code. She specifically pointed out that her XXXX mortgage account, identified under account number XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, had been consistently paid on time and in full, yet Experian reported multiple late payments on the account. XXXX emphasized that this was a direct violation of 15 U.S. Code 1666B, which governs the fair handling of billing errors, and also a breach of the FCRAs strict standards for accuracy. Furthermore, she highlighted that the reported information failed to meet Metro 2 compliance standards, which serve as the industry benchmark for accurate and consistent credit reporting across all bureaus. The tables provided in her dispute demonstrated clear discrepancies between Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion with respect to balances, monthly payments, and dates of account openings, reinforcing her argument that Experians records were unreliable and harmful to her credit profile. \n\nIn addition to the inaccurate mortgage reporting, XXXX strongly objected to two unauthorized hard credit inquiries from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that appeared on her report on XX/XX/year>, and XX/XX/year>. She argued that these inquiries were conducted without her knowledge or consent, making them violations of Section 604 of the FCRA, which requires a permissible purpose before any consumer report may be accessed. XXXX demanded immediate deletion of these inquiries and requested supporting documentation, including any signed applications, to justify their presence. Her insistence stemmed from the principle that no creditor has the right to access consumer information without explicit authorization, and Experians failure to remove or justify the entries constituted yet another infringement on her rights as a consumer. \n\nEqually concerning was XXXX accusation that Experian engaged in improper delays when processing her disputes. In her communications, she referenced 15 U.S. Code 1681i, which mandates that consumer reporting agencies must investigate disputes in a timely manner and without bias. She underscored that Experian appeared to be disregarding this obligation by issuing standardized template responses and by delaying investigations on the assumption that her disputes may have been prepared with third-party assistance, such as through a credit repair company. XXXX clarified that regardless of whether she sought advice or assistance, she retained full knowledge and consent of the letters submitted, and any delay based on this assumption was unlawful and a deliberate violation of her rights. She warned that such actions demonstrated willful non-compliance and would be grounds for litigation if not rectified. \n\nThroughout her letters, XXXX maintained a firm and resolute tone, making it clear that she would not tolerate inaccuracies that damaged her financial standing. She demanded the immediate deletion of all false late-payment remarks on her XXXX account, the removal of the unauthorized hard inquiries, and full written confirmation of these deletions within the statutory 30-day timeframe provided under the FCRA. She also expressed her disappointment with Experians lack of diligence, calling their practices both unprofessional and illegal. XXXX further noted that the discrepancies in account balances, monthly payment amounts, and reporting dates not only violated compliance standards but also introduced inconsistencies that could mislead potential lenders, thereby negatively impacting her ability to secure future credit. \n\nIn closing, XXXX issued strong warnings that failure to correct these issues promptly would result in legal escalation, including forwarding the matter to her attorney for litigation. She reminded Experian that as a consumer, she has the right to fair, accurate, and verifiable reporting, and any deviation from these obligations constitutes a violation of federal law. Her position underscored the broader principle that consumer rights must be respected and that credit reporting agencies bear a legal and ethical responsibility to ensure that all information reported is truthful, consistent, and properly substantiated. This case, therefore, illustrates not only an individuals determination to protect her financial integrity but also highlights systemic problems in how disputes are often mishandled by credit bureaus, making it a matter of potential interest for oversight by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ).","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-24T19:46:21.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"78224","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16140312","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-09-24T19:32:35.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["She argued that these inquiries were conducted without her knowledge or consent, making <em>them</em> violations of Section 604 of the FCRA, which requires a permissible purpose before any consumer report may be accessed. XXXX demanded immediate deletion of these inquiries and requested supporting documentation, including any <em>signed</em> applications, to justify their presence."]},"sort":[8.56781,"16140312"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16668094","_score":8.551031,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"1. My complaint starts when I received a letter from Chase stating my account was closing. Chase stated there was concerning activity and I was instructed by Chase in writing to destroy all cards and checks associated with the accounts ( attached ). \n\nA. The concerning activity I attempted to appeal this decision through the CFPB to get directly in contact with the XXXX XXXX but was met with a response that their decision was remaining the same. In their response, I noticed they revised their original statement referring to it as unexpected activity when responding to my appeal ( attached ). I would like clarification on this inconsistency, as the original terminology used is associated with accusations, which brings me to the next part of my complaint ; When a Chase XXXX representative previously accused me of money laundering when discussing my personal transfers. This was documented as a complaint with Chase, and after making them aware of that statement, two Chase managers called me directly about the issue, attempting to discuss the statement that was made. Now I have received a letter from Chase, after a transfer that was performed, dated the same day, providing notice that my accounts will be closing. A transfer that was performed in accordance with Chases published guidance, and yet Chase ultimately blamed me for activity being concerning that it itself directed and encouraged.. I will be attaching Chases own How to Avoid a Fee terms ( attached ). \n\nB. Credit Card Fraud and Possible Identity Theft I followed the instructions in the letter directly as stated, then discarded all the material. On XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX   EST, a Chase representative contacted me to verify transaction activity and I then realized I fell victim to fraud. I explained the letter I received and having trouble destroying a metal card, but ultimately followed the instructions on the letter. The representative claims she has no idea what I was talking about and intimidated me for following instructions by Chase then later stated during the call that my Social Security number and personal data may have been compromised due my actions the very outcome that resulted from following Chases own written instructions. \n\n- This sequence of events reflects negligence and a deceptive practice under the Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536 ). Furthermore, because Chases instructions directly created a risk of unauthorized use of my account and personal data, this also implicates Regulation E ( 12 C.F.R. 1005.6 ), which governs consumer liability and bank obligations following unauthorized transactions.\n\n2. Chases failure to deliver communications, including my account statements, through my authorized electronic communication channel, and the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive financial information 1. I was enrolled in Chase Banks paperless statements program, which required me to provide an email address for electronic communications.