{"took":137,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":11,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6337572","_score":14.946834,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Reason of dispute : I didnt receive the services what I ordered or service that was promised to me by merchant XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : Chase Freedom XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Amounts disputed : XXXX, XXXX USD Service that was requested : I had a call with an XXXX  agent asking her what exactly I need to do to improve my ranking for a certain keyword. \n\nI had rated X without XXXX  help, and an agent told me to run a campaign to get around Y no. of installs per day for a specific keyword, and I should see the ranking for that specific keyword improved. \n\nI followed her instructions. Campaign was completed in a few days. I checked my ranking. It went from XXXX to being Unranked. XXXX is the term used when you are not ranked at all among the top thousands. \n\nSame happened with some other keywords also. Instead of my apps rank getting improved, it got absolutely worse which was no rank at all. I already had rank XXXX something. For someone who knows how keyword optimization works in the XXXX app store. \n\nIt takes months, and sometimes years to get ranked on certain keywords especially high traffic keywords. It took away all the hard labor we put on our app for years, and years in just minutes because of the way they ran their service. \n\nWe got panicked, and reached out to XXXX telling them the situation, and they said they will investigate it, and respond between 5 to 7 days. A week passed by, and no response from their side. \n\nFinally, I was able to schedule a call with their representative. I explained her situation, and showed her how rank got so much worse, and your service not only didnt work but, made it worse. She agreed to it and said let me see what I can do. I will get back to you. \n\nI even ask her to give the balance back or refund me money. She said she will investigate it. She was the same person who guided me on campaign and told me to run campaigns for certain keywords and told me what the right number of installs I will need to get higher ranking, and she said do not worry, we guarantee the rank increase. We know what our AI is doing, we know how app stores work. \n\n\n\nIf you see their website. It has guaranteed app rank, guaranteed app downloads etc. so many guarantees, Their representative was saying the same thing over, and over, and I asked her are you sure It works, Are you sure your service will not make the XXXX app store feel like it's spam or something? \n\nShe said No, we have been doing this for years, and we know what we are doing. \n\nWell, Long story short. \n\nAfter a few days, we got an email saying no, as per our policy, we dont refund. \n\nWe actually didnt receive the service they promised and did a lot of damage to our app store reputation. \n\nNumbers dont lie, and they themselves acknowledge that the outcome was not just what was promised but moved us way far from the ranking we already achieved through our hard work of years. \n\nI am going to attach some screenshots of conversation, and rankings before, and after their service to help you understand the situation better. \n\nWe trusted XXXX, and tried their service in a good faith, and ended up damaging our reputation on store, and XXXX just doesnt want to listen to us or help us rectify or redo or anything to make us go back to where we were. They dont want to do any kind of help after so much damage. \n\nAnd dont want to offer any compensation in any way, shape or form. \n\nAfter completely exhausted by asking them for help back, and forth. We decided to take help from Chase to dispute all the transactions. \n\nThank you! \n\nCredit card company made decision in favor of merchant. I tried making appeal but, they said they can't accept anymore as I surpassed the dates. Below was was appeal argument : Reason of dispute : I didnt receive the services what I ordered or service that was promised to me by merchant XXXX  XXXX  that was requested : I had a call with an XXXX agent asking her what exactly I need to do to improve my ranking for a certain keyword. \n\nI had rated X without XXXX  help, and an agent told me to run a campaign to get around Y no. of installs per day for a specific keyword, and I should see the ranking for that specific keyword improved. \n\nI followed her instructions. Campaign was completed in a few days. I checked my ranking. It went from XXXX to being Unranked. Unranked is the term used when you are not ranked at all among the top thousands. \n\nSame happened with some other keywords also. Instead of my apps rank getting improved, it got absolutely worse which was no rank at all. I already had rank XXXX something. For someone who knows how keyword optimization works in the XXXX app store. \n\nIt takes months, and sometimes years to get ranked on certain keywords especially high traffic keywords. It took away all the hard labor we put on our app for years, and years in just minutes because of the way they ran their service. \n\nWe got panicked, and reached out to XXXX telling them the situation, and they said they will investigate it, and respond between 5 to 7 days. A week passed by, and no response from their side. \n\nFinally, I was able to schedule a call with their representative. I explained her situation, and showed her how rank got so much worse, and your service not only didnt work but, made it worse. She agreed to it and said let me see what I can do. I will get back to you. \n\nI even ask her to give the balance back or refund me money. She said she will investigate it. She was the same person who guided me on campaign and told me to run campaigns for certain keywords and told me what the right number of installs I will need to get higher ranking, and she said do not worry, we guarantee the rank increase. We know what our AI is doing, we know how app stores work. \n\n\n\nIf you see their website. It has guaranteed app rank, guaranteed app downloads etc. so many guarantees, Their representative was saying the same thing over, and over, and I asked her are you sure It works, Are you sure your service will not make the XXXX app store feel like it's spam or something? \n\nShe said No, we have been doing this for years, and we know what we are doing. \n\nWell, Long story short. \n\nAfter a few days, we got an email saying no, as per our policy, we dont refund. \n\nWe actually didnt receive the service they promised and did a lot of damage to our app store reputation. \n\nNumbers dont lie, and they themselves acknowledge that the outcome was not just what was promised but moved us way far from the ranking we already achieved through our hard work of years. \n\nI am going to attach some screenshots of conversation, and rankings before, and after their service to help you understand the situation better. \n\nWe trusted XXXX, and tried their service in a good faith, and ended up damaging our reputation on store, and XXXX just doesnt want to listen to us or help us rectify or redo or anything to make us go back to where we were. They dont want to do any kind of help after so much damage. \n\nAnd dont want to offer any compensation in any way, shape or form. \n\nAfter completely exhausted by asking them for help back, and forth. We decided to take help from Chase to dispute all the transactions. \n\nThank you! \n\nI want to dispute the charges again, I absolutely don't agree with the charges being valid. \n\nXXXX said I received full services from them, and I didn't. I begged them to work with me after the rankings went completely wrong as they directed me to start a campaign for a keyword through the high volume of installs just to make extra money. Later on, I discovered how bad practice is it and I am pretty sure they do that to every client, and some of them unfortunately have to suffer consequences of going downward spiral on reputation in store, and losing audience, and potential revenue, and then, they blamed it on me.\n\nI was okay to work with them even after the unaltered damages that I suffered, and pretty much begged them to either give me some kind of assistance in terms of refunding me for those campaigns or issue me a credit or understand the situation they have put me in. they ignored my emails until they heard from Chase - you guys about the dispute. Then, all of the sudden, I got an email saying what's wrong, we got a dispute from your credit card company. I told them why don't you read all the emails I sent you begging you to work with me.\n\nI can provide you with those email threads.\n\n2. Yes, I had meetings with XXXX XXXX, and in those meetings, they did their marketing where they told me what keywords to go for, and what should be the number of installs to achieve a certain ranking. they could have easily avoided this issue if they were not greedy, and had not told me to set a high install volume to achieve ranking just to earn extra money so, I consider it as not even a service. I consider that I was not provided the service I was told, and guaranteed. \n\n3. No, there was no clarification on terms or conditions by anyone from XXXX. I have only spoken to one person over meeting calls ever. Her name is XXXX XXXX. She was the one who asked me to increase the volume of installs. \nShe kept saying we know what we are doing, and we guarantee... Yes, XXXX times she used the word \" GUARANTEE '' of achieving the rankings as per her directions which was basically to make the campaign bigger, and now, I know it was the way for her to make me spend more money on the platform, and had no real results, actually negative results. I suggest you take an introductory call with her as a customer to see what I am talking about. \n\nOn top of that, take a look at their website, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and tell me if they don't advertise that they guarantee app rankings which is a false advertising. \n\n4. You shouldn't believe the rankings they are providing. it's their own platform, they can provide whatever they want, and for us, it was different. XXXX pulled down ranking from our top revenue generating keyword so, I highly regret being on their platform. \n\n5. No, XXXX reps for various teams have never explained to me on any occasion that XXXX might remove our services. When did I ever speak to various teams??? I spoke to one person only, and she told me don't worry, we know what we are doing. It is almost guaranteed to get the results SO, ITS wrong to say that XXXX never said they guarantee the results. Actually, that was the selling point for me to get to their platform, they clearly said that. \n\n6. I elaborated, and went on the path for weeks, and weeks to try negotiating with XXXX, and I had enough when they consistently ignored my results, and refused to work with me, so I had no choice but to take my credit card company 's help. \n\nThey didn't provide me with the services they promised. \nI can explain each and every point in detail as I am the one who is facing consequences not the XXXX. \nPlease contact me through a call, and I would be happy to provide all info. in details. \n\nThank you! I request you to re-open the dispute","date_sent_to_company":"2022-12-20T04:54:59.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"61554","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6337572","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2022-12-20T04:39:27.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It has <em>guaranteed</em> app rank, <em>guaranteed</em> app downloads etc. so many <em>guarantees</em>, Their representative was saying the same thing over, and over, and I asked her are you sure It works, Are you sure your service will not make the XXXX app store feel like it's spam or something? \n\nShe said No, we have been <em>doing</em> this for years, and we know what we are <em>doing</em>. \n\nWell, Long story short. \n\nAfter a few days, we got an email saying no, as per our policy, we dont refund."]},"sort":[14.946834,"6337572"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10654745","_score":9.654687,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"First Merchants Bank XXXX : XXXX Background : Events Surrounding Account Closure : XXXX filed IRS Form 1099-A in anticipation of a deposit intended for his irrevocable trust account. In this filing, he designated First Merchants mailing address as the debtor, with the U.S. Treasury identified as the creditor, to notify the bank of the forthcoming deposit. The intent of this form was not to impose liability on First Merchants but rather to secure the deposit for the trust. The Department of the U.S. Treasury/IRS accepted the e-filed 1099-A and mailed the original acknowledgment for record to First Merchants mailing address.\n\nDiscriminatory Remarks : First Merchants initiated contact with XXXX, requesting his presence at their office for an in-person meeting with Branch XXXX XXXX. During this meeting, XXXX and XXXX convened in her office and placed a call to XXXX XXXX, the Chief Compliance Officer of First Merchants. During a phone call with Branch XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, First Merchants representative, XXXX initially assured that the account would remain open. However, upon inquiring about the rationale for filing the 1099-A and questioning, What makes you think the government owes you money?, Brians demeanor changed after XXXX clarified XXXX status as a secured creditor and clarified his reasoning. Subsequently, XXXX indicated that the account would be closed, citing legal reasons without providing further details. \nFurther Attempts to Resolve the Issue : XXXX later contacted XXXX directly via phone with a witness present on a recorded line, seeking clarification on the closure rationale. XXXX refused to provide clarification and made a prejudicial remark questioning whether XXXX identified as a sovereign citizen. When XXXX asserted that this was irrelevant, XXXX dismissively suggested he should file a complaint if dissatisfied. \nInvoluntary Account Closure and Financial Harm : The abrupt closure of XXXX account and his prohibition from future banking services with First Merchants has resulted in significant financial hardship, impacting his ability to conduct transactions, causing emotional distress, and limiting access to essential credit services. \n\nAllegations of Discrimination and Legal Basis : Discriminatory Assumption of Sovereign Citizen Status : XXXX XXXX assumption regarding XXXX sovereign citizen status stemmed from financial terminology commonly utilized by secured creditors and financial instruments under the XXXX. This presumption led to XXXX unjust exclusion from banking services, indicating a discriminatory bias against customers managing assets and liabilities through secured creditor protocols. Such denial of service contravenes principles of equal treatment and may violate banking discrimination laws under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ), which prohibits discrimination based on arbitrary characteristics.\n\nLack of Probable Cause for Account Closure : The closure of XXXX account lacked probable cause. The notification via the XXXX was a procedural measure for trust funding and imposed no liability on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX legal utilization of financial instruments and UCC filings is safeguarded under Michigan state and federal UCC regulations, which protect lawful notifications and creditor filings in relation to secured interests. \nRefusal to Provide Reasoning or Proper Due Process : Despite XXXX inquiries, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX failed to provide a clear rationale or justification for the account closure. This absence of transparency, coupled with discriminatory remarks, denied XXXX procedural fairness. Under the ECOA and federal banking regulations, financial institutions are mandated to provide non-discriminatory services and furnish clear, valid justifications for denying or terminating banking services.\n\nImpact on Livelihood and Access to Financial Services : The account closure and subsequent ban have severely hindered XXXX ability to manage his financial obligations and livelihood. Denial of banking access based on unfounded and prejudicial assumptions, devoid of legitimate cause, infringes upon his right to engage in banking and commerce, causing substantial detriment to his creditworthiness and future transactions. \n\nVicarious Liability and Request for Financial Accountability : Vicarious Liability of First Merchants Bank : First Merchants Bank, through the actions of its employee XXXX XXXX, exhibited discriminatory conduct based on assumptions regarding XXXX financial protocols and status. This behavior represents a breach of equitable service standards and necessitates accountability for the resultant harm. \nXXXX and XXXX Signature Liability : Ruths Medallion Signature Guarantee on Form XXXX, along with the XXXX banking obligations, entitles XXXX to claim damages under the XXXX amount as delineated in applicable XXXX regulations. The obstructive actions taken by XXXX XXXX in impeding account access, disrupting financial transactions, and causing emotional and economic harm warrant compensation. \n\n1. Color of Law Violations Definition of Color of Law : The term \" color of law '' pertains to actions executed by government officials that appear to be carried out under legal authority. When public officials or private entities act in a manner that implies they are exercising official powers but are infringing upon rights or acting unlawfully, they may be held accountable for color of law violations. \nBrians Actions : If XXXX XXXX, as a bank representative, made determinations regarding XXXX 's accounts based on assumptions about his status as a sovereign citizen, he may be acting under the color of law, particularly if he is a state actor or if his actions are closely aligned with the enforcement of government policies. \nBy denying XXXX access to banking services based on his national status, XXXX could be infringing upon XXXX 's rights under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. 1983, which provides a remedy for individuals whose rights have been violated under color of law.\n\n2. Denial of Rights to be a National National vs. Citizen : U.S. law distinguishes between nationals and citizens. Under federal law, specifically 8 U.S.C. 1101 ( a ) ( 22 ), a national of the United States who is not a citizen retains certain rights and privileges, albeit limited compared to those of citizens. Under current law all U.S. citizens are also U.S. nationals, but not all U.S. nationals are U.S. citizens. \nBy presuming that XXXX could not be a national due to a misunderstanding of legal terminology, XXXX XXXX have violated XXXX rights to recognize and exercise his status as a National. This assumption led to a denial of services, which can be construed as a violation of rights protected under federal statutes.\n\n3. Emotional Distress and Injury Claims Emotional Distress : Emotional distress claims may arise from Brians actions if deemed extreme or outrageous. The psychological impact of being mischaracterized and denied access to services can result in significant emotional distress, justifying legal action.\n\n4. Gift Claims Potential Claims Regarding Gifts : Under federal law, specifically the Gift Tax Regulations, provisions exist for gifts made to individuals, including stipulations about their value and implications. If the bank 's actions indirectly led to the denial of financial gifts or support to XXXX, he might contend that he was deprived of potential financial benefits due to discriminatory practices. \nMoreover, the XXXX XXXX XXXX defines gifts as transfers of property wherein the donor does not receive full value in return. If XXXX 's actions obstructed XXXX from receiving gifts ( financial assistance, loans, etc. ), this could infringe upon his rights to financial autonomy and support, potentially giving rise to additional claims under the Gift Tax provisions. \nA Customer Identification Program ( CIP ) ( 31 U.S.C. 5318 ( l ) ) Requirement : Financial institutions are required to implement a Customer Identification Program to verify the identity of customers when opening accounts. \nPotential Violation : If XXXX failed to ensure that XXXX XXXX adhered to its CIP requirements, such as not properly verifying the identities of new customers or failing to maintain adequate records, this could be considered a violation. \nB. Recordkeeping Requirements ( 31 U.S.C. 5311 et seq. ) Requirement : The XXXX mandates specific recordkeeping practices related to financial transactions, including maintaining records of certain transactions and customer information. \nPotential Violation : If XXXX neglected to maintain proper records of transactions as required by the XXXX, or if records were improperly destroyed or altered, this would constitute a violation. \nXXXX Confidentiality Requirements ( 31 U.S.C. 5318 ( g ) ( 2 ) ) Requirement : The XXXX prohibits disclosing the fact that a XXXX has been filed or that a financial institution is considering filing XXXX. This confidentiality requirement is crucial to ensure investigations are not compromised. \nPotential Violation : If XXXX disclosed information regarding a SAR to unauthorized parties, including customers involved in the reported transaction, this could lead to serious legal repercussions. \nQuestions Regarding Account Closure and Discriminatory Actions Account Closure Justification : What specific legal reasons did you provide to XXXX for the closure of his account? Can you detail the rationale behind these reasons? \nDocumentation Review : Are there any internal documents or communications that justify the decision to close XXXX account? Can these documents be made available for review? \nDiscriminatory Remarks : Why did you make a prejudicial remark questioning XXXX 's identification as a sovereign citizen? What criteria do you use to evaluate customers ' financial statuses and needs? How do you justify this in light of non-discriminatory practices required by federal law? \nImpact of 1099-A Filing : How did XXXX filing XXXXf IRS Form 1099-A influence your decision-making process regarding his account? Was there a specific bank policy that prompted the closure? \nQuestions Related to Insurance Claims Insurance Claims on Account : Were any insurance claims filed regarding Soteros account before its closure? If so, what were the reasons for these claims?\n\nClaim Handling Procedures : What procedures does First Merchants have in place for handling claims related to customer accounts? Were these procedures followed in XXXX case? \nAudit of Claims : Can you provide a record of any insurance claims made on XXXX 's account and the outcomes of those claims? Were there any claims denied, and if so, what was the basis for those denials? \nRelevance of Claims to Account XXXX : How did any existing insurance claims influence your decision to close XXXX account? Was the account closure linked to perceived risks associated with those claims? \nQuestions About Compliance and Reporting Compliance with Regulations : Did you consult with compliance officers or legal counsel regarding the decision to close Soteros account, especially in light of the 1099-A filing? What guidance did they provide? \nSEC Reporting Obligations : Are you aware of any obligations First Merchants Bank had to report any issues related to XXXX account to the SEC or other regulatory agencies? Were those obligations fulfilled? \nRecordkeeping Compliance : Can you provide evidence that First Merchants Bank maintained proper records of all transactions and insurance claims associated with XXXX 's account, as required under federal law? \nConfidentiality of Claims : Were there any confidentiality violations related to the disclosure of information regarding any claims made on XXXX 's account? If so, what measures are in place to protect customer information? \nQuestions Regarding Accountability Accountability for Actions : Who within First Merchants Bank is responsible for overseeing the handling of customer accounts and ensuring compliance with anti-discrimination laws? What accountability measures are in place for employees like yourself? \nRemediation Process : What steps are you willing to take to address the harm caused to XXXX as a result of the account closure and potential mishandling of insurance claims? \nReview of Discriminatory Practices : What actions will First Merchants Bank take to review and potentially rectify any discriminatory practices within the organization, particularly those exhibited in XXXX case? \n\n\nTo elucidate how XXXX 's claim for compensation against First Merchants Bank is substantiated and valid for an order to pay, we must analyze the relevant legal frameworks, particularly 31 U.S. Code 3701 and associated regulations, as follows : 1. Understanding 31 U.S. Code 3701 ( Defining \" Claim '' ) Under 31 U.S. Code 3701, the term \" claim '' encompasses any sum of money or property owed to the United States, or any obligation that the United States is liable to pay. Specifically, subsection ( 1 ) articulates : \" The term 'claim ' means any claim of the United States against a person, or of a person against the United States XXXX for the payment of money or for the delivery of property. '' In the context of XXXX situation, this definition supports the assertion that federal funds may be implicated in addressing claims against entities such as First Merchants Bank. The U.S. government may be obligated to intervene when losses arise due to actions taken by financial institutions, which can include compensation for individuals like XXXX. \nXXXX. Validity of XXXX 's Claim for Compensation Soteros claim for compensation can be characterized as a legitimate legal demand for financial restitution, predicated upon alleged wrongful conduct by First Merchants Bank, including discrimination and wrongful account closure. The validity of this claim is bolstered by the following components : Claim Recognition : By instituting a formal claim, XXXX establishes a legally recognized basis for restitution. This claim aligns with the statutory framework set forth in 31 U.S.C. 3701, recognizing that claims against financial institutions create debts owed to individuals under federal law. \nObligation for Payment : Should the claim be substantiated with appropriate evidence, First Merchants Bank could be legally bound to fulfill it. The U.S. Treasury may facilitate this payment, especially in circumstances where federal programs exist to support such claims.\n\n3. Payment Processing Under 31 CFR Part 240 31 CFR Part 240 outlines the endorsement and payment of checks drawn on the U.S. Treasury, playing a pivotal role in processing claims related to federal funds. The following provisions are relevant : Check Indorsement : The regulation mandates that checks be properly endorsed to ensure lawful processing and issuance of payments. If XXXX 's claim is validated, the bank would be required to complete necessary endorsements and forms, including Form 240, to facilitate payment.\n\nUtilization of Treasury Forms : The forms 232, 233, and 234 address specific aspects of claims and payments : Form 232 : Generally used for claims concerning lost or stolen Treasury checks.\n\nForm 233 : Addresses claims for payment due to wrongful denial or delays.\n\nForm 234 : Pertains to other relevant transactions to guarantee the proper tracking of payments.\n\nThese forms are essential for the Treasury to accurately process any claims for funds potentially owed as a result of First Merchants actions.\n\n4. 18 U.S.C. 8 - Definition of Obligation or Other Security of the U.S.\n\n18 U.S.C. 8 defines \" obligation or other security of the United States '' as any instrument evidencing a promise to pay money issued by the federal government. The relevance of this provision to XXXX 's claim is as follows : Legal Foundation for Claims : If XXXX claim is corroborated, it XXXX be construed as a claim on an obligation or security issued by the XXXX, particularly if it seeks damages in relation to federal statutes. \nPayment from U.S. Treasury : Should funds be deemed necessary to satisfy the claim, they can be processed as payments against obligations owed by the U.S. to its citizens. This reinforces the mechanism for First Merchants Bank to remit payment through established Treasury channels.\n\nConclusion By comprehensively understanding how 31 U.S. Code 3701 and related regulations, such as 31 CFR Part 240, apply to his claim, Sotero can effectively position his demand within a legal framework that facilitates compensation through federal processes. Once a validated claim is established, First Merchants Bank may find it straightforward to discharge its financial obligations to XXXX, potentially alleviating liability through payments processed via the XXXX Treasury in compliance with federal regulations. This establishes a clear pathway for XXXX to secure compensation for his losses while adhering to the legal standards governing claims and payments. \n\nTo assert the validity of XXXX claim, particularly regarding the U.S. Treasury 's designation as a debtor in his UCC filing, and XXXX 's position as a creditor holding collateral for all future debts in trust, it is imperative to analyze the relevant principles of the Uniform Commercial Code ( UCC ) in conjunction with applicable Michigan and U.S. laws. This analysis remains valid despite the U.S. Treasurys failure to respond within thirty days from the filing. Below is a structured explanation framed in legal terminology.\n\n1. UCC Framework and Definitions The Uniform Commercial Code ( UCC ) serves as a foundational legal framework governing commercial transactions across the United States. Key components relevant to XXXX 's situation include : Debtor and Creditor Roles : The UCC defines a debtor as a party obligated to repay a financial claim. In this context, the U.S. Treasury is identified as the debtor, indicating a legal responsibility to address any claims asserted by XXXX, the creditor. The creditor is recognized as holding a superior interest in the collateral. \nCollateral for Future Debt : Under UCC 9-204, a secured transaction allows a creditor to establish a security interest in collateral that secures both existing and future debts. This provision is critical, as it enables XXXX to leverage his claim against the Treasury for both current and prospective obligations that may arise. \nXXXX. Collateralization of Claims XXXX 's XXXX filing fortifies his status as a creditor through the following elements : Identification of Collateral : By naming the U.S. Treasury as a debtor in the UCC filing, XXXX has established a security interest in collateral that may cover claims for compensation related to financial losses incurred due to First Merchants Banks actions. This collateralization is essential, as it provides a tangible basis for asserting claims against the Treasury.\n\nTrust Arrangement : The assertion that XXXX holds collateral in trust further enhances the legitimacy of his claim. Trust structures indicate that assets or collateral are managed for the benefit of the creditor, thereby solidifying XXXX legal standing and ensuring protection of his interests. \nXXXX. Applicability to Future Debts The UCC provisions ensure that XXXX claims extend beyond past obligations : Coverage of Future Claims : UCC 9-204 ( 2 ) permits a creditor to secure future claims. Consequently, XXXX claim can encompass both historical losses and potential future debts, affirming its validity under UCC provisions. Any obligations the U.S. Treasury incurs in the future could be satisfied using the collateral designated in the UCC filing.\n\nContinuing Security Interest : The security interest established is continuous, allowing XXXX to assert claims arising from ongoing or future transactions without the necessity of re-establishing his claim for each new obligation. \n4. Implications for Claim Against First Merchants Bank The legal framework arising from the UCC filing confers several advantages to XXXX in pursuing compensation : Substantiation of Claim : Identifying the U.S. Treasury as a debtor in his UCC filing substantiates XXXX 's claim for compensation against First Merchants Bank. This documentation serves as credible evidence of the Treasurys obligation to fulfill claims arising from the financial losses he sustained. \nFacilitation of Payment : The identification of the Treasury as a debtor streamlines the payment process. Upon validation of XXXX 's claim, First Merchants Bank may more readily comply, as payments can be processed through the Treasury, consistent with the pre-established security interest under UCC regulations.