{"took":289,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":7,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7591806","_score":26.558582,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Wednesday night ( XX/XX/XXXX ) at around XXXX XXXX I went to an ATM near my old residence to deposit some money, I was moving to my current address, I sold some furniture, I had some cash with me as well and to my security guard decided to deposit it so as not to travel on XXXX XXXX with this money in cash. I didn't count the amount because normally the ATM itself does this, I just followed the steps and inserted my money, then an error screen appeared asking me to enter an approximate amount that was being deposited, so I did some calculations and thought it was around of {$1600.00} and typed that, then a second screen saying to contact the bank as soon as possible if I disagreed with the amount that would be deposited ( I have a photo of both screens ), only {$300.00} was deposited ( I have the receipt saved, where on it contains a message saying that there was an error with the ATM ) so I did it, I called the number that appeared but only robots spoke to me, at that time of night there was no human representative to solve my problem, I felt nervous and anxious and I couldn't sleep right. I woke up the next day and first thing in the morning I called the bank, they told me that I would have to make a claim, so I did, and explained that I was moving and could not be without that amount of money at the moment, she said that They would evaluate the case and if possible, they would release a credit within 2 business days, 2 business days passed and the credit ( which is actually MY MONEY ) was not deposited, so I came to an agency close to my current address in XXXX, CA. and the attendant told me that there was nothing to do (?! ) and that I should wait. So I called the bank again, to talk about Claim number XXXX, and explain that I needed my money, I was treated with contempt by the attendant and I was furious, so I said I would go to the police and contact a lawyer. The lawyer informed me that before I went to court I could make a complaint on this website and here I am.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-09-22T19:46:00.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"CD (Certificate of Deposit)","zip_code":"95825","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7591806","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2023-09-22T19:07:23.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Deposits or withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I didn't count the <em>amount</em> because normally the ATM itself does this, I just followed the steps and inserted my money, then an <em>error</em> <em>screen</em> <em>appeared</em> <em>asking</em> me to <em>enter</em> an <em>approximate</em> <em>amount</em> that was <em>being</em> deposited, so I did some calculations and thought it was around of {$1600.00} and typed that, then a second <em>screen</em> saying to contact the bank as soon as possible if I disagreed with the <em>amount</em> that would be deposited ( I have a photo of both <em>screens</em> ), only {$300.00} was deposited ( I have the receipt"]},"sort":[26.558582,"7591806"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21242911","_score":17.997915,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Date of Incident : XX/XX/year> Location : Bank of America XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Incident Description On XX/XX/year>, at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX, I went to the drive-thru ATM located at the Bank of America branch mentioned above. The ATM located on the right side ( picture provided on attached documents ) is clearly located on bank premises and visibly labeled as a Bank of America machine ( specifically the right-side ATM unit ). \n\nI made a cash deposit in the amount of {$2200.00} into my account ending in # XXXX. \n\nAt the conclusion of the transaction, the ATM system did not provide a receipt nor the option to select a receipt delivery method. The screen went blank, and upon immediately checking my account, the deposit was not reflected and no transaction record appeared. \n\nImmediate Actions Taken I parked and entered the branch to report the issue. A representative in the business clients line informed me that they could not assist and that the bank was not responsible, directing me instead to call a phone number to file a claim. \n\nThe employee was a Hispanic/Latina female with dark hair, short height, wearing a long-sleeve white blouse ( name not provided ). \n\nI then called customer service ( XXXX ) XXXX while still at the location. I waited over XXXX minutes for assistance. \n\nI returned to the ATM multiple times ( a total of XXXX interactions : XXXX deposit and XXXX attempts to verify ), confirming that the funds were not credited to my account. \n\nClaim Filed I was provided with claim number : # XXXX I explained the situation in detail. I was informed that the investigation would take XXXX to XXXX business days. \n\nFinancial Impact & Bank Response I requested a provisional credit due to the urgency of my financial obligations, including : Rent ( initial payment for a new apartment ) Food ( including pet expenses ) Loan payments Gas and daily living expenses Other contractual obligations The bank refused to provide provisional credit. \n\nI specifically asked whether the bank would cover : Late fees Overdraft charges Credit impact due to missed payments I was informed that : They would not cover any damages to my credit. \n\nFollow-Up Visit ( XX/XX/year> ) On XX/XX/year>, I met in person with : XXXX XXXX Vice President, Financial Center Manager She stated that : The ATM is managed by a third-party company The bank is not responsible She also confirmed : No provisional credit could be issued She offered a credit card as a solution, which I declined, as it would negatively impact my credit due to an error caused by the bank. I should not be required to incur interest charges as a result of an error or misconduct caused by the bank. \n\nAdditional Concerns During the interaction, a comment was made minimizing the importance of the amount deposited, suggesting it was not a significant sum ( e.g., not {$20000.00} ). \n\nThis is unacceptable. Regardless of the amount, this is my money, and it is currently being withheld. \n\nThe funds are effectively being retained without authorization, while I suffer financial consequences. \n\nEscalation Attempt XXXX XXXX indicated she contacted XXXX XXXX, but no action or resolution was provided. \n\nFormal Complaint Bank of America has : Failed to assume responsibility for an ATM located on its premises Failed to provide immediate or reasonable resolution Refused provisional credit despite clear financial hardship Provided inconsistent and misleading information Failed to prioritize a time-sensitive financial issue Requested Resolution","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-14T22:03:59.