\n\n2. My original email address was later compromised, so I updated my email address in Chase Banks online system. Chase acknowledged and confirmed the updated email, and communications have been successfully sent to the new email since then. My old email was removed from my account profile and is no longer authorized. \n\n- When I updated my email address, this update served as an express revocation of consent for Chase to send any further electronic communications or statements to my previous email address. Chase acknowledged this change, and the old address no longer appeared in my online banking profile.\n\n3. After this update, I opened a new account with Chase, using the updated email address on the application. However, Chase sent communications, including statements, for this accountincluding account type, product type, balances, due dates, statement details, and the last 4 digits of my cardto my old, unauthorized email address. An address never provided for this account.\n\n4. I did not receive certain communications and statements at any authorized communication channel, preventing me from monitoring my accounts and accessing financial records I am entitled to. \n\nLegal and Regulatory Basis for Complaint 1. E-SIGN Act / Paperless Agreement Violation : Under the E-SIGN Act, electronic records must be delivered in a manner that ensures the customer can reliably access them. Chase failed to deliver statements to my authorized email, violating my rights under the paperless agreement.\n\n2. UDAAP Unfair and Abusive Practices ( Dodd-Frank Act 5531, 5536 ) : - Unfair : Chases failure to send statements to my authorized email caused substantial harm by preventing access to account information necessary for financial management.\n\n- Deceptive : Chase represented that my email information had been updated and that all paperless statements would be sent to my authorized address, which did not occur. - Abusive : Sending sensitive account information to an old, unauthorized\nemail interfered with my ability to manage my finances and exposed me to potential fraud risk.\n\nLegal basis for revoked consent A. E-SIGN Act Under 15 U.S.C. 7001 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( C ) ( ii ), consumers have the right to withdraw consent for electronic delivery at any time, and the institution must honor that withdrawal within a reasonable period.\n\nBy sending statements to the revoked address, Chase : * Ignored a withdrawn consent, and * Failed to provide effective electronic delivery as required by E-SIGN.\n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 7001 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( C ) ( ii ), I had the right to withdraw or modify my consent to receive records at a specific electronic address. My email update and Chases acknowledgment constituted withdrawal of consent for the prior email address. By continuing to send records to that revoked address, Chase failed to comply with the E-SIGN Acts consumer consent and withdrawal provisions. \n\nB. Regulation P ( GLBA, 12 C.F.R. 1016.13 ) Regulation P also ties consent and authorization to nonpublic personal information sharing. Once you revoke consent, the bank must stop sending or disclosing information to that contact channel.\n\nUnder 12 C.F.R. 1016.13, financial institutions must respect consumer directions regarding disclosure and delivery of nonpublic personal information. My revocation of consent for th\ne prior email address made any further disclosures to that channel unauthorized under Regulation P.\n\n3. Violation of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ) and Regulation P ( 15 U.S.C. 68016809 ; 12 C.F.R. Part 1016 ) - The GLBA and Regulation P require financial institutions to protect the confidentiality of nonpublic personal information ( NPI ) and to ensure that disclosures are made only to authorized recipients.\n\n- Chases continued transmission of account statements containing personal and financial details to an unauthorized, compromised email address constitutes a failure to safeguard NPI and an unauthorized disclosure under these provisions.\n\n4. Violation of the FTC Safeguards Rule ( 16 C.F.R. Part 314 ) - The Safeguards Rule, issued under the GLBA, requires financial institutions to maintain appropriate procedures to protect customer information from unauthorized access or disclosure.\n\n- Chases failure to prevent statements from being sent to an unauthorized email shows a breakdown in internal safeguards and information-security controls.\n\n5. Potential Violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act ( ECPA 18 U.S.C. 2511 ) - The ECPA prohibits the intentional transmission of electronic communications containing personal data to unauthorized or unintended recipients. By sending confidential statements to a deauthorized, compromised email address, Chase may have violated the ECPAs prohibition against the unauthorized disclosure of protected electronic communications.\n\n1. Following the account closure, I contacted Chase to request copies of my account statements, since I never received them through any authorized channel which banks are federally required to retain and make available. The representative named XXXX stated on a recorded line that I would need to step into a branch to receive my statements, despite me explaining that I was outside the country and unable to appear in person. When I informed her that such a requirement obstructs my rights as a consumer, she replied that it was procedure and then abruptly ended the call. \n\nAt the time my accounts were active, I was enrolled in paperless statements and regularly accessed them through Chase Online Banking. Since the closure, Chase has revoked my ability to view past statements electronically and now refuses to issue them physically by mail, thereby denying me access by both methods. This is not only unreasonable it is directly inconsistent with federal regulations requiring that consumers be able to access or reproduce their own account records within the retention period. \n\nChases refusal to provide statements through a reasonable and accessible means constitutes a violation of multiple consumer protection and recordkeeping laws, including : * 12 C.F.R. 1005.9 ( Regulation E ) and 12 C.F.R. 1030.6 ( Regulation DD ) Failure to provide periodic statement information as required for consumer accounts * 12 U.S.C. 5531 ( UDAAP ) Unfair restriction of access to financial records that causes harm the consumer can not reasonably avoid * 15 U.S.C. 7001 et seq. ( E-SIGN Act ) Denial of continued access to electronic disclosures and statements after consent was established Limiting statement access only to an in-branch process especially when the customer can not physically appear and previously received paperless electronic disclosures is an unfair and obstructive practice under federal law. It prevents the consumer from reviewing transactions, filing disputes, and maintaining accurate financial records, all of which constitute substantial harm. \n\nCompounding these issues, these incidents form a clear pattern of poor data handling, noncompliance, and consumer harm. I followed Chases instructions in good faith from discarding my cards and checks as directed, to maintaining updated contact information in my profile. Each time, Chases own actions resulted in harm, exposure, and blame directed at the customer. \n\nThe incident involving Chases unauthorized use of an old, compromised email address demonstrates that the customer had no control over the banks communications or internal processes, reinforcing that Chase not the customer is responsible for these failures. This sequence of events illustrates a systemic failure in Chases compliance, data protection, and customer communication practices, all of which place consumers at risk and violate federal privacy, banking, and consumer protection laws.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-17T07:31:46.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Other banking product or service","zip_code":"06614","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16668094","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2025-10-17T07:09:42.000Z","state":"CT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem accessing account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["E-<em>SIGN</em> Act / Paperless Agreement Violation : Under the E-<em>SIGN</em> Act, electronic records must be delivered in a manner that ensures the customer can reliably access <em>them</em>. Chase failed to deliver statements to my authorized email, violating my rights under the paperless agreement.