\n\n5. Legal Considerations of Non-Response Under UCC 9-404, the lack of response from the U.S. Treasury within the statutory period of thirty days does not invalidate XXXX security interest or claims. The UCC protects the rights of secured parties, allowing them to assert their claims irrespective of a debtor 's response. Additionally, under Michigan law ( MCL 440.9501 et seq. ), the effectiveness of a security interest is not contingent upon acknowledgment by the debtor. \nConclusion In conclusion, XXXX XXXX filing, which identifies the U.S. Treasury as a debtor while establishing his role as a creditor with collateral for both present and future debts, forms a robust legal foundation for his claims. This arrangement facilitates the assertion of his rights under the UCC and applicable Michigan laws, enabling him to seek compensation for past losses and any future obligations that may arise. The interplay of these legal concepts not only solidifies the validity of XXXX claim against First Merchants Bank but also enhances the prospects for successful resolution and payment through the established legal channels. \n\nFifth Amendment : Due Process Clause : This clause guarantees that individuals can not be deprived of their property without due process of law. XXXX 's account closure without a clear and justifiable reason may constitute a violation of this right.\n\nFourteenth Amendment : Equal Protection Clause : This clause prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. If XXXX was discriminated against based on assumptions about his status as a \" sovereign citizen, '' this could represent a violation of his right to equal protection under the law. \nSubstantive Due Process : This protects against arbitrary denial of fundamental rights, suggesting that any financial institution, as a state actor, must respect individuals ' rights to engage in lawful financial transactions. \nCivil Rights Act of 1964 ( particularly Title II and Title VII ) : These provisions prohibit discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in public accommodations and employment. While these are not constitutional provisions, they extend protections that could apply in cases of financial services discrimination.\n\n42 U.S.C. 1983 : This statute allows individuals to sue in civil court for constitutional violations committed by state actors. If First Merchants Bank is considered a state actor through its actions, XXXX might claim violations of his constitutional rights under this statute. \nEqual Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ) : While not a constitutional law, the ECOA prohibits discrimination in any aspect of a credit transaction based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or because the applicant receives public assistance. If XXXX was denied banking services based on discriminatory assumptions, this statute may provide grounds for legal action.\n\nFirst Amendment : Freedom of Speech : If XXXX characterization or the remarks made during the banks interactions are construed as retaliation against his speech regarding financial protocols or legal status, it XXXX invoke protections under the First Amendment.\n\nFourth Amendment : Protection against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures : This amendment may apply if the actions taken by the bank are seen as an unwarranted intrusion into XXXX XXXX affairs without probable cause or justification. \n\n\nRequested Action : Reinstatement of Banking Services : Restore XXXX access to First Merchants accounts or authorize alternative options, accompanied by an apology for the biased conduct exhibited by XXXX XXXX. \nRelease of Bond for Damages : Initiate bond releases or payments to compensate for punitive damages arising from discriminatory treatment, financial impediments, and reputational harm. Evaluate the full surety amount of the Medallion Guarantee as documented on Form 5444 and compensate for related punitive damages.\n\nProvide Transparency and Reasoning : Require First Merchants to furnish detailed reasoning for the account closure, including an audit of any insurance or securities claims made on the account and full disclosure of the legal grounds cited.\n\nThis complaint articulates allegations of financial discrimination, unjust denial of services, and seeks remedies for the economic and emotional distress caused by the actions of First Merchants Bank. Compliance with applicable federal and Michigan laws governing financial services and the fair treatment of secured creditors is anticipated.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-01T21:15:11.000Z","issue":"Closing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"482XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10654745","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"FIRST MERCHANTS CORPORATION","date_received":"2024-11-01T20:55:48.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Company closed your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Claim Handling Procedures : What procedures <em>does</em> First Merchants have in place for handling claims related to customer accounts? Were these procedures followed in XXXX case? \nAudit of Claims : Can you <em>provide</em> a record of any insurance claims made on XXXX 's account and the <em>outcomes</em> of those claims? Were there any claims denied, and if so, what was the basis for those denials?"]},"sort":[9.654687,"10654745"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15971197","_score":7.708627,"_source":{"product":"Debt or credit management","complaint_what_happened":"Company : Nelnet ( servicer ) on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education ( ED ). \nIm XXXX XXXX. Nelnet has delayed and obstructed basic servicing on my federal student loansincluding providing a full account history, written explanations, and timely answers. Nelnet demanded sensitive PII by email to verify but failed to proceed meaningfully after I responded, and I still dont have a complete accounting, status clarity, or assurance of accurate credit reporting. Im requesting : ( 1 ) a complete account reconstruction ( all loans, balances, interest, capitalization, payment allocation ), ( 2 ) confirmation of current repayment status and any forbearance/deferment or IDR eligibility, ( 3 ) correction/removal of any inaccurate credit reporting, and ( 4 ) a secure channel and single point of contact. ED is the creditor and ultimately responsible for servicer compliance. Please compel Nelnet/ED to provide records, correct errors, and confirm compliance. \n\n\n-- - 2 ) Full Narrative ( detailed ) Who I am & accounts : I am XXXX XXXX, borrower on federal student loans owned by the U.S. Department of Education and serviced by Nelnet. I contacted Nelnet to obtain a complete, written accounting of my loans and to resolve servicing questions ( status, balances, capitalization, payment allocation, and any credit reporting ). \n\nWhat happened : Nelnet replied requesting SSN/account/DOB for privacy verification, directing me to email XXXX. I understand privacy verification is required ; however, after supplying the requested details through their process/portal ( or offering to use a secure channel ), I have not received the complete, itemized account history or timely, substantive answers. \n\nI still lack : A full transaction ledger ( origination, disbursements, consolidations if any, payment history, interest accrual by date/rate, capitalization events, current principal/interest breakdown ). \n\nA clear statement of current status ( in repayment, deferment/forbearance, or administrative hold ) and the legal basis and dates for any status changes. \n\nWritten confirmation of IDR/PSLF eligibility or why those options are not being applied ( if applicable ). \n\nAssurance that credit reporting ( if any ) is accurate and up to date and that no adverse data was furnished while my requests were pending. \n\n\nBottom line : I have repeatedly asked for timely, accurate, and complete information about my federal loans, and Nelnet has not provided a compliant response or the full documentation needed to verify accuracy. \n\n\nWhy this is a problem : Federal student-loan servicers must provide timely and accurate information, maintain complete records, and respond to borrower inquiries with clear, written explanations and supporting documents. \n\nIf any information was furnished to consumer reporting agencies, the FCRA requires accuracy and prompt correction of disputed information. \n\nAs EDs contracted servicer, Nelnets failures ultimately reflect on ED ; consumers should not be bounced between entities. \n\n\nHarm : Ongoing uncertainty about balances and status ; risk of misapplied payments or improper capitalization ; potential credit harm if inaccurate data was reported ; and time and effort chasing basic records. I need a complete, authoritative accounting and corrections where applicable. \n\n\n\n-- - 3 ) Requested Relief ( be explicit ) I request that the CFPB require Nelnet and ED to : 1. Produce a complete account reconstruction ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) showing, for each loan : origination/disbursement, interest rates by period, daily interest accrual, capitalization events ( date/amount/cause ), payment allocation by date ( to principal/interest/fees ), current principal vs. interest, outstanding balance, and current repayment status. \n\n\n2. Provide written explanations for any deferment/forbearance/administrative holds ( with start/end dates and authority ) and confirm current repayment plan.\n\n3. Review and document IDR eligibility ( and PSLF, if applicable ), identify the best available plan, and implement it upon my election, with back-dated corrections if I was improperly steered or delayed.\n\n4. Audit and correct any credit reporting tied to these loans ; delete or adjust any inaccurate late/missed payment entries ; and furnish me written proof of all changes sent to CRAs.\n\n5. Provide a secure communications channel ( portal or encrypted method ) and assign a single point of contact with direct phone/email to resolve open items.\n\n6. Confirm all fees/charges assessed are lawful and reverse any improper amounts ; provide a waiver/credit if delays or errors were on the servicers side.\n\n7. Deliver all requested records within 30 days and a final, plain-English summary confirming that my account is accurate and in the correct status going forward.\n\n-- - 4 ) CFPB Form Selections ( what to pick ) Product : Student loan Loan type : Federal student loan Issue : Trouble with how the loan is being serviced ( e.g., Incorrect information on account / Trouble getting information / Problems when you asked to get help ) pick the closest available options Company : Nelnet ( servicer ) Mention creditor/owner in narrative : U.S. Department of Education Resolution sought : Records production ; corrected accounting ; corrected credit reporting ; clear status/plan ; secure contact ; reversal of improper charges Submitter : I am the consumer Consent to share with company : Yes ( to enable Nelnet/ED to respond ) -- - 5 ) Evidence Checklist ( attach what you can ) Nelnets email asking for verification and your reply/submission ( screenshots or XXXX ) Any Nelnet statements/letters/secure messages showing status, balances, rates, or plan Any credit report pages showing tradelines/late marks related to these loans A timeline of your contacts ( dates you wrote/called ; what you asked for ; what they sent or failed to send ) Your IDR/PSLF inquiries ( if applicable ) and any confirmations/denials Any proof of payment misapplication or unexplained capitalization Your contact info ( entered only in the portal fields ) -- - 6 ) One-paragraph version ( if the form forces brevity ) Nelnet ( for U.S. Dept. of Education ) has not provided a complete, timely accounting of my federal student loans despite multiple requests. I still lack a full transaction history, capitalization details, payment allocation, and clear current status/plan. I also need confirmation/correction of any credit reporting. Please compel Nelnet/ED to ( 1 ) provide a full account reconstruction ( XXXX  ), ( 2 ) explain any forbearance/holds and confirm my current plan/IDR eligibility, ( 3 ) correct any inaccurate credit reporting and confirm updates to CRAs, ( 4 ) reverse any improper charges, and ( 5 ) assign a secure channel and single point of contact. I want a final, clear summary within 30 days confirming my accounts are accurate and in the correct status. \n\n\nCompany : Nelnet ( servicer ) for the U.S. Department of Education. \nI am XXXX XXXX. Federal student loans were fraudulently taken out in 2009 without my consent. I have disputed this repeatedly with Nelnet and other parties for years, yet Nelnet continues to treat me as liable and allows interest to accumulate. Despite my requests, I have not received a full account reconstruction, documentation proving my consent, or correction of records. This debt is not legally mine. I request : ( 1 ) proof of consent or promissory notes, ( 2 ) immediate release of liability, ( 3 ) removal of all adverse credit reporting, and ( 4 ) refund/waiver of all amounts falsely charged. \n\n\n-- - XXXX ) Full Narrative Who I am : I am XXXX XXXX, listed as a borrower on federal student loans serviced by Nelnet on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education ( ED ).\n\nWhat happened : Student loans were taken out in XXXX without my knowledge or consent. I did not sign the Master Promissory Note ( MPN ) or authorize disbursement. I have raised this dispute with Nelnet and other third parties for years. \n\nDespite repeated complaints, Nelnet continues to treat me as legally liable, allowing interest to accumulate for over a decade on loans that were not lawfully originated. \n\nNelnet has not provided copies of signed notes, disbursement authorizations, or other documentary proof tying me to the loans. \n\nInstead, I receive form letters demanding repayment or directing me into repayment plans, which presuppose liability that I dispute. \n\nThis has caused long-term financial harm, damaged my credit, and created barriers to my career and candidacy for public office. \n\n\nWhy this is a problem : No lender or servicer may lawfully collect on a debt without proof of consent. \n\nUnder the Higher Education Act and ED servicing contracts, Nelnet is required to maintain and provide loan origination documents ( e.g., signed MPN ).\n\nContinuing to assess and capitalize interest on loans taken without consent violates basic contract principles, as well as consumer protection law. \n\nIf credit reporting has occurred, this may also violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \n\nI have a right under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ( if applicable ) to request verification and to not be held liable for debts I did not incur. \n\n\nHarm suffered : More than a decade of accrued, compounding interest on a fraudulent debt. \n\nCredit damage from adverse tradelines. \n\nRepeated stress, wasted time, and financial barriers from a debt I do not legally owe. \n\n\n\n-- - 3 ) Requested Relief I request that the CFPB compel Nelnet and ED to : 1. Produce original signed documentation ( Master Promissory Note, disbursement records, consent forms ). If no such documents exist, immediately acknowledge the loans were not authorized.\n\n2. Release me from all liability and update all records accordingly.\n\n3. Cease interest accrual and remove all accumulated amounts tied to these unauthorized loans.\n\n4. Correct credit reporting delete all tradelines and adverse marks tied to these fraudulent loans.\n\n5. Refund or credit any amounts collected based on this debt.\n\n6. Provide a written statement from ED confirming that I am not legally responsible for these loans.\n\n7. Establish a secure communications channel and assign a single point of contact to resolve this matter.\n\n-- - 4 ) CFPB Form Selections Product : Student loan Loan type : Federal student loan Issue : Loan was taken out without my consent / incorrect information on account / problems with dispute resolution Company : Nelnet ( servicer ) Mention creditor : U.S. Department of Education ( ED ) Resolution sought : Release of liability, deletion of tradelines, refund/waiver of all amounts, proof of origination documents Submitter : I am the consumer -- - 5 ) Evidence Checklist Copies of all prior disputes you sent to Nelnet/ED. \n\nAny Nelnet responses ( especially form letters that ignore your liability dispute ). \n\nCredit report showing adverse tradelines tied to these loans. \n\nDocumentation showing lack of consent ( no signed MPN, no disbursement authorization ). \n\nA timeline of your disputes ( XXXX ). \n\nCourses of Action ( XXXX ) A. Loan Origination & Consent Verification ( XXXX ) 1. Produce the original Master Promissory Note ( MPN ) signed in XXXX ( if any ). \n\n\n2. Provide a copy of any consent form authorizing disbursements from that year.\n\n3. Identify the disbursing institution and verify whether it followed required ED procedures.\n\n4. Verify my identity was confirmed when the loan was originated.\n\n5. Provide all records of communication in 2009 related to the loan origination.\n\n6. Produce any affidavits or declarations attesting that I consented.\n\n7. Provide documentation of loan counseling ( if required ) that I allegedly received.\n\n8. Show evidence of how the lender verified that the address and SSN were correct.\n\n9. Produce a signature sample comparison ( if signature exists ).\n\n10. Identify any witnesses to the signing or issuance of the loan.\n\n11. Provide copies of all notices required by law at origination ( e.g., borrower rights, repayment options ).\n\n12. Show whether any power of attorney or guardianship was used.\n\n13. Provide copies of all disbursement schedules tied to the loans.\n\n14. Provide all promissory note amendments or consolidations.\n\n15. Identify any consolidation loans into which these loans may have been rolled.\n\n16. Provide a timeline of all disbursements, interest accrual, and capitalization events.\n\n17. Confirm whether the origination complied with HEA ( Higher Education Act ) requirements.\n\n18. Provide any state law disclosures required in 2009.\n\n19. Prove chain of title if the loan was sold or transferred.\n\n20. Confirm no fraudulent signatures or identity theft investigations were performed.\n\nB. Full Account Reconstruction ( XXXX ) XXXX. Produce a detailed transaction ledger from 2009 to present. \n\n\n22. Show interest rates in effect over time, by period.\n\n23. Record all payments madeprincipal, interest, feeswith date allocation.\n\n24. Show all capitalization events ( when interest was added to principal ), with dates and amounts.\n\n25. Provide an amortization schedule or calculation.\n\n26. Compute daily interest accrual.\n\n27. Provide calculations showing what I would have owed if no interest accrued ( hypothetical ).\n\n28. Show what my balance would be under each possible repayment plan.\n\n29. Provide all notices of delinquency or default sent to me.\n\n30. Show any subsidies or deferments applied.\n\n31. Provide records of any forbearance or suspension.\n\n32. Provide records of any administrative holds.\n\n33. Provide records of any refund or credit.\n\n34. Provide statements/emails showing required disclosure of fees.\n\n35. Provide all correspondence about loan status.\n\n36. Provide breakdown of fees charged ( origination, late, default, collection ).\n\n37. Provide payment allocation method used ( toward interest vs. principal ).\n\n38. Provide proof of proper disclosures under federal law.\n\n39. Provide my current balance : principal, interest, fees, capitalized amounts.\n\n40. Show whether any payments were misapplied.\n\n41. Provide reconciliation between what I paid vs. what the account shows.\n\n42. Provide monthly statements or notices ( if required ).\n\n43. Provide notices of rights under IDR/PSLF ( if required ).\n\n44. Provide past payment plan documents.\n\n45. Show how extra payments ( if any ) were credited.\n\n46. Provide records of current repayment status.\n\n47. Provide notice of any late fees or penalties and their basis.\n\n48. Provide proof of mailing ( or electronic delivery ) of all required statements.\n\n49. Provide disclosures of default rights.\n\n50. Provide proof that I was notified of all required rights ( e.g., deferment, loan forgiveness programs ).\n\nC. Credit Reporting & FCRA Compliance ( XXXX ) 51. Confirm whether any negative reporting to credit bureaus occurred.\n\n52. If yes, provide which bureau ( s ), which tradelines, on what dates.\n\n53. Remove or correct any adverse tradelines resulting from unauthorized/incorrect debt.\n\n54. Send proof to bureaus that corrections were made.\n\n55. Provide copies of all credit bureau reports in which my loans appear.\n\n56. Provide all furnisher documentation ( information provided to bureaus ).\n\n57. Confirm whether you reported interest that accrued illegally.\n\n58. Provide written confirmation of what was sent in dispute letters.\n\n59. Provide correspondence with credit bureaus about dispute.\n\n60. Provide any credit repair or remediation undertaken.\n\n61. Confirm that no further reporting will occur until this is resolved.\n\n62. Provide credit reporting history from 2009 forward.\n\n63. Provide any automated adverse action notices sent due to reporting.\n\n64. Provide whether any collections agency was involved in reporting.\n\n65. Provide records of any fees or collections forwarded to agencies.\n\n66. Provide dispute escalation logs for credit reporting.\n\n67. Provide records of any fees for credit report copies.\n\n68. Provide sample translated notices if non-English required.\n\n69. Provide documentation showing compliance with FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2.\n\n70. Provide policy for how Nelnet corrects furnishing errors.\n\nD. Communication, Dispute Process & Customer Access ( 71-95 ) 71. Provide secure means of communication ( portal/email ) documented.\n\n72. Assign a single individual as point of contact for my case.\n\n73. Provide transcripts or logs of phone calls related to my disputes.\n\n74. Provide email threads or message records.\n\n75. Provide dates when I made requests and Nelnets responses.\n\n76. Provide notice log showing when and how notices were delivered.\n\n77. Provide content of any written denials or explanations.\n\n78. Provide policy for turnaround time on borrower dispute requests.\n\n79. Provide whether Nelnet offered IDR or PSLF options.\n\n80. Provide written delivery receipts of bills or notices.\n\n81. Provide sample notices used for late or missed payments.\n\n82. Provide audit log of who accessed my customer profile.\n\n83. Provide security/privacy notifications sent to me.\n\n84. Provide customer complaint history related to similar origin-of-loan issues.\n\n85. Provide documentation of Nelnets escalations and internal reviews.\n\n86. Provide disclosures required under HEA/TEACHING regulations.\n\n87. Provide documentation of required annual notices.\n\n88. Provide records of default collection attempts.\n\n89. Provide records of student loan servicing oversight audits.\n\n90. Provide data on how many borrowers disputed origin-of-loan claims and resolution rates.\n\n91. Provide policy copies about debt collection communication frequency.\n\n92. Provide transcripts or recordings of any in-person meetings ( if applicable ).\n\n93. Provide disclosure of any internal investigation into identity theft/fraud regarding my account.\n\n94. Provide notice of rights under FDCPA ( if applicable ).\n\n95. Provide customer service scripts or guidelines used when denying origin consent.\n\nE. Regulatory, Legal & Policy Compliance ( 96-125 ) 96. Confirm compliance with ED servicing agreement obligations.\n\n97. Provide EDs oversight reports for Nelnets performance.\n\n98. Provide audit or compliance reviews by ED documenting issues.\n\n99. Provide copies of any FSA Ombudsman determinations relating to my loans.\n\n100. Provide all applicable federal statutes e.g., HEA, Title IV, 34 CFR 685 etc.\n\n101. Provide your policy for proving identity theft or fraudulent origin.\n\n102. Provide legal opinions you relied on for insisting on liability.\n\n103. Confirm compliance with statute of limitations where applicable.\n\n104. Provide policies on retention/destruction of origination records.\n\n105. Provide your internal legal analyses of borrowers disputing origin.\n\n106. Provide your attorneys interpretations of arbitration / dispute clauses.\n\n107. Provide documentation you rely on for refusing to honor IDR or forgiveness programs.\n\n108. Provide your governing contract with ED showing what Nelnet is responsible for.\n\n109. Provide FSA/ED guidance cited in that contract.\n\n110. Provide EDs written policies on loan disputes and fraud.\n\n111. Provide policy guidance on interest capitalization.\n\n112. Provide legal basis for capitalizing interest while dispute unresolved.\n\n113. Provide HEA guidance on borrower rights.\n\n114. Provide waiver or discharge policies and how they apply to unauthorized origin loans.\n\n115. Provide legal precedent or case law used in your decision.\n\n116. Provide policy on how Nelnet investigates claims of non-consensual origination.\n\n117. Provide EDs oversight metrics and penalties for servicers who fail.\n\n118. Provide your compliance with federal consumer protection laws ( FTC Act, TILA etc if any cross-applicable ).\n\n119. Provide policy on preventing discrimination or unfair targeting ( political belief etc ).\n\n120. Provide certifications or attestations that data privacy laws are complied with ( FERPA, other ).\n\n121. Provide legal review logs ( internal counsel advice memos ).\n\n122. Provide your policy for notifying borrowers about pending account closure or legal liability.\n\n123. Provide policy regarding contending assumption of debt without debt-origin documentation.\n\n124. Provide policy on disputing closed claims and releasing borrowers from misattributed liability.\n\n125. Provide your policy on customer restitution when errors committed.\n\nF. Refunds, Compensation & Financial Remedies ( 126-150 ) 126. Refund all interest accrued on loans taken without my consent.\n\n127. Waive all principal and interest on debts for which no promissory note exists.\n\n128. Remove all associated fees, penalties, late charges.\n\n129. Credit my account for any overpayments made.\n\n130. Recompute balance under no-debt scenario if origin not proven.\n\n131. Adjust any tax reporting ( 1098-E, etc. ) if required.\n\n132. Remove any collection agency charges.\n\n133. Cover cost of disputes ( phone, mail, time ).\n\n134. Compensate for credit score impact.\n\n135. Cover attorneys fees ( if I hire counsel ).\n\n136. Provide monetary compensation for emotional distress.\n\n137. Provide compensation for lost opportunities ( if campaign or job disrupted ).\n\n138. Provide punitive damages if lawfully permitted.\n\n139. Refund any charges for credit report copies if required.\n\n140. Compensate me for time lost gathering documentation.\n\n141. Compensation for late/unjust debt collections.\n\n142. Compensation for being denied or delayed IDR or forgiveness options.\n\n143. Assign a lump-sum settlement for harm done.\n\n144. Provide non-monetary compensation ( e.g., certificate or public acknowledgment if appropriate ).\n\n145. Provide clear, written apology.\n\n146. Agree to cover any costs I incur due to credit repair.\n\n147. Provide budget for oversight compliance.\n\n148. Offer settlement check or payment to cover all relevant taxes.\n\n149. Provide checks or payments for any garnishments, wage offsets wrongly made.\n\n150. Cover cost of verifying origin ( e.g., legal cover, document retrieval ).\n\n151. Reimburse any third-party disbursement or default fee.\n\n152. Provide my account statement free of fee for entire timeline.\n\n153. Provide zero-interest payment plan if reinstated.\n\n154. Provide retroactive forbearance credit if delay from Nelnet.\n\n155. Provide clear yearly statements going forward at no charge.\n\n156. Provide ongoing monitoring of credit report status.\n\n157. Provide guarantee that future servicing will not breach my rights.\n\n158. Supply written policy revisions and post them publicly.\n\n159. Present independent third-party audit or oversight of this case if requested.\n\n160. Produce a notarized affidavit from the employee who first opened the account file in 2009 ( or statement that no such employee exists ).\n\n161. Provide chain-of-custody logs for any physical documents ( MPNs, signed forms ) that you claim prove origination.\n\n162. Deliver a forensic image ( hash-signed ) of the database table row ( s ) that contain my account record as of each year-end 20092024.\n\n163. Produce the schema definition for the account table ( s ) that store borrower identity and loan metadata.\n\n164. Provide the DBA/DBMS logs showing the exact SQL operations that created or modified my account record.\n\n165. Provide certificate-signed hashes ( SHA-256 ) of all produced native files so integrity can be independently verified.\n\n166. Provide any OCR/scan-to-text output files for paper originals plus the raw scanned images.\n\n167. Produce proof of chain verification for any digital signature applied to origination documents.\n\n168. Produce records of any third-party identity verification vendor used ( contract + verification instance for my identity ).\n\n169. Provide results of any fraud-analytics retrospective review run against my account ( false-positive/false-negative analysis ).\n\n170. Provide the retention schedule applied to my origination documents and show whether any files were destroyed under that schedule.\n\n171. Produce log of any document destruction events for records tied to my account, with authorized approver and method.\n\n172. Provide the full version history ( diffs ) for any document that was modified ( eg MPN amendments ).\n\n173. Produce timestamped audit trail of any manual redactions applied to documents produced in discovery.\n\n174. Provide a legally-certified translation of any non-English material relied on in the origination process.\n\n175. Produce the ID verification algorithm output ( proof tokens, vendor score, acceptance threshold ) used at origination.\n\n176. Deliver the code snippet or query used to generate the account closed flag for my record, with comments.\n\n177. Provide all business rules that map detection triggers to closure outcomes, with effective dates.\n\n178. Produce copies of all training datasets used to train any ML model that flagged my account ( with sensitive PII redacted if necessary ).\n\n179. Provide model drift analyses showing performance changes of closure models since XXXX. \n\n\nXXXX. Produce a signed certification from the Chief Data Officer that no backdoor overrides were used to force this closure.\n\n181. Produce the full ticket history including internal severity codes, root cause analysis, and SLA timestamps for every support/ticket number related to my account.\n\n182. Produce a list of all service desk approvers who authorized final closure, with their approval timestamps.\n\n183. Provide the exact policy text that was presented to frontline staff when they executed the closure.\n\n184. Produce a copy of any external legal demand, court order, or subpoena that referenced my account ( if any ).\n\n185. Provide the raw logs of any automated remediation scripts executed against my account ( cron jobs, patches ).\n\n186. Produce the last three change management approvals that touched compliance decision-making systems used in my case.\n\n187. Provide the full PII access request log ( who requested access, justification, outcome ) for all access events for my file.\n\n188. Produce the complete list of IP addresses that connected to my account within 30 days prior to closure and the geolocation mapping for each.\n\n189. Provide forensic device identifiers ( device fingerprinting ) used to associate sessions to my account at time of alleged suspicious activity.\n\n190. Produce all analytic dashboards and export data that displayed my accounts risk score on each relevant date.\n\n191. Provide an independent third-party attestation that the closure workflow complied with your written procedures ( attestor name, scope ).\n\n192. Produce all redaction keys used to anonymize any produced documents so we can verify redactions were not substantive.\n\n193. Produce the auditable payroll/timecard records demonstrating how many hours staff spent investigating my case and the cost attributed.\n\n194. Provide the chain of custody and transfer records for any funds held, including bank account, ACH file IDs, settlement files.\n\n195. Produce audit logs of all exports of my data to any third party ( CSV/XML ) including recipient and purpose.\n\n196. Provide any internal legal memos assessing whether closure of a political candidates account could trigger FEC or First Amendment issues.\n\n197. Produce the list of all accounts that were closed the same day with the same reason code and the aggregate statistical justification.\n\n198. Provide a statistical false-positive rate for the closure reason code as applied in the prior 24 months.\n\n199. Produce a signed statement from the CEO or General Counsel certifying that the action was not based on political viewpoint.\n\n200. Provide copies of all external communications to vendors about my account ( email chains, portal messages ).\n\n201. Produce a formal root-cause analysis ( RCA ) for the closure decision with corrective action plan and responsible owners identified.\n\n202. Provide the escalation log showing every internal stakeholder briefed ( names/dates ) with their responses.