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"32839","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21242911","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2026-04-14T21:05:48.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I made a cash deposit in the <em>amount</em> of {$2200.00} into my account ending in # XXXX. \n\nAt the conclusion of the transaction, the ATM system did not provide a receipt nor the option to select a receipt delivery method. The <em>screen</em> went blank, and upon immediately checking my account, the deposit was not reflected and no transaction record <em>appeared</em>. \n\nImmediate Actions Taken I parked and <em>entered</em> the branch to report the issue."]},"sort":[17.997915,"21242911"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2934475","_score":16.942,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Our mortgage loan is currently being serviced by Freedom Mortgage Company XXXX Freedom ). We are disputing a 30 days past due report that Freedom made to the credit bureaus for XX/XX/XXXX, which appears on our reports, as both incorrect and severely prejudicial to us. We request that this 30 days past due report be deleted immediately. \n\nIn approximately XX/XX/XXXX, our mortgage loan was sold and transferred to Freedom. We began making mortgage payments to Freedom via their online/web payment system in XX/XX/XXXX. For the first payment, in XX/XX/XXXX, we entered our ACH and routing numbers for our bank account and saved that information to our Freedom online account for all future online payments, and made the XXXX payment by clicking submit payment after verifying the account and payment details. In XX/XX/XXXX, and again in XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, we submitted our monthly mortgage payments through the normal payment process -- we logged into our account via the Freedom website, verified our payment and account details ( the ACH and routing numbers had been saved previously ) and clicked submit payment. Freedom debited the correct amount from our bank account for each of these months and we had no issues with a late payment. \n\nAt XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, as shown in the attached web browser history, we clicked submit payment after verifying the payment amount and account details as part of the normal online payment process. The next screen was a payment confirmation screen. We did not receive an error message, or any message or communication whatsoever, indicating that the payment did not go through or there was some error with the process. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, we logged in to our Freedom account to submit our XX/XX/XXXXpayment. Upon logging in, we saw that our XX/XX/XXXX payment was showing as past due with a late charge. We immediately paid all outstanding amounts via the online payment system, including the late charge for the purportedly late payment. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, we learned that Freedom had reported to the credit bureaus that our XX/XX/XXXX mortgage payment was submitted over thirty days past due. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, we submitted a written credit reporting dispute request to Freedom and asked that they correct the inaccurate reporting to the credit bureaus. On XX/XX/XXXX, we learned that Freedoms response was that they could not honor our request. During the telephone call on XX/XX/XXXX in which we discussed Freedoms findings from their consideration of our request, the Freedom supervisory employee ( first name and teller ID provided in attachment ) admitted that their records show that we went through the normal payment process and submitted payment on XX/XX/XXXX. The Freedom supervisory employee explained that Freedoms records show the payment was submitted on XX/XX/XXXX because we submitted it after business hours on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nThis issue has happened to other customers at Freedom, as evidenced by several recent complaints submitted by consumers to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. For example, on XX/XX/XXXX, another Freedom customer submitted a complaint to the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau describing the exact same payment and credit reporting issue ( Complaint Number XXXX, see attachment ) -- that he/she submitted payment through Freedoms online payment system, did not receive an error message, and subsequently learned that Freedom had reported him/her as over 30 days past due for that submitted payment to the credit bureaus. \n\nWe timely made our XX/XX/XXXX payment and our loan servicer, Freedom, has admitted the same. Freedom failed to apply this payment as required under our mortgage loan. Thus, Freedoms reporting of a late payment for XX/XX/XXXX is factually incorrect even by their own admission. \n\nThis inaccurate report of a late payment has greatly harmed us. Prior to the inaccurate report, we had a perfect credit history with not a single late payment, including no late mortgage payments across over eight years and multiple loan servicers for our mortgage loan. After Freedoms inaccurate report, our credit scores dropped by close to 100 points and we were denied a loan for a new mortgage as a result of Freedoms actions. We  should not be penalized for Freedoms failure to correctly apply a payment that we timely made in full. \n\nWe request that Freedom immediately delete the inaccurate 30 days late report on our credit reports.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-06-13T06:28:22.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"28209","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2934475","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Freedom Mortgage Company","date_received":"2018-06-13T01:43:57.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Our mortgage loan is currently <em>being</em> serviced by Freedom Mortgage Company XXXX Freedom ). We are disputing a 30 days past due report that Freedom made to the credit bureaus for XX/XX/XXXX, which <em>appears</em> on our reports, as both incorrect and severely prejudicial to us. We request that this 30 days past due report be deleted immediately. \n\nIn <em>approximately</em> XX/XX/XXXX, our mortgage loan was sold and transferred to Freedom."]