\n\n2."]},"sort":[8.551031,"16668094"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15213541","_score":8.452412,"_source":{"product":"Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan","complaint_what_happened":"This is a request to reopen my prior CFPB complaint ( No. XXXX ) against TitleMax XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX The CFPB closed my case based solely on an unverified statement from the company without requiring any supporting documentation. That is not proof of compliance or a lawful debt. The CFPB has a duty to protect consumers by requiring documentation before closing a case. \n\nThis complaint concerns a deceptive practice in which TitleMax XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX misrepresented creditor/debtor roles, took my property without full disclosure, and used misleading contract language to conceal that I was the original creditor. \n\n1. My Promissory Note Was My Property Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ( GAAP ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) rules, a signed promissory note is treated as a cash-equivalent asset. I provided this asset making me the original creditor while the company was the true borrower. This applies to both the Original Loan No. XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and the Refinance Loan No. XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\n2. Misleading Grant Language The contracts say I grant the company rights to my promissory note and credit enhancement. This wording is deceptive because : - It implies the company already had rights and I was only granting permission. \n- It conceals that the note and credit enhancement were my property and the true source of funds. \n- It omits that these assets would be immediately sold, pledged, or securitized for the companys benefit. \n\n3. Conversion and Theft by Deception Under Texas law ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ), conversion occurs when someone wrongfully exercises control over anothers property against the owners rights. \n- My promissory note was my personal property until lawfully transferred with informed consent. \n- The company took it, treated it as its own asset, and transferred it without clear disclosure. \n- This is conversion, and because it was done through deceptive wording, it also meets the definition of theft by deception under Texas Penal Code 31.01 and 31.03.\n\n4. Fraud by Nondisclosure Texas law ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ) recognizes fraud by nondisclosure when a party with a duty to disclose material facts fails to do so. The company had a duty under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX and federal lending laws to disclose the true use and disposition of my note and credit enhancement and did not. \n\n5. Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) Violation The Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ) and Regulation Z ( 12 C.F.R. Part 1026 ) require disclosure of the actual source of funds, all finance charges, and any amounts paid to third parties.\n\n- They failed to disclose that I was the creditor, that my property funded the transaction, and that it was transferred for value. \n- This omission extends my right to rescind up to 3 years under 15 U.S.C. 1635 ( f ).\n\n6. Breach of Contract The contract contains language stating that I give up my right to demand payment.\n\n- This clause is a deliberate attempt to preemptively block me from asserting my rightful claim to the value I provided. \n- By law, the consideration in a contract must be mutual. My promissory note and credit enhancement constituted the value given, making payment due to me. \n- A clause that strips me of my right to demand payment is effectively an acknowledgment by the company that value is owed to me. \n- This is a breach of contract in itself because a contract that contains provisions contrary to law, public policy, or made through concealment is voidable and unenforceable. \n\n7. CFPBs Duty to Protect Consumers The CFPBs role is to protect consumers, not to accept unverified corporate statements as fact. In my prior complaint, the company responded only with you signed the contract. That is not proof. The CFPB must require documentation showing : - How my promissory note was recorded on their books ; - Any sale, pledge, or securitization ; - All assignments or endorsements.\n\nThese requests apply to both the Original Loan No. XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and Refinance Loan No. XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nThis is bigger than my case TitleMax/XXXX XXXX are funneling consumer promissory notes and credit enhancements to TMX Finance XXXX XXXX which bundles and securitizes them without disclosure. This is a systemic practice harming consumers nationwide. \n\nRequested Action : I request that the CFPB reopen my prior complaint ( No. XXXX ), require the company to produce all relevant documentation, and address the misrepresentation of creditor/debtor roles, the wrongful conversion of consumer property, and the breach of contract provisions that waive fundamental rights. \n\nMy Information : XXXX XXXX XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX XXXX ( for clarity ) : - UCC-1 Filing No. : XXXX - Vehicle VIN : XXXX - XXXX XXXX XXXX. : XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) - Refinance Loan No. : XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX )","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-11T14:42:44.000Z","issue":"Was approved for a loan, but didn't receive money","sub_product":"Title loan","zip_code":"76549","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15213541","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CCF Intermediate Holdings LLC","date_received":"2025-08-11T14:23:08.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["That is not proof of <em>compliance</em> or a lawful debt. The CFPB has a duty to <em>protect</em> consumers by requiring documentation before <em>closing</em> a case. \n\nThis complaint concerns a deceptive practice in which TitleMax XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX misrepresented creditor/debtor roles, took my property without full disclosure, and used misleading contract language to conceal that I was the original creditor. \n\n1."]},"sort":[8.452412,"15213541"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6324574","_score":8.357805,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Good afternoon. \n\nI am writing in hopes to raise awareness and prevent further deceptive and predatory practices from Citi Card, which has now taken hours and weeks of my time and as we have detrimentally relied on the promotional offer and contracted terms we signed with them but are unable to receive. \n\nTo begin, about one month ago, we ( I, and my husband as an authorized user ), applied for a Citi Credit card- XXXX XXXX card, which offers XXXX reward miles if {$4000.00} are spent in the first three months.\n\nThe first couple of weeks there was no issue. We used the card as needed to earn the reward miles. However, apparently as we were too close to receiving this promotion, they have done everything possible to block our use of the card and not allow us to receive the miles. \n\nThe first block happened when we paid the entire balance in full ( before it was even due ). Even though Citi has direct third party access to my checking account ( which I authorized ), they decided to block the available balance for a whole 10 days after the payment was booked on the account, in order to \" verify '' the bank and payment info. This means that the money was taken out of my checking, but during the XXXX  XXXX, when we relied on the funds, they were unavailable to us on the credit card. \n\nThen, before this \" payment verification '' was completed, they also started sending alerts to my phone app that they had to verify prior purchases. \n\nOnce I called them to \" verify the purchases '' and remove the early fraud detection, they went through a series of steps : 1 ) They tried to verify my number ( even though it is the only number I have, the number they approved my application from, the number every other bank uses to verify my transactions ) and they said their system was unable to send me a text message. \n2 ) They tried to verify my employer ( even though no one at my work has any knowledge of this \" attempt '', and even though I was sitting at my work desk when I called them, and even though I have paycheck stubs they could have asked for, etc ) 3 ) They asked for another credit card ( I gave them 2 credit cards on my name, all in good standing, all functioning ) - they were unable to verify. \n4 ) They asked for my bank account information, which, again, even though they had because I made a payment with the same account, they were \" unable to verify ''.