\n\n203. Produce a redline history showing any policy text that was changed in response to past complaints about wrongful closures.\n\n204. Provide a list of all users/agents who had the authority to reverse a closure and show whether any reversal was attempted for my account.\n\n205. Produce confirmation of any hold placed on reporting to credit agencies during dispute and the start/end timestamps.\n\n206. Provide evidence that no adverse inference was drawn from my public political activity ( emails, memos showing political neutrality review ).\n\n207. Produce a list of every supervisory call ( recording or transcript ) where my case was discussed with senior management.\n\n208. Provide a corrective action metric showing percentage reduction in wrongful closures over past 12 months and link to remediation.\n\n209. Produce an offer to fund an independent audit by a mutually agreed firm ( with scope ) and agree to accept the auditors binding remediation recommendations.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-02T19:29:53.000Z","issue":"Unauthorized withdrawals or charges","sub_product":"Student loan debt relief","zip_code":"480XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15971197","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Nelnet, Inc.","date_received":"2025-09-17T04:34:10.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Provide</em> monetary <em>compensation</em> for emotional distress.\n\n137. <em>Provide</em> <em>compensation</em> for lost opportunities ( if campaign or job disrupted ).\n\n138. <em>Provide</em> punitive damages if lawfully permitted.\n\n139. Refund any charges for credit report copies if required.\n\n140. Compensate me for time lost gathering documentation.\n\n141. <em>Compensation</em> for late/unjust debt collections.\n\n142. <em>Compensation</em> for being denied or delayed IDR or forgiveness options.\n\n143. Assign a lump-sum settlement for harm done.\n\n144."]},"sort":[7.708627,"15971197"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2920891","_score":7.360245,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is meant to achieve two separate goals : A. Refund to me of out of pocket losses, and B. To demonstrate that Online buyers require more protection from Paypal than what the company is offering at the present time.\n\nThis complaint is about Paypal The main problem : Paypal claims and advertises that it offers its clients security for their Online purchases. As it stands at the present time, this promise does not cover the most important part of Online purchasing, that of facilitating the return of undesired items at no additional cost to the buyer.\n\nThe company does not advertise that its assurances for the buyer actually do not cover cost of returns. The impact of this exclusion on the buyer and on the entire Online commerce can be damaging.\n\nIn my case, due to an unsound process of my claim by Paypal, I sustained monetary damages and also time loss and frustrations.\n\nIn addition to the above, Paypal does not offer a vehicle to appeal what appears to be an arbitrary decision made by the Resolution Centre. At the present time, one can appeal only to the Resolution Centre itself where the unaccepted decision was made.\n\nPaypal does not provide for the means to contact senior management that could resolve customers ' disputes against the Resolution Centre, neither an Ombuds person who could assist clients with their grievances.\n\nDetails of the case : 1. On XX/XX/XXXX I ordered a pair of shoes Online from a seller, in XXXX, under the name of XXXX, for the cost of $ 120+ {$22.00} shipment = {$140.00}. \n2. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received an Email from the seller with shipment and tracking no. with XXXX and the expected day of delivery to be onXX/XX/XXXX. \nXXXX. Due to an error, XXXX delivered the parcel on the XXXX day of the month and later decided to refund the seller with {$22.00}, the cost of shipment. \n4. The seller credited my account with Paypal for the said refund of {$22.00}.\n\n5. Erroneously I complained to Paypal that I expected two pairs of shoes but soon after I realized my mistake ( I mixed up two sellers ) I apologized to both the seller and Paypal.\n\n6. Paypal closed the case on XX/XX/XXXX. \n7. A couple of days later, I tried on the shoes and found them unsuitable 8. I wrote to the seller ( XXXX ) about the unsuitability of the shoes, he apologized and offered me to return the shoes for a later refund. \n9. I called XXXX and found out that the cost of shipping the shoes back to the seller in XXXX was to be {$160.00}. \n10. I informed the seller with this cost of shipping and demanded a prepaid return label and the seller refused to send me the requested label but advised me to ship the parcel for a lesser cost. \n11. The Post Office demanded {$110.00} for shipping the said item to XXXX. \n12. On XX/XX/XXXX I telephoned Paypal and spoke with an agent who decided to reopen the closed case. \n13. On XX/XX/XXXX, I left town for two weeks and returned XX/XX/XXXX. \n14. On XX/XX/XXXX I found three emails from Paypal dated XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, requesting tracking info as evidence that I had returned the shoes to the seller, and another on XX/XX/XXXX informing me that the case was closed. \n15. The same day, I telephoned Paypal and spoke with a lady by the name of XXXX ( XXXX ). I explained the absurdity of Paypal 's request for Tracking info. Here I am asking Paypal to assist me towards achieving a prepaid return label from the seller to avoid paying the cost of shipping the shoes back, but Paypal requests of me a proof that I had already shipped the shoes back. \n\nHow on earth could I meet Paypal 's demand for tracking info when at the same time I was asking Paypal to enquire with the seller re. a prepaid return label? I must assume that my complaint was not properly read by Paypal. \n\nXXXX was a good listener and she clearly understood the issue. She also told me that probably Paypal would refund me the cost of the shoes. \n16. XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email saying that Paypal had closed the case. \n17. XX/XX/XXXX, I wrote a letter to Paypal, explaining that my case was never read and none of its content was addressed by the company in any of its emails. Therefore what the company closed was not related to my complaint. Also, had they studied my complaint, Paypal would not have a reason to request tracking info in the first place. I asked them to reopen the case or in the alternative refund me the cost of the shoes. I added that without the service of Paypal, which advertises their buyers ' protection, I would not have bought the shoes from a seller I had never known before especially not from XXXX where I have no recourse over the seller. \n18. I received an email from Paypal saying that due to the fact that I didn't answer their requests for tracking info on time, Paypal had decided for the seller and the case is closed.. \n19. I decided to appeal this unreasonable decision to a higher authority within the company, but found out that only the front tel. office is available to the public. I asked for a name, tel. no. or Email address of any of directors, VP, even the president but I could not penetrate the high wall that surrounds the executive Management. I XXXX asking how to reach Paypal management, received the entire roll of names of officers with their phone numbers, but later discovered that all those phones were either changed or cancelled. \n20. Paypal 's management hides behind closed doors. \n21. Now I possess shoes that I can not use and sustained out of pocket loss of {$120.00} all this was for the reason of lack of attention on the part of the Resolution Centre.\n\n22. Today I called Paypal to ask them the name of the person who wrote me on behalf of the Resolution Center. The lady ( XXXX ) who spoke to me on the phone asked me several questions about my complaint and decded to reopen the case, eventhough I did not ask her to do so. XXXX also mentioned that as a policy Paypal sometimes affords the buyer with up to {$30.00} refund to offset shipping cost. \nLater I received another rejection based on the same reason of not supplying tracking info. for the return of the shoes. \n23. This complaint is addressed to CFPB as my last resort.\n\nMy case has made clear that the public who use Paypal services for Online shopping is vulnerable to losses.\n\nI believe that the Online commerce can be effective only if the buyer 's purchase from an unseen and unknown seller is insured against losses that generated from having to spend unnecessary funds in case of returns.. Such insurance is required in cases when the buyer decides that the item he/she paid for is not in accordance with their expectations and would want to be reimbursed but the seller refuses to pay for the cost of shipping the item back No buyer would want to pay money to acquire an item with the suspicion that the item might be under \" final sale '' terms. \nPaypal assists buyers to have the seller agree to accept back unwanted items, but at what cost? Based on my case, when I bought an item for {$120.00} + {$22.00} shipping, would I want to pay an extra {$160.00} to ship it back? \nWhat if the seller had the advanced knowledge about the cost of shipping the item back? That seller would have the opportunity of selling items of lesser quality, betting on that the probability of receiving them back is low. Paypal should protect buyers from such eventualities. \n\nPaypal is at fault not to warn buyers, in clear language and large letters, about that it, Paypal, is not responsible in cases when sellers refuse to pay for the cost of returns, along with an example ( like that in my case. ) Luckily, most Online merchants do provide with prepaid return labels, otherwise an Online market would not be possible. It is the bad apples from whom Paypal must protect the buyers.\n\nPaypal could impose a condition on sellers to provide buyers with prepaid return labels. Those who would be reluctant to do so, probably, are the kind who corrupt otherwise an honest Online market. Sellers who use the services of Paypal, must be bona fide merchants. This is why buyers are prepared to buy from them.\n\nPaypal must choose either to clearly warn the buyer that it doesn't guarantee a cost free returns, refund buyers with the cost of shipping back ( or at least promise a refund of the shipping cost for shipped back items ) or better not deal with merchants who refuse to pay for the cost of returns. \n\nXXXX Paypal is also missing out on a real opportunity : that is of advertising that through Paypal, all legitimate reurns will be guaranteed by Paypal at no cost to the buyer. \n\nIt would be reasonable to expect that under these conditions ( that sellers must provide buyers with prepaid return labels ) merchants would take an extra step to ensure the correctness of the items they ship and the result is a win-win for all concerned. \n\n\nThis mail from Paypal was their response to my phone call to open a dispute. \n\nAttachments : From : PayPal Customer Service Mark as unread Print Delete Re : Resolution for case id : XXXX XX/XX/XXXX at XXXXXXXX XXXX Dear XXXX XXXX, Thank you for contacting PayPal. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, we contacted you to return the merchandise in question to the seller and to provide us with online tracking within 10 days. We also sent email reminders on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nUnfortunately, this claim was closed on XX/XX/XXXX because we never received a response from you. We can not accept your appeal of this claim, as you did not provide valid tracking for the returned item within the required time frame. \nI realise that this isn't the outcome you'd have wished for, but I hope you understand why we made this decision. While I can not change this, I will make sure your objection is duly recorded. \n\nThank you for your cooperation. \nIt is my pleasure to assist you. Thank you for choosing PayPal. \nSincerely, XXXX Protection Services Department PayPal -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- My reply to Paypals rejections letter of XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX To : XXXX XX/XX/XXXX at XXXXXXXX XXXX   Sirs, I am truly astonished with your latest email. Nothing like this I could expect out of a respectable organization like Paypal. \nInvariably, you skipped reading my complaint and rather dealt with a side issue that is absurd per se. \n\nYour demand of me to supply you with tracking info for my return of the bought item is a clear indication that you either don't understand my claim, haven't read it or purposely are ignoring it. I explain again : Tracking info is a proof of having returned the item. My complaint was and is that I wouldn't return the item due to the high cost of shipping it back to the seller ( cost of shipping back is just about the cost of the item ). This is why I think that asking me for tracking info is out of the reality of this claim and this demand of yours should never have been sent to me in the first place. Moreover, I don't have a business where an employee is present at all time to answer your mail within 72 hours, the way you do with the merchants. I am an individual and may be away when you send your email and therefore I should not be penalized for a delayed response on my part. But as far as this claim is concerned, had you studied it prior to sending me your demand for tracking info, in all probability you wouldn't have done so.\n\nOriginally I discussed this issue with the Paypal 's rep and the original case was reopened, based solely on my demand for a prepaid return label, the way it is common within the Online markets. This claim, as it appears, was never examined neither given any consideration by the Resolution Center, and deciding for the seller was an arbitrary decision, not based on the subject matter.\n\nI must add that the process of this case by Paypal can be source of embarrassment for the Center should it reach higher management of Paypal. \n\nI don't accept your arbitrary decision. I urge you to read all my correspondence, consult the notes of the phone reps and I hope that subsequently you agree to reconsider my claim. \nWith all due respect, Sincerely From : PayPal Customer Service Re : Resolution for case id : XXXX XX/XX/XXXX at XXXXXXXX XXXX Dear XXXX XXXX, Thank you for contacting PayPal. \nI realise that this isn't the outcome you'd have wished for, but I hope you understand why we made this decision. While I can not change this, I will make sure your objection is duly recorded. \nWe have now closed this case in your seller 's favor as we didn't receive return tracking information from you within the specified timeframe. We encourage you to work directly with your seller to reach an amicable resolution. \nThank you for your patience and cooperation. \nPlease let me know if you need further assistance. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX PayPal Paypals demand for additional info On Wednesday, XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX CDT, XXXX XXXX wrote : -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- We Need to Hear from You within 3 Days -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - Dear XXXX XXXX , We are currently investigating your claim : -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - Transaction Details -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - Seller 's Name : XXXX XXXX  Seller 's Email : XXXX Seller 's Transaction ID : XXXX Transaction Date : XX/XX/XXXX Transaction Amount : - {$140.00} USD Invoice ID XXXX XXXX Your Transaction ID : XXXX Case Number : XXXX Buyer 's Transaction ID : XXXX To complete our investigation, we need some additional details from you : Please respond to this email within 3 days to let us know If you received a refund or the item, or you reached some other settlement with the seller. If we dont hear from you within this timeframe, we may close this claim. \n\nThank you for your patience and cooperation. \n\nSincerely, PayPal My reply to Paypals asking if I had any compensation from the seller XX/XX/XXXX at XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX To : XXXX XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX  Thank you for your e-mail. \nThe only partial refund I received was actually from XXXX. They brought the shoes after eight days delay. Since I didn't engage XXXX neither did I pay them directly, XXXX sent the refund to the seller and the seller credited my account at Paypal. The seller was merely a conduit, intermediary for passing on the refund to me. \n\nThe seller had offered me a refund for the returned shoes, and since the shoes have not been yet returned I received no compensation from the seller. \nAs a subsequent to the seller 's refusal of sending me a pre-paid return label, our communications came to end. No promises given or received. \nXXXX Paypal 's final decision was posted on their Resolution Centre 's communication page. Later it was removed from the page.\n\nTheir reply was a repeat of their other decisions, excusing their rejection of my appeal to be my not repling on time to their demand for proof of return.\n\nPAYPAL PROMISE FOR PROTECTION OFFERED TO BUYERS \" Protection you can count on If you don't receive the item that you ordered, or it shows up significantly different from its description, you may qualify for Purchase Protection, and we'll reimburse you for the full purchase price plus any original shipping costs, subject to terms and limitations. If you are charged for a transaction that you didn't make, let us know within 60 days, and we've got you covered. '' Note 'original shipping cost ', no mention of shipping cost to return the unwanted item. \nUnder the above promise it would be easy to assume that buyers are fully protected by Paypal. An exclusion clause written in clear-to-notice and read manner is missing. \n\nNote : I am consenting for CFPB to publish this description on consumerfinance.gov but should Paypal accede to the proposed changes, this consent becomes nullified. \n=================================================","date_sent_to_company":"2018-05-29T04:38:08.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing issue","sub_product":"Other personal consumer report","zip_code":"78043","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2920891","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","date_received":"2018-05-29T00:07:49.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In addition to the above, Paypal <em>does</em> not offer a vehicle to appeal what appears to be an arbitrary decision made by the Resolution Centre. At the present time, one can appeal only to the Resolution Centre itself where the unaccepted decision was made.\n\nPaypal <em>does</em> not <em>provide</em> for the means to contact senior management that could resolve customers ' disputes against the Resolution Centre, neither an Ombuds person who could assist clients with their grievances.\n\nDetails of the case : 1."]},"sort":[7.360245,"2920891"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4013261","_score":7.325114,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I want to follow up on my complaints against self-proclaimed Servocers XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX and PennyMac ( collectively XXXX XXXX , XXXX ) who continue relentlessly lie to CFPB and homeowners like myself about some sales and servicing of my loan. \n\nNeither XXXX or PennyMac can not provide me ANY evidence WHOM they actually servicing and who sold my obligation ( IF exists ) to PennyMac who is purportedly an issuer of some mysterious securities which are purportedly guaranteed by XXXX XXXX who since XX/XX/2020 massively SELL ( lie ) their Mortgage Backed Securities ( never existed ) to Federal Reserve who purportedly assign them to its owners - Big Investment Banks like XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, ect. \n\nAll XXXX and PennyMacs statements about their servicing and sales of anyones mortgage is a LIE promoted by Bit Investment Banks. \n\nNeither XXXX or PennyMac ( as well as XXXX XXXX ) or fictitious smaller actors for hire like XXXX XXXX never lent ANY money to anyone, much less sold or securitized anything. The whole affair is a scam facilitated by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  who operate a massive fraud selling borrowers IDENTITIES to Investors which are not backed by any collateral. \n\nPennyMac and XXXX were called back to action by fictitious default debt buyers XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) and XXXX ( PennyMac ). \n\nMost recently PennyMac was accrued by XXXX XXXX ( where Mr. XXXX XXXX, XXXX/PennyMac CEO worked for a while. \n\nPennyMac LIES to authorities as instructed by XXXX XXXX Investment Banks. \n\nThere was a faulty and totally erroneous assumption ( in most cases ) that there was ANYTHING ) aka mortgages ) to buy or sell. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX have successfully relied upon complexity to force everyone else to rely on a single source for explanation of the falsely proclaimed securitization process. That single source is XXXX XXXX. As long as people are only getting our information from the perpetrators of this financial terrorism, they are paralyzed. \n\nNo sales ever happened with residential loans. No investor ever purchased a share of any loan. No XXXX XXXX  securities brokerage firm ( aka investment bank ) ever established, maintained or sold any homeowner obligation. But the XXXX XXXX firms did pretend to sell the note and mortgage, albeit without any conveyance of the alleged underlying obligation. \n\nA paper transfer of an asset is evidence of transfer, but it is not the actual transfer. None of it present in my situation. PennyMac is unable to present ANY evidence of any sales - including the name of the Seller. But Mr. XXXX XXXX continues to lie to me and hundreds of thousands of others about PennyMacs never existed ownership because this is how he makes his living - helps Big Investment Banks to defraud Americans. \n\nI repeatedly ask XXXX and PennyMac for proof of payment of value for the underlying obligation ( see Article 9 203 UCC ) to prove the SALE - as well as the name of the Seller. XXXX and PennyMacs employees lie relentlessly or avoid any answers. A transfer of a mortgage without transfer of the underlying obligation is a legal nullity in all 50 states, as it should be. \n\nAnd unless XXXX XXXX wants to tell us that such transfers were GIFTS, then those purchases were never completed because there was no payment of value one exchange for a conveyance of ownership of the alleged underlying obligation. This is one of the finer points that XXXX XXXX is exploiting. They may point to the movement of money or value but that movement did not result in a transaction in which an owner of the obligation ( i.e.e someone who paid for it ) was paid value for the obligation and executed a transfer document for value received. \n\nOf course, the underlying obligation had been extinguished contemporaneously with the origination or acquisition of the obligation because nobody wanted to be left holding the bag. Any entry on the accounting ledger of any entity that established the obligation as an asset purchased for value would make that entity liable for violations of lending laws. And nobody wanted to suffer a real loss if the homeowner failed to make scheduled payments to pay off a nonexistent debt. \n\nSo nobody wanted to own any debt from homeowners. And they didnt need to own anything. The securities scheme was not securitization of any homeowner debt. It was a much larger scheme that used homeowner transactions only as an outside reference point for data reporting in the sole discretion of XX/XX/XXXX firms who were the bookrunners in each scheme. \n\nThe securities were bets not evidence of ownership of anything. The sale and trading of such securities, combined with insurance and hedge contracts produced so much money that the homeowner transaction became irrelevant excepts as a reference point for data. So everyone got paid in full and then some. Nobody needed to own any homeowner obligation and the fact that they didnt own the obligation would not stop them from pursuing enforcement despite the lack of ownership. \n\nIn order to really sell an asset, you must own it. In order to own it you must pay for it. In order to transfer ownership of the asset, you must transfer the actual asset not just a piece of paper that talks about the asset. In residential transactions with homeowners, it is mostly NOT possible that any underlying obligation was transferred ( even if it appears to have been sold ). \n\nXXXX sales of non-perfuming loans and repurchase agreements for bad loans were and still are in fact a misnomer and perpetuated the myth that securitization of residential loans actually occurred. Litigation over rights that do not exist is a farce promoted by Courts and covered by the Government. \n\nAnd this financial terrorism by XXXX XXXX XXXX and their sham conduits like XXXX and PennyMac continues because XXXX and so-called Consumer Protection agencies are a PART of this FRAUD and instructed to cover for it by all possible means. It is very obvious from bogus settlements with so-called Servicers like XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/2020. \n\nXXXX XXXX, just like XXXX ( now XXXX/PennyMac ) lied and cheated their way into multiple foreclosures. The answer we are told is not to do anything about the illegal foreclosures and illegal collections ( neither CFPB or DIF never took ANY steps to conduct any investigation to my simple question - WHO SOLD my loan to PennyMac and merely repeated lies from XXXX XXXX XXXX scrips ) Because PennyMac and XXXX .are confident that all their crimes will be covered, as usual ;. They will pay ( from stolen from homeowners money provided to them by Investment Banks ) a few cents on each dollar for the extensive damages caused by wrongful, illegal fabricated foreclosures. \nBut the main rationalization for such actions that only compound the wrongs is the continuing erroneous belief that these loans exist, that there are unpaid debts, that here are deficiencies and default. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX use sham conduits likeXX/XX/XXXX and PennyMac to get the money back that they paid to homeowners in exchange for starting a series of transactions in which unregulated securities were sold, on an infinite basis, to investors who were betting on future announcements of data performance by the issuer doing business under the name of a legally nonexistent trust because nothing had actually been entrusted to the named trustee of the named trust. \n\nSo these settlements for pennies on the dollar or part of a massive cover-up. They reinforce the myth that the debts exist and that there is a creditor who owns the debt. In fact, the process referred to as securitization is a process of liquidating any entry on the ledger of any company on which a receivable had appeared. \n\nThus the assertion of authority is false as to the servicer, the trust and the trustee. It is also false as to the bank names used in litigation or notices of sale. XXXX XXXX, just like XXXX and PennyMac in my opinion, are guilty of criminal fraud and racket. The CFPB is guilty of grandstanding instead of helping people like myself of investigate and prosecute XXXX XXXX XXXX and their mobs like PennyMac, XXXX and other impersonators and order them to return stolen money - plus at least treble damages. \n\nWhat is obvious is false but only investment bankers know it. \nWithout knowing it, I am actually doing business with a XX/XX/XXXX securities brokerage firm calling itself an investment bank. \n\nI didnt know because they were never disclosed. And the money they paid to me was not a loan at least not for them it wasnt. They didnt treat it that way on their own records and I do not treat is as a loan too. That means they are attempting to collect back the money they paid to ME even though it wasnt a loan. \n\nSo what did they pay me for? When I issued the promissory note what were I buying? \n\nI asked for and thought I received a loan. After all, I did get the money. When I applied for a loan, you thought I had identified the lender, XXXX XXXX, with whom I was doing business. And this Lender is interested in the outcome of my loan and my payments. It was absolutely wrong. \n\nI was dealing with totally DIFFERENT parties those only interest was to put hate from me my signature on Promissory Note and put me in default by any possible means - because this is how XXXX XXXX XXXX can make more money and launder a fatally damaged Titles in the Court. \n\nMy so-called loan was originated by XXXX XXXX who started to scam me from the beginning with bogus Flood Insurance which was provided to them by XXXX, XXXX who operates Flood Zone Determination maps - without FEMAs involvement. FEMA covers for it because they get free and easy money from defrauded by XXXX XXXX/XXXX homeowners. \n\nHere is what I didnt know and that is actively concealed from me by XXXX XXXX XXXX and their sham conduits. \n\n1. Yes, I asked for a loan, but the application I submitted was not to a lender. The Lender - XXXX - was merely a collector of my data which they entered into XXXX XXXX system or passed to XXXX - who entered it on XXXX XXXX system. \n2. Contrary to the laws governing loan transactions many things were not disclosed to me. \n3. The intake for the application for a loan is performed by a loan broker ( XXXX ), who doesnt care what the transaction is called as long as he/she gets the commission. \n4. The loan broker then forwards the information on the loan application to an IT platform owned and controlled by XXXX XXXX and XXXX who in turn are acting for a securities firm preparing to issue and sell securities to investors. As far as theyre concerned they would prefer to pay me {$1.00} rather than {$130000.00}. But then how could they get me to sign a note for {$130000.00}? \n5. The securities that are issued and sold are not a conveyance of any interest in my transaction. They are bets based upon reports issued by the securities firm. The prices of those securities are unrelated to the total amount of my transaction or any part of my transaction. So they can sell these securities indefinitely until the market is saturated ( no more demand ). \n\nThus, XXXX and PennyMac statements about sales of my Note are blatant lies. My DATA was securitized by XXXX XXXX  and sold to investors - without my knowledge and consent, no need to say, without sharing any profits or reducing any debt 1. On average, the dollar volume of revenue generated by the securities firm selling the securities is {$12.00} ( XXXX ) to {$180.00} ( XXXX XXXX ) for each {$1.00} of my transaction. In other words, XXXX XXXX XXXX who collects my payments for the Cartel made over {>= $1,000,000} profits by selling BETS based on my identity, while my data is sold as performing and defaulted at the same time, 2. The amount they paid ME was, therefore, on average, around 8.5 % of the total revenue. It was a commission, not a loan. But I didnt know that. \n3. I received a payment that was dressed up as a loan. I never thought to bargain for reasonable compensation for entering into a transaction that was the keystone of all the sales of all of the securities. And I never thought about whether I wanted to be part of a business venture whose purpose was to sell betting rights based upon reports about my transaction and whether I was making scheduled payments. \n4. Collection and enforcement of the obligation I created when I executed the promissory note is the act of taking back the commission they paid to me, plus stealing all my escrow money.And because they want all of it back plus interestthat leaves me with negative compensation for initiating a huge business venture and allowing the use of my name and reputation- without my knowledge or consent. ( They get all the benefits, I get the shaft plus terror from one of most dangerous racketeering group who call themselves Servicers XXXX and PennyMac, former XXXX XXXX ). \n5. And even at the point of collection and enforcement I still dont know ( until now ) that I am actually dealing with a securities firm that has no financial interest in your transaction. I didnt know because nobody is telling me that. They insist on calling it a loan and since it looks like a loan, everyone ( including the borrower ) thinks it is a loan. \n6. When they get money from me, they have no place to put it.They cant debit an account receivable that reflects ownership of my obligation because there is no account receivable on the ledger of any company.My payments constitute a return of the commission they paid to me an amount that they deemed reasonable. That means that their payment is evidence of the amount of commission to the homeowner that the securities firm deemed reasonable.Ask any lawyer what that could mean. \n7. In court, they seek to increase their profits by forcing the sale of peoples houses. But that can only be done legally if the forced sale is granted by a court because the action is a foreclosure. But it isnt a foreclosure if the claimant is not the owner of homeowners obligation. Andthey cant be the owner of anyones obligation unless they paid value for it which is why there would be an entry on the accounting ledgers of some company if anyone paid for my obligation and received a conveyance of ownership of my obligation. \n8. In every loan, there is the lender and a borrower. I intended to be a borrower but I never made the journey. That is because my counterpart was not a lender, had no means or intention of being a lender, and was seeking to avoid being called a lenderat all costs because they didnt want to be held responsible for violations of the Federal Truth in Lending Act and other federal and state law governing lending, collections, and enforcement.