},"sort":[16.942,"2934475"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3067936","_score":15.263264,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"On Friday Night XX/XX/18 at approximately XXXX-XXXX XXXX I went to PNC Branch in XXXX , GA to use the drive-up ATM to load my PNC Smart Access prepaid card with {$580.00} in cash. I inserted the money into the deposit door and it counted it and verifed {$580.00} was inserted. I verified the amount and the screen started processing it then suddenly said transaction failed, contact financial institution. I waited for a minute or two and my card finally came back out, but none of the {$580.00} ever came back out of the deposit door. The door opened and closed multiple times like it was trying to give me the money but no money ever appeared and finally the machine went back to the welcome screen. I immediately called the number on the back of my card while still at the ATM machine and let them know what was going on, they apologized and said they could see where I attempted to make a {$580.00} deposit and it did not go through. I informed the lady that the money never came back out and she started the process of filing a claim. She later told me that since there was no transaction she couldn't file a claim but would take down everything I had told her and send it to the appropriate person and/or bank for investigation. I asked her what to do at the ATM and rather I should leave or not because I was afraid the money may come out after I leave and she said no it won't come out if it hasn't already as the atm won't do that. Fine.  I leave the ATM and finish up our conversation and ask for claim number. She claimed that since she couldn't file an actual dispute that she couldn't provide me with any sort of reference number and told me not to worry it would be forwarded to the appropriate people. Fast forward to Monday XX/XX/18, I called to follow up on this matter and spend 1 HR 32 MINS on the phone getting transferred to 10 different people and hearing 3-4 different stories about the matter. The stores I got are as follows : 1. ) The claim has been denied as the ATM reported no errors and it balanced.\n\n2. ) The claim is still open and hasn't been assigned 3. ) The claim was filed incorrectly on behalf of whomever I spoke to Friday night and that they entered XX/XX/XXXX instead of XX/XX/XXXX. \n4. ) That the claim was denied but they didn't understand how it was denied in the first place as no audit had even been done at that point on the machine.\n\n5. ) Finally, the 10th person I spoke with told me that he didnt understand what was going on because it appeared the dispute department handled the claim incorrectly and that he would forward me to someone who could reopen it. \n\nI got forwarded to someone who reopened it and they told me that XXXX was assigned to the case and would follow up. Tuesday XX/XX/18 I call again to follow up and again get put on a 1.5 hour merry go round of a phone call and get told everything from the claim was again denied, to the claim was still open and finally a manager who told me the claim was denied as no errors were shown, the atm balanced and that they saw no record of me even attempting to make a {$580.00} deposit on Friday Night. I told her that was impossible as the agent I spoke with on Friday Night was able to tell me that she saw where a deposit was attempted and did not go through and the lady responded that she didn't know what they were looking at cause she saw no evidence of that and told me there was nothing they could do. Finally, I got off the phone with her after getting no help and called back again and specifically asked the agent if she could see an attempted deposit on my card for {$580.00} Friday Night ... she looked and said yes. I explained to her that the manager of escalations just told me that she never even saw evidence of a deposit attempt and doesn't know what yall are looking at. The lady on the phone then told me that it was on the log clear as day and didn't understand what was going on. She put me on hold multiple times, talked to some folks and finally came back and said well it has been denied and there is nothing we can do. \n\nWhat the heck is going on here? Multiple stories, lies and transfers and I have no results and none of my money back to me. I even asked the manager on the phone if cameras were looked at, what was investigated and said video footage will clearly show me putting money in and nothing coming out. The lady told me that the atm video will not show that because they have no coverage of the deposit or withdrawal doors. \n\nI demand a through investigation into this matter including every angle of camera footage, total checks of all areas inside the ATM, a investigation into who verified this ATM and an internal review of every recorded phone call to verify this run around I have gotten. My money is missing and PNC Bank is acting like I don't matter and they don't care enough to look into it further. At the end of the day {$580.00} of my hard earned money is missing and I demand justice for this matter. How can I even trust them when they couldn't even get their story straight and even admitted to the claim being mishandled and keyed incorrectly? Nothing makes sense!!","date_sent_to_company":"2018-11-07T09:05:15.000Z","issue":"Trouble using the card","sub_product":"General-purpose prepaid card","zip_code":"30122","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3067936","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"PNC Bank N.A.","date_received":"2018-11-07T08:31:46.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem adding money"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["On Friday Night XX/XX/18 at <em>approximately</em> XXXX-XXXX XXXX I went to PNC Branch in XXXX , GA to use the drive-up ATM to load my PNC Smart Access prepaid card with {$580.00} in cash. I inserted the money into the deposit door and it counted it and verifed {$580.00} was inserted. I verified the <em>amount</em> and the <em>screen</em> started processing it then suddenly said transaction failed, contact financial institution."]},"sort":[15.263264,"3067936"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14708336","_score":8.0308485,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"b'Formal Complaint Against American Express for Deceptive Practices and Denial of Agreed Payment Plan (Plan It)\\n\\nTo Whom It May Concern,\\n\\nI am filing this complaint against American Express due to deceptive business practices and misleading customer service communication that resulted in financial harm and unresolved account management issues.\\n\\nOn XXXX XXXX XXXX, I contacted American Express via chat regarding my Platinum card account to request enrollment of three flight-related transactions totaling XXXX into their Plan It installment plan program. At that time, my balance was approximately XXXX and I was 10 days past due.