\n\nI called back in a few minutes because it was impossible to speak to this person who just kept telling me that I couldn't be verified, even though I was sitting at the desk with the card in my hand, and I was connected to someone else. This person actually called my number, heard that it was me, and was able to release the early fraud detection, but not release the available balance ( so I can continue using the card ) because the payment verification was ongoing, even though they had already taken my money out a week prior at that moment. \n\nI then received a letter in the mail, about two days later to call fraud prevention services again. AGAIN, I called and they were \" unable to verify me '' until I asked for a supervisor.\n\nAfter speaking to a supervisor, she was able to verify that the text wasn't going through to my phone because according to them it was tied to my fathers name ( my maiden name ), even though I opened my phone number under my married name and have never tied this number in any way to my maiden name. I was then told that I would be flagged as \" verified, '' the number would be flagged as trusted, and that in about 48 hours they would release my available balance to use. \n\nSo, this morning, once we saw that the balance was available again, my husband and I went to XXXX to go XXXX  shopping, and once we were at the register, my card was again declined!! I had to use another card. I called them straight away because I wanted to rewards miles, and again was told ( after more than 40 minutes on the call ), that they were again not able to verify it was me. I told them about the conversation I had two days previously, about flagging my number as trusted, and they did not care. \n\nThey have offered no way to remedy this. I have my paychecks, my bank statements, my IDs and my passport. I have had the same email addresses for about 15 years. All meaningful ways to verify who I am. I know now that they are not trying to protect my identity, rather, they are trying to ensure that the promotion they offered is unattainable. This falls clearly under UDAAP compliance - deceptive practices. \n\nThe easiest thing for me would be to close the account, but as we have already taken a \" hit '' on the hard pull credit check and another \" hit '' for opening a new account, which negatively affects our credit score, we would be further negatively impacted in doing so. Also, I do not feel that it is fair to allow them to get away with these actions and that I want to be able to use my card and earn the rewards I was promised.\n\nIn hopes that you can help me resolve this, I wish you a happy XXXX XXXX \n\nBest, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2022-12-15T21:34:22.000Z","issue":"Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"21042","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6324574","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CITIBANK, N.A.","date_received":"2022-12-15T20:58:15.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Didn't receive advertised or promotional terms"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I know now that they are not trying to <em>protect</em> my identity, rather, they are trying to ensure that the promotion they offered is unattainable. This falls clearly under UDAAP <em>compliance</em> - deceptive practices. \n\nThe easiest thing for me would be to <em>close</em> the account, but as we have already taken a \" hit '' on the hard pull credit check and another \" hit '' for opening a new account, which negatively affects our credit score, we would be further negatively impacted in doing so."]},"sort":[8.357805,"6324574"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6111901","_score":8.303144,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I filed a complaint with the CFPB on XX/XX/XXXX which was taken verbally by a CFPB agent. That complaint was incorrectly transcribed by the CFPB agent due his language difficulties and transcription errors were made in his documentation. I would like to delete it from your system and replace it with this complaint in my own words. The number assigned to the XX/XX/XXXX complaint was XXXX. I called the CFPB today and spoke with XXXX in Washington to see if the original complaint could be \" edited '' but because the agent also misspelled my name on his complaint she could not help me. I told her I have six complaints filed with the CFPB and she could not group the six together on her screen. I told her the other XXXX complaints concern XXXX XXXX and the XXXX I endured with them since XXXX. I asked her how I could address all of these matters in one current complaint since my current situation with Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. relates very strongly to the mortgage they were given by XXXX. XXXX said to tie it all together and to bring it current in this complaint. \n\nThe company involved in my complaint is Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, UT XXXX. The CFPB currently has over XXXX customer complaints against them ( per XXXX in Washington ). XXXX sold my XXXX loan ( signed \" under protest '' and created by XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) to Select Portfolio Servicing in XXXX. I told Select Portfolio on Day 1 \" you have just inherited a \" criminal '' mortgage. I told them I needed all of the loan transfer information XXXX provided to them and told them I would be keeping meticulous records of every transaction and every conversation we have. \n\nThe first red flags on this new servicing by Select Portfolio were Escrow account issues. I was constantly told I have an Escrow \" shortage '' and I made payments as soon as I was advised. Despite making timely payments, Select Portfolio Servicing would randomly increase my monthly mortgage payments using the \" shortages '' as their excuse. As this kept happening I asked the agents where my payments were going and they told me \" the tax office ''. So I went to our local tax office and asked them if they were receiving my payments from Select Portfolio. They looked at me like I had three heads and told me what I already suspected. Escrow analyses are normally performed once annually and the mortgage holder is given the results of the Escrow analysis at this time and decides how he/she wants to handle the shortage or overage RED FLAG # 1 - SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING TRIED TO TELL ME I WAS REQUESTING THE ESCROW ANALYSES AND THIS IS WHY MY MORTGAGE AMOUNTS KEPT FLUCTUATING. I TOLD SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING I AM ON A FIXED RATE MORTGAGE AND IN THE SIX YEARS THEY SERVICED MY ACCOUNT, THEY WERE HANDLING MY TRANSACTIONS NON-COMPLIANTLY. \n\nVery often I made \" extra '' payments to Select Portfolio Servicing and was very specific about how I wanted the funds disbursed. I told them to apply anything over the amount due to Principal and repeated this instruction to the agent processing my payments each month. Select Portfolio Servicing had a problem applying payments to Principal and very often ignored my instruction. Instead, they would place my extra principal payments in unapplied funds or mortgage. Because Select Portfolio kept changing my monthly payment due I could never accurately calculate proper crediting to my Principal account. RED FLAG # 2 - Compliant processing of mortgage payments. \n\nDue to my previous experiences with XXXX, I kept escalating improper handling of my account to the Ombudsman 's office at Select Portfolio Servicing. I eventually escalated this matter to XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, NY, The XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, NY and Congresswoman XXXX XXXX 's office in XXXX, NY. I have been reporting my mortgage compliance issues to the OCC, the CFPB, XXXX, XXXX, Attorney General 's Office, FTC and FBI for almost twenty years now and all of the government agencies respond with \" this is a contractual matter between you and the bank ''. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc. is not a bank. They are a \" debt collector '' / '' loan processor ''. XXXX told me after reviewing my payment histories to report \" white collar crime '' to the FBI and the Attorney General. Both agencies referred me back to the CFPB and to real estate lawyers. \n\nI requested two conference calls with XXXX XXXX, Select Portfolio 's Director of Compliance, a representative from Congresswoman XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX and my attorney, XXXX XXXX. Account audits were requested and in XXXX of XXXX Select Portfolio Servicing reversed over {$5000.00} to my credit. They issued a new XXXX but would not explain in detail what they did or why. \n\nI continued to make additional principal payments with the hope of getting away from Select Portfolio Servicing with a refinance and they continued to misapply my payments. I was approved by two separate mortgage companies for a refinance and lost out on one closing because the payoff letter generated by Select Portfolio Servicing was incorrect. I felt as if they were holding me XXXX and kept calling their Ombudsman 's office daily to get what I needed for the second refinance, As the date for the refinance neared I reached out to XXXX XXXX several times with copies to all involved. He replied that he was out of the office and gave me the names of people I could contact in his absence. I did contact them but none replied. Only one sent an e-mail stating he was in a new position and referred me to a XXXX XXXX. No response there either. \n\nI received a call recently from XXXX XXXX stating he was so sorry for everything that was happening, as much as was humanly possible. I told him I am a very forgiving person but said he was the Director of Compliance. I said I held him to a higher standard. I told him my account has been so mishandled that a forensic accounting is needed. I told him to do the right thing and conduct s forensic accounting. He replied \" I don't know if I can do that ''. His Ombudsman 's office finally agreed last week to do a forensic accounting but I doubt they will be able to finalize this by my closing date. There is just silence from Select Portfolio Servicing. \n\nI have been on the phone daily with the Ombudsman 's office and various agents at Select Portfolio Servicing begging for documents required by the new servicer. It was like pulling teeth. Nothing flowed smoothly. My most recent mortgage payments were also misapplied and not reflected properly in the requested payoff letters. The stress Select Portfolio Servicing caused me was unwarranted. Their responsibility to their mortgage holders is to compliantly handle their accounts and their duties. They fail in both arenas. \n\nXXXX handled two of my previous mortgages. They charged bogus fees and also handled their mortgages non-compliantly. In my situation, I had to deal with the tragic death of my spouse and raising of XXXX young children. I reached out to XXXX for help and they claimed they never received my requests. They crisscrossed two separate mortgage accounts and forced me to go to XXXX daily and to XXXX XXXX them my proofs of payment on each account. They later claimed they lost my address and sent my mail to an obsolete address. They forced me into a bankruptcy where I lost one home. Despite the bankruptcy Judge 's order not to contact me, their company XXXX did contact me and tried to negotiate a double mortgage payment monthly to save the home I lost.. They sent me personal mortgage statements for an XXXX family in California. I received robotic, generated letters in duplicate and triplicate that made no sense. They never addressed the issues at hand. They had ruinners posting Foreclosure Notices on my properties. \n\nNow, Select Portfolio Servicing is doing the same thing - trying to cover their lies. I gave their Director of Compliance my spreadsheet which contains everything needed for analysis and resolution. Some things never change. \n\nAfter my bankruptcy, XXXX broke into my current home saying they were \" securing '' it. They were supposed to secure the home I lost in a different county!!! They tried to auction my home and never informed me. It's a miracle I still have a roof over my head. The Judge told me I can keep and live in one primary residence but XXXX thought otherwise. I have photographs. I have Police reports. I have receipts. XXXX refused to reimburse me for anything. I had to make claims to my Personal Home Insurance for XXXX 's damages. And this is all okay? I don't think so! \n\nXXXX took a year to issue a corrupt XXXX mortgage and told me if I didn't sign it as provided that I would lose my home. I signed \" under protest ''. You don't just add thousands of dollars to a mortgage after you were non-compliant and smile about it XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX was right. This is white collar crime. \n\nMy life was never the same after the bankruptcy. My credit was destroyed. You made my life XXXX and then the icing on the cake - you sold my XXXX mortgage to Select Portfolio Servicing.. Why pass the buck? I made no late payments. I complied with all the XXXX requirements. I was ahead on my payments. \n\nAfter twenty years and after contacting every government agency assigned to mortgage fraud I know why. The banks, the regulators, the lawyers, the Judge 's are all in on the fraud. The word compliance is an oxymoron for \" acceptable '' white collar crime. There will never be justice.- \" forget about it '' I attach two spreadsheets with my mortgage payment histories with XXXX and Select Portfolio Servicing. I also attach several e-mails I sent to XXXX XXXX and my attorney last week. I still expect a forensic accounting from Select Portfolio Servicing. This is the only way to get a handle on their deception. \n\nSad that a person has to waste another {$7000.00} just to break away from injustice with a refinance. I urge the CFPB with all that is within me to \" protect '' innocent consumers who have been incorrectly funnelled like a tornado into a bank 's bad batch of bad loans for no reason. After twenty years I am convinced all of this has happened to try to force a default on my loan. This is the only way XXXX  and the other banks involved with the bank fraud of the XXXX XXXX can eliminate their fraudulent accounts and appear \" good '' once again in front of their regulators. What a travesty! \n\nXXXX complaints and no enforcement? Please let our voices be heard.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-10-21T05:07:51.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"129XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6111901","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","date_received":"2022-10-21T01:49:02.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The CFPB currently has over XXXX customer complaints against <em>them</em> ( per XXXX in Washington ). XXXX sold my XXXX loan ( <em>signed</em> \" under protest '' and created by XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) to Select Portfolio Servicing in XXXX. I told Select Portfolio on Day 1 \" you have just inherited a \" criminal '' mortgage. I told <em>them</em> I needed all of the loan transfer information XXXX provided to <em>them</em> and told <em>them</em> I would be keeping meticulous records of every transaction and every conversation we have."]