{"took":104,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":86,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19584899","_score":19.18926,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Formal Rebuttal Case ID XXXX / Complaint XXXX To Whom It May Concern, This letter serves as a formal rebuttal to Robinhoods response regarding the remaining {$3800.00} in my account. \n\nThe funds in question were part of my total account balance of {$14000.00} derived from stock and cryptocurrency positions. Robinhood previously released approximately {$10000.00} to my verified bank account via ACH withdrawal, confirming successful identity verification and compliance review. \n\nAfter I notified Robinhood that funds were missing, I was informed that if any internal error existed, the funds would be returned to my account. Subsequently, {$3800.00} was re-credited to my Robinhood account. I then received written confirmation via email stating that I could withdraw those funds. \n\nHowever, despite this written confirmation, my account remained restricted, preventing withdrawal. Robinhood now claims it is unable to verify the legitimacy of the same {$3800.00} that was previously re-credited and confirmed withdrawable in writing. \n\nRobinhood has not identified : Any fraudulent transaction Any chargeback Any ACH reversal Any defective securities trade Any compliance violation tied to a specific transaction If the funds were valid enough to : 1. Be re-credited after internal review, and 2. Be confirmed withdrawable in writing, then Robinhood must provide documented justification explaining why those same funds are now deemed unverifiable. \n\nAbsent specific transaction-level evidence, continued withholding of these funds constitutes improper retention of customer brokerage assets. \n\nI am formally requesting immediate release of the {$3800.00} or detailed documentation identifying the precise legal and transactional basis for withholding these funds. \n\nRespectfully, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-02-18T12:28:44.000Z","issue":"Trouble accessing funds in your mobile or digital wallet","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"60637","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19584899","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ROBINHOOD MARKETS INC.","date_received":"2026-02-18T12:06:53.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Robinhood has not identified : Any fraudulent <em>transaction</em> Any chargeback Any ACH reversal Any defective securities trade Any <em>compliance</em> <em>violation</em> <em>tied</em> to a <em>specific</em> <em>transaction</em> If the funds were valid enough to : 1. Be re-credited after internal review, and 2. Be confirmed withdrawable in writing, then Robinhood must provide documented justification explaining why those same funds are now deemed unverifiable."]},"sort":[19.18926,"19584899"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17391196","_score":17.573572,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"I used XXXX  to pay another XXXX  user for a purchase. I tagged the payment as a purchase, which according to XXXX Purchase Protection Program makes it eligible for buyer protection if the item is not delivered, misrepresented, or involves fraud. The seller never delivered the item and the transaction was fraudulent.\n\nI reported this to XXXX  immediately. XXXX  denied my claim with a generic template and did not perform any actual investigation. Their represent\native provided contradictory explanations and refused to identify which specific Purchase Protection criteria they believe the transaction did not meet. There was no evidence review or investigation summary provided. \n\nIn the first denial, XXXX  claimed the transaction was ineligible without explanation. After I challenged this, they changed their justification to a completely different reason ( funds are immediately available to the recipient ), which does not relate to Purchase Protection at all. This demonstrates the claim was not evaluated under their policy.\n\nXXXX  collected the seller fee associated with purchase protection transactions. They can not collect a fee tied to Purchase Protection and then refuse to apply that protection using shifting explanations. This appears deceptive and unfair.\n\nI requested escalation to a supervisor or compliance specialist and XXXXXXXX  stopped responding for four days. XXXX  failed to investigate the dispute properly, failed to apply their own posted policies, and provided contradictory explanations. This may violate UDAAP, CFPB digital wallet standards, Regulation E error-resolution requirements, and consumer rights. I need CFPB assistance to resolve this.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-20T12:07:52.000Z","issue":"Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"80301","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17391196","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","date_received":"2025-11-20T11:50:20.000Z","state":"CO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The seller never delivered the item and the <em>transaction</em> was fraudulent.\n\nI reported this to XXXX  immediately. XXXX  denied my claim with a generic template and did not perform any actual investigation. Their represent\native provided contradictory explanations and refused to identify which <em>specific</em> Purchase Protection criteria they believe the <em>transaction</em> did not meet. There was no evidence review or investigation summary provided."],"issue":["Unauthorized transactions or other <em>transaction</em> problem"]},"sort":[17.573572,"17391196"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18707791","_score":16.06913,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"My name is XXXX XXXX. The email associated with my Cash App account is XXXX. \n\nCash App deactivated my account and stated that I violated their Terms of Service due to alleged fraudulent activity. They did not identify what specific transaction or behavior was considered fraudulent, did not provide evidence, and did not give a clear appeal path with a real explanation. \n\nMy account activity was normal daily use. I used the Cash App card for ordinary purchases and typical spending. I did not engage in fraud, scams, money laundering, or prohibited transactions. I am being accused without proof and without meaningful due process.\n\nCash App sent a message stating they reviewed my account and found activity that violates their Terms of Service and that my account will remain deactivated. The notice does not provide enough detail for me to understand the allegation or respond. I requested clarification and reconsideration, but I have not received a specific reason, the transactions they claim are problematic, or documentation supporting the decision. \n\nSection : Harm caused This deactivation and fraud accusation has harmed me by XXXX Blocking access to my account features XXXX Creating uncertainty about my ability to access funds and use the service XXXX Labeling my account as fraudulent without proof or an explanation Section : What I want Cash App to do I request that Cash App do all of the following XXXX Provide a detailed written explanation of the exact reason for the restriction, including the specific transactions, dates, and policy sections they relied on XXXX Provide the evidence or rationale supporting the fraud allegation XXXX Provide a clear appeal and review process with a human review XXXX Reinstate my account if they can not substantiate the fraud claim XXXX If they refuse to reinstate, provide written confirmation that my account was closed without any finding of illegal activity and ensure I can withdraw any remaining funds without delay XXXX Provide all account records related to this decision, including internal notes or compliance flags tied to my profile","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-14T07:58:03.000Z","issue":"Closing an account","sub_product":"Other banking product or service","zip_code":"761XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18707791","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Block, Inc.","date_received":"2026-01-14T07:53:37.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Company closed your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["flags <em>tied</em> to my profile"]},"sort":[16.06913,"18707791"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11837200","_score":14.147879,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint Against XXXX for Security Fraud , Discrimination, and Consumer Credit Violations Complainant : Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX [ XXXX ] Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX Respondent : Name : XXXX Address : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Business Type : Automobile dealership and financing institution 1. Complaint to the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Summary of Violations : XXXX has engaged in practices that violate federal consumer protection laws and regulations, including : 1. Violation of the Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1605 ) : XXXX failed to provide clear and accurate disclosures regarding loan terms, including hidden fees and deceptive financing rates for the following vehicle : VIN : XXXX Make/Model : XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX MSRP/RETAIL Price : {$98000.00} Amount Financed : {$96000.00} Additionally, the violation of 15 U.S.C. 1611 involves the provision of false and misleading information during the transaction process, infringing upon the public law safeguarding consumer rights. 2. Unfair Use of Consumer Reports ( UCC 9-108 ) : The company accessed and utilized my consumer credit report without a permissible purpose, violating federal guidelines and UCC regulations . 3. Deceptive Financial Practices : Misrepresentation of financing agreements and failure to disclose accurate costs as required under 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ). Violation of the UCC Diffusion of Finance Charge by not disclosing the total finance charge, i.e., the sum of all amounts payable directly to XXXX. 4. Discrimination : Instances of discriminatory practices during the financing process, including inconsistent loan terms and denial of fair rates based on [ specific discriminatory basis ]. Supporting Documents : Vehicle financing agreements and disclosures Communications with XXXX Copies of consumer reports accessed by the respondent Evidence of discriminatory practices Relief Sought : Immediate investigation into XXXXXXXX XXXX financing practices . Enforcement of penalties for non-compliance with consumer protection laws. Compensation for damages, including financial losses, credit harm, and injuries caused by these violations. Compensation Requested : {>= $1,000,000} ( XXXX Million USD ). In addition, all transactions and violations will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service XXXX IRS ) under relevant consumer transaction forms, including 1099-A, 1099-B, 1099-OID, and 1099-C. 2. Complaint to the Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ) Summary of Violations : XXXX has committed security fraud and unethical practices in financial disclosures, including : 1. Misrepresentation of Financial Information : Misleading disclosures related to financing and investment opportunities tied to the vehicle purchase. Providing falsified or incomplete information to consumers about risks and obligations. 2. Violation of SEC Regulations : XXXX failed to comply with disclosure requirements under SEC rules , impairing my ability to make informed financial decisions. Supporting Documents : Financial statements or investment documents provided by XXXX Email or written communication demonstrating misrepresentation Relief Sought : Investigation into security fraud violations. Enforcement of penalties for misleading financial practices. Key Legal References Included : 1. Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1605 ) : Requires accurate disclosures of loan terms and costs. 2. 15 U.S.C. 1611 : Prohibits the provision of false and misleading information. 3. UCC 9-108 : Governs permissible use of consumer credit reports. 4. 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ) : Establishes regulations for credit transactions and fair disclosure practices. 5. UCC Diffusion of Finance Charge : Summation of all amounts payable directly to the creditor, requiring clear and accurate disclosure. 3. Additional Actions : Lien and Property Claims : The vehicle ( VIN : XXXX ) will be liened to secure the interest of the complainant. All property tied to the respondent will be claimed under secure party creditor rights. Legal Action : If this matter is not resolved, I will seek legal recourse for restitution and damages caused by the violations. IRS Reporting : All financial transactions involved in this complaint will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service for review of compliance with federal tax laws and consumer transaction documentation. Declaration : I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Signature : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX File Number : XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-29T14:08:43.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"61820","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11837200","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Volvo Car Financial Services U.S., LLC","date_received":"2025-01-29T14:08:40.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["All property <em>tied</em> to the respondent will be claimed under secure party creditor rights. Legal Action : If this matter is not resolved, I will seek legal recourse for restitution and damages caused by the <em>violations</em>. IRS Reporting : All financial transactions involved in this complaint will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service for review of <em>compliance</em> with federal tax laws and consumer <em>transaction</em> documentation."]},"sort":[14.147879,"11837200"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11830724","_score":14.107895,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and Consumer Credit Violations Complainant : Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Hunters Pond XXXX [ XXXX ] Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX Respondent : Name : Sullivan-Parkhill Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, IL XXXX Business XXXX : Automobile dealership and financing institution XXXX. Complaint to the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Summary of Violations : XXXX has XXXX in practices that violate federal consumer protection laws and regulations, including : XXXX. Violation of the Truth in Lending Act ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) : XXXX failed XXXX provide clear and accurate disclosures regarding loan terms, including hidden fees and deceptive financing rates for the following vehicle : VIN : XXXX Make/Model : 2024 XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX : {$98000.00} Amount Financed : {$96000.00} Additionally, the violation of 15 U.S.C. 1611 involves the provision of false and misleading information during the transaction process, infringing upon the public law safeguarding consumer rights. 2. Unfair Use of Consumer Reports ( UCC 9-108 ) : The company accessed and utilized my consumer credit report without a permissible purpose, violating federal guidelines and UCC regulations . 3. Deceptive Financial Practices : Misrepresentation of financing agreements and failure to disclose accurate costs as required under 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ). Violation of the UCC Diffusion of Finance Charge by not disclosing the total finance charge, i.e., the sum of all amounts payable directly to XXXX. XXXX. Discrimination : Instances of discriminatory practices during the financing process, including inconsistent loan terms and denial of fair rates based on [ specific discriminatory basis ]. Supporting Documents : Vehicle financing agreements and disclosures Communications with XXXX XXXX XXXX consumer reports accessed by the respondent Evidence of discriminatory practices Relief Sought : Immediate investigation into XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX Enforcement of penalties for non-compliance with consumer protection laws. Compensation for damages, including financial losses, credit harm, and injuries caused by these violations. Compensation Requested : {>= $1,000,000} ( XXXX XXXX  USD ). In addition, all transactions and violations will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service XXXX IRS ) under relevant consumer transaction forms, including 1099-A, 1099-B, 1099-OID, and 1099-C. 2. Complaint to the Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ) Summary of Violations : XXXX has committed security fraud and unethical practices in financial disclosures, including : 1. Misrepresentation of Financial Information : Misleading disclosures related to financing and investment opportunities tied to the vehicle purchase. Providing falsified or incomplete information to consumers about risks and obligations. 