\\n\\nThe Amex agent explicitly advised me that once I made a payment to bring my account current, I would then be eligible to enroll those charges into Plan It. I followed their instructions and made a payment of XXXX to bring the account current.\\n\\nAfter the payment posted, I attempted to follow through on the original intent. However, I was then denied access to Plan It for the three transactions because the planned amount now exceeded 95% of my reduced balance due to the very payment I was instructed to make.\\n\\nThis amounts to material misrepresentation of eligibility and terms by Amex agents.\\n\\n Misconduct Includes:\\nMisleading guidance causing ineligibility for financial service.\\n\\nOmission of key restrictions (95% rule and Pay Over Time limit).\\n\\nRefusal to escalate or resolve issue after repeated transfers (over 6 different agents/departments).\\n\\nUnwillingness to correct error despite documented evidence of misrepresentation.\\n\\nUnjust denial of access to a feature that was clearly qualified prior to payment.\\n\\nAttached below is the full transcript of my conversation with American Express agents, which clearly documents the misguidance and my repeated attempts to resolve the issue appropriately.\\n\\nPlease review this matter and take appropriate regulatory action. I request to be informed of the outcome and resolution.\\n\\n\\nXXXX XXXX XXXXnThere is an important matter regarding your account we need to chat with you about. Please respond to chat with us now.\\nhi - i need help adding items to a payment plan\\nA Customer Care Professional will be with you shortly.\\nHi, welcome to American Express Chat. My name is XXXX. Am I chatting with ----- XXXX\\nAm I chatting with -----?\\nyes\\nThank you. This chat may be recorded, monitored and analyzed for compliance and to improve our systems.\\n\\nWe just wanted to remind you about account status as it is past due and card is on hold.\\n\\nPast due amount is XXXXn\\nWould you be able to pay this XXXX today online?\\nyes, ill be paying that today\\ni just need help adding items to a \"\\nPlan it\" plan\\nOkay for this account has to be current, once account is paid you will get option to add items\\nokay\\nill do that and then reach out later today, but quick question\\nSure\\nhow long after charges are illegible for a \"plan it\" option\\nThat depends upon the charge amount\\nokay - i want to add all my upcoming flights on a plan it. The furthest charge is XXXX XXXX\\nOnce account becomes current you will get option to add charges/ietms\\nokay\\nitems*\\nthanks\\nToday\\nHi ------, please select one of these options, or in a few words tell me what you need help with.\\nXXXX XXXX\\nquestion\\nTo better understand your needs, please share a short sentence on how I can help you today.\\nmy plan question\\nYou can manage your finances with some of our services and programs to help you save, spend, and pay off your balance.\\nLearn More\\nWould you like to know more about one of these:\\nPlan It\\nPlan It lets you pay off big purchases over time with a fixed monthly fee and no interest charges. Eligibility required.\\nLearn More\\nif i pay off a plan it early do i still have to pay the total plan amount? or does it get adjusted\\nA Customer Care Professional will be with you shortly.\\nHi, -----. I\\'m Chae. Let me help check your inquiry about Plan it\\nYou do not need to pay the remaining plan fees if you pay off the plan early\\XXXX XXXX\\nso if i select the XXXX XXXXs and pay if off in like 6 - i dont have to pay the full XXXX fee, correct? I just want to clarify\\nCorrect.\\nis there a fee for early payoff also?\\nNo, only the plan fee associated per month for the transaction\\nokay - last question\\nSure\\ni still need to book one more flight can i add that - until when can i add past transactions on a \"plan it\" plan\\ni think they are at on almost at 30 days since the transactions posted\\nPurchases must appear on the current statement or unbilled (new cycle charges)\\nXXXX XXXXnAlso, it must not Exceed 95% of the account XXXX XXXX XXXX on your last billing statement or Exceed your Pay Over Time limit\\nXXXX XXXX\\nokay\\nthanks for your help\\nYou\\'re welcome, -----!\\nSince we\\'re able to check on your inquiry today, is there any other account and billing related questions or would that be all?\\nactually\\nI\\'ll keep this thread open so you can chat back if more help is needed.\\nSure\\ni just got this \"You are exceeding the total amount of your balance that you are allowed to plan.\" can you explain that\\nXXXX I confirm the amount of transaction please?\\nits 3 transactinos for XXXX\\nGot it, this amount Exceeds the 95% of the account Total New Balance on your last billing statement so this cannot be planned\\ni was counting on this being able to go on a plan it plan\\nAs per plan it policies you cannot plan an amount that reaches the percentage limit.\\nso if i had planeed this before my last payment where my balance was higher it would have been okay ? am i understanding that correctly ? that is absurd\\nYes, as long as it will not be more than 95% of your balance, you can plan the transaction.\\nthat is ridiculous -\\nso because i paid i cant \"plan it\"\\ni will need an override\\nor some sort of payment plan\\nas i mentioned i account for the card allowing me to \"plan it\"\\nwhat good is this card if i cant even do that\\nI am sorry but there is no override option for this case. We\\'ll have to follow the plan it procedures as there are requirements that are needed.\\nI will get you a specialist from our Special Team to check on payment plan options\\nBefore I connect the chat, is there any other account and billing related questions or would that be all?\\nno\\nGot it. One moment please\\nA Customer Care Professional will be with you shortly.\\nok\\nThank you for responding to American Express. My name is XXXX. Am I chatting with -----?\\nyes\\nPleasure to meet you online ----- .\\nThanks for confirming your name.\\n----, just to confirm you would like to checkout the financial relief program?\\nno that is not what i needed - i attempted to make a \"plan it\" and was blocked and told i couldnt until i made a payment on my account. So i made the payment . Now I can\\'t make a \"plan it\" because it exceeds 95% of my balance as IVE MADE A PAYMENT. you tricked me into being unable to make a plan and i need to talk to a supervisor now - i dont not need financial relief . What is this company\\nthis is absurd\\nOne moment please.\\n------, I see the chat got transferred to us to check for a payment plan which is financial relief plan.\\nI will have to connect you back to our customer service team to check and assist you with plan it options.\\nwell that is yet another error on behalf of your comapny\\ni need to speak to a supervisor\\nnow\\n------, to assist you with your concern regarding plan it, our customer service team will have to check that for you since it is their area of expertise.