\n\n9. I have every legal right and legal expectation that the party representing itself as a lender is doing the underwriting of a loan with due diligence. That means they have a stake in the outcome of the transaction. It if its a loan, their revenue, profit, and assets are dependent upon repayment of the loan. \n10. But my transaction was conducted by the securities firm acting through sham conduit intermediaries. The sole purpose was to start the sale of securities. Some of those securities were bets against the performance data of your loan.\n\n11. So they had an incentive and a vested interest in seeing my obligation fail. That is why they inflated appraisals, sold bogus insurances ; fabricated deficiencies, that were guaranteed to push me in default. The securities brokerage firm was betting on a sure thing.\n\n12. In addition, the riskier the loan the higher the interest they could charge. Thats because everyone ( except the XX/XX/XXXXt firm ) thought it was a loan. And the higher the interest the less they had to pay out from the fund of capital generated by selling securities to investors. So if you had a {$130000.00} transaction where the securities brokerage firm set a price of 10 % interest, they were receiving around {$270000.00} from investors to cover that loan ( which was actually a commission ). That is why there is no loan account receivable on the books of anyone not even the securities brokerage firm that funded it out of investor capital. \n13. Everyone on the securitization team got paid with one exception - borrower who signed the Promissory Note to initiate a windfall to XXXX XXXX XXXX mistakenly thinking that they borrowed these money. There is no debt. \n\n\nBut in fact it was a XXXX XXXX investment banks who steal back money that was earned by me and other homeowners. \n\nI demand CFPB to conduct a FULL investigation, identify the SELLER of my loan ( if any ) to PennyMac ; provide me PROOF of ALL sales ( if any ) starting from XXXX ; compensate me for damages for fraud in treble amount ( XXXX x 3 ) pay me 20 % commission from ALL trades based on my data ( I expressly PROHIBIT any trades until the FULL commission owed to me byXX/XX/XXXX Brokerage Firm is paid ; and other compensation for other damages including severe emotional distress.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-12-15T07:56:57.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"490XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4013261","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.","date_received":"2020-12-15T07:52:25.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt was result of identity theft"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Neither XXXX or PennyMac can not <em>provide</em> me ANY evidence WHOM they actually servicing and who sold my obligation ( IF exists ) to PennyMac who is purportedly an issuer of some mysterious securities which are purportedly <em>guaranteed</em> by XXXX XXXX who since XX/XX/2020 massively SELL ( lie ) their Mortgage Backed Securities ( never existed ) to Federal Reserve who purportedly assign them to its owners - Big Investment Banks like XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, ect."]},"sort":[7.325114,"4013261"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12651504","_score":5.5718184,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"MCM - Midland Credit Management Improper Service, Perjury, & Corruption ( Georgia ) I have already filed a Judicial Qualifications Complaint ( see attached ) against the judge on this matter and will continue to escalate complaints to the appropriate state and federal authorities for all those involved in this illegal debt collection attempt, abuse of the legal system, and the repeated violations of my constitutional rights. Congress made clear in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act that debt collectors must tell the truth to consumers. It also empowered consumers to act when debt collectors break the law.\n\nIn civil cases, collusion involves parties secretly agreeing to a specific outcome or manipulating the legal process for an unfair advantage, often to defraud others or obtain an illegal objective.Civil conspiracy is a related concept, where parties agree to commit a wrongful act, such as fraud or deceit, to harm a third party.Collusion is when two or more parties secretly agree to defraud a third-party ( the defendant in this matter ) of their rights or accomplish an illegal purpose.\n\nDetails and relevant statutes herein.\n\nGeorgias Rule of Professional Conduct indicate ( you will be DEPOSED ) : RULE 8.4 MISCONDUCT * It shall be a violation of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct for a lawyer to : * violate or knowingly attempt to violate the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another; * be convicted of a felony; * be convicted of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude where the underlying conduct relates to the lawyer 's fitness to practice law ; * engage in professional conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; * fail to pay any final judgment or rule absolute rendered against such lawyer for money collected by him or her as a lawyer within ten days after the time appointed in the order or judgment; * state an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official by means that violate the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct or other law ; * state an ability to achieve results by means that violate the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct or other law ; * achieve results by means that violate the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct or other law ; * knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable Rules of judicial conduct or other law ; or * commit a criminal act that relates to the lawyer 's fitness to practice law or reflects adversely on the lawyer 's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer, where the lawyer has admitted in XXXX, the commission of such act. \n\nRULE XXXX MERITORIOUS CLAIMS AND CONTENTIONS In the representation of a client, a lawyer shall not : * file a suit, assert a position, conduct a defense, delay a trial, or take other action on behalf of the client when the lawyer knows or when it is obvious that such action would serve merely to harass or maliciously injure another ; * knowingly advance a claim or defense that is unwarranted under existing law, except that the lawyer may advance such claim or defense if it can be supported by good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law.\n\nThe maximum penalty for a violation of this rule is a public reprimand.\n\n4 ] A lawyer should use the law 's procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate others. A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the law, the legal system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and public officials. While it is a lawyer 's duty, when necessary, to challenge the rectitude of official action, it is also a lawyer 's duty to uphold legal process.\n\n[ 11 ] The legal profession 's relative autonomy carries with it special responsibilities of self-government. The profession has a responsibility to assure that its regulations are conceived in the public interest and not in furtherance of parochial or self-interested concerns of the bar. Every lawyer is responsible for observance of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct. A lawyer should also aid in securing their observance by other lawyers. Neglect of these responsibilities compromises the independence of the profession and the public interest which it serves. [ 12 ] The fulfillment of a lawyer 's professional responsibility role requires an understanding by them of their relationship to our legal system. The Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, when properly applied, serve to define that relationship.\n\nRULE 1.1 COMPETENCE A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation as used in this rule means that a lawyer shall not handle a matter which the lawyer knows or should know to be beyond the lawyer 's level of competence without associating another lawyer who the original lawyer reasonably believes to be competent to handle the matter in question. Competence requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.\n\nThoroughness and Preparation [ 5 ] Competent handling of a particular matter includes inquiry into and analysis of the factual and legal elements of the problem, and use of methods and procedures meeting the standards of competent practitioners. It also includes adequate preparation. The required attention and preparation are determined in part by what is at stake ; major litigation and complex transactions ordinarily require more elaborate treatment than matters of lesser consequence.\n\n4:11. Communications with Unrepresented Persons Rule of Professional Conduct 4.3 provides that : * In dealing on behalf of a client with a person who is not represented by counsel, a lawyer shall not : * State or imply that the lawyer is disinterested ; when the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the unrepresented person misunderstands the lawyers role in the matter, the lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to correct the misunderstanding ; Its possible for debt buyers to face XXXX charges if their debt collection practices constitute a pattern of racketeering activity or unlawful debt collection related to an \" enterprise ''. \n\n* Proving a XXXX Violation : To successfully prosecute a XXXX case against a debt buyer, the government must prove that their actions constitute a pattern of racketeering activity connected to an enterprise. \n* Civil XXXX Actions : Individuals can also bring civil XXXX lawsuits against debt XXXX if they believe their practices violate XXXX laws. \n\nThe XXXX statute expressly states that it is unlawful for any person to conspire to violate any of the subsections of 18 U.S.C.A. 1962. The government need not prove that the defendant agreed with every other conspirator, knew all of the other conspirators, or had full knowledge of all the details of the conspiracy. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. at XXXX. All that must be shown is : ( XXXX ) that the defendant agreed to commit the substantive racketeering offense through agreeing to participate in XXXX racketeering acts ; ( XXXX ) that he knew the general status of the conspiracy; and ( XXXX ) that he knew the conspiracy extended beyond his individual role. UXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nGovernment racketeering, often investigated under the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ), involves a pattern of illegal activities, like bribery, fraud, or extortion, used to gain or maintain control of an enterprise, including government entities.WXXXX XXXX XXXX Racketeering is not limited to traditional criminal organizations. Individuals involved in corporate fraud, embezzlement, insider trading, and other white-collar crimes can also be charged with racketeering. The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) can be applied to cases of government corruption, providing a potent legal tool to combat organized criminal enterprises involved in corrupt activities within government institutions. Government corruption encompasses various offenses, such as bribery, extortion, embezzlement, and abuse of power. Heres how XXXX XXXX apply to government corruption : Enterprise Involvement. XXXX targets individuals or entities involved in an enterprise, which, in the context of government corruption, can refer to criminal organizations or networks operating within government institutions. The enterprise XXXX involve public officials, law enforcement personnel, or individuals working in collaboration with corrupt government officials. \n\nDebt buyers ( or debt XXXX ) must prove they own the debt and are legally entitled to collect it, which often includes providing a copy of the original contract or credit agreement. \n\n* Proving Ownership : When a debt buyer sues you, they must demonstrate they are the rightful owner of the debt they are trying to collect. \n* Required Documentation : This typically involves providing evidence of the debt 's transfer from the original creditor ( e.g., a bill of sale, an assignment, or a receipt ). \n* Original Contract/Agreement : A key piece of evidence is a copy of the original written agreement ( like a loan note or credit card agreement ) that you signed, which proves the debt 's existence and terms. \n* Why Debt Buyers May Resist : Some debt buyers might be hesitant to provide the purchase agreement from the original creditor, as it might contain clauses stating the original creditor makes no representations about the accuracy of the debt information.\n\n* Debt Validation : If you dispute the debt, the debt collector must provide you with \" validation information, '' which includes details about the debt, the original creditor, and the balance owed.\n\n* Dispute Process : If you dispute the debt, you should notify the debt collector in writing within 30 days, and they must stop collection efforts until they provide verification or a copy of a judgment. \n\nI have suffered XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and significant lack of sleep due to their unethical business practices and intimidation tactics and will consult a lawyer for a counter lawsuit and call for an investigation into SUSPECTED COLLUSION AND RACKETEERING should Midland not IMMEDIATELY submit the appropriate legal documentation/motion to the appropriate court ( s ) to dismiss/vacate this default judgement and dismiss/vacate any claims for financial compensation or interest immediately. I further demand that they cease and desist ALL collections and communication attempts immediately. Per CFPB, A debt collector is also not allowed to harass, oppress, or abuse you or anyone else they contact. This includes repetitious phone calls with the intent to harass, use of obscene or profane language, and threats of violence or harm.\n\nMCM is in direct violation of the SCAM Debt Act which : Improve transparency by requiring debt collectors to provide consumers an itemization, including information like the name of the original creditor, the account number of the debt, the amount owed, total fees charged on the debt, and the most recent date of default. ( This info has not been provided, documents have been manufactured and proven falsified, and they have been grossly inconsistent ) Guarantee consumers would be able to dispute the debt in the contact method of their choosing, expanding opportunities to exercise their FDCPA rights. ( In my CFPB complaints I specifically requested to dispute via that platform, but they refused and alternatively sued me despite having several an open complaints and disputes ) Define legal action to make sure consumers are also protected in arbitration, enforcement of security interests, garnishment, liens, and mediation. ( This was not defined nor provided ) Expand the requirements that debt collectors must meet to take legal action, including : o providing 30-day written notice of the intent to take legal action, ( This was not defined nor provided ) o proving the consumer agreed to the contact, ( This was not defined nor provided ) o guaranteeing that debt buyers have verifiable information when they go to collect ; and, ( This was not defined nor provided ) o restricting the practices of lawsuit mills by requiring collectors to submit sworn statements of their personal review of relevant documents. ( This was not submitted with the lawsuit nor provided ) Fair Debt Collection Practices Act prohibits debt collectors from making false statements. Importantly, people can sue debt collectors who break the law by lying or providing wrong information. I have repeatedly raised concerns about this debt buyer submitting doctored and fraudulent contracts as proof of this alleged debt. \n\nNo XXXX to XXXX : XXXX '' means a person or business has a legal interest in a case. In collection suits, it means a debt buyer must prove that it legally owns your debt. Because the debt buyer didn't enter into a contract with me, it can only meet the standing requirement by demonstrating that the original creditor sold or assigned the debt to it. Many courts require that the debt buyer produce documents showing the assignment or purchase of the debt which they have NOT provided and I requested this since as early as XX/XX/XXXX ( see attached ). \n\nFurthermore, I have not been afforded rights outlined in the publicly available XXXX agreements for the alleged original creditor as they state : XXXX well-established Georgia law XXXX without proper service or a valid waiver of service, the court does not have jurisdiction over the defendant. See XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ). \n\nA fundamental requirement of due process of law is notice reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of an action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections.The notice must reasonably convey the required informationand must afford a reasonable time for those interested to make their appearance. ( Mullane v. XXXX XXXX Bank, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) ). \n\nPursuant O.C.G.A. XXXX, to properly serve a defendant, a plaintiff must comply with O.C.G.A. XXXX, XXXX law governing service of process. Importantly, Georgia requires personal service on a defendant mailing a copy of the lawsuit to the defendant is insufficient. This defendant and this court also did not properly serve or mail me notices to appear in court in XXXX despite being made aware in XXXX that they had and continued to use the INCORRECT ADDRESS. They have thus violated several rights afforded by the constitution by committing perjury on record and leading the judge to believe that proper service was provided in this case which it was NOT. \nThis is a violation of my constitutional rights which indicate : * The XXXX aims to establish justice and secure liberty, which are fundamental principles of a free and just society. \n* Right to a XXXX and XXXX XXXX : This ensures that trials are conducted promptly and openly, preventing lengthy delays and ensuring transparency in the legal process. \n* Right to an Impartial Jury : The accused has the right to be tried by a jury that is unbiased and representative of the community. \n* Right to be Informed of the XXXX and Cause of the Accusation : This means the defendant must understand the charges against them and have sufficient information to prepare a defense. \n* Right to Confront Witnesses : The defendant has the right to face and question the witnesses who testify against them. \n* Right to Compulsory Process for Obtaining Witnesses : The defendant can compel witnesses to appear in court and testify on their behalf. \n* Right to Assistance of Counsel : The defendant has the right to legal representation, including the right to an appointed attorney if they can not afford one.\n\n* Rule of Law : The principle of the rule of law ensures that everyone, including government officials, is subject to the law and that laws are applied fairly and consistently.The attorneys for the Plaintiff committed perjury on several instances in this matter whereas XXXX defines perjury as XXXX Georgia, perjury, or lying under oath, is a serious crime with potential penalties including fines and imprisonment, with harsher penalties if the perjury causes harm, such as imprisonment or death. \n* Here 's a more detailed explanation : Perjury occurs when someone knowingly and willfully makes a false statement under oath in a legal proceeding. This can happen during a trial, deposition, or any other legal proceeding where a person is under oath.\n\n* They did NOT properly serve me at any point in the last 3+ years though they inform the judge in XXXX  that I have been served on multiple occasions. \n\nAs outlined in my original CFPB complaints, the XXXX engaged in illegal debt collection practices and should be investigated thoroughly as they : * Falsely claiming to be attorneys or government representatives : They can not impersonate legal or government officials. ( They did this prior to filing the lawsuit in XXXX ) * Misrepresenting the amount of the debt or its judicial status : They can not misrepresent the amount owed or the status of the debt. ( My complaints clearly indicated many discrepancies in their claims which were never addressed prior to the lawsuit. \n* Trying to collect more than the original amount : They can not try to collect more than the amount originally agreed upon. \n* Communicating with third parties about the debt without your consent : They can not discuss your debt with third parties without your permission. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I filed a Motion to Dismiss ( Case Number XXXX ) after submitting several Consumer Finance Protection Bureau complaints for over a year for a fraudulent debt collection claim ( by MCM ) along with evidence and multiple related statutes. The most significant mention was that XXXX XXXX let alone any Georgia courthouse DOES NOT have jurisdiction over me due to such matters. In this motion I clearly indicated that the XXXX was and continued to INTENTIONALLY utilize the incorrect address to continue their fraudulent case in that court ( essentially never serving me but apparently continuing to mail items to the same incorrect address that they were informed on numerous occasions even prior to filing a lawsuit against me ), but the judge refused to acknowledge any of this, believed their lies ( on record ) that they were \" serving me '' lawfully, and XXXX allowed them to lie on record having made no actual attempts to lawfully address these concerns and patterns of deceit. \n\nI was a victim of a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXXXXXX and have not been in the state for several years due to this instance, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and due to the harassment and intimidation that I endured by law enforcement and due to the perpetrator. I submitted several complaints against law enforcement and legal officials in Georgia for their obstruction of justice and it seems this order ( as Judge XXXX granted a Motion for Default Judgement on XX/XX/XXXX ) despite the facts of this case, and Georgia XXXX outlined in my Motion to Dismiss is a form of retaliation for me reporting a GA STATE PROSECUTOR EMPLOYEE, XXXX XXXX, for drugging me and raping me XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nA prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate. This responsibility carries with it specific obligations to see that the defendant is accorded procedural justice and that guilt is decided upon the basis of sufficient evidence. \n\nXXXX had absolutely no lawful or ethical reason to continue to consider let alone XXXX a default judgment in this case as again, my motion to dismiss was sufficient, but their court refused to respond to it to this date and theyve only elected to acknowledge the Plaintiff. \n\nThis is grossly unethical and a violation of my civil and constitutional rights and a form of harassment and intimidation and RACKETEERING. It is believed that this debt collector continued to pursue this case in Georgia with both the court and this plaintiff intentionally using the the incorrect address because the statutes of limitations already expired in my actual state of residence, concerns of collusion due to their discussions with XXXX parties that have nothing to do with me or my personal finances which THEY CAN ALL BE DEPOSED TO REVEAL who and what correspondence has taken place unethically and unlawfully off record. However, XXXX ignored all of the facts of this case and the relevant conditions to issue a default judgement and again I believe this was done maliciously and unethically by both parties.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-25T14:06:24.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"99508","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12651504","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","date_received":"2025-03-25T13:43:42.000Z","state":"AK","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The most significant mention was that XXXX XXXX let alone any Georgia courthouse <em>DOES</em> NOT have jurisdiction over me due to such matters."]},"sort":[5.5718184,"12651504"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7341019","_score":5.570382,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"My letter to the board of WSFS and their retained counsel:\n\nRepresentatives at XXXX, XXXX, XXXX  and WSFS representatives:\n\nThank you for taking the time to read the information enclosed below regarding the ongoing issues and pending legal action against WSFS.\n\nMost of you are aware of the previous correspondence sent by myself to the board regarding issues stemming from allegations of discrimination in conjunction with several other improprieties.  That correspondence was met with initial concern from your Chief Legal Officer who guaranteed an investigation into the matter.\n\nXXXX XXXX then reviewed the matter, decided to cancel the relationship, and call in a line of credit to be immediately satisfied in full of $XXXX  which was paid entirely.  In the following weeks, XXXX XXXX, a collection specialist, was given the account, and instructed me I could only make payment by paper check.  Three attempts have been made to satisfy loan payments by check, two of three not cashed, all check numbers available if needed.  I find it auspicious that I still was unable to make payment electronically.  As of today, payment will be dropped off, in person, at your corporate office, with a video made, so as to make sure there is no confusion.\n\nAs a result of the missed payments, which I would like to point out that in 11 years, the only missed payments ever recorded was during this situation.  XXXX XXXX, sent a pdf of a letter accelerating all loans to be satisfied in 15 days for over $XXXX XXXX.  It was sent to XXXX which was an email created for the sole purpose of emailing attorneys regarding my case and never furnished to WSFS or XXXX XXXX.\n\nIts imperative that this board, and anyone reading this, comprehends what is taking place in the present, and what will take place in the future.  On XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, in response to the actions that took place by WSFS, and before I addressed the board on XXXX, I sent a detailed outline to a reporter from the XXXX XXXX XXXX  that I have cultivated an association with over the years.\n\nThe next part is important, so pay attention.  In that outline, I stated the actions that would take place, the likely response by the bank, and the likely outcome of the situation.  The individual has been receiving the communications and the videos I have shared, the ones I will share in this letter, and he has the ones that I still have yet to release.  This person has been watching the situation unfold with the strong anticipation.\n\nXXXX XXXX sent the acceleration demand to an email that was only structured for the purpose of emailing attorneys, an email that he and WSFS were never furnished.  I instructed the board of my intention of emailing attorneys, I just didnt say when.  Time passing and my prevailing patience hasnt changed the course of action.  The first push of connections was 274 attorneys.  Some of which may or may not have been emailed to known attorneys that have a conflict of interest, where it may or may not have been assumed it would reach your counsel in one way or another, which it did as he sent it to the email provided only to those attorneys.\n\nThe email sent to these attorneys, as Im sure youre aware, is a quick outline of the case, with attached videos.  The first video is the one sent in my original letter to the board, the second is a video of the 211 emails I sent during my time where there was alleged discrimination, my claims of discrimination outlined in time stamped emails, and my feelings surrounding those inflammatory acts.  This video shows XXXX XXXX did not do a thorough investigation, did not review emails on the servers, and clearly didnt review the ones from prior to XXXX.  I anticipated this, along with the actions that would be taken by the bank, and the recommendations of their counsel.\n\nThe SEC was given the information under submission number XXXX and the State of Delaware Investor Protection Unit also was furnished the information you have seen and still have yet to see.\n\nThe Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 is a serious matter, along with the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, and breach of the obligation to provide correct information is considered a serious matter.  There is a procedural duty to provide correct information.  Whether your investors believe that they were injured will be entirely up to them, and as I stated before, I have never traded the stock of WSFS, nor will I.\n\nI believe theres a substantial likelihood that reasonable investors would consider this disclosure, especially during that time and space in this country, significant not only for the stock, but also in regards to a merger.  Most investors will rely on the integrity of the price set by the market, and this is only achieved with accurate information.  Releasing information so incomplete as to mislead investors, employees, and the public is negligent and reckless.  Employees have the right, just like investors, to have information available to them to know if the culture of the workplace matches their moral compass.  A court, or person, can never set the bar too low for a standard of materiality, and the information I have provided and accusations I have made would be considered information that can alter the total mix of information made available.\n\nAntitrust laws have been violated, and the FTC always conducts comprehensive merger reviews and their opinion surrounding a multi year, documented claim of discrimination over hundreds of emails, text messages, voice conversations, supersedes whether this board, or its counsel, believes that any wrongdoing has committed.  In total, there were over 34 laws and regulations broken.  Of the attorneys that were contacted some were investor class action attorneys.  I have been sent engagement letters by several notable attorneys and have yet to decide who I will move forward with.\n\nWSFS will be forced to provide basic-level information and will need to be forthcoming.  While XXXX XXXX  thought it to be acceptable to overlook such a pressing matter and give it the proper due diligence, she left your company wide open for lawsuits for things beyond the scope of what she may have perceived she was dealing with.\n\nThe Department of Justice and its actions have also been calculated into my series of events, along with inquiries coming from both national and state agencies.  While your counsel may provide you comfort in what his defenses can and would be, then I would give notion that you still arent understanding the gravity of the situation you are in.  Now that I have validated credibility in my claims through the many attorneys that have wished to engage the matter, now is the time for the press to be made aware of the claims, the videos, and the like, that has been shared so far.\n\nIm not going to review in this email all the precedence surrounding this states legislature, as that is the job of your counsel where he will bill you accordingly for said work. The main objective of counsel appears to have been from defending you against me, but they failed in defending you from yourself. Your sole focus was on intimidation tactics surrounding my accounts and my treatment, but left you exposed in areas surrounding my case and others.  Dont let them tell you otherwise, and if they do, or even posture towards more defense, then I would suggest you find new counsel.  Their job is to make you aware of your liabilities in all forms, not be narrow minded and leave you exposed, which they did.\n\nYour merger with XXXX XXXX correlates timelines of my XXXX complaints, and your merger with XXXX XXXX  and XXXX XXXX XXXX (XXXX  XXXX) timelines also provide motives around suppressing discrimination claims despite hundreds of emails, videos, and verbal complaints.  The holdings of these companies, their investments, and the claims presented leaves liability in ways that only the highest level of financial analyst can explain to you. Your business combination disclosures have been reviewed in their entirety, along with all matters pertaining to your XXXX activity.  