2. Violation of SEC Regulations : XXXX failed to comply with disclosure requirements under SEC rules XXXX impairing my ability to make informed financial decisions. Supporting Documents : Financial statements or investment documents provided by XXXX Email or written communication demonstrating misrepresentation Relief Sought : Investigation into security fraud violations. Enforcement of penalties for misleading financial practices. Key Legal References Included : 1. Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1605 ) : Requires accurate disclosures of loan terms and costs. 2. 15 U.S.C. 1611 : Prohibits the provision of false and misleading information. 3. UCC 9-108 : Governs permissible use of consumer credit reports. 4. 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ) : Establishes regulations for credit transactions and fair disclosure practices. 5. UCC Diffusion of Finance Charge : Summation of all amounts payable directly to the creditor, requiring clear and accurate disclosure. 3. Additional Actions : Lien and Property Claims : The vehicle ( VIN : XXXX ) will be liened to secure the interest of the complainant. All property tied to the respondent will be claimed under secure party creditor rights. Legal Action : If this matter is not resolved, I will seek legal recourse for restitution and damages caused by the violations. IRS Reporting : All financial transactions involved in this complaint will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service for review of compliance with federal tax laws and consumer transaction documentation. Declaration : I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Signature : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX File Number : XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-29T14:08:32.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"61820","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11830724","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Mercedes Benz Financial Services","date_received":"2025-01-29T13:43:49.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["All property <em>tied</em> to the respondent will be claimed under secure party creditor rights. Legal Action : If this matter is not resolved, I will seek legal recourse for restitution and damages caused by the <em>violations</em>. IRS Reporting : All financial transactions involved in this complaint will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service for review of <em>compliance</em> with federal tax laws and consumer <em>transaction</em> documentation."]},"sort":[14.107895,"11830724"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11837201","_score":14.08484,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint Against XXXX for Security Fraud , Discrimination, and Consumer Credit Violations Complainant : Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX [ XXXX ] Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX Respondent : Name : XXXX Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Business Type : Automobile dealership and financing institution 1. Complaint to the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Summary of Violations : XXXX has engaged in practices that violate federal consumer protection laws and regulations, including : 1. Violation of the Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1605 ) : XXXX failed to provide clear and accurate disclosures regarding loan terms, including hidden fees and deceptive financing rates for the following vehicle : VIN : XXXX Make/Model : XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX MSRP/RETAIL Price : {$98000.00} Amount Financed : {$96000.00} Additionally, the violation of 15 U.S.C. 1611 involves the provision of false and misleading information during the transaction process, infringing upon the public law safeguarding consumer rights. 2. Unfair Use of Consumer Reports ( UCC 9-108 ) : The company accessed and utilized my consumer credit report without a permissible purpose, violating federal guidelines and UCC regulations . 3. Deceptive Financial Practices : Misrepresentation of financing agreements and failure to disclose accurate costs as required under 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ). Violation of the UCC Diffusion of Finance Charge by not disclosing the total finance charge, i.e., the sum of all amounts payable directly to XXXX. 4. Discrimination : Instances of discriminatory practices during the financing process, including inconsistent loan terms and denial of fair rates based on [ specific discriminatory basis ]. Supporting Documents : Vehicle financing agreements and disclosures Communications with XXXX Copies of consumer reports accessed by the respondent Evidence of discriminatory practices Relief Sought : Immediate investigation into XXXX 's financing practices . Enforcement of penalties for non-compliance with consumer protection laws. Compensation for damages, including financial losses, credit harm, and injuries caused by these violations. Compensation Requested : {>= $1,000,000} ( XXXX Million USD ). In addition, all transactions and violations will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service ( IRS ) under relevant consumer transaction forms, including 1099-A, 1099-B, 1099-OID, and 1099-C. 2. Complaint to the Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ) Summary of Violations : XXXX has committed security fraud and unethical practices in financial disclosures, including : 1. Misrepresentation of Financial Information : Misleading disclosures related to financing and investment opportunities tied to the vehicle purchase. Providing falsified or incomplete information to consumers about risks and obligations. 2. Violation of SEC Regulations : XXXX failed to comply with disclosure requirements under SEC rules XXXX impairing my ability to make informed financial decisions. Supporting Documents : Financial statements or investment documents provided by XXXX Email or written communication demonstrating misrepresentation Relief Sought : Investigation into security fraud violations. Enforcement of penalties for misleading financial practices. Key Legal References Included : 1. Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1605 ) : Requires accurate disclosures of loan terms and costs. 2. 15 U.S.C. 1611 : Prohibits the provision of false and misleading information. 3. UCC 9-108 : Governs permissible use of consumer credit reports. 4. 12 CFR Part 1026 ( Regulation Z ) : Establishes regulations for credit transactions and fair disclosure practices. 5. UCC Diffusion of Finance Charge : Summation of all amounts payable directly to the creditor, requiring clear and accurate disclosure. 3. Additional Actions : Lien and Property Claims : The vehicle ( VIN : XXXX ) will be liened to secure the interest of the complainant. All property tied to the respondent will be claimed under secure party creditor rights. Legal Action : If this matter is not resolved, I will seek legal recourse for restitution and damages caused by the violations. IRS Reporting : All financial transactions involved in this complaint will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service for review of compliance with federal tax laws and consumer transaction documentation. Declaration : I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Signature : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX File Number : XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-29T14:08:43.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"61820","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11837201","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-29T14:08:40.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["All property <em>tied</em> to the respondent will be claimed under secure party creditor rights. Legal Action : If this matter is not resolved, I will seek legal recourse for restitution and damages caused by the <em>violations</em>. IRS Reporting : All financial transactions involved in this complaint will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service for review of <em>compliance</em> with federal tax laws and consumer <em>transaction</em> documentation."]},"sort":[14.08484,"11837201"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19526650","_score":13.132011,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint regarding Navy Federal Credit Unions handling of an unauthorized credit card transaction dispute and its failure to conduct a reasonable investigation as required under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 ) and Regulation Z. \n\nBetween XX/XX/2025 to XX/XX/2025, my Navy Federal XXXX XXXX credit card was charged approximately {$8700.00} for repeated transactions by a merchant known as XXXX / XXXX. I did not authorize these charges, did not knowingly use this merchant, and did not receive or retain any goods or services associated with the transactions. \n\nI timely notified Navy Federal of the unauthorized activity and submitted a fraud dispute. Navy Federal initially acknowledged an error and issued provisional credit. The case was later marked Resolved in Navy Federals Case Status Center. Despite this, Navy Federal subsequently reversed the provisional credit and determined that no error occurred, reinstating the full balance to my account. \n\nAfter the denial, I formally requested copies of all merchant-provided documentation and evidence relied upon by Navy Federal in reaching its determination, including any authorization records, transaction logs, authentication data, or other materials provided by the merchant. Navy Federal refused to provide this information, stating that its investigation relied on electronic systems and internal processes and that it could not disclose the evidence used to deny my claim.\n\nIn its written response, Navy Federal stated that its information contradicts my claim of unauthorized activity and referenced access provided by XXXX to review transaction data, despite the fact that the account at issue is an XXXX XXXX credit card. Navy Federal did not explain this discrepancy or identify what specific evidence demonstrated authorization. \n\nThe merchants own communications to me failed to provide any proof that I authorized the transactions. The merchant did not produce IP address data, device or browser identifiers, authentication records, or any evidence tying the transactions to me personally. Navy Federal nevertheless relied on undisclosed information to deny my claim while refusing to provide me a meaningful opportunity to review or rebut that evidence.\n\nNavy Federals actions constitute a failure to conduct a reasonable investigation under the Fair Credit Billing Act and Regulation Z. A denial based on undisclosed evidence, coupled with refusal to provide the basis for the determination, deprives the consumer of due process and violates federal billing-error resolution requirements. \n\nI am requesting that the CFPB review Navy Federal Credit Unions handling of this dispute, including : The reversal of provisional credit after initially acknowledging error The denial of the fraud claim without disclosure of supporting evidence The reliance on unexplained and contradictory payment-network information The failure to provide merchant documentation or a meaningful explanation of the investigation I respectfully request regulatory review and corrective action to ensure compliance with federal consumer protection laws and proper resolution of this unauthorized transaction dispute.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-02-16T15:23:54.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19526650","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2026-02-16T14:57:18.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["federal consumer protection laws and proper resolution of this unauthorized <em>transaction</em> dispute."]},"sort":[13.132011,"19526650"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11340504","_score":12.554745,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally file a complaint regarding unauthorized hard and soft inquiries on my credit report. These inquiries have resulted in violations of my rights under multiple federal laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), and the Privacy Act of 1974. Below, I outline the legal violations, provide additional context, and demand immediate corrective action. \n\nViolations of Federal Law 1. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6801 ( a ) and 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) : As per the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, financial institutions have a continuing obligation to respect the privacy of their customers and protect their nonpublic personal information. Additionally, 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) prohibits the disclosure of nonpublic personal information to nonaffiliated third parties unless the consumer is explicitly informed of their right to opt out. I have never been provided with such notice by any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed, nor was I afforded the opportunity to exercise my right to nondisclosure.\n\n2. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 ( a ) ( 2 ) and 1681b ( c ) ( 3 ) : Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, consumer reports can only be furnished with the explicit written instructions of the consumer to whom the report relates. I have not provided any written consent to XXXX, XXXX, TRANSUNION, or any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed to perform or request these inquiries. Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be tied to a legitimate credit or insurance transaction. There was no such transaction, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a transaction.\n\n3. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right. Furthermore, 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 explicitly allows consumers to opt-out at any time. Through this complaint, I am formally opting out of all future inquiries and the reporting of my information to any non-affiliated third parties. \n\n4. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) : Entities providing information to consumer reporting agencies are required to ensure that the information furnished is accurate and not misleading. The financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed have failed to meet this obligation by reporting unauthorized inquiries. \n\n5. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ) : Consumer reporting agencies must maintain reasonable procedures to prevent unauthorized access to consumer reports. XXXX, XXXX, and TRANSUNION have failed to uphold this responsibility by allowing these unauthorized inquiries to appear on my credit report. \n\n6. Violation of 5 U.S.C. 552a ( b ) : The Privacy Act prohibits the sharing or disclosure of personal information without the individuals prior written consent, except under specific exceptions. No such consent was provided for the inquiries listed. \n\n7. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 Section 602 ( a ) ( 4 ) : Congress emphasized the importance of fairness, impartiality, and respect for consumer privacy in the FCRA. XXXX, XXXX, and TRANSUNION have failed to exercise these responsibilities by sharing and reporting my private information without proper authorization. \nDemands 1. Removal of Unauthorized Inquiries : All hard and soft inquiries appearing on my credit report without my explicit consent must be removed immediately. \n\n2. Proof of Authorization and Transactions : Provide written proof of my consent authorizing the inquiries in question.\n\nSubmit evidence of any credit or insurance transactions allegedly tied to these inquiries, including proof of valuable consideration.\n\n3. Investigation of Violations : Conduct a thorough investigation into these violations and hold XXXX, XXXX, TRANSUNION, the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed, and other relevant parties accountable. \n\n4. Confirmation of Compliance : Provide a written confirmation that the unauthorized inquiries have been removed and that appropriate steps have been taken to prevent future violations. \n\nFormal Opt-Out Notice In accordance with 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 ( a ), I am exercising my right to opt out of all reporting and information sharing services with the consumer reporting agencies ( XXXX, XXXX, and Transunion ), as well as the financial institutions involved, including XXXX XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nSupporting Documentation Enclosed are the following : A copy of my credit reports from XXXX, XXXX, and TRANSUNION highlighting the unauthorized inquiries. \nConclusion These actions represent clear violations of my rights under federal law, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and the Privacy Act of 1974. I trust the CFPB will act swiftly to address these violations and ensure that my rights as a consumer are fully restored.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-02T03:10:49.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"68137","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11340504","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-02T03:10:46.000Z","state":"NE","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be <em>tied</em> to a legitimate credit or insurance <em>transaction</em>. There was no such <em>transaction</em>, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a <em>transaction</em>.