\\n\\nEven if you want to have a word with asupervisor, the customer service team supervisor will be available.\\nXXXX XXXX\\nShall I connect them?\\nsure\\nPlease stay connected.\\nHello -----! My name is XXXX You have been reconnected and I will be the one assisting you moving forward.\\nok\\nAllow me 1-2 minutes to check where you left off.\\nok\\nThank you for staying online. Upon checking, I see that you are having issues with your Plan It on your Platinum card account.\\nyes, i requested to make a \"plan it\" then was told i needed to make a payment. once the payment is made now i dont qualify for my full amount because you made me make a payment and now its over 95% of my balance\\nI appreciate the details. May I ask which transaction would you like to enrol to Plan it?\\nthat is unethical and questionable to say the least\\nyes\\nThis is definitely not the experience that American Express wants you to have, so I\\'ll do my very best to help you on this matter.\\nits 3 transactions - let me retrieve them for you\\XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\nGot it, thank you.\\nI have checked, and the Plan It amounts for these three charges is XXXX You can select from 3, 6, and 12 months monthly payments.\\nKindly check the link it here:XXXX\\nPlease let me know if you are able to submit your monthly payment terms for these three transactions.\\nHi just checking in, are you still with me?\\nXXXX XXXX\\nits not letting\\nyes\\nAppreciate you getting back to me.\\nbut i cant complete\\nMay I ask what the exact error message is from your screen?\\ntaht it exceeds 95%\\nIt shows it exceeds your limit of 95%, right?\\n\"ou are exceeding the total amount of your balance that you are allowed to plan.\\nPlease select smaller or fewer transactions or enter a lower amount before proceeding.\"\\nyes\\nLet me double-check your balance here. One moment, please.\\nI really appreciate your patience here, -----.\\nI have checked the Plan It limits, and it looks like we cannot enroll transaction amounts that will exceed 95% of your pay over time limit which is currently at XXXX\\n\\nIf you want, you can enroll two charges from the three transactions you mentioned, and it will go through.\\nim still here - sry i am working\\nNot a problem at all, -----.\\ni need all three\\ndoes it have to be 95% of the same billing statement\\nbecause while it is very unethical - i am understanding if i spend more then ill be able to put all 3 transactions on a \"plan it\"\\nThe 95%, is for the account XXXX XXXX XXXX but it also will not proceed, if the amount exceeds your Pay Over Time Limit.\\nso if i charge more, i will then be allowed to Plan the full amount?\\nLet me clarify all the restrictions on enrolling to Plan It:\\n\\n-Exceed 95% of the account XXXX XXXX XXXX on their last billing statement (doesnt apply to unbilled charges)\\n-(Lending Cards) Exceed 95% of their credit limit\\n-(Pay Over Time) Exceed their Pay Over Time limit\\nwhat is pay it?\\nPay It is a feature where you can pay for a specific charge that is under XXXX.\\nso what you are telling me that due to the instructions i was given a payment i am now not qualified for a plan it and there is no way around it?\\nSince your Pay Over Time Limit is only XXXX this exceeds the total amount of the three transactions you wish to enroll.\\npay over time you said is less than XXXX so how is that even useful\\nthis doesnt make sense\\nit is extremely\\nunethical\\ni need to talk to a supervisor\\nPay It is different from Plan It. Pay it allows you to make a payment for a specific charges under XXXX, and Plan it, allows you to make monthly payments with fees for your transactions.\\nbecause again, if i hadnt been told to make the payment I would have qualified\\nI understand you\\'d like to speak with my supervisor, however, I want to assure you, we at American Express employ a consistent and thorough review process, and all colleagues, regardless of title or authority, operate with the same guidelines and uphold the same consistency regarding the issue at hand.\\nokay - then find a solution\\n?\\nI do apologize for the long wait. If you want, we can try to increase your Pay Over Time Limit here but there is no guarantee, but we can still try to make sure to enroll your three transactions. Would this work for you?\\nI do not intend to rush you, however, we have not heard from you for some time. Are we still connected?\\ni dont see how a \"pay it\" that has a cap of XXXX  will DO ANYTHING TO FIND A SOLUTION\\nAppreciate you getting back to me.\\ni am getting increasingly frustrated, this is incredibly dishonest\\ni need 3 charges on a \"Plan it\" final -\\nit would have been done if i wasn\\'t forced to make a payment\\nWe do appreciate the payment you made here, but the reason why the Plan It is not allowing for these three purchases to go through is due to your Pay Over Time Limit.\\nwhat is a pay over time limit\\nyou guys keep coming up with new terms and plans\\nNONE of which were discussed or brought up when i initially inquired\\nagain, it doesn\\'t seem like you are able to find a solution - it may be best to talk to someone else\\nI really understand this may be confusing sometimes, -----.\\nA Pay Over Time limit is not a preset spending limit. This limits the amount of your charges that you can choose to carry a balance on with interest. You may be able to make charges above or below the Pay Over Time limit, depending on the different credit factors that we look at.\\nXXXX XXXX\\nPlease stay online while I connect you to our supervisor.\\nits not confusing, its dishonest .\\nA Customer Care Professional will be with you shortly.\\nGood afternoon, ------ ! My name is XXXX  one of the supervisors. Please allow me a moment to read your previous chat.\\nThank you for waiting. I greatly appreciate your patience on this. We have received your inquiry about Pay Over Time. Could you please elaborate a bit so that I can guide you?\\nMy inquiry is not regarding \"pay over time\" please properly prepare yourself by reading the above conversatin\\nApologies, -----. I sincerely apologize, the message is not appearing on my end. Could you please re-type your query, I will be happy to assist you.\\nXXXX XXXX\\nI am trying to put 3 transactions on a \"Plan It\" - when i initially inquired to do this i was instructed to make a payment first. So I did - Now when I try to \"Plan It\" the same 3 transactions it says i dont qualify because it exceeds 95% of my balance. Which is entirely the case because of the payment I was instructed to make.\\nXXXX XXXXnI want the 3 transactions I initially inquired about on a 12 months \"Plan It\"\\nXXXX XXXX\\nIt is unethical and dishonest to now not allow me to do that\\nThank you for sharing this with me. Please give me a quick moment to check this for you.