},"sort":[8.303144,"6111901"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"1937656","_score":8.223964,"_source":{"product":"Bank account or service","complaint_what_happened":"I was purchasing a home care company called XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX ( XXXX ) from a man named XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. Upon completing my due diligence on the corporation, I came to find out that the corporation had virtually no patients and it did not comply with required Medicare/Medicaid regulations as XXXX XXXX had originally led me to believe and as represented in section XXXX of the stock purchase agreement. After learning of the multiple compliance issues and XXXX XXXX ' fraudulent scheme to transfer the company 's patients, I informed XXXX XXXX that I would no longer be purchasing this company and demanded a refund of the {$100000.00} I sent to Huntington Bank to be held in an escrow account and be ONLY disbursed upon closing, XXXX XXXX refused to cancel the deal so I filed a lawsuit against him for breach of contract. \nDuring the purchase of XXXX XXXX XXXX was represented by attorney XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX, XXXX. As part of the transaction, XXXX XXXX and I signed an Escrow Agreement that was drafted by XXXX XXXX. As part of the agreement, I paid XXXX XXXX XXXX checks, XXXX for {$20000.00} and XXXX for {$80000.00} and these checks were to be placed into an escrow account pending completion of the purchase transaction. During the Discovery phase of the lawsuit, it was discovered that the {$100000.00} was NEVER deposited into the escrow account, furthermore, XXXX XXXX had cashed the checks and spent the money. \nDuring XXXX XXXX ' deposition taken on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, he repeatedly testified that his Attorney, XXXX XXXX advised him to cash both the {$80000.00} check and the {$20000.00} check despite the contractual agreement ( referenced above ) that these funds are to be held by Huntington Bank in an escrow account. ( Exhibit A-XXXX Deposition ). Pursuant to sections XXXX, XXXX and XXXX of said agreement, if a claim is filed by either the Buyer or Seller, the funds in dispute may only be paid out upon receipt of, ( a ) a joint written direction of buyer and seller, ( b ) a final written decision of a neutral arbitrator or ( c ) a final non-appealable order of a court of competent jurisdiction. ( Exhibit B-Escrow Agreement ). \nXXXX XXXX was well aware of the terms and conditions that had to be fulfilled before the release of any funds held in escrow and of his obligation to return any money held in escrow, if the purchase transaction was not followed through with for some reason. I have attached email correspondence between Huntington Bank 's Escrow Manager and XXXX XXXX a/k/a XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX 's paralegal, showing that XXXX XXXX instructed the Bank to return the escrow checks to his office, whereby, he proceeded to give them to XXXX XXXX, who cashed on the advice of XXXX XXXX. Based on all the evidence and documentation obtained during the course of discovery in this case, it is clear that XXXX XXXX had every intention of knowingly helping XXXX XXXX perpetrate fraud not only against me, but also against Huntington Bank because he knew that as soon as XXXX XXXX got those checks he was going to cash them. \nIn an effort to conceal his part in the fraudulent scheme that he and XXXX XXXX committed during this whole ordeal, XXXX XXXX withdrew as attorney for XXXX XXXX, but then filed a motion as an intervening Plaintiff, for no other reason than to monitor the progression of this case and try to influence the outcome to the benefit of XXXX XXXX and himself. As former defense counsel to XXXX XXXX, XXXX 's intervention as Plaintiff is clearly a conflict because what interests is he trying to protect? XXXX XXXX even went so far as to write an email to case evaluation tribunal advocating on behalf of XXXX XXXX and calling me a liar.","date_sent_to_company":"2016-05-23T19:14:07.000Z","issue":"Making/receiving payments, sending money","sub_product":"Cashing a check without an account","zip_code":"48127","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"1937656","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, THE","date_received":"2016-05-23T19:14:06.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["After learning of the multiple <em>compliance</em> issues and XXXX XXXX ' fraudulent scheme to transfer the company 's patients, I informed XXXX XXXX that I would no longer be purchasing this company and demanded a refund of the {$100000.00} I sent to Huntington Bank to be held in an escrow account and be ONLY disbursed upon <em>closing</em>, XXXX XXXX refused to cancel the deal so I filed a lawsuit against him for breach of contract."]},"sort":[8.223964,"1937656"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8067740","_score":8.159855,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Transfer of Lien Fraud and Violation of the XXXX XXXX XXXX Adjudicated Deferred Prosecution Agreement the DOJ. \n\nXXXX XXXX, Chief Executive Officer Caliber Home Loans , Inc., and XXXX XXXX, owner of XXXX XXXX XXXX and Caliber Home Loans , IncXXXX violated the XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX DOJ Adjudicated Deferred Prosecution Agreement XXXX ( see in attachment ). Caliber became the XXXX for XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX. Caliber and XXXX XXXX XXXX  are Managerial Partners of real estate investment vehicle known as, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  entered into an agreement to buy mortgages and HELOCs from XXXX XXXX XXXX. Caliber and XXXX XXXX XXXX failed to comply with the Sale or Merger section and the Anti Money Laundering rules of the DPA. XXXX XXXX XXXX and Caliber Home Loans , Inc. are Foreign-For-Profit entities and also must comply with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. \n\nSale or Merger of XXXX Parties The XXXX Parties agree that in the event they sell, merge, or transfer all or substantially all of their business operations as they exist as of the date of this Agreement, whether such sale is structured as a sale, asset sale, merger, or transfer, it shall include in any contract for sale, merger, or transfer a provision binding the purchaser, or any successor in interest thereto, to the obligations described in this Agreement. \n\nXXXX and XXXX engaged in a series of bad and deceptive business practices by filing fraudulent securities instruments with Property Clerks of government agencies, criminal non-disclosure of the contract/trust sale and price paid for the real estate property purchased, wrongful foreclosure, filing frivolous lawsuits and money laundering. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and Caliber were engaged in criminal fraud and money laundering by creating a Trustee contracts with an entity that is not registered to engage in business and/or litigation in the State of Texas. \n\nXXXX filed tens of thousands of fraudulent security instruments with property clerks to transfer liens they didnt legitimately own. XXXX instrument for my personal real estate property was filed with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX It is fraudulent on its face. It is not a legal document due to the fact that the entity receiving the real estate property is not able to do business and the signee is not authorized as an Attorney-in-Fact. These fraudulent filings were a material step in order for Caliber to seize control of property they do not own, foreclose on them and launder the money. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was involved in the disbursement and sale of XXXX XXXX XXXX Secured Receivables and the closing of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. He retired in XXXX and became a member of Calibers Board in XXXX. Short sales and pre-negotiated discounts originally for the borrowers, were, diverted, and packaged for third party lenders such as XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  and XXXX under XXXX watch. Those lenders were obligated to offer the borrowers those same short sales and pre-negotiated discounts which they purchased from XXXX per the DPA. Caliber, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX did not comply with the DPA. \n\nPer page 120, SEC XXXX 10-K Report, XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX addressed the disbursements of these assets. Aggregate cash consideration received during XXXX for these real estate secured receivables totaled XXXX XXXX  The Report states that XXXX continued to work with borrowers : As we continued to work with borrowers, we may also agree to a short sale whereby the property is sold by the borrower at a price which has been pre-negotiated with us and the borrower is released from further obligations. The Report also states that, year-ending XX/XX/XXXX that non-credit card receivables were sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX It also reported that the mortgage service division contracts were sold ending XXXX XXXX Included is an email for XXXX which states they never owned my HELOC. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  recorded investment transactions with the SEC in XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. ) This was a short-closed, 13-month investment fund, per the SEC. \n\nOn XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX my account general ledger which stated the new discounted total due on my property was {$55000.00}. It is assumed that Caliber paid {$55000.00} for the HELOC since the balance on that ledger was {$0.00}, as of XXXX Caliber said my outstanding balance was {$140.00}, XXXX XXXX XXXX. Caliber engaged in real estate fraud and money laundering by collecting {$190000.00} on XX/XX/XXXX per their records. Caliber and XXXX XXXX Funds breached the XXXX XXXX XXXX which the successors must be in compliance with. Caliber collected at least {$140000.00} they did not earn. \nBreach of the Agreement If, during the Term of this Agreement, the Department determines, in its sole discretion, that the XXXX Parties have ( a ) committed any crime under U.SXXXX federal law subsequent to the signing of this Agreement, ( b ) at any time provided in connection with this Agreement deliberately false, incomplete, or misleading information, or ( c ) otherwise breached the Agreement, the XXXX Parties shall thereafter be subject to prosecution for any federal criminal violation of which the Department has knowledge, including the charges in the Information described in Paragraph 1, which may be pursued by the Department in the United States District Court for the XXXX XXXX of New York or any other appropriate venue. \n\nCaliber has engaged in many improprieties in collecting debt which they do not legally own. On XX/XX/XXXX, Caliber sent the attached letter Demand for Payment and Notice of Intent to Accelerate as the Servicer for XXXX XXXX. The transfer of XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, to XXXX XXXX was made after the acceleration notice. My homestead protection instrument was invoked in XX/XX/XXXX to protect my homestead from sale or XXXX. I was a Protected Member of the XXXX Class Action Lawsuit ( violations of RESPA, FDCPA, FCRA, TILA ) which settled favorable for the Members. My loan was disbursed in XXXX of the the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Calibers XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX sent a letter in XXXX XXXX XXXX, stating their file was closed due to a payoff of the loan. Calibers XXXX XXXX sued me by using XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  as Trustee for LSF8 Master Participation Trust knowing the contract to sue was illegal and the debt was established to have a XXXX balance in XXXX. XXXX created fraudulent Modification Contracts which did not have any fiduciary principle tying into an amount to cure. Caliber disregarded XXXX XXXX XXXX language which they were obligated to comply with. In an effort to artificially inflate the debt through unlawful financial transactions. Caliber augmented the debt by incorporating 6 years deferred interest on a loan they had no legitimate bases of ownership. Attorney from XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX stated in an email in XX/XX/XXXX, that my property was purchased as a short sale from XXXX  XXXX Caliber and XXXX XXXX persistently withheld the contractual and purchase price since XXXX since it would substantiate a lack of ownership of the debt. \n\nFake Closing XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX XXXX ) scheduled a fake closing in which there was no funding on XXXX. Caliber negotiated a short sale with XXXX and XXXX. They defrauded me of {$190000.00}. This is not only fraud, but money laundering. XXXX refused to turn over the XXXX closing package and a copy of the check/wire on XX/XX/XXXX. The Lender ( who was not there ) on that closing stated she did not fund that closing. On XXXX XXXX closed on my property with XXXX to XXXX. XXXX, XXXX and XXXX refuse to send a copy of the check/wire that paid of the debt. The Title Attorney withheld filing the XX/XX/XXXX closing instrument with the XXXX XXXX XXXX by XXXX weeks so the XX/XX/XXXX closing and the XX/XX/XXXX closing did not raise any red flags. The check Caliber received was dated XXXX Caliber has stated on the phone and in the attached letters that they will not release a copy of the check/wire which paid off the account. They are violating another FDCPA rule. \n\nThe Judicial climate in Texas is heavily influenced by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The lawyers recommended by the Bar Association would not take on the contract issue of the claim, even when the Defendant attorneys asked to negotiate a settlement in XX/XX/XXXX. They were all familiar with the XXXX XXXX Funds Foreclosure Litigations and their attorneys. Attorneys stated it was unfair that I have a home without paying for it when they had too. However, they would take the case if I filed Bankruptcy and paid {$3000.00} up front. The system is very corrupt even including the judges. When informing JXXXX XXXX at the XX/XX/XXXX, hearing, that there was not a copy of a contract between me and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX denied me due process under the law when he told me to shut up or he would have his bailiff throw me out of this Court. He allowed an admittance of hearsay evidence stating I was not a party of the Class Action Lawsuit and a Modification Agreement that I did not sign. Evidence of both, the Class Action Lawsuit and that the Modification Agreement was included in the Response I filed with the Court. Caliber created multiple modifications which did not tie into any contract of a loan. \nSummary Caliber and XXXX XXXX Funds are obligated to adhere to the XXXX XXXX. If it were not for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. fraudulent transfers of lien, I would not have lost my property to the bad actors. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has been on the Board of Caliber Home Loans XXXX XXXX since XXXX. The XXXX XXXX Report stated that many directors and officers breached their fiduciary duties. Those pre-negotiated prices for borrowers loans had to cross XXXX XXXX Instead of negotiating with borrowers, he deceptively sold those discounted loans to XXXX XXXX XXXXCaliber and other third-party lenders/trusts who violated the DPA. XXXX instigated these criminal and deceptive practices, by defrauding their own customers to recover millions lost from the fine, XXXX XXXX. This is not only fraud, but unchecked capitalism which leads to economic discrimination and massive homelessness. Agencies are not enforcing RESPA and FDCPA laws. Caliber and XXXX XXXX Funds can continue these bad actions due to the sanctions do not penalize them enough to correct the illegal activities. It is profitable for them to commit fraud and money laundering than to adhere to laws that prevent homeowners from losing their property to those frauds. A copy of these complaints will be sent to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-12-27T23:08:47.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","zip_code":"70503","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8067740","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Caliber Home Loans, Inc.","date_received":"2023-12-27T22:44:21.000Z","state":"LA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Closing disclosure or other related disclosures"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Caliber and XXXX XXXX Funds breached the XXXX XXXX XXXX which the successors must be in <em>compliance</em> with. Caliber collected at least {$140000.00} they did not earn."],"issue":["<em>Closing</em> on a mortgage"],"sub_issue":["<em>Closing</em> disclosure or other related disclosures"]},"sort":[8.159855,"8067740"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":95,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":95}]}},"product":{"doc_count":95,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":26,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":26}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":18,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":8},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":5},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":2},{"key":"Conventional fixed mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","doc_count":1},{"key":"Other type of mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":15,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":8},{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":3},{"key":"Medical debt","doc_count":2},{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Telecommunications debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":8,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":8}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":7,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":4},{"key":"Other