\n\n3. <em>Violation</em> of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right."]},"sort":[12.554745,"11340504"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11340698","_score":12.518648,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally file a complaint regarding unauthorized hard and soft inquiries on my credit report. These inquiries have resulted in violations of my rights under multiple federal laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), and the Privacy Act of 1974. Below, I outline the legal violations, provide additional context, and demand immediate corrective action. \n\nViolations of Federal Law 1. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6801 ( a ) and 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) : As per the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, financial institutions have a continuing obligation to respect the privacy of their customers and protect their nonpublic personal information. Additionally, 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) prohibits the disclosure of nonpublic personal information to nonaffiliated third parties unless the consumer is explicitly informed of their right to opt out. I have never been provided with such notice by any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed, nor was I afforded the opportunity to exercise my right to nondisclosure. \n\n2. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 ( a ) ( 2 ) and 1681b ( c ) ( 3 ) : Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, consumer reports can only be furnished with the explicit written instructions of the consumer to whom the report relates. I have not provided any written consent to EXPERIAN, XXXX, XXXX, or any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed to perform or request these inquiries. Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be tied to a legitimate credit or insurance transaction. There was no such transaction, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a transaction. \n\n3. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right. Furthermore, 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 explicitly allows consumers to opt-out at any time. Through this complaint, I am formally opting out of all future inquiries and the reporting of my information to any non-affiliated third parties. \n\n4. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) : Entities providing information to consumer reporting agencies are required to ensure that the information furnished is accurate and not misleading. The financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed have failed to meet this obligation by reporting unauthorized inquiries.\n\n5. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ) : Consumer reporting agencies must maintain reasonable procedures to prevent unauthorized access to consumer reports. EXPERIAN, XXXX, and XXXX have failed to uphold this responsibility by allowing these unauthorized inquiries to appear on my credit report. \n\nXXXX. Violation of XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ) : The Privacy Act prohibits the sharing or disclosure of personal information without the individuals prior written consent, except under specific exceptions. No such consent was provided for the inquiries listed. \n\nXXXX. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 Section 602 ( a ) ( 4 ) : Congress emphasized the importance of fairness, impartiality, and respect for consumer privacy in the FCRA. EXPERIAN, XXXX, and XXXX have failed to exercise these responsibilities by sharing and reporting my private information without proper authorization. \nDemands 1. Removal of Unauthorized Inquiries : All hard and soft inquiries appearing on my credit report without my explicit consent must be removed immediately.\n\n2. Proof of Authorization and Transactions : Provide written proof of my consent authorizing the inquiries in question.\n\nSubmit evidence of any credit or insurance transactions allegedly tied to these inquiries, including proof of valuable consideration. \n\n3. Investigation of Violations : Conduct a thorough investigation into these violations and hold EXPERIAN, XXXX, XXXX, the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed, and other relevant parties accountable. \n\n4. Confirmation of Compliance : Provide a written confirmation that the unauthorized inquiries have been removed and that appropriate steps have been taken to prevent future violations. \n\nFormal Opt-Out Notice In accordance with 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 ( a ), I am exercising my right to opt out of all reporting and information sharing services with the consumer reporting agencies ( Experian, XXXX, and XXXX ), as well as the financial institutions involved, including XXXX XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX. \n\nSupporting Documentation Enclosed are the following : A copy of my credit reports from EXPERIAN, XXXX, and XXXX highlighting the unauthorized inquiries. \nConclusion These actions represent clear violations of my rights under federal law, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and the Privacy Act of 1974. I trust the CFPB will act swiftly to address these violations and ensure that my rights as a consumer are fully restored.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-02T03:10:36.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"68137","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11340698","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-01-02T02:47:46.000Z","state":"NE","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be <em>tied</em> to a legitimate credit or insurance <em>transaction</em>. There was no such <em>transaction</em>, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a <em>transaction</em>. \n\n3. <em>Violation</em> of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right."]},"sort":[12.518648,"11340698"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11340466","_score":12.518648,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally file a complaint regarding unauthorized hard and soft inquiries on my credit report. These inquiries have resulted in violations of my rights under multiple federal laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), and the Privacy Act of 1974. Below, I outline the legal violations, provide additional context, and demand immediate corrective action. \n\nViolations of Federal Law 1. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6801 ( a ) and 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) : As per the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, financial institutions have a continuing obligation to respect the privacy of their customers and protect their nonpublic personal information. Additionally, 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) prohibits the disclosure of nonpublic personal information to nonaffiliated third parties unless the consumer is explicitly informed of their right to opt out. I have never been provided with such notice by any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports, nor was I afforded the opportunity to exercise my right to nondisclosure.\n\n2. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 ( a ) ( 2 ) and 1681b ( c ) ( 3 ) : Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, consumer reports can only be furnished with the explicit written instructions of the consumer to whom the report relates. I have not provided any written consent to XXXX, XXXX, TRANSUNION, or any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports to perform or request these inquiries. Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be tied to a legitimate credit or insurance transaction. There was no such transaction, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a transaction. \n\n3. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right. Furthermore, 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 explicitly allows consumers to opt-out at any time. Through this complaint, I am formally opting out of all future inquiries and the reporting of my information to any non-affiliated third parties. \n\n4. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) : Entities providing information to consumer reporting agencies are required to ensure that the information furnished is accurate and not misleading. The financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports have failed to meet this obligation by reporting unauthorized inquiries.\n\n5. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ) : Consumer reporting agencies must maintain reasonable procedures to prevent unauthorized access to consumer reports. XXXX, XXXX, and TRANSUNION have failed to uphold this responsibility by allowing these unauthorized inquiries to appear on my credit report. \n\n6. Violation of 5 U.S.C. 552a ( b ) : The Privacy Act prohibits the sharing or disclosure of personal information without the individuals prior written consent, except under specific exceptions. No such consent was provided for the inquiries listed.\n\n7. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 Section 602 ( a ) ( 4 ) : Congress emphasized the importance of fairness, impartiality, and respect for consumer privacy in the FCRA. XXXX, XXXX, and TRANSUNION have failed to exercise these responsibilities by sharing and reporting my private information without proper authorization. \nDemands XXXX. Removal of Unauthorized Inquiries : All hard and soft inquiries appearing on my credit report without my explicit consent must be removed immediately. \n\nXXXX. Proof of Authorization and Transactions : Provide written proof of my consent authorizing the inquiries in question. \nSubmit evidence of any credit or insurance transactions allegedly tied to these inquiries, including proof of valuable consideration. \n\nXXXX. Investigation of Violations : Conduct a thorough investigation into these violations and hold XXXX, XXXX, TRANSUNION, the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports, and other relevant parties accountable. \n\nXXXX. Confirmation of Compliance : Provide a written confirmation that the unauthorized inquiries have been removed and that appropriate steps have been taken to prevent future violations. \n\nFormal Opt-Out Notice In accordance with 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 ( a ), I am exercising my right to opt out of all reporting and information-sharing services with the consumer reporting agencies ( XXXX, XXXX, and TRANSUNION ) XXXX including the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports involved. \n\nSupporting Documentation Enclosed are the following : A copy of my credit reports from XXXX, XXXX, and TRANSUNION highlighting the unauthorized inquiries. \nConclusion These actions represent clear violations of my rights under federal law, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and the Privacy Act of 1974. I trust the CFPB will act swiftly to address these violations and ensure that my rights as a consumer are fully restored.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-02T03:47:55.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"68137","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11340466","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-02T03:47:52.000Z","state":"NE","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be <em>tied</em> to a legitimate credit or insurance <em>transaction</em>. There was no such <em>transaction</em>, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a <em>transaction</em>. \n\n3. <em>Violation</em> of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right."]},"sort":[12.518648,"11340466"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11340494","_score":12.516583,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally file a complaint regarding unauthorized hard and soft inquiries on my credit report. These inquiries have resulted in violations of my rights under multiple federal laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), and the Privacy Act of 1974. Below, I outline the legal violations, provide additional context, and demand immediate corrective action.\n\nViolations of Federal Law 1. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6801 ( a ) and 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) : As per the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, financial institutions have a continuing obligation to respect the privacy of their customers and protect their nonpublic personal information. Additionally, 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) prohibits the disclosure of nonpublic personal information to nonaffiliated third parties unless the consumer is explicitly informed of their right to opt out. I have never been provided with such notice by any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports, nor was I afforded the opportunity to exercise my right to nondisclosure.\n\n2. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 ( a ) ( 2 ) and 1681b ( c ) ( 3 ) : Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, consumer reports can only be furnished with the explicit written instructions of the consumer to whom the report relates. I have not provided any written consent to EXPERIAN, XXXX, XXXX, or any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports to perform or request these inquiries. Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be tied to a legitimate credit or insurance transaction. There was no such transaction, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a transaction.\n\n3. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right. Furthermore, 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 explicitly allows consumers to opt-out at any time. Through this complaint, I am formally opting out of all future inquiries and the reporting of my information to any non-affiliated third parties.\n\n4. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) : Entities providing information to consumer reporting agencies are required to ensure that the information furnished is accurate and not misleading. The financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports have failed to meet this obligation by reporting unauthorized inquiries.\n\n5. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ) : Consumer reporting agencies must maintain reasonable procedures to prevent unauthorized access to consumer reports. EXPERIAN, XXXX, and XXXX have failed to uphold this responsibility by allowing these unauthorized inquiries to appear on my credit report.\n\n6. Violation of 5 U.S.C. 552a ( b ) : The Privacy Act prohibits the sharing or disclosure of personal information without the individuals prior written consent, except under specific exceptions. No such consent was provided for the inquiries listed.\n\n7. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 Section 602 ( a ) ( 4 ) : Congress emphasized the importance of fairness, impartiality, and respect for consumer privacy in the FCRA. EXPERIAN, XXXX, and XXXX have failed to exercise these responsibilities by sharing and reporting my private information without proper authorization.\n\nDemands 1. Removal of Unauthorized Inquiries : All hard and soft inquiries appearing on my credit report without my explicit consent must be removed immediately.\n\n2. Proof of Authorization and Transactions : Provide written proof of my consent authorizing the inquiries in question.\n\nSubmit evidence of any credit or insurance transactions allegedly tied to these inquiries, including proof of valuable consideration.\n\n3. Investigation of Violations : Conduct a thorough investigation into these violations and hold EXPERIAN, XXXX, XXXX, the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports, and other relevant parties accountable.\n\n4. Confirmation of Compliance : Provide a written confirmation that the unauthorized inquiries have been removed and that appropriate steps have been taken to prevent future violations.\n\nFormal Opt-Out Notice In accordance with 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 ( a ), I am exercising my right to opt out of all reporting and information-sharing services with the consumer reporting agencies ( EXPERIAN, XXXX, and XXXX ) , including the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports involved.\n\nSupporting Documentation Enclosed are the following : A copy of my credit reports from EXPERIAN, XXXX, and XXXX highlighting the unauthorized inquiries.\n\nConclusion These actions represent clear violations of my rights under federal law, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and the Privacy Act of 1974. I trust the CFPB will act swiftly to address these violations and ensure that my rights as a consumer are fully restored.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-02T03:47:43.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"68137","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11340494","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-01-02T03:34:00.000Z","state":"NE","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be <em>tied</em> to a legitimate credit or insurance <em>transaction</em>. There was no such <em>transaction</em>, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a <em>transaction</em>.\n\n3. <em>Violation</em> of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right."]