\\n\\nJust to make sure we\\'re on the same page, you do see the Plan It offer on your Platinum Card, correct?\\nyes\\nfor these 3 transactions:\\nJun 20\\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXnThank you for sharing this with me. It appears that the account is currentlt being handled by our credit team.\\nin order to qualify for the plan it option. We would need to have your account transferred to the right team first.\\n\\nKindly stay on the line for me,-----\\nA Customer Care Professional will be with you shortly.\\nThank you for responding to American Express chat. My name is XXXX. Am I chatting with ------?\\nno\\nyes, this is -------\\nwhy was I transfered yet again\\nThank you for the verification.\\nLet me check the reason for transfer.\\nI see you were discussing plan it, correct?\\nyes, i tried to make the plan when i had a higher balance - which would have qualified me for the 95% rule. But i was told to make a payment - so now my 3 transactions do not qualify for a \"Plan It\"\\nXXXX XXXX\\nthis is dishonest and incredibly frustration\\nXXXX XXXX\\nfrustrating*\\nThank you for sharing the details.\\nYes, I understand.\\nFor the plan it concern that you have stated above, we have a dedicated customer service team, I have made a note on the file and team will be quick to help.\\n\\nYou are connected to credit team and we do not handle this so I will have to connect you back.\\nWhy am I being transferred - without approval\\nthis is the 5th transfer!\\nI have already raised this as a feedback for incorrect transfer without approval.\\nI want to note that I have this transcript on record - this is absurd\\nI understand your frustration.\\nI have noted the same clearly.\\nXXXX XXXX\\nShall I transfer now\\'?\\ni want a supervisor now\\nYour concern is plan it which is handled by customer service team not credit team (my team).\\n\\nSo, my supervisor will not be able to help you on this.\\n\\nI am connecting you to customer service team and you can ask for supervisor there for your concern.\\nthen why i transfered to credfit and financial relief WHEN THIS IS A SUPERVIOR ISSUE\\ncustomer service supervisor now\\nYou want to discuss financial relief program or plan it?\\ngod damn it a\\nare you insane\\nCUSTOMER SERVICE SUPERVISOR\\nTransferring the chat to customer service team.\\nA Customer Care Professional will be with you shortly.\\nHello -------, my name is XXXX, please allow me 2-3 minutes and I\\'ll pick up from where we left off.\\nNo -\\nyou will transfer me to a supervisor immediately\\ni have been transfered to the incorrect department for the 6th time\\nyou cannot help me\\nyour team members have aggrivated and made the issue significantly worse\\nyou will not trasnfer or assist me other than correctly transferring to a supervisor and no one else\\nNOW\\nPlease know that this is not the experience we want you to have as one of our valued Card Members.\\nPlease let me connect you over to my supervisor. I\\'ll provide a summary, and they will be with you shortly, please stay connected.\\n?\\nPlease stay connected while I transfer.\\nA Customer Care Professional will be with you shortly.\\nAn agent has now joined\\nHi ------. This is XXXX, one of the supervisors. Please allow me a moment here to go through your last conversation and access your account.\\nThis is absolutely insane - I have been trasnfered to the incorrect people a total of 6 times. This is is now beyond exacerbated and significantly worse.\\nThe issue is I reached out to make a \"Plan It\" i reached out inquired - was told I needed to make a payment. So I made the payment - waited for it to post. Now that my balance is lower my 3 transactions I wish to put on a \"Plan It\" do not qualify because it exceeds the 95% - but it would have qualified before I made that payment.\\nWe will not be discussing any other option other than a \"Plan It\"\\nI dont want mention of any unfeasible options as ridiculous as \"Pay It\\' and certainly not \"financial relief\" which someone did already transfer me to.\\nI appreciate you sharing the information with me. Kindly give me 2-3 minutes to examine the details and I will get back to you.\\XXXX XXXXnWhy I was trasnfered to financial relief or credit team is BEYOND me - everyone that I have talked to in the past hour I demand a formal complaint and I have this chat transcript on record.\\nXXXX XXXXnI regret the experience you had. I will definitely look into that for you and provide feedback.\\nMay I please know the date and amount of the transactions you want to add in Planit?\\nyes\\XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\nOkay yes the total is XXXXnyes\\non a Plan It for 12 months\\nYour most recent statement balance is XXXX Therefore, you can only plan charges not more than 95% of this balance on your card.\\n\\nThis means you can only plan charges up to XXXX. Consequently, all three charges are not being processed.\\nYou may want to select one XXXX charge and one XXXX XXXX charge for Planit.\\nright - but had i not be forced to make the payment prematurely IT WOULD HAVE QUALIFIED\\nXXXX XXXX\\nit was deceiving to make me make a payment - so that then my \"plan it\" wouldnt qualify\\nXXXX XXXX\\nit was deliberately dishonest\\nXXXX XXXX\\nsam, I am working. this has taken an hour. I truly need this resolved now. Please\\nI understand the request however I see the card has credit concerns and that\\'s why we requested you to make payments.\\nYou may want to select two charges for Plan for now.\\XXXX XXXX\\nI need all 3 transactions\\nit was misleading and honestly unethical\\nI can understand the request however it is not possible because then it will exceed 95% of the last statement balance.\\nI made the payment he day it was requested and now I expect Amex to be honest and complete their end\\nI will definitely capture it as a feedback so that we can review if there is an error.\\nMay I please know the date of the payment you;re referring to?\\XXXXnprior to that the balance would have been XXXX\\nwhich then my Plan It would have been less tha 95%\\nand approved\\nso you see, it is delibertely misleading to tell me to make the payment then my request of plan it would have\\nqualified\\nXXXX XXXX\\nPlease allow me a moment here to check the details.\\nsure\\ni will respond to you shortly, but please dont disconnect. i will be back\\nI reviewed this for you but you were already late for the payment for last statement and that\\'s why we requested you to make payment.\\nXXXX XXXX\\nit doesnt change that I was requesting the \"plan it\" and would have then qualified and now Amex is dishonestly rejecting the request\\nI understand the request however I do not see any error here. As suggested, you cannot plan all 3 charges, you may want to select 2 charges and then try to initiate Plan it.