banking product or service","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":7,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Virtual currency","doc_count":3},{"key":"International money transfer","doc_count":2},{"key":"Mobile or digital wallet","doc_count":1},{"key":"Money order, traveler's check or cashier's check","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":3},{"key":"Store credit card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Bank account or service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Cashing a check without an account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Title loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Private student loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":95,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":16,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":16}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":14,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":7},{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":6},{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","doc_count":9,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closing disclosure or other related disclosures","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":8,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":4},{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":2},{"key":"Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":6,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":6,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance","doc_count":2},{"key":"Payment process","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone","doc_count":2},{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":1},{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Seized or attempted to seize your property","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Closing an account","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":2},{"key":"Can't close your account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed","doc_count":2},{"key":"Problem accessing account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing your account","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Repossession","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company explaining amount owed","doc_count":1},{"key":"Loan balance remaining after the vehicle is repossessed and sold","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive advertised or promotional terms","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Received bad information about your loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"False statements or representation","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempted to collect wrong amount","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Getting a loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Changes in terms mid-deal or after closing","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Loan servicing, payments, escrow account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Making/receiving payments, sending money","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Managing the loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan sold or transferred to another company","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Other features, terms, or problems","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Privacy issues","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Other transaction problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Transaction was not authorized","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble using your card","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Can't use card to make purchases","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Was approved for a loan, but didn't receive money","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":95,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":93},{"key":"No","doc_count":2}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":95,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":76},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":16},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":3}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":95,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":95}]}},"company":{"doc_count":95,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":10},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":10},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":8},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":5},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":4},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":4},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":4},{"key":"Bay Area Receivables, Inc","doc_count":3},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":2},{"key":"HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, THE","doc_count":2},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":2},{"key":"Rocket Mortgage, LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"ADESA CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"AES/PHEAA","doc_count":1},{"key":"ALLY FINANCIAL INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"AmeriHome Mortgage Company, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Auto Credit of Virginia Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE","doc_count":1},{"key":"CARDINAL FINANCIAL COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP","doc_count":1},{"key":"CCF Intermediate Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Caliber Home Loans, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Caneel Capital, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Capio Partners, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Consumer Portfolio Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Exeter Finance, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FIRST AMERICAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FNIS)","doc_count":1},{"key":"GMFS, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"GUARANTEED RATE INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Kriya Capital, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"MORTGAGE 1 INCORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Mr. Cooper Group Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"PARAMOUNT RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE GROUP","doc_count":1},{"key":"PNC Bank N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Payward Ventures Inc. dba Kraken","doc_count":1},{"key":"RUOFF MORTGAGE","doc_count":1},{"key":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","doc_count":1},{"key":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"VANDYK MORTGAGE CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"VERITAS FUNDING, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Winklevoss Exchange LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"World Omni Financial Corp.","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":95,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"FL","doc_count":15},{"key":"TX","doc_count":13},{"key":"CA","doc_count":9},{"key":"GA","doc_count":5},{"key":"IA","doc_count":5},{"key":"IL","doc_count":5},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":5},{"key":"NV","doc_count":5},{"key":"MI","doc_count":4},{"key":"SC","doc_count":4},{"key":"IN","doc_count":2},{"key":"LA","doc_count":2},{"key":"MA","doc_count":2},{"key":"MD","doc_count":2},{"key":"MN","doc_count":2},{"key":"RI","doc_count":2},{"key":"AL","doc_count":1},{"key":"CT","doc_count":1},{"key":"DC","doc_count":1},{"key":"DE","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NE","doc_count":1},{"key":"NM","doc_count":1},{"key":"NY","doc_count":1},{"key":"OH","doc_count":1},{"key":"OR","doc_count":1},{"key":"UT","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":95,"company_public_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","doc_count":39},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":10},{"key":"Company believes the complaint is the result of a misunderstanding","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":95,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":15},{"key":"Older American","doc_count":6},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[8.159855,"8067740"],"3":[5.7116313,"16333446"],"4":[4.1432076,"4402901"]}}}