},"sort":[12.516583,"11340494"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11340465","_score":12.495483,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally file a complaint regarding unauthorized hard and soft inquiries on my credit report. These inquiries have resulted in violations of my rights under multiple federal laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), and the Privacy Act of 1974. Below, I outline the legal violations, provide additional context, and demand immediate corrective action.\n\nViolations of Federal Law 1. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6801 ( a ) and 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) : As per the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, financial institutions have a continuing obligation to respect the privacy of their customers and protect their nonpublic personal information. Additionally, 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) prohibits the disclosure of nonpublic personal information to nonaffiliated third parties unless the consumer is explicitly informed of their right to opt out. I have never been provided with such notice by any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports, nor was I afforded the opportunity to exercise my right to nondisclosure. \n\nXXXX. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 ( a ) ( 2 ) and 1681b ( c ) ( 3 ) : Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, consumer reports can only be furnished with the explicit written instructions of the consumer to whom the report relates. I have not provided any written consent to XXXX, EQUIFAX, XXXX, or any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports to perform or request these inquiries. Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be tied to a legitimate credit or insurance transaction. There was no such transaction, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a transaction. \n\n3. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right. Furthermore, 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 explicitly allows consumers to opt-out at any time. Through this complaint, I am formally opting out of all future inquiries and the reporting of my information to any non-affiliated third parties.\n\n4. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) : Entities providing information to consumer reporting agencies are required to ensure that the information furnished is accurate and not misleading. The financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports have failed to meet this obligation by reporting unauthorized inquiries.\n\n5. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ) : Consumer reporting agencies must maintain reasonable procedures to prevent unauthorized access to consumer reports. XXXX, EQUIFAX, and XXXX have failed to uphold this responsibility by allowing these unauthorized inquiries to appear on my credit report. \n\n6. Violation of 5 U.S.C. 552a ( b ) : The Privacy Act prohibits the sharing or disclosure of personal information without the individuals prior written consent, except under specific exceptions. No such consent was provided for the inquiries listed.\n\n7. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 Section 602 ( a ) ( 4 ) : Congress emphasized the importance of fairness, impartiality, and respect for consumer privacy in the FCRA. XXXX, EQUIFAX, and XXXX have failed to exercise these responsibilities by sharing and reporting my private information without proper authorization. \nDemands XXXX. Removal of Unauthorized Inquiries : All hard and soft inquiries appearing on my credit report without my explicit consent must be removed immediately. \n\nXXXX. Proof of Authorization and Transactions : Provide written proof of my consent authorizing the inquiries in question. \nSubmit evidence of any credit or insurance transactions allegedly tied to these inquiries, including proof of valuable consideration. \n\nXXXX. Investigation of Violations : Conduct a thorough investigation into these violations and hold XXXX, EQUIFAX, XXXX, the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports, and other relevant parties accountable. \n\nXXXX. Confirmation of Compliance : Provide a written confirmation that the unauthorized inquiries have been removed and that appropriate steps have been taken to prevent future violations. \n\nFormal Opt-Out Notice In accordance with 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 ( a ), I am exercising my right to opt out of all reporting and information-sharing services with the consumer reporting agencies ( XXXX, EQUIFAX, and XXXX ) XXXX including the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the enclosed credit reports involved. \n\nSupporting Documentation Enclosed are the following : A copy of my credit reports from XXXX, EQUIFAX, and XXXX highlighting the unauthorized inquiries. \nConclusion These actions represent clear violations of my rights under federal law, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and the Privacy Act of 1974. I trust the CFPB will act swiftly to address these violations and ensure that my rights as a consumer are fully restored.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-02T03:47:55.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"68137","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11340465","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-02T03:47:52.000Z","state":"NE","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be <em>tied</em> to a legitimate credit or insurance <em>transaction</em>. There was no such <em>transaction</em>, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a <em>transaction</em>. \n\n3. <em>Violation</em> of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right."]},"sort":[12.495483,"11340465"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11340447","_score":12.495483,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally file a complaint regarding unauthorized hard and soft inquiries on my credit report. These inquiries have resulted in violations of my rights under multiple federal laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), and the Privacy Act of 1974. Below, I outline the legal violations, provide additional context, and demand immediate corrective action. \n\nViolations of Federal Law 1. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6801 ( a ) and 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) : As per the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, financial institutions have a continuing obligation to respect the privacy of their customers and protect their nonpublic personal information. Additionally, 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) prohibits the disclosure of nonpublic personal information to nonaffiliated third parties unless the consumer is explicitly informed of their right to opt out. I have never been provided with such notice by any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed, nor was I afforded the opportunity to exercise my right to nondisclosure. \n\n2. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 ( a ) ( 2 ) and 1681b ( c ) ( 3 ) : Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, consumer reports can only be furnished with the explicit written instructions of the consumer to whom the report relates. I have not provided any written consent to XXXX, EQUIFAX, XXXX, or any of the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed to perform or request these inquiries. Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be tied to a legitimate credit or insurance transaction. There was no such transaction, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a transaction. \n\n3. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right. Furthermore, 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 explicitly allows consumers to opt-out at any time. Through this complaint, I am formally opting out of all future inquiries and the reporting of my information to any non-affiliated third parties. \n\n4. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) : Entities providing information to consumer reporting agencies are required to ensure that the information furnished is accurate and not misleading. The financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed have failed to meet this obligation by reporting unauthorized inquiries. \n\n5. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ) : Consumer reporting agencies must maintain reasonable procedures to prevent unauthorized access to consumer reports. XXXX, EQUIFAX, and XXXX have failed to uphold this responsibility by allowing these unauthorized inquiries to appear on my credit report. \n\n6. Violation of 5 U.S.C. 552a ( b ) : The Privacy Act prohibits the sharing or disclosure of personal information without the individuals prior written consent, except under specific exceptions. No such consent was provided for the inquiries listed. \n\n7. Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681 Section 602 ( a ) ( 4 ) : Congress emphasized the importance of fairness, impartiality, and respect for consumer privacy in the FCRA. XXXX, EQUIFAX, and XXXX have failed to exercise these responsibilities by sharing and reporting my private information without proper authorization. \nDemands 1. Removal of Unauthorized Inquiries : All hard and soft inquiries appearing on my credit report without my explicit consent must be removed immediately.\n\n2. Proof of Authorization and Transactions : Provide written proof of my consent authorizing the inquiries in question.\n\nSubmit evidence of any credit or insurance transactions allegedly tied to these inquiries, including proof of valuable consideration.\n\n3. Investigation of Violations : Conduct a thorough investigation into these violations and hold XXXX, EQUIFAX, XXXX, the financial institutions and companies listed on all three of the credit reports enclosed, and other relevant parties accountable. \n\n4. Confirmation of Compliance : Provide a written confirmation that the unauthorized inquiries have been removed and that appropriate steps have been taken to prevent future violations.\n\nFormal Opt-Out Notice In accordance with 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 ( a ), I am exercising my right to opt out of all reporting and information sharing services with the consumer reporting agencies ( XXXX, Equifax, and XXXX ), as well as the financial institutions involved, including XXXX XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX. \n\nSupporting Documentation Enclosed are the following : A copy of my credit reports from XXXX, EQUIFAX, and XXXX highlighting the unauthorized inquiries. \nConclusion These actions represent clear violations of my rights under federal law, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and the Privacy Act of 1974. I trust the CFPB will act swiftly to address these violations and ensure that my rights as a consumer are fully restored.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-02T03:10:49.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"68137","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11340447","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-02T03:10:46.000Z","state":"NE","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Moreover, inquiries not initiated by me must be <em>tied</em> to a legitimate credit or insurance <em>transaction</em>. There was no such <em>transaction</em>, and I demand proof of valuable consideration to substantiate any claim of a <em>transaction</em>. \n\n3. <em>Violation</em> of 15 U.S.C. 6802 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( C ) and 12 C.F.R. 1016.7 : I was not informed of my right to opt out of information sharing, nor was I given the required explanation of how to exercise this right."]},"sort":[12.495483,"11340447"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13964887","_score":12.0128765,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am deeply frustrated and profoundly disappointed by the inaccurate and unlawful reporting by Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion of my XXXX and XXXX accounts as charge-offs on my consumer report. This unjustified dissemination of erroneous financial data violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) and the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666b ), and I demand an immediate investigation under FCRA Section 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ). I insist on the prompt removal of these unfounded charge-off notations and a corrected consumer report. Failure to comply within 30 days will prompt a series of complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), followed by decisive legal action for significant damages under the FCRA. This is your final opportunity to address this serious breach! \n\nXXXX. Deep Dive into XXXX Account : A Questionable Financial Narrative The XXXX account, reported as a charge-off, is presented as a \" account '' a record or statement of financial expenditure and receipts relating to a specific period, akin to a chronicle, narrative, or transaction log. However, this so-called \" detailed account of what has been achieved '' lacks credible substance! Under FCRA, a charge-off indicates a creditor has written off the debt as a loss and closed the account. Yet, 15 U.S.C. 1681b limits permissible purpose to the collection of an account, not the collection of a debt. XXXX reporting of this charge-off appears to exceed its authority, suggesting an improper debt collection effort rather than legitimate account management. \n\nFurthermore, a charge-off requires a delinquent or late status, supported by multiple late payments tied to specific due dates, with notices sent 21 days before each due date under 15 U.S.C. 1666b. Without a verifiable sequence of late paymentseach with a precise due date and corresponding XXXX noticethis charge-off lacks legitimacy. I demand that XXXX provide dated proof of every late payment notice and due date, or you must remove this unsubstantiated entry immediately. Your failure to verify this critical timeline undermines the charge-offs validity! \n\nXXXX. Deep Dive into XXXX Account : An Unsupported Financial Record Likewise, the XXXX account, labeled as a charge-off, is portrayed as a \" account '' a description or rendition of financial transactions, a memoir of expenditures, or a log of receipts, yet it stands on shaky ground! A charge-off implies XXXX wrote XXXX the debt as a loss, but this assertion collapses under scrutiny. Under 15 U.S.C. 1681b, permissible purpose is confined to account management, not debt collection. XXXX XXXXeporting of this charge-off seems to overstep its legal bounds, presenting a distorted financial record without justification. \n\nA valid charge-off demands a documented history of delinquency, with late payments tied to specific due dates and backed by multiple XXXX notices per 15 U.S.C. 1666b. Without this thorough documentationshowing a progression of late statuses ( e.g., 30 days, 60 days, 90 days ) with exact dates and noticesthis charge-off is indefensible. I demand that XXXX furnish dated evidence of each late payment notice and due date, or you must eliminate this questionable charge-off from my report at once. Your role in perpetuating unverified data is unacceptable! \n\nXXXX. Rebuttal : Charge-Off Reporting Demands Delinquency and Proper Notices A charge-off can not exist in isolationit is intrinsically linked to late payments as a dependent component! Under FCRA and credit reporting standards, a charge-off requires the account to be delinquent or late, with multiple consecutive late payments ( typically after 180 days ) documented with specific due dates. Each late payment must be preceded by a notice mailed or delivered 21 days before the due date under 15 U.S.C. 1666b, affording me a fair chance to address the delinquency. Without this chain of evidencespecific due dates, multiple late payment notices, and a clear delinquency sequencethe charge-off has no legal standing and must be removed! \n\nYour reporting of the XXXX and XXXX accounts as charge-offs without this essential proof constitutes a clear violation. Late payments and charge-offs are inseparable ; one can not be reported without the other. If XXXX and XXXX can not provide records of multiple late payments with XXXX notices tied to exact due dates, these charge-offs are invalid, and I demand their immediate deletion. Your failure to uphold this standard is a serious oversight! \n\n4. Demand for Investigation and Correction Under FCRA Section 611 Under FCRA Section 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ), you are legally required to conduct a reasonable investigation within 30 days, or 45 days if I provide additional information within the initial period. Any delay beyond this is unacceptable and will be rejected. I demand you : Investigate the unauthorized and unverified charge-off reporting by XXXX and XXXX. \n\n\n\nRequire XXXX and XXXX to provide proof of specific due dates, multiple XXXX late payment notices, and a delinquency sequence for each charge-off. \n\n\n\nRemove all charge-off notations if the information can not be validated or verified. \n\n\n\nProvide a written response within 30 days, including all documentation relied upon. \n\nDemands and Consequences I demand the following within 15 days, with a full investigation completed within 30 days per FCRA Section 611 : Immediate removal of all charge-off notations for XXXX and XXXX accounts from my credit report.