\\nXXXX XXXX\\n.ot\\nIs there anything else I can assist you with?\\nYou don\\'t see an error in misleading a client then rejecting their their request that would have qualified prior to following your companies instructions???\\nI understand but as per Planit guidelines, you cannot exceed 95% of the last statement balance.\\nbut prior to that payment, it would have qualified. Yes or No ?\\nI am unable to check that, -----.\\nyes, you are\\nHowever, I do see that payment was already late and we charged you late fee as wlel.\\n95% of the balance at the time is XXXX XXXX meaning all three transactions would have qualified\\nprior to being scammed into ineligibility due to your companies instructions\\nSo to clarify - by following your agents instructions I no longer qualify for a service I requested to fulfill. And now, after obliging with the instructions Amex agent provided, am an no longer able to add my 3 desired transactions on a \"plan It\\' nor are you an Amex supervisor willing to correct the error, is that right?\\nI understand the request and to confirm, we requested payment as the card was already late for the payment and as per the Plan guidelines, you cannot move charges to Planit exceeding 95% of last statement balance.\\neven though i have a transcript, written proof, stating that after the payment will be made I can add those transactions\\ni would be happy to send the transcript to you or your legal department\"'","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-17T21:19:53.000Z","issue":"Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"95403","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14708336","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2025-07-17T21:03:26.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["\\nI have checked, and the Plan It <em>amounts</em> for these three charges is XXXX You can select from 3, 6, and 12 months monthly payments.\\nKindly check the link it here:XXXX\\nPlease let me know if you are able to submit your monthly payment terms for these three transactions.\\nHi just checking in, are you still with me?\\nXXXX XXXX\\nits not letting\\nyes\\nAppreciate you getting back to me.\\nbut i cant complete\\nMay I <em>ask</em> what the exact <em>error</em> message is from your <em>screen</em>?"]},"sort":[8.0308485,"14708336"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7320697","_score":7.3994493,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am adding this info onto my current complaint to Citi bank reporting my recently settled account info as a recent charge off and recent late payment. According to the FCRA terms and guidelines, what they are doing is against the law and I refuse to stand for it, and accept what they are doing. I have made multiple attempts to call them and ask them to correct the info immediately as it is effecting my quality of life and has dropped my credit score below the acceptable range for a mortgage and I am going to be homeless in the next month due to an error made in part by them. According to this section of the FCRA 87 FR 64689 as follows, they are breaking the guidelines that are supposed to be adhered to. I am requesting this info be fixed ASAP or I will be taking measures necessary to correct it myself. They have retaliated against me for disputing the info that they did not update when I settled the debt with them last XXXX. Please see the following guidelines for the specific details of the FCRA Accuracy in consumer reports is of vital importance to the consumer reporting system, particularly as consumer reports play an increasingly central role in the lives of American consumers. Consumer reporting agencies collect and assemble credit, public record, and other consumer information into consumer reports. [ 2 ] Creditors, insurers, landlords, employers, and others use the information in these reports to make eligibility determinations and other decisions that can have a significant impact on consumers. For example, creditors use information in consumer reports to determine whether, and on what terms, to extend credit to a particular consumer, while landlords and employers use background screening reports in deciding whether to rent to prospective tenants and hire employees, respectively. \n\nInaccurate, derogatory information in consumer reports can have significant adverse impacts on consumers. For example, inaccurate, derogatory information in consumer reports can lead to higher interest rates, ineligibility for promotional offers, or otherwise less favorable credit terms for affected consumers. This in turn may cost consumers hundreds or thousands of dollars in additional interest. Even worse, inaccurate, derogatory information in consumer reports could lead lenders to deny a consumer credit entirely, making it difficult or impossible for that consumer to obtain a mortgage, auto loan, student loan, or other credit. Any of these consequences can be devastating for a consumer 's financial well-being and life. Inaccurate, derogatory information in consumer reports can also harm the businesses that use such reports by leading them to make unsupported decisions. \n\nConsumer report accuracy depends on the various parties to the consumer reporting system, including : the three nationwide consumer reporting agencies ( XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ) ; other consumer reporting agencies, such as background screening companies ; entities such as creditors who furnish information to consumer reporting agencies ( i.e., furnishers ) ; and public record repositories. While any of these parties may introduce inaccurate information into the consumer reporting process, a consumer reporting agency is uniquely positioned to identify certain obvious inaccuracies and implement policies, procedures, and systems to keep them off of consumer reports. In some cases, such as when certain account or other information fields on consumer reports are logically inconsistent with other fields of information, a consumer reporting agency can detect the logical inconsistencies and prevent the inaccurate information from being included in consumer reports it generates, thereby avoiding the consumer harm to individual consumers that can result from reporting such inaccurate information. \n\nInaccuracy in consumer reports is a long-standing issue that remains a problem today. Pursuant to its obligations under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions ( FACT ) Act [ XXXX ] to conduct a study of consumer report accuracy and completeness, the Federal Trade Commission in XXXX  published a report finding, among other things, that one in five consumers who participated in the study had an error on at least one of their three