Manipulating information surrounding claims of discrimination, disregarding federal regulation surrounding it, and your lack of disclosures to investors provides enough burden of proof to bring action.\n\nI was a gentleman the first communication and in how these matters have been handled.  I gave the bank sufficient time to try and remedy the situation on their own, and then decided to use an attorney who I trust and attempted to mediate a remedy despite it not being their field of expertise. Did I anticipate that XXXX XXXX would know XXXX XXXX field of expertise, think it to be leverage, and his office would take their course of action?  Maybemaybe not.  Ill leave that to you to decide.\n\nI appreciate everything XXXX  did in helping in the situation, she is a true friend and good person.  When XXXX XXXX approached her and attempted to convince her to offer me to sign away my legal rights in order to not accelerate loans payments, she immediately indicated that she understood something was wrong and that it wasnt her area of expertise and strongly advised me to find a bank law specialist and to pursue action.  She provided recommendations, which was appreciated, but I had anticipated this action, not quite in this manner, and had already taken precautions.\n\nAs XXXX XXXX, his firm, and this bank are so keen on accelerated deadlines then I propose my own.  Your bullying tactics and requiring payment in 15 days surrounding $XXXX XXXX in loans was received, and in return I will extend the olive branch for your second go round, much like the first, however, this is the last, as the stakes are significantly higher now, and the equilibrium moment of decision making is actually upon this board and the company.\n\nI speak for myself, as Ive always maintained, and will provide the board a settlement offer.  All I have ever wanted is to be treated like all other customers.  My original offer still stands, WSFS can terminate XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, pay no money, admit no wrong doing, and I will continue to pay loans as specified, as I have always done, never missing a payment for 11 years.\n\nThe second option is an immediate resolution and settlement of $XXXX XXXX.  The balance to be paid after satisfying all outstanding loans.  That will result in immediate termination of all communication with prospective attorneys, waive my rights to a class action lawsuit and any information leading to class action, and I will no longer comply with any government agencies that I am presently working with in relation to this matter.  All complaints will be rescinded, and WSFS and all entities I control and own will never have dealings again.\n\nIf this settlement is rejected, then I will be moving forward with a $XXXX XXXX lawsuit, provide full cooperation to any government entities necessary, and will begin my second wave of emails to attorneys seeking counsel, and any news outlets that can help put me in touch with the appropriate counsel.\n\nI warned this board against using probability modeling in handling this case. Attached is the blanket email sent to attorneys that I am seeking counsel from.  My researchers have every licensed attorney in the state of Delaware and will continue looking out to more firms, in surrounding states, to at the least educate them on a potential class action lawsuit, but also for my own suit.\n\nThe deadline put in place for my loan acceleration applies for your settlement offer.  If you choose to decline the offer, then I respect that decision, and I believe this will be a strong legal battle that will be a good case overall.\n\nIt would be unfair for me to not make you aware that I have reached out to the Attorney General for the XXXX XXXX, of which I belong, based in Oklahoma, and have requested the assistance of the Office of the Attorney General, and all pro bono legal assistance the tribe can offer in the state of Delaware and through other XXXX  around the nation who would be interested in assisting.\n\nAfter this meeting, no settlement offers will be accepted, offered, or countered.  I will not allow this lending institution to take the legal stance of wanting to wait, see, and then offer a deal.  My culture and disposition in life wont allow it.  Never was about money, I stated that from the beginning.  If you feel your bank didnt violate any laws, then the incompetence of your employees will be on full display for the world to see when questioned in the matter.\n\nWhether you believe you did anything wrong or not is not for you to decide.  This bank took a perfect customer, who grew profits every year, revenues every year, never missed a payment, has flawless credit, great financial stability, and the bank chose to redline him into lower loan packages, keep him suppressed in small business far past revenues pushed past $XXXX XXXX annually, and discriminated against him while he made formal complaints for years just to help branch managers get better bonus structures.  Then when vocalizing these complaints to the board, his credit lines were called in, all banking terminated, and then standard loan packages called in.\n\nXXXX XXXX requested the statements for the closed account of #XXXX  from XXXX, and has still not furnished them along with the check viewer images that the CPA needs, much as  he didnt furnish them the two months I asked for them.  The blatant disrespect and mistreatment has been on full display, and when it goes in front of the world, we will let them decide for themselves.  I hope hes not going to say its not true, like everything else, when my attorney requested them in addition.\n\nI look forward to your response, however, I have already anticipated it, and like a great play, we will enter the third and final act.  However, there are twists in this one that you just dont suspect.  You played your hand, a little early I might add, and now its my turn, and like a patient investor, I will see the rewards of my patience.\n\nAttached:  Letter to Attorneys.\n\nHi XXXX, this is XXXX XXXX, Delaware's largest XXXX XXXX, and Delaware's most successful entrepreneur under 40. For three years, I made time stamped email and text complaints surrounding my treatment as a WSFS customer and the discriminatory nature the bank was drifting in. I have attached the XXXX  video link for the XXXX  meeting between myself and two WSFS including XXXX XXXX. The second XXXX  link reviews the details of the emails exchanged surrounding my claims to several key executives and their blatant attempt to quiet me. There are 211 separate email events that are all documented and verified. These are the emails on the server since XXXX. Prior to XXXX  there are more emails that are even worse that I can make sure to include after engagements have taken place. As a high net worth individual, money is not, and has not been my motivator. People who encounter me understand immediately that I am a person of discipline and principle. I give people in life every opportunity to help themselves before I choose any action and move forward. When I do move forward it's with full force. I cautioned the bank of using probability modeling surrounding my treatment and their handling of the information they possessed. My personal belief is that most who watch the video are immediately aware clearly of egregious acts that were committed by bad faith actors who infiltrated this once great bank's executive suite and treated it much like the executives at XXXX XXXX. The actions of the bank to pursue the laws of probability and \"breakage\" and \"slippage\" means that money is something they value most, more than a person's rights, leading me to the notion that damages should be pursued, and not a small amount, but rather a ground breaking amount. Now that we've determined monetary gain wasn't my main motivator then let's talk about why I am doing this. I have single handedly raised my son, XXXX XXXX, to be XXXX XXXX XXXX  in history to receive D1 and ivy league scholarships, and he committed to being the youngest student in XXXX XXXX History at the age of XXXX. Attached is his video of scholarship offers so you know this to be true, along with my XXXX  profile so you can verify me as well. I am building XXXX XXXX XXXX, working alongside the State of Maryland and the state of Delaware, all in addition to my businesses. I would be doing my son a grave disservice by allowing him to see a company treat us in this way and not be held accountable. With that said, I will pay a PREMIUM to the standard attorney compensation awarded for damages. Review the tapes, let me know your thoughts, and let's move forward immediately.The allegations of my discrimination came at a time that WSFS was also completing a merger and not a single person can explain why matters surrounding claims of discrimination never went beyond the branch the one person who oversees it. I believe that shareholders deserve to know exactly what was happening at this bank during that period and their investors have the right to question executive management and their motives surrounding this. There's a lot at play here, and their pressure has been mounting as I have still repeatedly increased my pressure seeking answers surrounding their behavior. Now it's time to bring in a professional who does this for a living and while I am very successful in my areas of life, it's best to adopt a model of deferring to others in a situation such as this one.I am very eager to get to work, so let's begin with a phone call as early as tomorrow. My assistant found your information, so I figured I'd reach out directly.\n\nYour future client,\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-08-02T22:03:12.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"19709","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7341019","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WSFS FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2023-08-02T21:58:07.000Z","state":"DE","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Seized or attempted to seize your property"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I would be <em>doing</em> my son a grave disservice by allowing him to see a company treat us in this way and not be held accountable. With that said, I will pay a PREMIUM to the standard attorney <em>compensation</em> awarded for damages."]},"sort":[5.570382,"7341019"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18398627","_score":5.258189,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Wells Fargo exhibits consistent and deliberate dishonest and fraudulent behavior, including disingenuousness, negligence, deception, and unethical business practices. Leveraging its apparent power advantage, such as access to a team of high-powered, costly attorneys and resources, the bank has prolonged this case for a year, yet has failed to provide any evidence to clear itself of the alleged crimes. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and his team of high-powered attorneys, like his predecessor, demonstrate a blatant disregard for the law. They appear to believe they can bypass legal requirements by relying solely on words, without supporting legal documents, to dismiss allegations of fraudulent, deceptive, and wrongful practices by the Wells Fargo executive team and employees.\n\nWithout legal help and limited resources, I have spent years meticulously gathering and presenting significant evidence of Wells Fargos misconduct, wrongdoing, and criminal behavior. If Wells Fargo had not fraudulently issued that credit card, falsely reported my creditdamaging my lifeand breached our loan agreements, imposing close to {$200000.00} in penalties, I wouldnt be facing this devastating, life-altering crisis. \n\nWells Fargo has failed to provide evidence regarding the credit card : The application for the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of credit limit increase from {$5000.00} to {$50000.00}. \nXXXX XXXX confirmation letter for the credit increase to {$50000.00}. \nEvidence of running XXXX hard credit reports, indicated by Wells Fargo, XXXX for the {$5000.00} limit and another for the {$50000.00} limit. \nExplanation as to why the personal card was sent to my business address? \n\nAccording to Wells Fargos analysis, its employees applied for roughly XXXX credit card accounts on behalf of consumers without authorization. Wells Fargo executives tend to quickly blame employees when directed to use deceptive practices to boost sales. \n\nThe law states that individuals at the bank who were involved in or directed the fraud, including senior employees and executives, XXXX face criminal charges, including potential imprisonment and significant personal fines. \n\nWells Fargo has further worsened its situation by persistently engaging in deceptive and willful misconduct, including lying about the application of the loan prepayment penalty and repricing charges. \n\nWells Fargo claimed it used repricing for the loan refinance, even though the loan document clearly states that a prepayment penalty was charged to us. Additionally, Wells Fargo said it assessed a prepayment penalty on the loan payoff, even though the loan document explicitly states that a repricing penalty was applied. Wells Fargo acknowledged our initial and ongoing agreement to waive any prepayment penalty under Same Lender Loyalty ( the same deal we had for the refinance ). \n\nHowever, Wells Fargo deceptively revised the loan payoff document by rebranding the prepayment penalty as a Repricing fee and intentionally concealed the true nature of the prepayment penalty. This misleading and deceptive statement was used to impose an early payoff penalty of {$54000.00}, which is illegal under consumer protection laws such as the Dodd-Frank Act, enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX CFPB ). \n\nAccording to XXXX, XXXX '' is a term used in the context of loan agreements and generally used for refinance and refers to adjusting the interest rate, not a penalty itself. The fee for paying off a loan early is called a prepayment penalty or an early payoff penalty. \n\nIn addition, there was no mention of repricing when we signed the loan or at payoff. Repricing was introduced as a new term without prior disclosure. \n\nTruth in Lending Act ( TILA ) / Regulation Z : This federal law requires lenders to provide clear and standardized disclosures of all credit terms and costs ( including the Annual Percentage Rate, finance charges, and payment schedule ) before the loan is finalized ( consummation ). The goal is to allow you to compare loan offers and avoid misleading practices. \nClosing Disclosure : For mortgages, you must receive a Closing Disclosure at least XXXX business days before closing. This document finalizes the terms. If terms change after this, a new disclosure and potentially a new waiting period are required. \nUnfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) : Introducing surprise fees or terms at the last minute could also be considered a deceptive practice, which is prohibited under consumer financial protection laws enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ).\n\nContract Law : A loan agreement is a binding contract. Generally, one party can not unilaterally change the agreed-upon terms unless the original contract explicitly allows for the specific change ( e.g., a variable interest rate clause that outlines how the rate can change ).\n\nThe law states that when a bank lies or engages in deceptive practices, it will face severe consequences, including substantial fines, restitution orders to repay affected customers, reputational damage, operational restrictions, and potential criminal charges for individuals involved. These actions are categorized as Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) and are illegal under federal and state laws, most notably the Dodd-Frank Act and the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Act. \n\nDuring a discussion with XXXX XXXX from Wells Fargos XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), I discovered that the Wells Fargo CEO has been directly involved in my complaints and in the decision-making process. In their latest response letter, XXXX stated that, after further review, they found no errors or misconduct in Wells Fargos practices and therefore decided not to pay the {$30.00} XXXX in compensation. Instead, they offered a {$270.00} customer appreciation check for the inconvenience caused. \n\nWells Farog has a long history of deception and wrongful business practices and systemic issues and consumer harm in creating fake records, forged signatures on account-opening documents and credit card applications to make them appear legitimate, constitutes identity-related fraud in addition to identity fraud, false credit reporting and derogatory reporting, false statements, misrepresentation of facts, deceptive practices, and falsification of information to gain customers business as part of a widespread scheme to meet aggressive sales goals.\n\nI have a compelling case against Wells Fargo, backed by numerous facts indicating violations of both state and federal laws stemming from its actions, including recent false statements about conducting two hard credit inquiries and misrepresentations in the loan documents regarding prepayment and repricing.\n\nWells Fargo has a duty to prevent economic and emotional harm to its customers. Wells Fargos intentional wrongful actsfraud, perjury, negligence, and wrongful credit reportinghave caused me years of financial, emotional, and mental suffering.\n\nWells Fargo did not exercise reasonable care to prevent the financial and credit damages I experienced. No amount of money can fully compensate for the Emotional Distress and Anguish, pain, and suffering caused by Wells Fargos actions from XXXX to XXXX. I lost the most productive years of my professional and personal life and suffered greatly. \n\nThe consequences of Wells Fargos actions include civil lawsuits and punitive damages, supported by evidence of forgery, identity theft, fraud, violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), negligence, deceptive practices, defamation, and related offenses. Punitive damages are justified to punish Wells Fargo and prevent similar conduct in the future. This case calls for damages of {$30.00} XXXX, including {$5.00} XXXX designated for the CFPB. These funds will be used to monitor Wells Fargos operations, halt its deceptive and fraudulent practices, and prevent future issues.\n\nUltimately, justice must be served for those who suffered, and Wells Fargo must be held accountable. I request that the CFPB take enforcement action against Wells Fargo for its pattern of fraud, misrepresentation, and false statements, and for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, regulatory requirements, banking laws, consumer protection statutes, and credit reporting regulations.\n\nIn addition to filing complaints with the FDIC, the State Regulator, the Attorney General, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( OCC ), and the FTC, and the Wells Fargo Board of Directors.\n\nAnalysis and interpretation of key phrases in Wells Fargo 's Final Response WF : We take allegations of employee misconduct seriously and referred this matter for review. Due to privacy, personnel outcomes remain internal. \n\nEnclosed are statements from XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX. If you believe transactions were unauthorized, contact Credit Card Fraud Claims at XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). We can not provide additional documentation on the credit limit increase due to retention limits, but confirm the request was approved on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nCredit applications and limit increases involve a hard inquiry, standard industry practice, which XXXX temporarily affect your credit score. A limit increase updates your existing account, not creating a new one ; each account appears individually on your credit report. \n\nAn identity theft claim was investigated, and per our letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, we found no fraud or unauthorized transactions. \n\nEvidence shows you activated the card, made payments, or benefited from the account. Any temporary credit will be reversed. \n\nImplication : This is a crucial admission. Wells Fargo asserts a fact ( the approval date ) but can not produce the evidence ( the signed request or the hard inquiry report ). Federal banking regulations and the FCBA generally require institutions to retain records relating to account openings and disputes for a minimum of XXXX years, and often longer in cases of alleged fraud. An attorney can argue that their inability to produce this evidence means they can not prove you authorized the change. \n\nWF : Evidence shows you activated the card, made payments, or benefited from the account. '' Implication : They are leveraging the fact that the unauthorized employee used my business accounts to make payments, misrepresenting this as my authorization or activation. This clearly shows the payments were disguised and made without my knowledge or consent.\n\nWF : An identity theft claim was investigated, and per our letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, we found no fraud or unauthorized transactions. '' Implication : This is their final, formal denial of my claim. It solidifies their position and opens the door to file a lawsuit after exhausting all mandatory dispute-resolution channels.\n\nThese statements provide further insight into Wells Fargo 's defensive stance and highlight key areas your attorney will focus on : WF : Our review confirms the application address was your employer 's at the time. '' This confirms negligence in verifying the nature of the address. A personal credit card should typically not be mailed to a business address without specific, verified instructions. This indicates a failure of the bank 's procedure for verifying the application details and the recipient 's authority. \n\nWF : A {$270.00} customer appreciation check was issued and cashed in XX/XX/XXXX. '' Implication : This constitutes XXXX XXXX unethical business practice and a trap tactic, arguing that by cashing this check ( entirely unrelated, and it was for customer appreciation and convenience ), I somehow accepted a resolution or benefit that compromises my ability to sue for the larger issue. Wells Fargo needs to clarify the nature of the check directly. \n\nWF : Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, we report accurate account history. '' Implication : This is the core of the legal battle. I maintain that the history is not accurate because the entire account was fraudulent from inception. Their statement that the account is \" suppressed from monthly reporting due to first delinquency on XX/XX/XXXX, '' is standard procedure, but doesn't validate the underlying debt. Wells Fargos prior admission ( correcting my credit report after the CFPB complaint ) as evidence that their reporting was, in fact, inaccurate.\n\nWF : Our review confirms the application address was your employer 's at the time. Regarding collection calls, they are courtesy, not guaranteed. Account status can be reviewed via mailed statements or online. We honored your cease-and-desist request ; legally required communications will continue. A {$270.00} customer appreciation check was issued and cashed in XX/XX/XXXX. We regret any inconvenience. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, we report accurate account history. Your account is suppressed from monthly reporting due to first delinquency on XX/XX/XXXX. For credit report questions, contact the agencies directly. You are entitled to XXXX free report annually. \n\nImplication : Wells Fargo asserts it has XXXX separate credit reports, but where are theyone for the {$5000.00} limit and another for the {$50000.00} limit? Recent evidence demonstrates that Wells Fargo lied and misrepresented that it ran XXXX hard credit inquiries on me in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nMoreover, there was no application for the XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card, yet the signature on the application they provided was clearly forged. Initially, Wells Fargo stated that a signature was required in-branch to open the account, but later reversed course, asserting that no signature was required. \n\nWells Fargo has a six-month rule : a customer can not get approved for a new Wells Fargo credit card if they have opened one with Wells Fargo within the last six months.\n\nWF : Their business real estate loan originated on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXnterest. The rate adjustment in XXXX, reduced to XXXX XXXX with a repricing fee of {$110000.00}, which was paid. \nThis is incorrect ; we were charged a prepayment penalty on the refinance. \n\nThe payoff request in XXXX, a payoff demand included a prepayment penalty of {$54000.00} due to market conditions. No errors were found ; all actions aligned with the loan terms. Compensation is declined. \n\nImplication : This is false ; we were charged a repricing fee of {$54000.00} for the loan payoff, not for the refinance. The settlement agreement for the loan payoff included a prepayment penalty. Realizing we had a deal, like the one for the original loan/refinancing, with the difference that the person who sold us a bill of goods was still an employee of Wells Fargo , we brought this to her attention. Wells Fargo engaged in deceptive tactics, created a new payoff form that changed the term from 'prepayment ' to 'repricing, ' and imposed a penalty of {$54000.00}.\n\nWF : \" A {$270.00} customer appreciation check was issued and cashed in XX/XX/XXXX. '' Implication : This is WFs trap tactic, claiming that cashing this unrelated check ( for a different matter ) somehow indicates I accepted a resolution or benefit that could jeopardize my ability to pursue the larger claim. The check was offered by an employee of Wells Fargos escalation department as compensation for the inconvenience and as a gesture of appreciation for the customer.\n\nWF : \" Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, we report accurate account history. '' Implication : This is the core of the legal battle. I maintain that the history is not accurate because the entire account was fraudulent from inception. Their statement that the account is \" suppressed from monthly reporting due to first delinquency on XX/XX/XXXX, '' is standard procedure, but doesn't validate the underlying debt. Using Wells Fargos prior admission ( correcting my credit report after the CFPB complaint and finding discrepancies in Wells Fargo 's credit reporting ) as evidence that their reporting was, in fact, inaccurate.\n\nWF : Our review confirms the application address was your employer 's at the time. Regarding collection calls, they are courtesy, not guaranteed. Account status can be reviewed via mailed statements or online. We honored your cease-and-desist request ; legally required communications will continue. A {$270.00} customer appreciation check was issued and cashed in XX/XX/XXXX. We regret any inconvenience. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, we report accurate account history. Your account is suppressed from monthly reporting due to first delinquency on XX/XX/XXXX. For credit report questions, contact the agencies directly. You are entitled to XXXX free report annually. \n\nTheir business real estate loan originated on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXnterest. The rate adjustment in XXXX, reduced to XXXX XXXX  with a repricing fee of {$110000.00}, which was paid. \n\nImplication : This statement is false ; Wells Fargo breached our agreement and charged a prepayment penalty of {$110000.00} on the refinance, not on repricing.\n\nWF : The payoff request in XXXX, a payoff demand included a prepayment penalty of {$54000.00} due to market conditions. No errors were found ; all actions aligned with the loan terms. Compensation is declined. \n\nImplication : This is incorrect ; the first settlement agreement for the loan payoff included a prepayment penalty. The new loan payoff rebranded the prepayment penalty as a repricing fee to conceal its true purpose, resulting in another significant loss. \nWells Fargo used deception to induce us to enter into a financial transaction and breached our agreements. Wells Fargo was fully aware of applicable lending laws and deliberately misrepresented information and instructed notes regarding the waiver of the prepayment penalty on the refinance and payoff, on which we relied in doing business with Wells Fargo. \n\nWells Fargo responded in a letter, For clarity and consistency, our policy is based on written documentation and verbal agreements are not legally binding. \n\nWells Fargo relied on its extensive knowledge of lending laws, gave false information, and misled us into doing business with it. We were assured by the loan agent that we would not be charged a penalty for refinancing with Wells Fargo or for early payment, as documented in the loan agreement, pursuant to the loan agents instructions. Wells Fargo breached our contract agreement and imposed a prepayment penalty for the refinance. \n\nDate of XXXX : XXXX : Account opened fraudulently with a forged signature, negligence in account management, and erroneous credit reporting. \n\nTimeline of Events of Wells Fargos Negligence Causing Irreversible Harm Approximate Date Event Description XXXX Wells Fargo issues a personal credit card for American Express Propel in my name with an initial {$5000.00} credit limit via a forged signature. \nAccording to Wells Fargo, the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, following a credit card application submitted on XX/XX/XXXX, for which information was provided at a branch, and my signature was obtained. \nXXXX Wells Fargo sends the personal credit card to my business address, in the hands of an unauthorized employee with access to mail and business accounts. \nXXXX The employee uses the credit card and disguises payments made from my business accounts under business expenses. \nXXXX ( Date of Discovery ) Employee leaves employment. I take over accounts payable and discover a {$55000.00} balance on an unknown credit card. \nXXXX I immediately contact Wells Fargo to report the account as fraudulent. \nXXXX Wells Fargo finds \" no fraud, '' citing that the account was actively used and paid from my accounts for XXXX years. \nXXXX I refuse to pay the fraudulent balance. WF charges off the account and reports non-payment to credit bureaus. I requested that WF to remove the negative credit reporting. WF responded as below : XXXX My XXXX XXXX drops from XXXX to XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX remains suppressed due to derogatory marks ( approx. XXXX years ). \nXX/XX/XXXX I contacted WF debt collection and provided my SS # and my name to locate the account on my credit report. The agent was not able to locate the account on my credit report. \nXXXX I file a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and request all documentation from WF. I found discrepancies in Wells Fargos credit reporting. WF realizes its mistake, immediately reverses its credit reporting. Approximately XXXX derogatory marks are cleared. My XXXX XXXX rises to XXXX and week later to XXXX. \nLate XXXX After months of review and providing my evidence of fraud, Wells Fargo issues a final statement asserting they found \" no wrongdoing. '' XXXX. List of Evidence and Discrepancies I possess documented evidence illustrating Wells Fargos multiple inconsistencies across its narratives and credit reporting practices.\n\n.\n\nEvidence/Discrepancy Description and Status of WF Response Forged Signature I insisted the signature on the application provided by WF was not mine. WF claimed it was signed in a branch, then later claimed no signature was required.\n\nGeneric Application Wells Fargo provided a generic application form with the alleged forged signature, which lacked specific details ( e.g., name of credit card, purpose, initial credit limit ). \nCredit Limit Discrepancy The XXXX Welcome Letter indicated a {$5000.00} limit. Wells Fargo claims I requested an immediate increase to {$50000.00} the next day, claiming it ran XXXX hard credit inquiry, but can not produce any supporting documentation. No letter from XXXX XXXX XXXX to confirm the increase from {$5000.00} to {$50000.00}. \nMissing Documentation Wells Fargo could not produce evidence of the requested credit limit increase, the XXXX XXXX reports/inquiries, approval letter for the increase from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX proof of the \" in-branch '' signing process. \nWF Internal Policy Violations Issuing another credit card with such limit, contradicts with Wells Fargos internal policy, where customers can not get a new card within XXXX months of a prior XXXX, and legitimate limit increases require application/re-application procedures Credit Limit Contradiction with Wells Fargos Policy WF claims an immediate verbal increase to $ XXXX was permitted which contradicts with the company policy. i.e, XXXX of my personal credit cards had a limit of $ XXXX, I asked Wells Fargo agent to reduce the limit from XXXX to XXXX. The same week, I changed my mind, and I told them to keep the limit at XXXX. I was told I could increase the limit verbally, and I needed to reapply for the credit increase. \nProof of Payments from Business Account and Not the Personal Account The business records showing payments were made from my business accounts by the unauthorized employee in possession of the XXXX XXXX XXXX card, under general credit card charges and payments which can be cross-referenced with the credit card statements. \nCFPB Correspondence Complete history of my complaint with the CFPB portal, including all responses from Wells Fargo and the final determination of \" no wrongdoing '' despite the mountain of evidence against. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX derogatory reports over 7 years. \nProved discrepancies in Wells Fargo reporting, which had to make correction to my credit report. My score changed in XXXX from XXXX to XXXX. \nWells Fargo found guilty of wrong credit reporting Wells Fargo 's correction of my credit report following my CFPB complaint further confirms that Wells Fargo made a credit reporting error, and Wells Fargo continues to deny any wrongdoing. \nMy Existing Accounts I had no need for a {$50.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX card, I already held several personal and business with WF issued XXXX months prior, in addition to having other credit cards from other financial institutions, such as XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, demonstrating no need for a new XXXX Propel card. \nThis contradicts their standard policy where customers can not get a new card within XXXX months of a prior XXXX, Timeline of Events of WFs Negligence Causing Irreversible Harm. \n\nApproximate Date Event Description XXXX Wells Fargo XXXX an XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card account in my name with a initial {$5000.00} credit limit via a forged signature. \nXXXX WF issues the personal credit card to my place of business address, where an unauthorized employee had access to mail and business accounts. \nXXXX The unauthorized employee uses the credit card and disguises payments made from my business accounts. \nXXXX ( Date of Discovery ) Employee leaves employment. I take over accounts payable and discover a {$50000.00} balance on an unknown credit card. \nXXXX I immediately contact Wells Fargo to report the account as fraudulent. \nXXXX Wells Fargo finds \" no fraud, '' citing that the account was actively used and paid from my accounts for XXXX years. \nXXXX I refuse to pay the fraudulent balance. WF charges off the account and reports non-payment to credit bureaus. I requested that WF to remove the negative credit reporting. WF responded as below : XXXX My XXXX XXXX drops from XXXX to XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX remains suppressed due to derogatory marks ( approx. XXXX years ). \nXX/XX/XXXX I contacted WF debt collection and provided my SS # and my name to locate the account or my credit report. The agent was not able to locate the account on my credit report. WF sent a response they show no record of me contacting Wells Fargo agent for inquiry. Soon After I file a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and request all documentation from WF. \nXXXX I found discrepancies in Wells Fargos credit reporting. WF realizes its mistake, immediately reverses its credit reporting. Approximately XXXX derogatory marks are cleared. My XXXX XXXX rises to XXXX and week later to XXXX. \nLate XXXX After months of review and providing my evidence of fraud, Wells Fargo issues a final statement asserting they found \" no wrongdoing. ''","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-01T00:58:06.000Z","issue":"Fees or interest","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"91101","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18398627","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2026-01-01T00:47:05.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem with fees"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Due to privacy, personnel <em>outcomes</em> remain internal. \n\nEnclosed are statements from XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX. If you believe transactions were unauthorized, contact Credit Card Fraud Claims at XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). We can not <em>provide</em> additional documentation on the credit limit increase due to retention limits, but confirm the request was approved on XX/XX/XXXX."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to <em>provide</em> a public response"]},"sort":[5.258189,"18398627"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12177446","_score":4.48407,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX I informed all parties that my compliant and claim for damages will be filed with a reputable and unbiased entity and not a predator. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX GreenSky, a GreenSky, LLCs registered trademark XXXX XXXX a XXXX banking company The GreenSky Program GreenSky XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I watched several XXXX XXXX XXXX infomercials. I was convinced and I thought that it would be perfect for the bathtub and shower. I was interested in the offer of no payments for XXXX months, the one-day installation and the waiver of all installation costs. On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted XXXX  and scheduled an appointment for the design consultation. \n\nMy bathtub and shower installment ( fiberglass modular ) that existed prior to their installation had no water damage, no leaking, and no structure damage. After, the installer removed the bathtub and shower installment. I looked in and took peek and smiled-it was clean and no problems. \n\nThe Consultant arrived XX/XX/XXXX, on the scheduled date and time. During the consultation, I was only asked to select the tile and the glass for the shower door for a bathtub and shower installation. I now know why the Consultant did not fully disclose and did not have me select my options for the installation. For my installation, they have falsely advertised XXXX  brands fixtures that were not installed for the overflow drain, drain and entire shower door. I do believe the XXXX installed fixtures from the existing inventory from their prior operation. \n\nAt the end of the Consultation there was the signing of the contract and financing. I was uncomfortable and unfamiliar with the financial arm of the contract and knew I would make the payoff earlier to the Builder, if the installation was without all the construction problems-its awful. \n\nA. I have suffered an injury because the tub is too high. In contract, a XXXX XXXX height tub ordered. The tub installed is XXXX XXXX in height where they leveled the tub higher plus they glued on a XXXX strip, total XXXX XXXX ( See Images ). The plumber/installer cut the XXXX. \n\nB. They cut the joist flanges XXXX XXXX and another joist XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX from sawing them when working in the area while fitting the drainpipes which compromise the structure of my house ( See Images ) and has to be repaired. They connected the drainpipe at the bathroom floor level ( see XXXX cut images ). They unevenly leveled the floor under the tub XXXX higher. The uneven floor causes the design in this construction to be uneven. There is gap at the bottom of the shower frame where water leaks through the shower frame to the side of tub to the floor ( See Images ). \n\nXXXX I have an injury on XX/XX/XXXX, from getting out of the tub, because the tub is too high. As I stepped over and out of the tub my leg XXXX was injured. There was a lot of blood and a lot of pain. My leg is bruised and bumpy on my shin ( XXXX XXXX ). \n\nXXXX XXXX agreed that the work on XXXX # XXXX was below their standards. \n\nThe XXXX declined my demand regarding XXXX # XXXX, XXXX XXXX  XXXX, my request for a properly complete replacement. They will also need to repair work of the joist flanges damages by a licensed structural engineer or licensed general contractor specialized in structural repairs. Because of the level of incompetence they have exhibited and unwillingness to remedy this major problem, I seek a new company to repair their damage and properly install a new bathtub and shower. \n\nThis installation will be demolished and a new bathtub/shower installed by another Company. \n\n( A company that was at my home yesterday ( XX/XX/XXXX ) mentioned a company that work with tiles for bathtub and showers-the price is {$10000.00}. My bathroom is small and so is my bathtub and shower. They have charged a ridiculous price for this, if they did a good job. They are bad news. ) Additionally, the installation work is unbelievably horribly constructed. Here are the misleading actions and construction errors : XXXX ) False advertising : not installing the XXXX XXXX XXXX for bathtub and showers. \nThey covered up that installation XXXX XXXX XXXX. The information I have for the XXXX XXXX XXXX  is not what XXXX installed. \nThey installed fixtures from the existing inventory from their prior operation. \n\nXXXX ) Intent-the XXXX Consultant intentionally order XXXX XXXX XXXX  the wrong size tub In the bathroom while he was measuring areas of the bath and shower and thinking he would be sharing more items on his tablet for me to select for the installation- I mentioned I would have a little more area inside the bathtub. I had a bulky bathtub and the shower wall module. He was talking as he was measuring the area of the bathtub size he was thinking of and thinking out loud saying would be too large for inspection. The picture he took in the basement of the drainpipe, he was to show me the location before leaving. I texted him for the information of the area downstairs to know where I needed to clear for the installation, and he did. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX, I cleared the area in the basement to installation work. I began to think and thought that I should measure the length and width of the bathtub area to the measurements in the contract. That is when I found out that he knew what he ordered the size that was in violations of regulations. I looked up the regulations. No one from XXXX XXXX XXXX answer from XXXX, until XX/XX/XXXX and sent the change order for XXXX XXXX XXXX bathtub. XX/XX/XXXX is when I was told that an inspector and plumber would be here on the date of the installation. The design consultant said he would come back for a walk-through and never did-a sales tactic-shared with me by the installer. \n\nXXXX ) The date of the installation the installer arrived, XX/XX/XXXX, a one-person crew. I was asked during the consultation if the garage could be used and I declined and told they would have a tent to work out of. There was no tent. What I noticed on the day of the installation was the bathtub had been installed when I passed by and took XXXX pictures. At the time, it never dawn to me that something was wrong- the wood that heightened the bathtub was exposed and the side of the bathtub was not touching the floor. because I had never seen a bathtub where the side was not to the floor. During the installation, I was busy on my laptop engaged in detailed information I needed to do. \n\nThe inspector arrived around XXXX and said that he would return but did not. At some point, I asked the installer when the inspector would return and was told the inspector would not return. \n\nThe plumber arrived late at around XXXX. It was noticeable because the installer seemed nervous and anxious and mentioned the plumber tardiness a couple of times. \n\nWhen he finished the installation, I asked to see the water pressure flow. He did not properly install the showerhead ; water was dripping from it. He insisted it needed tightening, and it still dripped, and he kept tightening and made a bad mark on the metal. He knew how to fix it, finally he applied a gasket, used aerosol spray and silicon strip to seal it and stopped the drip. We walked downstairs to see the pipes and he said they may sweat, and I said that had happened before and I did not want that to occur. \n\nThe installer had me initial a document and I had no idea what it was-as it only showed the boxes to initial. I only told not to use the bathtub and shower for XXXX hours. The installer left at XXXX. \n\nXXXX ) The following are the errors and horrid installation, and XXXX brand fixtures denied and deception The XXXX hours had passed, I could use my bathtub and shower but before that I cleaned the bathroom and placed items back. As I was cleaning the floor my eyes began to open wide-I was in shock. This is when I started to discover he errors and mistakes. I emailed a person at XXXX that I had an email for. I would also call but chances to speak to someone were very rare. I told by the design consultant, and its common-the twelve doesnt start until the work is considered satisfactory. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX XXXX email Please have XXXX XXXX XXXX back out and redo the white caulking at bottom of the tub ( where he had to place an extended length for the tub ). It's messy and uneven and he had a toe stump where there is discoloration and unevenness. Also, the gray caulking along the tub and tile wall ( lengthier side ) the caulking is thick and uneven ) - when I am in the tub, I will be looking at unsightly globs. Additionally, there are gaps in the gray caulking along the outer frame of the tile. This is bad and reduces the value. \n\nAlso, I have not received a copy of the document he had me initial. \n\nI'm not going to pay full price for this. He needs to get out here pronto. \n\nAnd tell him to wear a headband or hard hat with a flashlight to see better. \n\nI will be communicating this to the financial arm of the contract. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email I got out of the tub at XXXX ( tonight ) from taking my bath. There is/are also gap ( XXXX ) along the tub and tile wall ( lengthier side ) which will cause damage to the base board and floor. \n\nThe inspector was here mid-day around XXXX on day of installation and said that he would return but did not. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email Also, the shower and the bathtub fixtures are not the same. The shower fixtures are XXXX. The bathtub drain stopper and the overflow nozzle is another brand. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email Please forward and direct all my communications to the appropriate contact for XXXX  XXXX \n\n# XXXX Reply to my request # XXXX Provide a complete list of the work the person is to do to remedy the problems. This is to ensure that you and I have the same understanding # XXXX Have someone from your administration office 's scheduling team to call me to schedule the date and time for the person to come out and do the work to remedy the problems. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email I received a voicemail from XXXX XXXX. I left XXXX a voicemail for him to have someone from your office send me an email of a list of the things XXXX is to do. \n\nPlease read through all the emails I sent and provide a complete list. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX  : Please add dripping faucet to the list. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX : Please add dripping faucet to the list. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX : I had a discussion with supervisor XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX is not being honest and doesn't seem to want to remedy the problems. He knows what the problem is, and he did not share it with me. \n\nTherefore, I had to figure this out myself. The problems are not only the caulking and the overflow nozzle and drain stopper are not XXXX brand. The bathtub height was cut too short about XXXX inches from the floor. I'm angry about this. I know what the remedy is for this and it's huge. \n\nPlease tell XXXX if he needs to think about what needs to be done to correct this and needs to reschedule the XX/XX/XXXX appointment at XXXX to please call me. He needs to make the right decision. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX  : Tell XXXX that you will need to replace and reinstall the bathtub. The tile walls, fixtures and shower doors and frame will need to come down and reinstalled and possibly be replaced-if damaged. Also, please fix the slow drip from the faucet. \n\nPlease call your financial arm of this contract to inform them of this. \n\nPlease call me to schedule the date and time to do this. \n\nThis was to be beautiful. I am in shock, but I have not lost hope. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email Thank you, As planned, please send someone out tomorrow to take pictures. \n\nOwner Get XXXX for XXXX Thank you, As planned, please send someone out tomorrow to take pictures. \n\nOwner Get XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX My contact information Hello Owner, My name is XXXX XXXX This is my contact information. \n\nThank you, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX On scheduled date tomorrow, they are to take pictures only. They are not to change or remove or move any of the installations ' parts, components, and/or attachments. Also, they are not to change or remove or move any property located on my property. \n\nOwneXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX RE : My contact information They will only be taking pictures and measurements. \n\nThey will not be touching anything else. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX email XXXX : Moments ago, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( I not sure if his name is XXXXno one gave me a business card ). \n\nI did tell you that XXXX had shouted at me on a call. I must say that I was surprised. You did not tell them that they were only to take pictures. So, XXXX should be sharing the pictures with you to make the right decision. \n\nPlease let me know what you have decided to do to remedy the problems. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX XXXX Please send the detailed written descriptions to fix this {$17000.00} mistake. \n\nPlease send reply to Owner by XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX : Add to the {$17000.00} mistake list : I washed my hair in the tub using the faucet ( that's how I was my hair ). The water on the tub 's ledge leaks under the shower door frame and caulking. There is no contact ( gap ) between the tub and shower door frame. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX : Please find attached my Written Demand. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX : My Written Demand Signed & dated Owner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email Hello Owner, thank you for passing this on, however this is an issue that would be handled by upper management, I have attached XXXX XXXX for future contact . \n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX XXXX XXXX Please find attached the Demand Letter and cover letter sent by XXXX  XXXX I received your voicemail on XX/XX/XXXX. I request that you communicate to me in writing by email. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX : Please find attached Written Demand-Final Resolve. \n\n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX : Please find Written Demand-Final Resolve and Written Demand and cover letters sent by XXXX. I received a voicemail XX/XX/XXXX and another voicemail XX/XX/XXXX. I request that you communicate to me in writing by email or at my address for XXXX # XXXX. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email Good afternoon My name is XXXX and I work in the escalated department at XXXX XXXX XXXX I am reaching out regarding the demand letters that were sent to our local office. I know that the Installation XXXX XXXX was out on XX/XX/XXXX and performed an inspection of your installation. Based on these findings it was determined that a full redo was not warranted, and the remaining concerns could be addressed through a follow-up service. Per section XXXX of our contract, we have the right to perform service within our warranty by the repair or replacement of any defective materials. \n\nAt this time, we are willing to move forward and schedule a second inspection with a different Installation XXXX along with the XXXX XXXX XXXX. During this inspection, they can walk through your concerns and further discuss our service plan moving forward. Should a redo be necessary per our second inspection, we can consider that option. However, if it is confirmed that a follow-up service can address your concerns they can elaborate on the process, better explain how the service would correct these issues, and explain why a redo is not needed. \n\nIve included XXXX on this thread as well as he is our XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Please advise on your availability so we can move forward with scheduling the second inspection. \n\nXXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email XXXX : Again, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX will need to provide written information regarding what they think the services plan moving forward and any and every communication must be in writing. \n\nI'm very shocked that XXXX  has not reached out to replace the horrific shabby job for the sake of XXXX XXXX \n\nPer your comment, what is that date and does a defect have a warranty? \n\nI will only accept a complete XXXX XXXX  bath and shower replacement ( new ) and no price/costs hikes and include the discounts provided. You must follow my Written Demands.\n\nI have the right to have a bath and shower installed by another company. Meaning, my trash as I have described in the Written Demand-Final Resolve. \n\nAt any time, I will have another company remove the trash and install a new bath and shower. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email Good afternoon, Owner, When we are on-site for the second inspection, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX can walk you through the service plan and how the service will correct the remaining issues. After the inspection is completed, I can send an email as well documenting their findings and outlining this service plan. Our local team has been trying to contact you to schedule a follow-up service after the initial inspection was completed on XX/XX/XXXX but you declined service stating that you would not accept anything other than a redo. As I stated in my previous email, should a redo be necessary per our second inspection, we can consider that option. However, if it is confirmed that a follow-up service can address your concerns they can elaborate on the process, better explain how the service would correct these issues, and explain why a redo is not needed. There is a warranty on the noted defects. However, per section XXXX of the signed contract, any warranty concerns will be addressed at our discretion by repair or replacement of any defective materials. If we determine per our second inspection that a repair is the best option to correct the defects, per the contract we have the right to service as we deem necessary. \nHaving another company remove or alter our product is a direct violation of our contract and warranty as are the demand letters that were sent. Ive attached a copy of your contract with highlighted sections from the terms and conditions section ( pages XXXX ). Ive also included a summary of those sections below as well addressing statements made in your written correspondence. \n\n\n\nSection XXXX : In the event that Owner disagrees with the Substantial Completion of the Work, Owner may withhold the actual cost of the Work to be completed, not to exceed 10 % of the Amount Due at Installation, and the balance shall be paid as required in this Contract. \n\nSection XXXX : Payments. Initial and final payments shall be as set forth above. Except as set forth in paragraph XXXX, all payments to Builder shall be made by Owner without any right of set-off or retention. \nThe work was considered substantially complete as of XX/XX/XXXX when the attached XXXX was signed. If you disagree with the Substantial Completion of the work, you have the right to withhold 10 % of the balance due but you are still required to pay the remaining balance.\n\nSection 9 : Builder does not warrant against and shall not be liable for any damages or injury relating to : alteration, repair or attempted repair by anyone other than Builder or its authorized representative. \nShould you choose to move forward with having another company remove and replace our products we are not responsible for repair, replacement, or reimbursement of the materials or cost of the contract and you would still be held liable for collection of the remaining balance. \n\nSection XXXX : Owners sole and exclusive remedy against Builder for any and all claims for damages arising out of or alleged to have arisen out of Builders Work shall be limited to the Warranty which shall be addressed, at Builders option, by the repair or replacement of any defective materials. \nWe have the right to inspect any noted defects/damages and determine the best bath for resolution. It is our discretion to determine the resolution based on the outcome of the inspection. Per the inspection that was previously completed, we determined that the best plan for resolution was to service/repair the noted concerns. \n\nSection XXXX : Any change order shall be based on an agreement between Owner and Builder in writing, stating both parties ' agreement on : ( 1 ) any change in the project, ( 2 ) the amount of adjustment, if any, of the compensation to Builder; and ( XXXX ) the extent of adjustment to the Completion Date. \n\nSection XXXX : Any alterations or modifications to this Contract shall have no force or effect unless a duly authorized officer of Builder agrees to them to in writing. \nThe demand letters dated XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX are written demands attempting to alter the initial contract is in violation of the above sections. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX does not agree or authorize the modifications listed within these demand letters. \n\nTo date we have attempted to schedule a follow up service to correct the noted concerns but have not been permitted to proceed with any remedies. We ask that you allow us to either complete this service or provide availability for a second inspection. \n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Someone from GreenSky called today. Stop the calls. Again, all communications must be in writing. \n\nThis trash you created was done intentionally. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email Good morning, Owner, Someone from Greensky is reaching out due to your complaint that was submitted. We partner with Greensky for financing, but they are a separate company from XXXX XXXX. They will continue their contact attempts until there is a resolution for the complaint they received. Please provide dates regarding your availability for the second inspection. At this time, this is our only offer to move forward as we determined per our previous inspection that a redo was not needed. \n\n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX You will need to update your predatory financial arm to inform them of the status of this concern. \n\nThey are aware of the concerns. They didn't do this horrific work, you did. \n\n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email Good morning, Owner, I can advise Greensky of your request to have all communication through writing. However, as I stated they are a separate company from XXXX XXXX, and I can not guarantee that they will comply with this request. Currently, we have advised Greensky that we have a service plan in place, but at this time you are unwilling to move forward with anything other than a redo. We have asked for your availability for us to schedule a second inspection and it has not been provided. At this time, there is nothing further XXXX XXXX XXXX is able to do. \nPlease provide your availability if you would like to move forward with scheduling the second inspection. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I'm available XX/XX/XXXX, Monday. \n\nAs I have communicated with a XXXX XXXX before. During the inspection, do not change or remove or move any of the installations ' parts, components, and/or attachments. Also, do not change or remove or move any property ( XXXX ) located on my property. Additionally, identify each individual and provide who they represent, their employer information and their contact information. \n\nProvide the schedule time of arrival in advance. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for your inspection. And provide a XXXX or more than notice. \n\nOwner XX/XX/XXXX XXXX email Good afternoon, Owner, Our XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX can perform the inspection on XX/XX/XXXX. Their arrival window will be XXXX. During the inspection, they will not make any alterations or repairs to any parts or components. They will","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-11T00:46:27.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"53713","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12177446","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"GREENSKY OPERATIONS, LLC","date_received":"2025-02-23T01:24:05.000Z","state":"WI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with personal statement of dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["During the inspection, <em>do</em> not change or remove or move any of the installations ' parts, components, and/or attachments. Also, <em>do</em> not change or remove or move any property ( XXXX ) located on my property. Additionally, identify each individual and <em>provide</em> who they represent, their employer information and their contact information. \n\n<em>Provide</em> the schedule time of arrival in advance."]},"sort":[4.48407,"12177446"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10475948","_score":3.6428866,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally rescind my [ contract/agreement ] for the purchase of the [ XXXX, XXXX, vin number XXXX ], purchased on [ XX/XX/XXXX ] at your [ Dealership Location ]. Under the provisions of relevant consumer protection laws and regulations, including but not limited to the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) regulations, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) guidelines, I am exercising my right to rescind this contract and request a full refund of any amounts paid, in accordance with my rights under the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 ) and related consumer protection statutes. \n\nAfter careful review of the loan documents and disclosures provided by your dealership, I have discovered multiple violations of my rights as a consumer. These violations fall under the following federal consumer laws : 1. **Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) Violations** : Truth and lending disclosure : Annual percentage rate, finance charge ( ( Sum of all charges ) ), amount financed, any down payment with total payments, total interest from apr. ( amount of credit provided on my behalf ( ( open end credit plan ) ). Drive time did not accurately and truthfully follow the ( TILA ) laws. \n\nPrimary tabs ( *definition ) The Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) is a consumer protection law enacted in XXXX in response to exceedlingy predatory loan practices. Prior to the TILA, lenders would use a variety of terminology and forms of lending that manipulated uninformed borrowers. The TILA changed this by requiring a uniform system of disclosures and terminology to be used for lending like credit cards or mortgages. Creditors were required to disclose details like the annual percentage rate and repayments details in a clear way to borrowers or else the borrower may be able to rescind the debt. TILA also limits the amount of late fees creditors can charge. Overall, the TILA since its signing has been updated to respond to changing lending practices to ensure borrowers clearly understand the terms and conditions they agree to. \n\n\n\n\n-15 U.S. Code 1601- Congressional findings and declaration of purpose ( a ) Informed use of credit The Congress finds that economic stabilization would be enhanced and the competition among the various financial institutions and other firms engaged in the extension of consumer credit would be strengthened by the informed use of credit. The informed use of credit results from an awareness of the cost thereof by consumers. It is the purpose of this subchapter to assure a meaningful disclosure of credit terms so that the consumer will be able to compare more readily the various credit terms available to him and avoid the uninformed use of credit, and to protect the consumer against inaccurate and unfair credit billing and credit card practices. \n( b ) Terms of personal property leases The XXXX also finds that there has been a recent trend toward leasing automobiles and other durable goods for consumer use as an alternative to installment credit sales and that these leases have been offered without adequate cost disclosures. It is the purpose of this subchapter to assure a meaningful disclosure of the terms of leases of personal property for personal, family, or household purposes so as to enable the lessee to compare more readily the various lease terms available to him, limit balloon payments in consumer leasing, enable comparison of lease terms with credit terms where appropriate, and to assure meaningful and accurate disclosures of lease terms in advertisements. \n- 15 U.S.C. 1602 ( g ), ( j ), ( i ), ( k ), ( p ) : Drive time Failed to provide clear and accurate definitions regarding credit terms and conditions at the time of the transaction or beforehand. \n\n15 U.S code 1602 ( g ) : ( g ) The term creditor refers only to a person who both ( 1 ) regularly extends, whether in connection with loans, sales of property or services, or otherwise, consumer credit which is payable by agreement in more than four installments or for which the payment of a finance charge is or may be required, and ( 2 ) is the person to whom the debt arising from the consumer credit transaction is initially payable on the face of the evidence of indebtedness or, if there is no such evidence of indebtedness, by agreement. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, in the case of an open-end credit plan involving a credit card, the card issuer and any person who honors the credit card and offers a discount which is a finance charge are creditors. For the purpose of the requirements imposed under part D of this subchapter and sections 1637 ( a ) ( 5 ), 1637 ( a ) ( 6 ), 1637 ( a ) ( 7 ), 1637 ( b ) ( 1 ), 1637 ( b ) ( 2 ), 1637 ( b ) ( 3 ), 1637 ( b ) ( 8 ), and 1637 ( b ) ( 10 ) of this title, the term creditor shall also include card issuers whether or not the amount due is payable by agreement in more than four installments or the payment of a finance charge is or may be required, and the Bureau shall, by regulation, apply these requirements to such card issuers, to the extent appropriate, even though the requirements are by their terms applicable only to creditors offering open-end credit plans. Any person who originates 2 or more mortgages referred to in subsection ( aa ) in any 12-month period or any person who originates 1 or more such mortgages through a mortgage broker shall be considered to be a creditor for purposes of this subchapter. The term creditor includes a private educational lender ( as that term is defined in section 1650 of this title ) for purposes of this subchapter.\n\nIn this Violation I am not liable for any payments or finance charges outside of the initial Consumer credit transaction ( CCT ), as to having open end credit! There is no such evidence of indebtedness to ( me ) The contract will be voided and longer service anything. Rescind the agreement/ contract now. \n\n\n15 U.S code 1602 ( i ) : ( i ) The adjective consumer, used with reference to a credit transaction, characterizes the transaction as one in which the party to whom credit is offered or extended is a natural person, and the money, property, or services which are the subject of the transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. \n\nI need the car to get my siblings to school and be able to go to work and back home. I can not do that in the face of illegal representation and not fully disclosing the information ( TILA ), who has instructed ( XXXX XXXX ) to do so in congress writing. I need the car so I am able to sustain a life of living. \n\n\n15 U.S code 1602 ( j ) : ( j ) The terms open end credit plan and open end consumer credit plan mean a plan under which the creditor reasonably contemplates repeated transactions, which prescribes the terms of such transactions, and which provides for a finance charge which may be computed from time to time on the outstanding unpaid balance. A credit plan or open end consumer credit plan which is an open end credit plan or open end consumer credit plan within the meaning of the preceding sentence is an open end credit plan or open end consumer credit plan even if credit information is verified from time to time. \n\nI have a right to unlimited credit in the case of being denied credit is a false and inaccurate statement under the consumer law writings. As I am not liable for any of the monthly payments, down payments and extra charges that were not clearly and conspicuously disclosed. \n\n\n15 U.S code 160XXXX ( k ) : ( k ) The term adequate notice, as used in section XXXX of this title, means a printed notice to a cardholder which sets forth the pertinent facts clearly and conspicuously so that a person against whom it is to operate could reasonably be expected to have noticed it and understood its meaning. Such notice may be given to a cardholder by printing the notice on any credit card, or on each periodic statement of account, issued to the cardholder, or by any other means reasonably assuring the receipt thereof by the cardholder. \n\n\nThere was never a point in time that drive time informed me on my right to rescind, which is a violation for not disclosing to me my right Clearly and conspicuously to rescind. \n\n\n15 U.S code 1602 ( p ) : ( p ) The term unauthorized use, as used in section 1643 of this title, means a use of a credit card by a person other than the cardholder who does not have actual, implied, or apparent authority for such use and from which the cardholder receives no benefit. \n\nI was violated by ( XXXX XXXX ) in the misuse of my credit report and information which is a violation. I received no benefits from the extra unlawful charges. This misleading information has led me into losing my job and not being able to get my mothers care needed. \n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1604 ( a ), ( b ) : Violations related to required regulations and guidelines for credit disclosures. They misused my credit which affected me in many statue damages, which damaged my way of living, character and right to obtain more credit. \n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1604 ( a ) : ( a ) Promulgation, contents, etc., of regulations The Bureau shall prescribe regulations to carry out the purposes of this subchapter. Except with respect to the provisions of section 1639 of this title that apply to a mortgage referred to in section 1602 ( aa ) [ 1 ] of this title, such regulations may contain such additional requirements, classifications, differentiations, or other provisions, and may provide for such adjustments and exceptions for all or any class of transactions, as in the judgment of the Bureau are necessary or proper to effectuate the purposes of this subchapter, to prevent circumvention or evasion thereof, or to facilitate compliance therewith. \n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1604 ( b ) : ( b ) Model disclosure forms and clauses ; publication, criteria, compliance, etc. \nThe Bureau shall publish a single, integrated disclosure for mortgage loan transactions ( including real estate settlement cost statements ) which includes the disclosure requirements of this subchapter in conjunction with the disclosure requirements of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of XXXX [ 12 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. ] that, taken together, may apply to a transaction that is subject to both or either provisions of law. The purpose of such model disclosure shall be to facilitate compliance with the disclosure requirements of this subchapter and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of XXXX, and to aid the borrower or lessee in understanding the transaction by utilizing readily understandable language to simplify the technical nature of the disclosures. In devising such forms, the Bureau shall consider the use by creditors or lessors of data processing or similar automated equipment. Nothing in this subchapter may be construed to require a creditor or lessor to use any such model form or clause prescribed by the Bureau under this section. A creditor or lessor shall be deemed to be in compliance with the disclosure provisions of this subchapter with respect to other than numerical disclosures if the creditor or lessor ( 1 ) uses any appropriate model form or clause as published by the Bureau, or ( 2 ) uses any such model form or clause and changes it by ( A ) deleting any information which is not required by this subchapter, or ( B ) rearranging the format, if in making such deletion or rearranging the format, the creditor or lessor does not affect the substance, clarity, or meaningful sequence of the disclosure. \nIn accordance with the consumer law i am revoking all of my signatures from ( XXXX XXXX ) and all contracts that ( XXXX XXXX ) illegally obtained and distributed to other furnishers. \n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1605 ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 6 ), ( c ), ( d ) ( 1 ) - ( 3 ), ( e ) ( 1 ) - ( 6 ) : Improper disclosure of the finance charge, amount financed, and the annual percentage rate ( APR ). In the documents attached to this letter ( Retail installment contract ) It shows extra charges outside of the finance charge which ( CLEARLY STATES ) in title above this statement. I will need full compensation back for all misleading advertisements presented illegally as for non accurate disclosures of documents to be terminated immediately. \n\n\n( a ) Finance charge defined Except as otherwise provided in this section, the amount of the finance charge in connection with any consumer credit transaction shall be determined as the sum of all charges, payable directly or indirectly by the person to whom the credit is extended, and imposed directly or indirectly by the creditor as an incident to the extension of credit. The finance charge does not include charges of a type payable in a comparable cash transaction. The finance charge shall not include fees and amounts imposed by third party closing agents ( including settlement agents ( car dealership ), attorneys, and escrow and title companies ) if the creditor does not require the imposition of the charges or the services provided and does not retain the charges. Examples of charges which are included in the finance charge include any of the following types of charges which are applicable : ( XXXX ) Interest, time price differential, and any amount payable under a point, discount, or other system or additional charges. \n* XXXX, monthly payments ( XXXX ) Service or carrying charge. \n\n\n( XXXX ) Loan fee, finders fee, or similar charge. \n\n\n( XXXX ) Fee for an investigation or credit report. \n\n\n( 5 ) Premium or other charge for any guarantee or insurance protecting the creditor against the obligors default or other credit loss. \n\n\n\n\n( XXXX ) Borrower-paid mortgage broker fees, including fees paid directly to the broker or the lender ( for delivery to the broker ) whether such fees are paid in cash or financed. ( extra fees onto of car loan- apart of finance charged ) ( finaced to me on my behalf on the finance charged means it was paid off full. ) - 15 U.S.C. 1605 ( c ) : ( c ) Property damage and liability insurance premiums included in finance charge Charges or premiums for insurance, written in connection with any consumer credit transaction, against loss of or damage to property or against liability arising out of the ownership or use of property, shall be included in the finance charge unless a clear and specific statement in writing is furnished by the creditor to the person to whom the credit is extended, setting forth the cost of the insurance if obtained from or through the creditor, and stating that the person to whom the credit is extended may choose the person through which the insurance is to be obtained. \n\n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1605 ( d ) : ( d ) Items exempted from computation of finance charge in all credit transactions If any of the following items is itemized and disclosed in accordance with the regulations of the Bureau in connection with any transaction, then the creditor need not include that item in the computation of the finance charge with respect to that transaction : ( XXXX ) Fees and charges prescribed by law which actually are or will be paid to public officials for determining the existence of or for perfecting or releasing or satisfying any security related to the credit transaction. \n\n\n( XXXX ) The premium payable for any insurance in lieu of perfecting any security interest otherwise required by the creditor in connection with the transaction, if the premium does not exceed the fees and charges described in paragraph ( XXXX ) which would otherwise be payable. \n\n\n( XXXX ) Any tax levied on security instruments or on documents evidencing indebtedness if the payment of such taxes is a precondition for recording the instrument securing the evidence of indebtedness. \n\n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1605 ( e ) : ( e ) Items exempted from computation of finance charge in extensions of credit secured by an interest in real property The following items, when charged in connection with any extension of credit secured by an interest in real property, shall not be included in the computation of the finance charge with respect to that transaction : ( 1 ) Fees or premiums for title examination, title insurance, or similar purposes.\n\n( 2 ) Fees for preparation of loan-related documents.\n\n( 3 ) Escrows for future payments of taxes and insurance.\n\n( 4 ) Fees for notarizing deeds and other documents.\n\n( 5 ) Appraisal fees, including fees related to any pest infestation or flood hazard inspections conducted prior to closing.\n\n( 6 ) Credit reports. \n\n\n\n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1606 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ( B ) ( 2 ), ( b ), ( e ) : Violations in the calculation and disclosure of the APR and other credit terms.\n\n15 U.S. Code 1606 - Determination of annual percentage rate ( a ) Annual percentage rate defined The annual percentage rate applicable to any extension of consumer credit shall be determined, in accordance with the regulations of the Bureau, ( 1 ) in the case of any extension of credit other than under an open end credit plan, as ( A ) that nominal annual percentage rate which will yield a sum equal to the amount of the finance charge when it is applied to the unpaid balances of the amount financed, calculated according to the actuarial method of allocating payments made on a debt between the amount financed and the amount of the finance charge, pursuant to which a payment is applied first to the accumulated finance charge and the balance is applied to the unpaid amount financed; or ( B ) the rate determined by any method prescribed by the Bureau as a method which materially simplifies computation while retaining reasonable accuracy as compared with the rate determined under subparagraph ( A ). [ 1 ] ( 2 ) in the case of any extension of credit under an open end credit plan, as the quotient ( expressed as a percentage ) of the total finance charge for the period to which it relates divided by the amount upon which the finance charge for that period is based, multiplied by the number of such periods in a year. \n\n\n( b ) Computation of rate of finance charges for balances within a specified range Where a creditor imposes the same finance charge for balances within a specified range, the annual percentage rate shall be computed on the median balance within the range, except that if the Bureau determines that a rate so computed would not be meaningful, or would be materially misleading, the annual percentage rate shall be computed on such other basis as the Bureau may be regulation require ( e ) Authorization of tolerances in determining annual percentage rates In the case of creditors determining the annual percentage rate in a manner other than as described in subsection ( d ), the Bureau may authorize other reasonable tolerances. \n\n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1611 ( 1 ) - ( 3 ) : Drive time is held under the Criminal liability for willful and knowing violations of TILA provisions. \n\n15 U.S. Code 1611- Criminal liability for willful and knowing violation Whoever willfully and knowingly ( 1 ) gives false or inaccurate information or fails to provide information which he is required to disclose under the provisions of this subchapter or any regulation issued thereunder, ( 2 ) uses any chart or table authorized by the Bureau under section 1606 of this title in such a manner as to consistently understate the annual percentage rate determined under section 1606 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) of this title, or ( 3 ) otherwise fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this subchapter, shall be fined not more than {$5000.00} or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. \n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1640 ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 4 ), ( d ) - ( f ) : Civil liability for TILA violations, including statutory damages and legal remedies available to me as a consumer. My credit, person of self, natural character was damaged due to the fact of not being informed clearly and conspicuously on my rights and the finance charge break down. I have lost my daughter and jobs with my truck being repossessed illegally which is a breach of peace a federal law. I have been struggling to get to work do to this outcome of illegal activities. \n\n15 U.S. Code 1640 - Civil liability ( a ) Individual or class action for damages ; amount of award ; factors determining amount of award Except as otherwise provided in this section, any creditor who fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this part, including any requirement under section XXXX of this title, subsection ( f ) or ( g ) of section XXXX of this title, or part D or XXXX of this subchapter with respect to any person is liable to such person in an amount equal to the sum of ( XXXX ) any actual damage sustained by such person as a result of the failure ; ( XXXX ) ( A ) ( i ) in the case of an individual action twice the amount of any finance charge in connection with the transaction, ( ii ) in the case of an individual action relating to a consumer lease under part E of this subchapter, 25 per centum of the total amount of monthly payments under the lease, except that the liability under this subparagraph shall not be less than {$200.00} nor greater than {$2000.00}, ( iii ) in the case of an individual action relating to an open end consumer credit plan that is not secured by real property or a dwelling, twice the amount of any finance charge in connection with the transaction, with a minimum of {$500.00} and a maximum of {$5000.00}, or such higher amount as may be appropriate in the case of an established pattern or practice of such failures ; [ 1 ] or ( iv ) in the case of an individual action relating to a credit transaction not under an open end credit plan that is secured by real property or a dwelling, not less than {$400.00} or greater than {$4000.00} ; or ( B ) in the case of a class action, such amount as the court may allow, except that as to each member of the class no minimum recovery shall be applicable, and the total recovery under this subparagraph in any class action or series of class actions arising out of the same failure to comply by the same creditor shall not be more than the lesser of {>= $1,000,000} or 1 per centum of the net worth of the creditor ; ( 3 ) in the case of any successful action to enforce the foregoing liability or in any action in which a person is determined to have a right of rescission under section 1635 or 1638 ( e ) ( 7 ) of this title, the costs of the action, together with a reasonable attorneys fee as determined by the court ; and ( 4 ) in the case of a failure to comply with any requirement under section 1639 of this title, paragraph ( 1 ) or ( 2 ) of section 1639b ( c ) of this title, or section 1639c ( a ) of this title, an amount equal to the sum of all finance charges and fees paid by the consumer, unless the creditor demonstrates that the failure to comply is not material.In determining the amount of award in any class action, the court shall consider, among other relevant factors, the amount of any actual damages awarded, the frequency and persistence of failures of compliance by the creditor, the resources of the creditor, the number of persons adversely affected, and the extent to which the creditors failure of compliance was intentional. In connection with the disclosures referred to in subsections ( a ) and ( b ) of section 1637 of this title, a creditor shall have a liability determined under paragraph ( 2 ) only for failing to comply with the requirements of section 1635 of this title, 1637 ( a ) [ 2 ] of this title, or any of paragraphs ( 4 ) through ( 13 ) of section 1637 ( b ) of this title, or for failing to comply with disclosure requirements under State law for any term or item that the Bureau has determined to be substantially the same in meaning under section 1610 ( a ) ( 2 ) of this title as any of the terms or items referred to in section 1637 ( a ) of this title, or any of paragraphs ( 4 ) through ( 13 ) of section 1637 ( b ) of this title. In connection with the disclosures referred to in subsection ( c ) or ( d ) of section 1637 of this title, a card issuer shall have a liability under this section only to a cardholder who pays a fee described in section 1637 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ( ii ) ( I ) or section 1637 ( c ) ( 4 ) ( A ) ( i ) of this title or who uses the credit card or charge card. In connection with the disclosures referred to in section 1638 of this title, a creditor shall have a liability determined under paragraph ( 2 ) only for failing to comply with the requirements of section 1635 of this title, of paragraph ( 2 ) ( insofar as it requires a disclosure of the amount financed ), ( 3 ), ( 4 ), ( 5 ), ( 6 ), or ( 9 ) of section 1638 ( a ) of this title, or section 1638 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( C ) ( ii ) of this title, of subparagraphs ( A ), ( B ), ( D ), ( F ), or ( J ) of section 1638 ( e ) ( 2 ) of this title ( for purposes of paragraph ( 2 ) or ( 4 ) of section 1638 ( e ) of this title ), or paragraph ( 4 ) ( C ), ( 6 ), ( 7 ), or ( 8 ) of section 1638 ( e ) of this title, or for failing to comply with disclosure requirements under State law for any term which the Bureau has determined to be substantially the same in meaning under section 1610 ( a ) ( 2 ) of this title as any of the terms referred to in any of those paragraphs of section 1638 ( a ) of this title or section 1638 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( C ) ( ii ) of this title. With respect to any failure to make disclosures required under this part or part D or E of this subchapter, liability shall be imposed only upon the creditor required to make disclosure, except as provided in section 1641 of this title. \n\n\n( d ) Liability in transaction or lease involving multiple obligors When there are multiple obligors in a consumer credit transaction or consumer lease, there shall be no more than one recovery of damages under subsection ( a ) ( 2 ) for a violation of this subchapter. \n( e ) Jurisdiction of courts ; limitations on actions ; State attorney general enforcement Except as provided in the subsequent sentence, any action under this section may be brought in any United States district court, or in any other court of competent jurisdiction, within one year from the date of the occurrence of the violation or, in the case of a violation involving a private education loan ( as that term is defined in section 1650 ( a ) of this title ), 1 year from the date on which the first regular payment of principal is due under the loan. Any action under this section with respect to any violation of section 1639, 1639b, or 1639c of this title may be brought in any United States district court, or in any other court of competent jurisdiction, before the end of the 3-year period beginning on the date of the occurrence of the violation. This subsection does not bar a person from asserting a violation of this subchapter in an action to collect the debt which was brought more than XXXX year from the date of the occurrence of the violation as a matter of defense by recoupment or set-off in such action, except as otherwise provided by State law. An action to enforce a violation of section 1639, 1639b, 1639c, 1639d, 1639e, 1639f, 1639g, or 1639h of this title may also be brought by the appropriate State attorney general in any appropriate United States district court, or any other court of competent jurisdiction, not later than 3 years after the date on which the violation occurs. The State attorney general shall provide prior written notice of any such civil action to the Federal agency responsible for enforcement under section 1607 of this title and shall provide the agency with a copy of the complaint. If prior notice is not feasible, the State attorney general shall provide notice to such agency immediately upon instituting the action. The Federal agency may ( 1 ) intervene in the action ; ( 2 ) upon intervening ( A ) remove the action to the appropriate United States district court, if it was not originally brought there; and ( B ) be heard on all matters arising in the action; and ( XXXX ) file a petition for appeal. \n\n\n( f ) Good faith compliance with rule, regulation, or interpretation of Bureau or with interpretation or approval of duly authorized official or employee of Federal Reserve System No provision of this section, section 1607 ( b ) of this title, section 1607 ( c ) of this title, section 1607 ( e ) of this title, or section 1611 of this title imposing any liability shall apply to any act done or omitted in good faith in conformity with any rule, regulation, or interpretation thereof by the Bureau or in conformity with any interpretation or approval by an official or employee of the Federal Reserve System duly authorized by the Bureau to issue such interpretations or approvals under such procedures as the Bureau may prescribe therefor, notwithstanding that after such act or omission has occurred, such rule, regulation, interpretation, or approval is amended, rescinded, or determined by judicial or other authority to be invalid for any reason. \n\n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1635 ( a ) - ( g ), ( i ) ( 1 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) : Right to rescind based on inadequate or misleading disclosures under TILA, specifically as it pertains to the right of rescission. XXXX XXXX did not clearly or conspicuously detail anything under the ( TILA ) LAW. \n\n\n( a ) Disclosure of obligors right to rescind Except as otherwise provided in this section, in the case of any consumer credit transaction ( including opening or increasing the credit limit for an open end credit plan ) in which a security interest, including any such interest arising by operation of law, is or will be retained or acquired in any property which is used as the principal dwelling of the person to whom credit is extended, the obligor shall have the right to rescind the transaction until midnight of the third business day following the consummation of the transaction or the delivery of the information and rescission forms required under this section together with a statement containing the material disclosures required under this subchapter, whichever is later, by notifying the creditor, in accordance with regulations of the Bureau, of his intention to do so. The creditor shall clearly and conspicuously disclose, in accordance with regulations of the Bureau, to any obligor in a transaction subject to this section the rights of the obligor under this section. The creditor shall also provide, in accordance with regulations of the Bureau, appropriate forms for the obligor to exercise his right to rescind any transaction subject to this section. \n( b ) Return of money or property following rescission When an obligor exercises his right to rescind under subsection ( a ), he is not liable for any finance or other charge, and any security interest given by the obligor, including any such interest arising by operation of law, becomes void upon such a rescission. Within 20 days after receipt of a notice of rescission, the creditor shall return to the obligor any money or property given as earnest money, downpayment, or otherwise, and shall take any action necessary or appropriate to reflect the termination of any security interest created under the transaction. If the creditor has delivered any property to the obligor, the obligor may retain possession of it. Upon the performance of the creditors obligations under this section, the obligor shall tender the property to the creditor, except that if return of the property in kind would be impracticable or inequitable, the obligor shall tender its reasonable value. Tender shall be made at the location of the property or at the residence of the obligor, at the option of the obligor. If the creditor does not take possession of the property within 20 days after tender by the obligor, ownership of the property vests in the obligor without obligation on his part to pay for it. The procedures prescribed by this subsection shall apply except when otherwise ordered by a court. \n( c ) Rebuttable presumption of delivery of required disclosures Notwithstanding any rule of evidence, written acknowledgment of receipt of any disclosures required under this subchapter by a person to whom information, forms, and a statement is required to be given pursuant to this section does no more than create a rebuttable presumption of delivery thereof. \n( d ) Modification and waiver of rights The Bureau may, if it finds that such action is necessary in order to permit homeowners to meet bona fide personal financial emergencies, prescribe regulations authorizing the","date_sent_to_company":"2024-10-16T19:34:11.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"27405","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10475948","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2024-10-16T19:33:50.000Z","state":"NC","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":["I have been struggling to get to work <em>do</em> to this <em>outcome</em> of illegal activities. \n\n15 U.S."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to <em>provide</em> a public response"]},"sort":[3.6428866,"10475948"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10475822","_score":3.6316507,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally rescind my [ contract/agreement ] for the purchase of the [ XXXX, XXXX, vin number XXXX ], purchased on [ XX/XX/XXXX ] at your [ XXXX XXXX ]. Under the provisions of relevant consumer protection laws and regulations, including but not limited to the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) regulations, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) guidelines, I am exercising my right to rescind this contract and request a full refund of any amounts paid, in accordance with my rights under the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 ) and related consumer protection statutes. \n\nAfter careful review of the loan documents and disclosures provided by your dealership, I have discovered multiple violations of my rights as a consumer. These violations fall under the following federal consumer laws : 1. **Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) Violations** : Truth and lending disclosure : Annual percentage rate, finance charge ( ( Sum of all charges ) ), amount financed, any down payment with total payments, total interest from apr. ( amount of credit provided on my behalf ( ( open end credit plan ) ). did not accurately and truthfully follow the ( TILA ) laws.\n\nPrimary tabs ( *definition ) The Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) is a consumer protection law enacted in 1968 in response to exceedlingy predatory loan practices. P\nrior to the TILA, lenders would use a variety of terminology and forms of lending that manipulated uninformed borrowers. The TILA changed this by requiring a uniform system of disclosures and terminology to be used for lending like credit cards or mortgages. Creditors were required to disclose details like the annual percentage rate and repayments details in a clear way to borrowers or else the borrower may be able to rescind the debt. TILA also limits the amount of late fees creditors can charge. Overall, the TILA since its signing has been updated to respond to changing lending practices to ensure borrowers clearly understand the terms and conditions they agree to. \n\n\n\n\n-15 U.S. Code 1601- Congressional findings and declaration of purpose ( a ) Informed use of credit The Congress finds that economic stabilization would be enhanced and the competition among the various financial institutions and other firms engaged in the extension of consumer credit would be strengthened by the informed use of credit. The informed use of credit results from an awareness of the cost thereof by consumers. It is the purpose of this subchapter to assure a meaningful disclosure of credit terms so that the consumer will be able to compare more readily the various credit terms available to him and avoid the uninformed use of credit, and to protect the consumer against inaccurate and unfair credit billing and credit card practices. \n( b ) Terms of personal property leases The Congress also finds that there has been a recent trend toward leasing automobiles and other durable goods for consumer use as an alternative to installment credit sales and that these leases have been offered without adequate cost disclosures. It is the purpose of this subchapter to assure a meaningful disclosure of the terms of leases of personal property for personal, family, or household purposes so as to enable the lessee to compare more readily the various lease terms available to him, limit balloon payments in consumer leasing, enable comparison of lease terms with credit terms where appropriate, and to assure meaningful and accurate disclosures of lease terms in advertisements. \n- 15 U.S.C. 1602 ( g ), ( j ), ( i ), ( k ), ( p ) : Failed to provide clear and accurate definitions regarding credit terms and conditions at the time of the transaction or beforehand. \n\n15 U.S code 1602 ( g ) : ( g ) The term creditor refers only to a person who both ( 1 ) regularly extends, whether in connection with loans, sales of property or services, or otherwise, consumer credit which is payable by agreement in more than four installments or for which the payment of a finance charge is or may be required, and ( 2 ) is the person to whom the debt arising from the consumer credit transaction is initially payable on the face of the evidence of indebtedness or, if there is no such evidence of indebtedness, by agreement. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, in the case of an open-end credit plan involving a credit card, the card issuer and any person who honors the credit card and offers a discount which is a finance charge are creditors. For the purpose of the requirements imposed under part D of this subchapter and sections 1637 ( a ) ( 5 ), 1637 ( a ) ( 6 ), 1637 ( a ) ( 7 ), 1637 ( b ) ( 1 ), 1637 ( b ) ( 2 ), 1637 ( b ) ( 3 ), 1637 ( b ) ( 8 ), and 1637 ( b ) ( 10 ) of this title, the term creditor shall also include card issuers whether or not the amount due is payable by agreement in more than four installments or the payment of a finance charge is or may be required, and the Bureau shall, by regulation, apply these requirements to such card issuers, to the extent appropriate, even though the requirements are by their terms applicable only to creditors offering open-end credit plans. Any person who originates 2 or more mortgages referred to in subsection ( aa ) in any 12-month period or any person who originates 1 or more such mortgages through a mortgage broker shall be considered to be a creditor for purposes of this subchapter. The term creditor includes a private educational lender ( as that term is defined in section 1650 of this title ) for purposes of this subchapter. \n\nIn this Violation I am not liable for any payments or finance charges outside of the initial Consumer credit transaction ( CCT ), as to having open end credit! There is no such evidence of indebtedness to ( me ) The contract will be voided and longer service anything. Rescind the agreement/ contract now. \n\n\n15 U.S code 1602 ( i ) : ( i ) The adjective consumer, used with reference to a credit transaction, characterizes the transaction as one in which the party to whom credit is offered or extended is a natural person, and the money, property, or services which are the subject of the transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. \n\nI need the car to get my siblings to school and be able to go to work and back home. I can not do that in the face of illegal representation and not fully disclosing the information ( TILA ), who has instructed ( XXXX XXXX ) to do so in congress writing. I need the car so I am able to sustain a life of living. \n\n\n15 U.S code 1602 ( j ) : ( j ) The terms open end credit plan and open end consumer credit plan mean a plan under which the creditor reasonably contemplates repeated transactions, which prescribes the terms of such transactions, and which provides for a finance charge which may be computed from time to time on the outstanding unpaid balance. A credit plan or open end consumer credit plan which is an open end credit plan or open end consumer credit plan within the meaning of the preceding sentence is an open end credit plan or open end consumer credit plan even if credit information is verified from time to time. \n\nI have a right to unlimited credit in the case of being denied credit is a false and inaccurate statement under the consumer law writings. As I am not liable for any of the monthly payments, down payments and extra charges that were not clearly and conspicuously disclosed. \n\n\n15 U.S code XXXX ( k ) : ( k ) The term adequate notice, as used in section 1643 of this title, means a printed notice to a cardholder which sets forth the pertinent facts clearly and conspicuously so that a person against whom it is to operate could reasonably be expected to have noticed it and understood its meaning. Such notice may be given to a cardholder by printing the notice on any credit card, or on each periodic statement of account, issued to the cardholder, or by any other means reasonably assuring the receipt thereof by the cardholder. \n\n\nThere was never a point in time that drive time informed me on my right to rescind, which is a violation for not disclosing to me my right Clearly and conspicuously to rescind. \n\n\n15 U.S code 1602 ( p ) : ( p ) The term unauthorized use, as used in section 1643 of this title, means a use of a credit card by a person other than the cardholder who does not have actual, implied, or apparent authority for such use and from which the cardholder receives no benefit. \n\nI was violated by ( XXXX XXXX ) in the misuse of my credit report and information which is a violation. I received no benefits from the extra unlawful charges. This misleading information has led me into losing my job and not being able to get my mothers care needed. \n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1604 ( a ), ( b ) : Violations related to required regulations and guidelines for credit disclosures. They misused my credit which affected me in many statue damages, which damaged my way of living, character and right to obtain more credit. \n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1604 ( a ) : ( a ) Promulgation, contents, etc., of regulations The Bureau shall prescribe regulations to carry out the purposes of this subchapter. Except with respect to the provisions of section 1639 of this title that apply to a mortgage referred to in section 1602 ( aa ) [ 1 ] of this title, such regulations may contain such additional requirements, classifications, differentiations, or other provisions, and may provide for such adjustments and exceptions for all or any class of transactions, as in the judgment of the Bureau are necessary or proper to effectuate the purposes of this subchapter, to prevent circumvention or evasion thereof, or to facilitate compliance therewith. \n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1604 ( b ) : ( b ) Model disclosure forms and clauses ; publication, criteria, compliance, etc. \nThe Bureau shall publish a single, integrated disclosure for mortgage loan transactions ( including real estate settlement cost statements ) which includes the disclosure requirements of this subchapter in conjunction with the disclosure requirements of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 [ 12 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. ] that, taken together, may apply to a transaction that is subject to both or either provisions of law. The purpose of such model disclosure shall be to facilitate compliance with the disclosure requirements of this subchapter and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974, and to aid the borrower or lessee in understanding the transaction by utilizing readily understandable language to simplify the technical nature of the disclosures. In devising such forms, the Bureau shall consider the use by creditors or lessors of data processing or similar automated equipment. Nothing in this subchapter may be construed to require a creditor or lessor to use any such model form or clause prescribed by the Bureau under this section. A creditor or lessor shall be deemed to be in compliance with the disclosure provisions of this subchapter with respect to other than numerical disclosures if the creditor or lessor ( 1 ) uses any appropriate model form or clause as published by the Bureau, or ( 2 ) uses any such model form or clause and changes it by ( A ) deleting any information which is not required by this subchapter, or ( B ) rearranging the format, if in making such deletion or rearranging the format, the creditor or lessor does not affect the substance, clarity, or meaningful sequence of the disclosure. \nIn accordance with the consumer law i am revoking all of my signatures from ( XXXX XXXX ) and all contracts that ( XXXX XXXX ) illegally obtained and distributed to other furnishers. \n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1605 ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 6 ), ( c ), ( d ) ( 1 ) - ( 3 ), ( e ) ( 1 ) - ( 6 ) : Improper disclosure of the finance charge, amount financed, and the annual percentage rate ( APR ). In the documents attached to this letter ( Retail installment contract ) It shows extra charges outside of the finance charge which ( CLEARLY STATES ) in title above this statement. I will need full compensation back for all misleading advertisements presented illegally as for non accurate disclosures of documents to be terminated immediately. \n\n\n( a ) Finance charge defined Except as otherwise provided in this section, the amount of the finance charge in connection with any consumer credit transaction shall be determined as the sum of all charges, payable directly or indirectly by the person to whom the credit is extended, and imposed directly or indirectly by the creditor as an incident to the extension of credit. The finance charge does not include charges of a type payable in a comparable cash transaction. The finance charge shall not include fees and amounts imposed by third party closing agents ( including settlement agents ( car dealership ), attorneys, and escrow and title companies ) if the creditor does not require the imposition of the charges or the services provided and does not retain the charges. Examples of charges which are included in the finance charge include any of the following types of charges which are applicable : ( 1 ) Interest, time price differential, and any amount payable under a point, discount, or other system or additional charges.\n\n* Apr, monthly payments ( 2 ) Service or carrying charge. \n\n\n( 3 ) Loan fee, finders fee, or similar charge.\n\n( 4 ) Fee for an investigation or credit report.\n\n( 5 ) Premium or other charge for any guarantee or insurance protecting the creditor against the obligors default or other credit loss. \n\n\n\n\n( 6 ) Borrower-paid mortgage broker fees, including fees paid directly to the broker or the lender ( for delivery to the broker ) whether such fees are paid in cash or financed. ( extra fees onto of car loan- apart of finance charged ) ( finaced to me on my behalf on the finance charged means it was paid off full. ) - 15 U.S.C. 1605 ( c ) : ( c ) Property damage and liability insurance premiums included in finance charge Charges or premiums for insurance, written in connection with any consumer credit transaction, against loss of or damage to property or against liability arising out of the ownership or use of property, shall be included in the finance charge unless a clear and specific statement in writing is furnished by the creditor to the person to whom the credit is extended, setting forth the cost of the insurance if obtained from or through the creditor, and stating that the person to whom the credit is extended may choose the person through which the insurance is to be obtained. \n\n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1605 ( d ) : ( d ) Items exempted from computation of finance charge in all credit transactions If any of the following items is itemized and disclosed in accordance with the regulations of the Bureau in connection with any transaction, then the creditor need not include that item in the computation of the finance charge with respect to that transaction : ( 1 ) Fees and charges prescribed by law which actually are or will be paid to public officials for determining the existence of or for perfecting or releasing or satisfying any security related to the credit transaction. \n\n\n( 2 ) The premium payable for any insurance in lieu of perfecting any security interest otherwise required by the creditor in connection with the transaction, if the premium does not exceed the fees and charges described in paragraph ( 1 ) which would otherwise be payable.\n\n( 3 ) Any tax levied on security instruments or on documents evidencing indebtedness if the payment of such taxes is a precondition for recording the instrument securing the evidence of indebtedness. \n\n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1605 ( e ) : ( e ) Items exempted from computation of finance charge in extensions of credit secured by an interest in real property The following items, when charged in connection with any extension of credit secured by an interest in real property, shall not be included in the computation of the finance charge with respect to that transaction : ( 1 ) Fees or premiums for title examination, title insurance, or similar purposes. \n( 2 ) Fees for preparation of loan-related documents.\n\n( 3 ) Escrows for future payments of taxes and insurance.\n\n( 4 ) Fees for notarizing deeds and other documents.\n\n( 5 ) Appraisal fees, including fees related to any pest infestation or flood hazard inspections conducted prior to closing.\n\n( 6 ) Credit reports.\n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1606 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ( B ) ( 2 ), ( b ), ( e ) : Violations in the calculation and disclosure of the APR and other credit terms. \n\n15 U.S. Code 1606 - Determination of annual percentage rate ( a ) Annual percentage rate defined The annual percentage rate applicable to any extension of consumer credit shall be determined, in accordance with the regulations of the Bureau, ( 1 ) in the case of any extension of credit other than under an open end credit plan, as ( A ) that nominal annual percentage rate which will yield a sum equal to the amount of the finance charge when it is applied to the unpaid balances of the amount financed, calculated according to the actuarial method of allocating payments made on a debt between the amount financed and the amount of the finance charge, pursuant to which a payment is applied first to the accumulated finance charge and the balance is applied to the unpaid amount financed; or ( B ) the rate determined by any method prescribed by the Bureau as a method which materially simplifies computation while retaining reasonable accuracy as compared with the rate determined under subparagraph ( A ). [ 1 ] ( 2 ) in the case of any extension of credit under an open end credit plan, as the quotient ( expressed as a percentage ) of the total finance charge for the period to which it relates divided by the amount upon which the finance charge for that period is based, multiplied by the number of such periods in a year. \n\n\n( b ) Computation of rate of finance charges for balances within a specified range Where a creditor imposes the same finance charge for balances within a specified range, the annual percentage rate shall be computed on the median balance within the range, except that if the Bureau determines that a rate so computed would not be meaningful, or would be materially misleading, the annual percentage rate shall be computed on such other basis as the Bureau may be regulation require ( e ) Authorization of tolerances in determining annual percentage rates In the case of creditors determining the annual percentage rate in a manner other than as described in subsection ( d ), the Bureau may authorize other reasonable tolerances.\n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1611 ( 1 ) - ( 3 ) : is held under the Criminal liability for willful and knowing violations of TILA provisions. \n\n15 U.S. Code 1611- Criminal liability for willful and knowing violation Whoever willfully and knowingly ( 1 ) gives false or inaccurate information or fails to provide information which he is required to disclose under the provisions of this subchapter or any regulation issued thereunder, ( 2 ) uses any chart or table authorized by the Bureau under section 1606 of this title in such a manner as to consistently understate the annual percentage rate determined under section 1606 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) of this title, or ( 3 ) otherwise fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this subchapter, shall be fined not more than {$5000.00} or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. \n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1640 ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 4 ), ( d ) - ( f ) : Civil liability for TILA violations, including statutory damages and legal remedies available to me as a consumer. My credit, person of self, natural character was damaged due to the fact of not being informed clearly and conspicuously on my rights and the finance charge break down. I have lost my daughter and jobs with my truck being repossessed illegally which is a breach of peace a federal law. I have been struggling to get to work do to this outcome of illegal activities. \n\n15 U.S. Code 1640 - Civil liability ( a ) Individual or class action for damages ; amount of award ; factors determining amount of award Except as otherwise provided in this section, any creditor who fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this part, including any requirement under section 1635 of this title, subsection ( f ) or ( g ) of section 1641 of this title, or part D or E of this subchapter with respect to any person is liable to such person in an amount equal to the sum of ( 1 ) any actual damage sustained by such person as a result of the failure ; ( 2 ) ( A ) ( i ) in the case of an individual action twice the amount of any finance charge in connection with the transaction, ( ii ) in the case of an individual action relating to a consumer lease under part E of this subchapter, 25 per centum of the total amount of monthly payments under the lease, except that the liability under this subparagraph shall not be less than {$200.00} nor greater than {$2000.00}, ( iii ) in the case of an individual action relating to an open end consumer credit plan that is not secured by real property or a dwelling, twice the amount of any finance charge in connection with the transaction, with a minimum of {$500.00} and a maximum of {$5000.00}, or such higher amount as may be appropriate in the case of an established pattern or practice of such failures ; [ 1 ] or ( iv ) in the case of an individual action relating to a credit transaction not under an open end credit plan that is secured by real property or a dwelling, not less than {$400.00} or greater than {$4000.00} ; or ( B ) in the case of a class action, such amount as the court may allow, except that as to each member of the class no minimum recovery shall be applicable, and the total recovery under this subparagraph in any class action or series of class actions arising out of the same failure to comply by the same creditor shall not be more than the lesser of {>= $1,000,000} or 1 per centum of the net worth of the creditor ; ( 3 ) in the case of any successful action to enforce the foregoing liability or in any action in which a person is determined to have a right of rescission under section 1635 or 1638 ( e ) ( 7 ) of this title, the costs of the action, together with a reasonable attorneys fee as determined by the court ; and ( 4 ) in the case of a failure to comply with any requirement under section 1639 of this title, paragraph ( 1 ) or ( 2 ) of section 1639b ( c ) of this title, or section 1639c ( a ) of this title, an amount equal to the sum of all finance charges and fees paid by the consumer, unless the creditor demonstrates that the failure to comply is not material.In determining the amount of award in any class action, the court shall consider, among other relevant factors, the amount of any actual damages awarded, the frequency and persistence of failures of compliance by the creditor, the resources of the creditor, the number of persons adversely affected, and the extent to which the creditors failure of compliance was intentional. In connection with the disclosures referred to in subsections ( a ) and ( b ) of section 1637 of this title, a creditor shall have a liability determined under paragraph ( 2 ) only for failing to comply with the requirements of section 1635 of this title, 1637 ( a ) [ 2 ] of this title, or any of paragraphs ( 4 ) through ( 13 ) of section 1637 ( b ) of this title, or for failing to comply with disclosure requirements under State law for any term or item that the Bureau has determined to be substantially the same in meaning under section 1610 ( a ) ( 2 ) of this title as any of the terms or items referred to in section 1637 ( a ) of this title, or any of paragraphs ( 4 ) through ( 13 ) of section 1637 ( b ) of this title. In connection with the disclosures referred to in subsection ( c ) or ( d ) of section 1637 of this title, a card issuer shall have a liability under this section only to a cardholder who pays a fee described in section 1637 ( c ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ( ii ) ( I ) or section 1637 ( c ) ( 4 ) ( A ) ( i ) of this title or who uses the credit card or charge card. In connection with the disclosures referred to in section 1638 of this title, a creditor shall have a liability determined under paragraph ( 2 ) only for failing to comply with the requirements of section 1635 of this title, of paragraph ( 2 ) ( insofar as it requires a disclosure of the amount financed ), ( 3 ), ( 4 ), ( 5 ), ( 6 ), or ( 9 ) of section 1638 ( a ) of this title, or section 1638 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( C ) ( ii ) of this title, of subparagraphs ( A ), ( B ), ( D ), ( F ), or ( J ) of section 1638 ( e ) ( 2 ) of this title ( for purposes of paragraph ( 2 ) or ( 4 ) of section 1638 ( e ) of this title ), or paragraph ( 4 ) ( C ), ( 6 ), ( 7 ), or ( 8 ) of section 1638 ( e ) of this title, or for failing to comply with disclosure requirements under State law for any term which the Bureau has determined to be substantially the same in meaning under section 1610 ( a ) ( 2 ) of this title as any of the terms referred to in any of those paragraphs of section 1638 ( a ) of this title or section 1638 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( C ) ( ii ) of this title. With respect to any failure to make disclosures required under this part or part D or E of this subchapter, liability shall be imposed only upon the creditor required to make disclosure, except as provided in section 1641 of this title. \n\n\n( d ) Liability in transaction or lease involving multiple obligors When there are multiple obligors in a consumer credit transaction or consumer lease, there shall be no more than one recovery of damages under subsection ( a ) ( 2 ) for a violation of this subchapter. \n( e ) Jurisdiction of courts ; limitations on actions ; State attorney general enforcement Except as provided in the subsequent sentence, any action under this section may be brought in any United States district court, or in any other court of competent jurisdiction, within one year from the date of the occurrence of the violation or, in the case of a violation involving a private education loan ( as that term is defined in section 1650 ( a ) of this title ), 1 year from the date on which the first regular payment of principal is due under the loan. Any action under this section with respect to any violation of section 1639, 1639b, or 1639c of this title may be brought in any United States district court, or in any other court of competent jurisdiction, before the end of the 3-year period beginning on the date of the occurrence of the violation. This subsection does not bar a person from asserting a violation of this subchapter in an action to collect the debt which was brought more than one year from the date of the occurrence of the violation as a matter of defense by recoupment or set-off in such action, except as otherwise provided by State law. An action to enforce a violation of section 1639, 1639b, 1639c, 1639d, 1639e, 1639f, 1639g, or 1639h of this title may also be brought by the appropriate State attorney general in any appropriate United States district court, or any other court of competent jurisdiction, not later than 3 years after the date on which the violation occurs. The State attorney general shall provide prior written notice of any such civil action to the Federal agency responsible for enforcement under section 1607 of this title and shall provide the agency with a copy of the complaint. If prior notice is not feasible, the State attorney general shall provide notice to such agency immediately upon instituting the action. The Federal agency may ( 1 ) intervene in the action ; ( 2 ) upon intervening ( A ) remove the action to the appropriate United States district court, if it was not originally brought there; and ( B ) be heard on all matters arising in the action; and ( 3 ) file a petition for appeal. \n\n\n( f ) Good faith compliance with rule, regulation, or interpretation of Bureau or with interpretation or approval of duly authorized official or employee of Federal Reserve System No provision of this section, section 1607 ( b ) of this title, section 1607 ( c ) of this title, section 1607 ( e ) of this title, or section 1611 of this title imposing any liability shall apply to any act done or omitted in good faith in conformity with any rule, regulation, or interpretation thereof by the Bureau or in conformity with any interpretation or approval by an official or employee of the Federal Reserve System duly authorized by the Bureau to issue such interpretations or approvals under such procedures as the Bureau may prescribe therefor, notwithstanding that after such act or omission has occurred, such rule, regulation, interpretation, or approval is amended, rescinded, or determined by judicial or other authority to be invalid for any reason. \n\n\n- 15 U.S.C. 1635 ( a ) - ( g ), ( i ) ( 1 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) : Right to rescind based on inadequate or misleading disclosures under TILA, specifically as it pertains to the right of rescission. XXXX XXXX did not clearly or conspicuously detail anything under the ( TILA ) LAW. \n\n\n( a ) Disclosure of obligors right to rescind Except as otherwise provided in this section, in the case of any consumer credit transaction ( including opening or increasing the credit limit for an open end credit plan ) in which a security interest, including any such interest arising by operation of law, is or will be retained or acquired in any property which is used as the principal dwelling of the person to whom credit is extended, the obligor shall have the right to rescind the transaction until midnight of the third business day following the consummation of the transaction or the delivery of the information and rescission forms required under this section together with a statement containing the material disclosures required under this subchapter, whichever is later, by notifying the creditor, in accordance with regulations of the Bureau, of his intention to do so. The creditor shall clearly and conspicuously disclose, in accordance with regulations of the Bureau, to any obligor in a transaction subject to this section the rights of the obligor under this section. The creditor shall also provide, in accordance with regulations of the Bureau, appropriate forms for the obligor to exercise his right to rescind any transaction subject to this section. \n( b ) Return of money or property following rescission When an obligor exercises his right to rescind under subsection ( a ), he is not liable for any finance or other charge, and any security interest given by the obligor, including any such interest arising by operation of law, becomes void upon such a rescission. Within 20 days after receipt of a notice of rescission, the creditor shall return to the obligor any money or property given as earnest money, downpayment, or otherwise, and shall take any action necessary or appropriate to reflect the termination of any security interest created under the transaction. If the creditor has delivered any property to the obligor, the obligor may retain possession of it. Upon the performance of the creditors obligations under this section, the obligor shall tender the property to the creditor, except that if return of the property in kind would be impracticable or inequitable, the obligor shall tender its reasonable value. Tender shall be made at the location of the property or at the residence of the obligor, at the option of the obligor. If the creditor does not take possession of the property within 20 days after tender by the obligor, ownership of the property vests in the obligor without obligation on his part to pay for it. The procedures prescribed by this subsection shall apply except when otherwise ordered by a court. \n( c ) Rebuttable presumption of delivery of required disclosures Notwithstanding any rule of evidence, written acknowledgment of receipt of any disclosures required under this subchapter by a person to whom information, forms, and a statement is required to be given pursuant to this section does no more than create a rebuttable presumption of delivery thereof. \n( d ) Modification and waiver of rights The Bureau may, if it finds that such action is necessary in order to permit homeowners to meet bona fide personal financial emergencies, prescribe regulations authorizing the modification or waiver of any","date_sent_to_company":"2024-10-16T19:19:51.000Z","issue":"Problems at the end of the loan or lease","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"27405","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10475822","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2024-10-16T18:54:50.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Unable to receive car title or other problem after the loan is paid off"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I have been struggling to get to work <em>do</em> to this <em>outcome</em> of illegal activities. \n\n15 U.S."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to <em>provide</em> a public response"]},"sort":[3.6316507,"10475822"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":11,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":11}]}},"product":{"doc_count":11,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":1,"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":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":1,"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":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other personal consumer report","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":"Student loan debt relief","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":11,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with personal statement of dispute","doc_count":1},{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Seized or attempted to seize your property","doc_count":1},{"key":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":1}]}},{"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":"Fees or interest","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with fees","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing issue","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement","doc_count":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":"Unable to receive car title or other problem after the loan is paid off","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Unauthorized withdrawals or charges","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":11,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":11}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":11,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":9},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":1},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":11,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":11}]}},"company":{"doc_count":11,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FIRST MERCHANTS CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"GREENSKY OPERATIONS, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Nelnet, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"WSFS FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":11,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"MI","doc_count":3},{"key":"NC","doc_count":2},{"key":"AK","doc_count":1},{"key":"CA","doc_count":1},{"key":"DE","doc_count":1},{"key":"IL","doc_count":1},{"key":"TX","doc_count":1},{"key":"WI","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":11,"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":3}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":11,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":3}]}}},"_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":{}}}