\n\nA revised consumer report reflecting this correction.\n\nWritten confirmation of compliance.\n\nIf you fail to act, I will file robust complaints with the CFPB and FTC, and pursue determined legal action for damages under the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n ). This is your last opportunity to resolve this unacceptable error!","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-08T07:45:16.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"088XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13964887","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-08T07:44:52.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Your reporting of the XXXX and XXXX accounts as charge-offs without this essential proof constitutes a clear <em>violation</em>. Late payments and charge-offs are inseparable ; one can not be reported without the other. If XXXX and XXXX can not provide records of multiple late payments with XXXX notices <em>tied</em> to exact due dates, these charge-offs are invalid, and I demand their immediate deletion. Your failure to uphold this standard is a serious oversight! \n\n4."]},"sort":[12.0128765,"13964887"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13962776","_score":12.0128765,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am deeply frustrated and profoundly disappointed by the inaccurate and unlawful reporting by Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion of my XXXX and XXXX accounts as charge-offs on my consumer report. This unjustified dissemination of erroneous financial data violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) and the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666b ), and I demand an immediate investigation under FCRA Section 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ). I insist on the prompt removal of these unfounded charge-off notations and a corrected consumer report. Failure to comply within 30 days will prompt a series of complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), followed by decisive legal action for significant damages under the FCRA. This is your final opportunity to address this serious breach! \n\nXXXX. Deep Dive into XXXX Account : A Questionable Financial Narrative The XXXX account, reported as a charge-off, is presented as a \" account '' a record or statement of financial expenditure and receipts relating to a specific period, akin to a chronicle, narrative, or transaction log. However, this so-called \" detailed account of what has been achieved '' lacks credible substance! Under FCRA, a charge-off indicates a creditor has written off the debt as a loss and closed the account. Yet, 15 U.S.C. 1681b limits permissible purpose to the collection of an account, not the collection of a debt. XXXX reporting of this charge-off appears to exceed its authority, suggesting an improper debt collection effort rather than legitimate account management. \n\nFurthermore, a charge-off requires a delinquent or late status, supported by multiple late payments tied to specific due dates, with notices sent 21 days before each due date under 15 U.S.C. 1666b. Without a verifiable sequence of late paymentseach with a precise due date and corresponding XXXX noticethis charge-off lacks legitimacy. I demand that XXXX provide dated proof of every late payment notice and due date, or you must remove this unsubstantiated entry immediately. Your failure to verify this critical timeline undermines the charge-offs validity! \n\nXXXX. Deep Dive into XXXX Account : An Unsupported Financial Record Likewise, the XXXX account, labeled as a charge-off, is portrayed as a \" account '' a description or rendition of financial transactions, a memoir of expenditures, or a log of receipts, yet it stands on shaky ground! A charge-off implies XXXX wrote XXXX the debt as a loss, but this assertion collapses under scrutiny. Under 15 U.S.C. 1681b, permissible purpose is confined to account management, not debt collection. XXXX XXXXeporting of this charge-off seems to overstep its legal bounds, presenting a distorted financial record without justification. \n\nA valid charge-off demands a documented history of delinquency, with late payments tied to specific due dates and backed by multiple XXXX notices per 15 U.S.C. 1666b. Without this thorough documentationshowing a progression of late statuses ( e.g., 30 days, 60 days, 90 days ) with exact dates and noticesthis charge-off is indefensible. I demand that XXXX furnish dated evidence of each late payment notice and due date, or you must eliminate this questionable charge-off from my report at once. Your role in perpetuating unverified data is unacceptable! \n\nXXXX. Rebuttal : Charge-Off Reporting Demands Delinquency and Proper Notices A charge-off can not exist in isolationit is intrinsically linked to late payments as a dependent component! Under FCRA and credit reporting standards, a charge-off requires the account to be delinquent or late, with multiple consecutive late payments ( typically after 180 days ) documented with specific due dates. Each late payment must be preceded by a notice mailed or delivered 21 days before the due date under 15 U.S.C. 1666b, affording me a fair chance to address the delinquency. Without this chain of evidencespecific due dates, multiple late payment notices, and a clear delinquency sequencethe charge-off has no legal standing and must be removed! \n\nYour reporting of the XXXX and XXXX accounts as charge-offs without this essential proof constitutes a clear violation. Late payments and charge-offs are inseparable ; one can not be reported without the other. If XXXX and XXXX can not provide records of multiple late payments with XXXX notices tied to exact due dates, these charge-offs are invalid, and I demand their immediate deletion. Your failure to uphold this standard is a serious oversight! \n\n4. Demand for Investigation and Correction Under FCRA Section 611 Under FCRA Section 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ), you are legally required to conduct a reasonable investigation within 30 days, or 45 days if I provide additional information within the initial period. Any delay beyond this is unacceptable and will be rejected. I demand you : Investigate the unauthorized and unverified charge-off reporting by XXXX and XXXX. \n\n\n\nRequire XXXX and XXXX to provide proof of specific due dates, multiple XXXX late payment notices, and a delinquency sequence for each charge-off. \n\n\n\nRemove all charge-off notations if the information can not be validated or verified. \n\n\n\nProvide a written response within 30 days, including all documentation relied upon. \n\nDemands and Consequences I demand the following within 15 days, with a full investigation completed within 30 days per FCRA Section 611 : Immediate removal of all charge-off notations for XXXX and XXXX accounts from my credit report.\n\nA revised consumer report reflecting this correction.\n\nWritten confirmation of compliance.\n\nIf you fail to act, I will file robust complaints with the CFPB and FTC, and pursue determined legal action for damages under the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n ). This is your last opportunity to resolve this unacceptable error!","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-08T07:45:21.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"088XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13962776","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-06-08T07:15:49.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Your reporting of the XXXX and XXXX accounts as charge-offs without this essential proof constitutes a clear <em>violation</em>. Late payments and charge-offs are inseparable ; one can not be reported without the other. If XXXX and XXXX can not provide records of multiple late payments with XXXX notices <em>tied</em> to exact due dates, these charge-offs are invalid, and I demand their immediate deletion. Your failure to uphold this standard is a serious oversight! \n\n4."]},"sort":[12.0128765,"13962776"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13961798","_score":12.010389,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am deeply frustrated and profoundly disappointed by the inaccurate and unlawful reporting by Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion of my XXXX and XXXX accounts as charge-offs on my consumer report. This unjustified dissemination of erroneous financial data violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) and the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666b ), and I demand an immediate investigation under FCRA Section 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ). I insist on the prompt removal of these unfounded charge-off notations and a corrected consumer report. Failure to comply within 30 days will prompt a series of complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), followed by decisive legal action for significant damages under the FCRA. This is your final opportunity to address this serious breach! \n\nXXXX. Deep Dive into XXXX Account : A Questionable Financial Narrative The XXXX account, reported as a charge-off, is presented as a \" account '' a record or statement of financial expenditure and receipts relating to a specific period, akin to a chronicle, narrative, or transaction log. However, this so-called \" detailed account of what has been achieved '' lacks credible substance! Under FCRA, a charge-off indicates a creditor has written off the debt as a loss and closed the account. Yet, 15 U.S.C. 1681b limits permissible purpose to the collection of an account, not the collection of a debt. XXXX reporting of this charge-off appears to exceed its authority, suggesting an improper debt collection effort rather than legitimate account management. \n\nFurthermore, a charge-off requires a delinquent or late status, supported by multiple late payments tied to specific due dates, with notices sent 21 days before each due date under 15 U.S.C. 1666b. Without a verifiable sequence of late paymentseach with a precise due date and corresponding XXXX noticethis charge-off lacks legitimacy. I demand that XXXX provide dated proof of every late payment notice and due date, or you must remove this unsubstantiated entry immediately. Your failure to verify this critical timeline undermines the charge-offs validity! \n\nXXXX. Deep Dive into XXXX Account : An Unsupported Financial Record Likewise, the XXXX account, labeled as a charge-off, is portrayed as a \" account '' a description or rendition of financial transactions, a memoir of expenditures, or a log of receipts, yet it stands on shaky ground! A charge-off implies XXXX wrote XXXX the debt as a loss, but this assertion collapses under scrutiny. Under 15 U.S.C. 1681b, permissible purpose is confined to account management, not debt collection. XXXX XXXXeporting of this charge-off seems to overstep its legal bounds, presenting a distorted financial record without justification. \n\nA valid charge-off demands a documented history of delinquency, with late payments tied to specific due dates and backed by multiple XXXX notices per 15 U.S.C. 1666b. Without this thorough documentationshowing a progression of late statuses ( e.g., 30 days, 60 days, 90 days ) with exact dates and noticesthis charge-off is indefensible. I demand that XXXX furnish dated evidence of each late payment notice and due date, or you must eliminate this questionable charge-off from my report at once. Your role in perpetuating unverified data is unacceptable! \n\nXXXX. Rebuttal : Charge-Off Reporting Demands Delinquency and Proper Notices A charge-off can not exist in isolationit is intrinsically linked to late payments as a dependent component! Under FCRA and credit reporting standards, a charge-off requires the account to be delinquent or late, with multiple consecutive late payments ( typically after 180 days ) documented with specific due dates. Each late payment must be preceded by a notice mailed or delivered 21 days before the due date under 15 U.S.C. 1666b, affording me a fair chance to address the delinquency. Without this chain of evidencespecific due dates, multiple late payment notices, and a clear delinquency sequencethe charge-off has no legal standing and must be removed! \n\nYour reporting of the XXXX and XXXX accounts as charge-offs without this essential proof constitutes a clear violation. Late payments and charge-offs are inseparable ; one can not be reported without the other. If XXXX and XXXX can not provide records of multiple late payments with XXXX notices tied to exact due dates, these charge-offs are invalid, and I demand their immediate deletion. Your failure to uphold this standard is a serious oversight! \n\n4. Demand for Investigation and Correction Under FCRA Section 611 Under FCRA Section 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ), you are legally required to conduct a reasonable investigation within 30 days, or 45 days if I provide additional information within the initial period. Any delay beyond this is unacceptable and will be rejected. I demand you : Investigate the unauthorized and unverified charge-off reporting by XXXX and XXXX. \n\n\n\nRequire XXXX and XXXX to provide proof of specific due dates, multiple XXXX late payment notices, and a delinquency sequence for each charge-off. \n\n\n\nRemove all charge-off notations if the information can not be validated or verified. \n\n\n\nProvide a written response within 30 days, including all documentation relied upon. \n\nDemands and Consequences I demand the following within 15 days, with a full investigation completed within 30 days per FCRA Section 611 : Immediate removal of all charge-off notations for XXXX and XXXX accounts from my credit report.\n\nA revised consumer report reflecting this correction.\n\nWritten confirmation of compliance.\n\nIf you fail to act, I will file robust complaints with the CFPB and FTC, and pursue determined legal action for damages under the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n ). This is your last opportunity to resolve this unacceptable error!","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-08T07:45:17.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"088XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13961798","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-08T07:44:52.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Your reporting of the XXXX and XXXX accounts as charge-offs without this essential proof constitutes a clear <em>violation</em>. Late payments and charge-offs are inseparable ; one can not be reported without the other. If XXXX and XXXX can not provide records of multiple late payments with XXXX notices <em>tied</em> to exact due dates, these charge-offs are invalid, and I demand their immediate deletion. Your failure to uphold this standard is a serious oversight! \n\n4."]},"sort":[12.010389,"13961798"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18042643","_score":11.892231,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This CFPB complaint is being submitted because the credit reporting agencies have now crossed from negligence into clear willful noncompliance. The most recent dispute letters placed Equifax Experian and TransUnion on explicit notice of specific factual inaccuracies Metro2 violations and identity contamination. Despite that notice the bureaus chose to continue publishing the same defective data while claiming verification without producing a single piece of competent evidence. \n\nThis is not a disagreement over interpretation. This is a failure of basic data integrity. \n\nThe most egregious example is the XXXX XXXX XXXX  account. TransUnion admitted to removing incorrect personal identifiers from my file while simultaneously verifying this collection account as accurate. That position is legally indefensible. If the underlying file contained contaminated identity data serious enough to require deletion of names addresses and employer information then any account tied to that same corrupted dataset can not be verified. Verification under those conditions is not reasonable and not lawful.\n\nAcross Equifax Experian and TransUnion the XXXX XXXX account is reported with conflicting account statuses conflicting dates opened conflicting dates last active and conflicting last reported dates. One bureau reports the account as open while others report it as closed. Activity dates differ by years. These are core Metro2 fields that must align if the data is accurate. An account can not exist in multiple contradictory states at the same time. Continuing to report it as verified proves that no real investigation occurred. \n\nThe XXXX XXXX collection account reflects the same pattern of abuse. It is reported with different open dates different activity dates and different statuses across bureaus. No original creditor is clearly identified. No chain of ownership has been established. No contract no payment history and no proof of lawful reporting authority has ever been produced. Reporting a collection account opened in XXXX with no documentation and no consistent data is not a clerical error. It is reckless reporting. \n\nIn addition multiple hard inquiries remain on my credit file that I did not authorize. These include XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. I did not apply for credit with these companies. The bureaus have failed to produce any evidence of permissible purpose such as a signed application or consumer initiated transaction. Each day these inquiries remain on my file is a continuing violation of my privacy rights. \n\nThe bureaus have also demonstrated ongoing mishandling of personal identifying information. Although some incorrect names addresses and employer entries were removed others remain or reappear connected to disputed accounts. This creates an active mixed file risk and destroys the credibility of any verification performed. A file that is admitted to be partially inaccurate can not be selectively treated as reliable. \n\nAt every stage the bureaus relied on automated furnisher responses instead of conducting a lawful reasonable reinvestigation. No original contracts no billing statements no complete account level transaction histories and no reconciliation of cross bureau conflicts were ever reviewed. Accepting automated confirmations in the face of obvious contradictions is not compliance. It is willful disregard of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. \n\nThis conduct has caused measurable harm. Collection accounts and hard inquiries are among the most damaging elements in FICO scoring. The continued reporting of this false data has suppressed my credit scores increased borrowing costs interfered with access to credit and caused significant stress and disruption to my financial life. I have acted in good faith. The credit bureaus have not.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-15T16:30:48.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"641XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18042643","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-12-15T16:30:18.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["No original contracts no billing statements no complete account level <em>transaction</em> histories and no reconciliation of cross bureau conflicts were ever reviewed. Accepting automated confirmations in the face of obvious contradictions is not <em>compliance</em>. It is willful disregard of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. \n\nThis conduct has caused measurable harm. Collection accounts and hard inquiries are among the most damaging elements in FICO scoring."]},"sort":[11.892231,"18042643"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18042638","_score":11.892231,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This CFPB complaint is being submitted because the credit reporting agencies have now crossed from negligence into clear willful noncompliance. The most recent dispute letters placed Equifax Experian and TransUnion on explicit notice of specific factual inaccuracies Metro2 violations and identity contamination. Despite that notice the bureaus chose to continue publishing the same defective data while claiming verification without producing a single piece of competent evidence. \n\nThis is not a disagreement over interpretation. This is a failure of basic data integrity. \n\nThe most egregious example is the XXXX XXXX XXXX  account. TransUnion admitted to removing incorrect personal identifiers from my file while simultaneously verifying this collection account as accurate. That position is legally indefensible. If the underlying file contained contaminated identity data serious enough to require deletion of names addresses and employer information then any account tied to that same corrupted dataset can not be verified. Verification under those conditions is not reasonable and not lawful.\n\nAcross Equifax Experian and TransUnion the XXXX XXXX account is reported with conflicting account statuses conflicting dates opened conflicting dates last active and conflicting last reported dates. One bureau reports the account as open while others report it as closed. Activity dates differ by years. These are core Metro2 fields that must align if the data is accurate. An account can not exist in multiple contradictory states at the same time. Continuing to report it as verified proves that no real investigation occurred. \n\nThe XXXX XXXX collection account reflects the same pattern of abuse. It is reported with different open dates different activity dates and different statuses across bureaus. No original creditor is clearly identified. No chain of ownership has been established. No contract no payment history and no proof of lawful reporting authority has ever been produced. Reporting a collection account opened in XXXX with no documentation and no consistent data is not a clerical error. It is reckless reporting. \n\nIn addition multiple hard inquiries remain on my credit file that I did not authorize. These include XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. I did not apply for credit with these companies. The bureaus have failed to produce any evidence of permissible purpose such as a signed application or consumer initiated transaction. Each day these inquiries remain on my file is a continuing violation of my privacy rights. \n\nThe bureaus have also demonstrated ongoing mishandling of personal identifying information. Although some incorrect names addresses and employer entries were removed others remain or reappear connected to disputed accounts. This creates an active mixed file risk and destroys the credibility of any verification performed. A file that is admitted to be partially inaccurate can not be selectively treated as reliable. \n\nAt every stage the bureaus relied on automated furnisher responses instead of conducting a lawful reasonable reinvestigation. No original contracts no billing statements no complete account level transaction histories and no reconciliation of cross bureau conflicts were ever reviewed. Accepting automated confirmations in the face of obvious contradictions is not compliance. It is willful disregard of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. \n\nThis conduct has caused measurable harm. Collection accounts and hard inquiries are among the most damaging elements in FICO scoring. The continued reporting of this false data has suppressed my credit scores increased borrowing costs interfered with access to credit and caused significant stress and disruption to my financial life. I have acted in good faith. The credit bureaus have not.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-15T16:30:48.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"641XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18042638","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-15T16:24:45.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["No original contracts no billing statements no complete account level <em>transaction</em> histories and no reconciliation of cross bureau conflicts were ever reviewed. Accepting automated confirmations in the face of obvious contradictions is not <em>compliance</em>. It is willful disregard of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. \n\nThis conduct has caused measurable harm. Collection accounts and hard inquiries are among the most damaging elements in FICO scoring."]},"sort":[11.892231,"18042638"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18042644","_score":11.84937,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This CFPB complaint is being submitted because the credit reporting agencies have now crossed from negligence into clear willful noncompliance. The most recent dispute letters placed Equifax Experian and TransUnion on explicit notice of specific factual inaccuracies Metro2 violations and identity contamination. Despite that notice the bureaus chose to continue publishing the same defective data while claiming verification without producing a single piece of competent evidence. \n\nThis is not a disagreement over interpretation. This is a failure of basic data integrity. \n\nThe most egregious example is the XXXX XXXX XXXX  account. TransUnion admitted to removing incorrect personal identifiers from my file while simultaneously verifying this collection account as accurate. That position is legally indefensible. If the underlying file contained contaminated identity data serious enough to require deletion of names addresses and employer information then any account tied to that same corrupted dataset can not be verified. Verification under those conditions is not reasonable and not lawful.\n\nAcross Equifax Experian and TransUnion the XXXX XXXX account is reported with conflicting account statuses conflicting dates opened conflicting dates last active and conflicting last reported dates. One bureau reports the account as open while others report it as closed. Activity dates differ by years. These are core Metro2 fields that must align if the data is accurate. An account can not exist in multiple contradictory states at the same time. Continuing to report it as verified proves that no real investigation occurred. \n\nThe XXXX XXXX collection account reflects the same pattern of abuse. It is reported with different open dates different activity dates and different statuses across bureaus. No original creditor is clearly identified. No chain of ownership has been established. No contract no payment history and no proof of lawful reporting authority has ever been produced. Reporting a collection account opened in XXXX with no documentation and no consistent data is not a clerical error. It is reckless reporting. \n\nIn addition multiple hard inquiries remain on my credit file that I did not authorize. These include XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. I did not apply for credit with these companies. The bureaus have failed to produce any evidence of permissible purpose such as a signed application or consumer initiated transaction. Each day these inquiries remain on my file is a continuing violation of my privacy rights. \n\nThe bureaus have also demonstrated ongoing mishandling of personal identifying information. Although some incorrect names addresses and employer entries were removed others remain or reappear connected to disputed accounts. This creates an active mixed file risk and destroys the credibility of any verification performed. A file that is admitted to be partially inaccurate can not be selectively treated as reliable. \n\nAt every stage the bureaus relied on automated furnisher responses instead of conducting a lawful reasonable reinvestigation. No original contracts no billing statements no complete account level transaction histories and no reconciliation of cross bureau conflicts were ever reviewed. Accepting automated confirmations in the face of obvious contradictions is not compliance. It is willful disregard of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. \n\nThis conduct has caused measurable harm. Collection accounts and hard inquiries are among the most damaging elements in FICO scoring. The continued reporting of this false data has suppressed my credit scores increased borrowing costs interfered with access to credit and caused significant stress and disruption to my financial life. I have acted in good faith. The credit bureaus have not.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-15T16:30:49.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"641XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18042644","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-15T16:30:18.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["No original contracts no billing statements no complete account level <em>transaction</em> histories and no reconciliation of cross bureau conflicts were ever reviewed. Accepting automated confirmations in the face of obvious contradictions is not <em>compliance</em>. It is willful disregard of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. \n\nThis conduct has caused measurable harm. Collection accounts and hard inquiries are among the most damaging elements in FICO scoring."]},"sort":[11.84937,"18042644"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15317258","_score":11.794925,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this formal complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau regarding multiple inaccuracies, unauthorized items, and reporting violations on my consumer credit report. These items are causing significant harm to my creditworthiness, financial opportunities, and overall reputation. I am requesting a thorough investigation, deletion of all inaccurate data, and immediate compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), and other applicable laws. The credit bureaus and furnishers are legally obligated to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of the information they report, yet these items remain despite prior disputes and clear evidence of inaccuracy, non-verification, or improper reporting. Below I am listing each disputed item with specific legal violations and supporting explanation for removal. \nADDRESS Item : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX  XXXX Law : FCRA Section 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) I have the right to request and be provided with all information in my file, and Section 611 ( a ) you must reinvestigate disputed information within XXXX  days and delete unverifiable data Issue : This address is inaccurately listed on my credit report. I have never lived, worked, or been associated with this address, and no accounts in my report are tied to it Story : The continued presence of this address is damaging my creditworthiness by creating a false link to locations that may be tied to fraudulent or negative activity. In my first dispute, you failed to provide verification from the original furnisher or any signed documentation showing I resided here. Since no proof exists, this information must be deleted immediately under the FCRA INQUIRY Item : XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/year> Law : FCRA Section 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) a permissible purpose must exist for a hard inquiry ; FCRA Section 611 ( a ) right to dispute and request reinvestigation Issue : This inquiry was made without my consent or any application for credit Story : I have no relationship or transaction with XXXX XXXX XXXX that would authorize this inquiry. This was previously disputed, yet no documentary evidence was provided to prove a permissible purpose. Continued reporting violates my rights under the FCRA and must be removed INQUIRY Item : XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/year> Law : FCRA Section 604 ( a ) ( 3 ), Section 611 ( a ) Issue : Unauthorized hard inquiry with no consumer-initiated application or request for credit Story : I never applied for any financing or loan with XXXX XXXX on or around this date . The lack of permissible purpose makes this a violation, and your failure to validate it in the first round requires immediate deletion INQUIRY Item : XXXX XX/XX/year> Law : FCRA Section 604 ( a ) ( 3 ), Section 611 ( a ) Issue : Inquiry recorded without my authorization Story : I did not submit any credit application to XXXX. No documentation was provided during the initial investigation showing my signed consent. Reporting this inquiry without verification violates federal law and harms my credit score INQUIRY Item XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/year> Law : FCRA Section 604 ( a ) ( 3 ), Section 611 ( a ) Issue : No permissible purpose for this inquiry exists Story : I have no accounts or applications with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The first dispute produced no evidence, and this second-round request demands deletion for failure to verify INQUIRY Item : XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/year> Law : FCRA Section 604 ( a ) ( 3 ), Section 611 ( a ) Issue : Unauthorized inquiry damaging my consumer report Story : I did not authorize or apply for any credit product from XXXX XXXX XXXX. Your reinvestigation must remove this as no permissible purpose was proven I am demanding the immediate deletion of all inaccurate addresses, unverifiable accounts, and unauthorized inquiries listed above. The credit bureaus and furnishers have failed to provide proper documentation despite their legal obligations under FCRA and FDCPA. If they can not produce original signed contracts, complete payment records, or proof of permissible purpose for each inquiry, these items must be deleted. These inaccuracies are causing me severe harm, including denial of credit, higher interest rates, and reputational damage. I request the CFPB to take enforcement action to ensure compliance and hold the reporting agencies and furnishers accountable.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-15T11:09:26.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"92571","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15317258","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-08-15T11:06:16.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I request the CFPB to take enforcement action to ensure <em>compliance</em> and hold the reporting agencies and furnishers accountable."]},"sort":[11.794925,"15317258"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11164342","_score":11.622555,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX To : Acima Credit , LLC Account # XXXX Date : XX/XX/year> Notice to an Agent is Notice to the Principal. \n\nThis letter serves as a formal dispute and a demand for full clarification regarding ACIMA 's representations of \" XXXX XXXX '' on its website. It further asserts my right to pursue all available legal remedies concerning the misrepresentations, deceptive practices, and violations of federal consumer protection statutes. \n\nXXXX. Request for Clarification of \" XXXX XXXX '' : Your website prominently advertises that consumers can \" get approved for {$XXXX} to {$XXXX} of shopping power ''. The phrase \" shopping power '' is neither a legally defined term under consumer credit law nor a concept with a universally understood meaning. Its presentation, however, implies a form of financial leverage or access to upfront purchasing ability, which under applicable law, aligns with the concept of an extension of credit. I formally request that Acima provide a precise, written explanation of the following : The legal and functional definition of \" XXXX XXXX '' as presented on XXXX website. \n\nThe operational mechanism by which \" XXXX XXXX '' is facilitated to consumers. \n\nWhether \" XXXX XXXX '' is a direct financial allocation, line of credit, or any other credit-like arrangement. \n\nThe specific terms, conditions, obligations, and disclosures tied to \" XXXX XXXX. '' Given the inherent ambiguity of the term, it is essential that Acima provide clarity to ensure full compliance with federal disclosure requirements under the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) and related consumer protection laws.\n\n2. Basis for Dispute and Legal Grounds : The characterization of \" Shopping Power '' and its functional implications invoke several legal concerns, including but not limited to the following : Misleading Representations ( 15 U.S.C. 1667d, TILA ) : Your depiction of \" XXXX XXXX '' implies access to purchasing capacity without explicit acknowledgment that it constitutes a credit transaction. This representation directly misleads consumers regarding the nature of the arrangement. \nFailure to Disclose Material Terms ( 15 U.S.C. 1635, TILA ) : If \" Shopping Power '' functions as an extension of credit, you are required to provide clear disclosures of the XXXX, repayment schedule, and associated fees. The absence of these disclosures violates my right to informed consent in financial dealings.\n\nDeceptive Use of Forms ( 15 U.S.C. 1692j, FDCPA ) : If the agreements signed under the pretense of \" XXXX XXXX '' fail to disclose its true credit nature, these forms are materially deceptive. \n\n\nXXXX. Demands for Immediate Remedy : To avoid escalation, I demand that Acima take the following corrective actions : Clarify \" Shopping Power '' : Provide a comprehensive explanation, as noted in Section XXXX, of the term \" Shopping Power '' as it appears on your website, detailing its legal, financial, and operational dimensions. \n\n\nProvide Full Disclosures : Disclose all terms, including XXXX, fees, payment schedules, and any other material terms applicable to the \" Shopping Power '' arrangement, as required under the Truth in Lending Act. \nRescind Transaction : Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1635, I demand the immediate rescission of any transaction associated with \" XXXX XXXX, '' as I did not receive the requisite disclosures to make an informed decision. \nCease and Desist : Cease all reporting of this transaction to credit reporting agencies and halt any communications with third-party debt collectors. This request is made in accordance with my rights under 15 U.S.C. 1692c ( c ) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.\n\nProvide Verification of Alleged Debt : Produce verifiable proof of the nature and classification of this alleged debt, especially as it relates to the characterization of \" Shopping Power '' as non-credit, in accordance with 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.\n\n4. Notice of Intent to Pursue Legal Action : Should Acima fail to address this dispute within 10 days from receipt of this letter, I will pursue all available legal remedies, including statutory, actual, and punitive damages under TILA, FDCPA, and FCRA. This letter serves as notice of my intent to seek relief for deceptive practices, misrepresentation, and non-compliance with federal consumer protection statutes.\n\nThis correspondence is issued in good faith with the expectation of a timely, meaningful response. I reserve all rights, remedies, and defenses available to me under the law. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-16T01:11:44.000Z","issue":"Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers","sub_product":"Store credit card","zip_code":"211XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11164342","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ACIMA CREDIT, LLC","date_received":"2024-12-16T01:05:42.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The <em>specific</em> terms, conditions, obligations, and disclosures <em>tied</em> to \" XXXX XXXX. '' Given the inherent ambiguity of the term, it is essential that Acima provide clarity to ensure full <em>compliance</em> with federal disclosure requirements under the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) and related consumer protection laws.\n\n2."]},"sort":[11.622555,"11164342"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18150142","_score":11.09682,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : CFPB Complaint # XXXX Formal Notice of Willful FCRA Violations, Deficient Investigation, and Demand for XXXX Dear Executive Correspondence Team , This correspondence constitutes my formal rebuttal and continued dispute in response to XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX under CFPB Complaint # XXXX. XXXX conclusion that I am responsible for this account is unsupported by competent evidence and reflects a legally deficient investigation in violation of federal law. \n\nFailure to Conduct a Reasonable Investigation Under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), furnishers of information are required to conduct a reasonable and good-faith investigation upon receipt of notice of a dispute. Courts have repeatedly held that a furnisher may not satisfy this obligation by merely relying on information supplied by a third party or by reviewing internal records alone. \n\nXXXX v. XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) ( holding that a furnishers investigation must be reasonable and that merely confirming information from internal databases is insufficient ). \n\nXXXX v. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) ( a furnisher must conduct a genuine investigation and can not simply parrot information received from the original creditor ). \n\nXXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) ( finding that reliance on a creditors representations without independent verification may constitute an unreasonable investigation ). \n\nXXXX response demonstrates precisely the conduct rejected in these decisionsuncritical reliance on documents provided by XXXX, a third party with a direct financial interest in validating the transaction. \n\nLack of Proof of Authorization Assertions regarding account logins, email communications, or alleged installation of equipment do not establish contractual liability or authorization. Federal courts have made clear that documentation generated after account opening or tied only to an address or email is insufficient to prove identity or consent. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Md. XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) ( finding that billing statements and account activity do not establish that the consumer opened or authorized the account ). \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) ( recognizing that inaccurate attribution of debt to a consumer can support FCRA liability when reasonable procedures are lacking ). \n\nXXXX has produced no contemporaneous evidence showing lawful identity verification at account origination, such as government-issued ID validation, authenticated electronic signatures, IP or device metadata tied to me, or recorded consent. \n\nWillful and Reckless Noncompliance Where a furnisher continues to report disputed information without adequate verification, courts have found such conduct may constitute willful noncompliance under the FCRA. \n\nXXXX XXXX. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) ( defining willfulness under the FCRA to include reckless disregard of statutory duties ). \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) ( emphasizing that furnishers and CRAs must do more than make superficial investigations ). \n\nFormal Demands Accordingly, I hereby demand : An immediate reinvestigation conducted by XXXX  in compliance with 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), independent of XXXX. \n\nProduction of all identity-verification and underwriting records relied upon at account origination, including application metadata, IP logs, device fingerprints, signature authentication records, and internal verification notes. \n\nIdentification of the specific identity-verification and Red Flags compliance procedures XXXX claims to have followed prior to extending credit. \n\nWritten confirmation that the account will remain marked as disputed with all consumer reporting agencies and that no adverse reporting or collection activity will occur during the pendency of this dispute. \n\nIf XXXX continues to assert liability without producing competent proof of authorization, such conduct will be viewed as willful and reckless disregard of its obligations under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 1681o, exposing XXXX to statutory damages, actual damages, punitive damages, attorneys fees, and costs.\n\nThis letter constitutes formal notice and a good-faith opportunity to cure. I reserve all rights and remedies at law and in equity and do not waive any claims by virtue of this correspondence. \n\nI expect XXXX written response within the timeframes mandated by federal law. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-18T18:59:07.000Z","issue":"Getting a credit card","sub_product":"Store credit card","zip_code":"19134","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18150142","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Atlanticus Services Corporation","date_received":"2025-12-18T18:53:27.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Card opened without my consent or knowledge"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Identification of the <em>specific</em> identity-verification and Red Flags <em>compliance</em> procedures XXXX claims to have followed prior to extending credit. \n\nWritten confirmation that the account will remain marked as disputed with all consumer reporting agencies and that no adverse reporting or collection activity will occur during the pendency of this dispute."]},"sort":[11.09682,"18150142"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16588243","_score":11.0841255,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : FINAL NOTICE CEASE & DESIST / INTENT TO LITIGATE To : NCB Management Services , Inc. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, PA XXXX RE : Alleged XXXX XXXX Account / XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # XXXX To Whom It May Concern, This serves as my Final Notice, a Cease and Desist Demand, and a Formal Intent to Pursue Legal Action regarding the alleged deficiency balance your company, NCB Management Services , Inc., claims to have acquired from XXXX XXXX XXXX concerning my XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ). \n\nI have performed a thorough review of every document tied to this accountincluding the Retail Installment Contract, the XXXX deficiency letter, the Bill of Sale dated XX/XX/XXXX, and the full XXXX  Transaction Historyand the evidence confirms multiple legal, procedural, and accounting violations. \nUntil full lawful validation is provided, this debt is unverified, inaccurate, and legally unenforceable. \n\n\n\n1. False and Misleading Balance Reporting ( FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) ; FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ) XXXX  own deficiency letter dated XX/XX/XXXX lists a {$13000.00} balance, yet NCB is reporting {$11000.00} as of XX/XX/XXXX. \nNo ledger or transaction record explains the {$1500.00} difference. \nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( 2 ) ( A ), reporting or collecting on an amount without factual accounting support constitutes false representation of the character, amount, or legal status of a debt.\n\n2. Missing Proof of Ownership ( FDCPA 809 ( b ) ) The Bill of Sale from XXXX XXXX to NCB contains only generic language referencing a spreadsheet ( CUTOFF.xlsx ) but no reference to my name, VIN, or account number.\n\nWithout a specific assignment identifying this debt, NCB can not demonstrate lawful ownership or standing to collect. \nGeneric bulk transfers are not valid validation under 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ).\n\n3. Repossession and Sale Violations ( UCC 9-614 / 9-625 ) The XXXX notice claims my vehicle sold on XX/XX/XXXX for {$4400.00} with {$180.00} in auction fees. \nHowever, the required Notice of Intent to Sell Collateral was never provided, and no documentation identifies where or to whom the vehicle was sold. \nUnder UCC 9-625 ( b ), failure to provide proper notice forfeits the creditors right to any deficiency balance.\n\nThis deficiency is therefore void.\n\n4. Missing 1099-C Filing ( IRS 6050P / FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ) If XXXX XXXX charged off or sold the account for less than full value, a Form 1099-C ( Cancellation of Debt ) was legally required.\n\nNone was produced.\n\nIf the debt was charged off, it is legally treated as discharged income, not a collectible balance.\n\nAttempting to collect or re-report such a balance violates federal tax reporting and credit-furnishing laws.\n\n5. Unlawful Transfer Timeline ( FDCPA 807 / FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) ) XXXX declared the deficiency in XX/XX/XXXX but did not execute its Bill of Sale to NCB until XX/XX/XXXX XXXXtwo years later. \nThis gap in chain of title means NCB can not prove continuous ownership or lawful assignment of the alleged account. \nReporting or collecting without legal title is a clear violation of FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) and FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ).\n\n6. Incomplete and Inaccurate Accounting ( FDCPA 807 / UCC 9-210 ) The Exeter Transaction History confirms : {$4400.00} marked as PROCEEDS from sale and {$180.00} in AUCTION FEE. Numerous $ 10- {$20.00} late-fee and NSF entries. No application of sale proceeds to the principal balance and no running\nbalance to substantiate the {$13000.00} deficiency claimed later. \nThis proves XXXX records are mathematically inconsistent and can not support any lawful balance transfer to NCB.\n\nDemand for Immediate Action Under FDCPA 809 ( b ) and FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) you are hereby ordered to : 1. Provide complete and lawful validation of this accountincluding contract, payment ledger, proof of sale, repossession notice, and specific Bill of Sale listing this account ; or 2. Cease all collection activity, remove any credit-reporting tradeline, and confirm deletion in writing within 15 days of receipt.\n\nFailure to comply will result in formal complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Federal Trade Commission, and the State Attorney General, and immediate initiation of civil litigation for statutory damages and legal fees under the FDCPA, FCRA, and UCC.\n\nNotice of Intent to Pursue Legal Action If NCB Management Services or its agents contact me again regarding this alleged debt without first producing full, lawful validation, such contact will constitute willful non-compliance and harassment. \nI have documented evidence of every discrepancy between XXXX internal accounting and NCBs current reporting.\n\nAny continued communication or reporting will be met with a lawsuit for damages, attorney fees, and injunctive relief under federal law. \n\nYou are now on official notice. Govern yourselves accordingly. \n\n\n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-15T22:08:52.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"53403","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16588243","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NCB Management Services Inc.","date_received":"2025-10-15T21:57:41.000Z","state":"WI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I have performed a thorough review of every document <em>tied</em> to this accountincluding the Retail Installment Contract, the XXXX deficiency letter, the Bill of Sale dated XX/XX/XXXX, and the full XXXX  <em>Transaction</em> Historyand the evidence confirms multiple legal, procedural, and accounting <em>violations</em>. \nUntil full lawful validation is provided, this debt is unverified, inaccurate, and legally unenforceable. \n\n\n\n1."]},"sort":[11.0841255,"16588243"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19974261","_score":11.026009,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Re : Consumer Complaint No. XXXX To the Cash App Complaint Operations Team, I am writing in response to your XX/XX/year> letter concerning my complaint submitted to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau regarding my Cash App account.\n\nYour response states that my account was found to be in violation of Cash Apps Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policy, yet it also states that you are unable to provide any further details and that the decision is final.\n\nRespectfully, this response fails to provide a meaningful explanation for the restriction placed on my account and on my Social Security number. It leaves me in the position of being accused of violating a policy without any identification of what conduct allegedly occurred or which provision of the Terms of Service was violated.\n\nFor more than a year, I attempted to resolve this matter directly with Cash App support. I tried repeatedly to obtain a Cash App Card and restore full access to the services your platform offers. When those attempts went nowhere, I even closed my account and attempted to reopen one in the belief that doing so might clear any technical or administrative issue associated with my account. Your letter confirms that I initiated closure on XX/XX/year>. \n\nI ultimately filed my complaint with the CFPB on XX/XX/year> after exhausting normal support channels without receiving any explanation or resolution. \n\nDuring the time I used Cash App, my activity was entirely consistent with normal consumer use. I used the platform to file my taxes through your system, participate in promotional offers such as the {$10.00} XXXX incentive tied to qualifying purchases, and send or receive money with friends and acquaintances. At no time did I knowingly engage in activity that would violate Cash Apps Terms of Service or Acceptable Use Policy. I have carefully reviewed those policies and remain confident that I have not violated any provision. \n\nDespite this, your letter indicates that my account was restricted and that my Social Security number has effectively been blocked from opening future accounts. This is a significant action to take against a consumer without providing even the most basic description of the alleged violation. \n\nWhile I understand that companies may protect certain internal fraud detection procedures, refusing to identify the alleged policy violation entirely prevents a consumer from correcting a misunderstanding, addressing a potential error, or disputing an inaccurate determination. A statement that a violation occurred without identifying the conduct at issue is not a meaningful explanation. \n\nAdditionally, if this restriction is based on information about my identity, account history, or transaction behavior that has been used in a manner similar to a consumer report or risk profile, I would expect the determination to comply with the principles of transparency and accuracy that govern consumer financial services.\n\nAccordingly, I respectfully request that Cash App take one of the following actions : XXXX. Reinstate my ability to open and use a Cash App account, including eligibility to obtain a Cash App Card ; XXXX XXXX. Provide a clear written explanation identifying : The specific section ( XXXX ) of the Terms of Service or Acceptable Use Policy that you believe were violated The general nature of the activity that triggered the restriction ( for example : suspected fraud category, prohibited transaction type, dispute activity, or other policy category ) The approximate time frame during which the activity occurred To be clear, I am not requesting proprietary fraud detection methods or internal investigative procedures. I am simply requesting enough information to understand the basis for the decision affecting my access to financial services. \n\nI have attempted to resolve this issue patiently and in good faith for over a year. I have used Cash App as an ordinary consumer and have not engaged in prohibited activity. Being indefinitely restricted without explanation is not reasonable and does not reflect fair treatment of a customer. \n\nIf this matter can not be resolved through reinstatement or a clear explanation, I will consider pursuing additional review through the appropriate consumer protection channels so that the basis of this restriction can be properly evaluated. \n\nI respectfully request that this matter be escalated for a full internal compliance review and that I receive a substantive response. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-04T19:22:32.000Z","issue":"Problem adding money","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"75219","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19974261","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Block, Inc.","date_received":"2026-03-04T19:18:45.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Provide a clear written explanation identifying : The <em>specific</em> section ( XXXX ) of the Terms of Service or Acceptable Use Policy that you believe were <em>violated</em> The general nature of the activity that triggered the restriction ( for example : suspected fraud category, prohibited <em>transaction</em> type, dispute activity, or other policy category ) The approximate time frame during which the activity occurred To be clear, I am not requesting proprietary fraud detection methods or internal investigative procedures"]},"sort":[11.026009,"19974261"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12421415","_score":10.24153,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"After reviewing my updated credit report, I am appalled at the credit reporting agencies as they repeatedly failed to address fraudulent accounts and unauthorized hard inquiries that I have previously disputed. They have broken a total of 3 laws : The FTC Act, ECOA, and the FCRA. I am writing again to demand immediate action to block and delete these entries in full compliance with federal law. The creditors negligence and irresponsibility to remove these unauthorized inquiries is costing me and my family to suffer for me to provide them a better life. As a XXXX XXXX and father, I carry the heavy responsibility of providing for my family, but these fraudulent entries have severely hindered my ability to achieve financial stability. This is more than just a disputeit reflects the systemic barriers I continue to face while trying to secure a better future for my household. Under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Credit agencies are legally required to block all fraudulent information within 4 business days of receiving my identity theft documentation. Your failure to comply has violated my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \n\nThey also violated my equal credit opportunity rights, under ECOA Regulation B ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Discrimination in Any Aspect of a Credit Transaction. \nCredit bureaus and creditors can not engage in practices that disproportionately harm a protected class. \nViolation : If you can prove that the reinserted fraudulent accounts disproportionately affect minorities or single parents, it could be considered a pattern of discrimination, violating XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nThe last law that the credit agencies broke and violated is the FTC XXXX Violation Deceptive and Unfair Practices. \nUnder the FTC Act ( 15 U.S.C. XXXX ), businesses, including credit bureaus and data furnishers, are prohibited from engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce. The specific violations in your case fall under Section XXXX of the FTC Act. \n\n1. Unfair Practices Failure to Honor Identity Theft Block FTC Act Section XXXX ( a ) ( 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( a ) ) Prohibition of Unfair or Deceptive Acts A business practice is unfair if it : Causes substantial injury to consumers. \nCan not be reasonably avoided by consumers. \nHas no countervailing benefit to consumers or competition. \nViolation : The credit bureau removed the fraudulent accounts but then reinserted them without justification. \nThis caused harm to you ( lower credit score, potential financial loss ). \nYou could not have prevented it since they failed to notify you properly. \nThere is no legitimate reason to allow fraudulent accounts to reappear. \nThis is an unfair practice under FTC Act XXXX ( a ). \n2. Deceptive Practices Misrepresentation of Consumer Rights FTC Act Section XXXX ( a ) ( 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( a ) ) Deceptive Business Practices A practice is deceptive if it : Misrepresents or omits material facts that would affect a consumers decision. \nLeads a reasonable consumer to believe false or misleading information. \nViolation : The credit bureaus misrepresented that the fraudulent accounts were permanently removed. \nBy re-reporting the fraudulent accounts, they misled you into believing they had complied with the law. \nThis is a deceptive act under FTC Act XXXX ( a ). \n3. Failure to Follow Identity Theft Consumer Protections FTC Identity Theft Rules ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) The FTC enforces identity theft rules under the FTC Act. These rules require credit bureaus and furnishers to take reasonable steps to prevent reinsertion of fraudulent data. \nViolation : By failing to prevent reinsertion of fraudulent accounts, they violated FTC rules under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, which are tied to FTC Act enforcement. \n\nPlease immediately delete and block the fraudulent accounts and unauthorized hard inquiries listed above. The credit agencies must adhere to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX by blocking the entries within 4 business days of receiving this complaint. their continued inaction has already caused harm and is a direct violation of my rights under the FCRA. For violating the FTC Act, ECOA, and my rights, I request you send payment immediately via Certified Funds to : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX  XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-11T03:28:19.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"75068","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12421415","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-03-11T02:54:00.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Violation</em> : By failing to prevent reinsertion of fraudulent accounts, they <em>violated</em> FTC rules under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, which are <em>tied</em> to FTC Act enforcement. \n\nPlease immediately delete and block the fraudulent accounts and unauthorized hard inquiries listed above."]},"sort":[10.24153,"12421415"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":86,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":86}]}},"product":{"doc_count":86,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":53,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":53}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":8,"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":5},{"key":"Store credit card","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":6,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":6}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":5,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":3},{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":5,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mobile or digital wallet","doc_count":4},{"key":"Virtual currency","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":2},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other banking product or service","doc_count":2},{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt or credit management","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt settlement","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":"Payday loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":86,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":29,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":24},{"key":"Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize","doc_count":5}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":15,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":14},{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":10,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":10}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":5,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card","doc_count":3},{"key":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":2,"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":1},{"key":"Problem accessing account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing the loan or lease","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Billing problem","doc_count":1},{"key":"Problem with fees charged","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Payment process","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":"Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Charged fees or interest you didn't expect","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Closing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue with the loan closing","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Didn't provide services promised","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"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 credit card","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card opened without my consent or knowledge","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":"Problem adding money","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problem when making payments","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem during payment process","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problems at the end of the loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with paying off the loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Repossession","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Lender trying to repossess or disable the vehicle","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble accessing funds in your mobile or digital wallet","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":86,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":86}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":86,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":68},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":17},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":86,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":86}]}},"company":{"doc_count":86,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":19},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":16},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":15},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":3},{"key":"Block, Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"ROBINHOOD MARKETS INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"ACIMA CREDIT, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"AMERISAVE MORTGAGE CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"American Credit Acceptance, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Atlanticus Services Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"CCF Intermediate Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Consumer Financial Services Solutions, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Consumer Portfolio Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"FIRST CITIZENS BANCSHARES, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Kikoff Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Mercedes Benz Financial Services","doc_count":1},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"NCB Management Services Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"National Credit Systems,Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"Payward Ventures Inc. dba Kraken","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rausch Sturm LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rosebud Economic Development Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":1},{"key":"Volvo Car Financial Services U.S., LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":86,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TX","doc_count":22},{"key":"CA","doc_count":13},{"key":"MO","doc_count":6},{"key":"NE","doc_count":6},{"key":"IL","doc_count":5},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":5},{"key":"CT","doc_count":3},{"key":"KS","doc_count":3},{"key":"OR","doc_count":3},{"key":"GA","doc_count":2},{"key":"LA","doc_count":2},{"key":"MD","doc_count":2},{"key":"MI","doc_count":2},{"key":"VA","doc_count":2},{"key":"AZ","doc_count":1},{"key":"CO","doc_count":1},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"NY","doc_count":1},{"key":"OH","doc_count":1},{"key":"OK","doc_count":1},{"key":"PA","doc_count":1},{"key":"SC","doc_count":1},{"key":"WI","doc_count":1},{"key":"WV","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":86,"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":36},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":2},{"key":"Company believes complaint represents an opportunity for improvement to better serve consumers","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":86,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":3},{"key":"Older American","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":[10.241387,"12421415"],"3":[7.5656805,"22607004"],"4":[5.5178366,"22695793"]}}}