nationwide credit reports. [ 4 ] Another more recent study, published in XXXX, found that over 34 % of consumers surveyed were able to identify at least one error in their credit reports. [ 5 ] Consumer complaints submitted to the Bureau continue to reflect significant consumer concern about inaccuracies in consumer reports. Complaints about incorrect information on your report have represented the largest share of credit or consumer reporting complaints submitted to the Bureau each year for at least the last six years. [ 6 ] In XXXX  alone, companies responded to more than 157,000 such complaints, representing a majority ( 53 % ) of credit or consumer reporting complaint responses that year. [ 7 ] Moreover, the Bureau continues to see accuracy issues at furnishers and consumer reporting agencies through its supervisory activities. For example, the Bureau noted in its XXXX XXXX Supervisory Highlights that many furnishers lacked reasonable written policies and procedures regarding the accuracy and integrity of the information relating to consumers. [ 8 ] In its XXXX XXXX Supervisory Highlights, the Bureau explained that some consumer reporting agencies lacked adequate procedures for assuring maximum possible accuracy of consumer reports when they continued to include information in consumer reports that was provided by unreliable furnishers. [ 9 ] The Bureau also continues to find accuracy issues in the consumer reporting context through its enforcement activities. For example, the Bureau has brought enforcement actions against consumer reporting agencies whose inadequate name-only matching led to reports with inaccurate derogatory criminal and public records information on consumers. [ 10 ] The Bureau also has brought enforcement actions against furnishers who furnish information with inherent logical inconsistencies, such as furnishing an increasing original loan amount over time, where that field should not change. [ 11 ] The FCRA regulates consumer reporting. [ 12 ] The statute was designed to ensure that consumer reporting agencies adopt reasonable procedures for meeting the needs of commerce for consumer credit, personnel, insurance, and other information in a manner which is fair and equitable to the consumer, with regard to the confidentiality, accuracy, relevancy, and proper utilization of such information. [ 13 ] In interpreting the statute, Federal courts likewise highlight the importance of data accuracy. The FCRA was enacted to protect consumers from the transmission of inaccurate information about them and to establish credit reporting practices that utilize accurate, relevant, and current information in a confidential and responsible manner. [ 14 ] Because of the importance of consumer report accuracy to businesses and consumers, the structure of the FCRA creates interrelated legal standards and requirements to support the policy goal of accurate credit reporting. Among these is the requirement that, when preparing a consumer report, consumer reporting agencies shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. [ 15 ] Inaccuracies in consumer reports can, in part, be attributed to consumer reporting agencies failing to maintain reasonable procedures, such as business rules, to prevent the inclusion of facially false data, including logical inconsistencies relating to consumer data and/or the status or other information associated with consumer accounts, when preparing consumer reports. Courts have recognized that in certain instances, inaccurate credit reports by themselves can fairly be read as evidencing unreasonable procedures [. ] [ 16 ] The Bureau is issuing this advisory opinion to highlight that the legal requirement to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individuals about whom the reports relate includes, but is not limited to, procedures to screen for and eliminate logical inconsistencies to avoid including facially false data in consumer reports. \n\nThere are many logical inconsistencies that could result in inaccurate, facially false data being included on consumer reports in violation of section 607 ( b ). The following is a non-exhaustive list of examples of some of the types of logical inconsistencies that reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy would screen for and eliminate : Inconsistent Account Information or Statuses A consumer reporting agency 's policies and procedures should be sufficient to detect tradelines with account statuses or codes that are plainly inconsistent with other information reported for that same account, such that, if included in a consumer report, at least one item of information therein would necessarily be inaccurate. Such inconsistencies may include : An account whose status is paid in full, and thus has no balance due but nevertheless reflects a balance due ; [ 17 ] An account that reflects an Original Loan Amount that increases over time, an impossibility by definition ; [ 18 ] and Derogatory information being reported on an account, although that derogatory information predates an earlier report that did not include the derogatory information. [ 19 ] A consumer reporting agency 's policies and procedures should further identify and prevent illogical reporting of a Date of First Delinquency in connection with an account. [ 20 ] Section 605 ( a ) of the FCRA identifies categories of information that can not be included in a consumer report after a certain amount of time. [ 21 ] For example, a consumer reporting agency may not include on a consumer report accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss that antedate the report by more than seven years and 180 days. [ 22 ] This provision enables consumers to move beyond their past and rebuild their credit following a delinquency. The Date of First Delinquency provided by a furnisher must reflect the month and year on which the delinquency being reported commenced. [ 23 ] When accurate, that date corresponds with the start of the time period that, once elapsed, precludes the delinquency from remaining on a consumer report under FCRA section 605 ( a ). A Date of First Delinquency that is more recent than the start of a delinquency may lead a report user to believe a consumer had financial difficulty more recently than is the case. Similarly, a Date of First Delinquency reflected on a report where a consumer is not in fact delinquent could cause a user to inaccurately believe that the consumer is delinquent. Examples of an illogical Date of First Delinquency may include : A Date of First Delinquency reported for an account whose records reflect no delinquency, such as through activity reflecting a current account ( complete history of timely payments, {$0.00} amount overdue ) or through a current account status code ; [ 24 ] A Date of First Delinquency that post-dates a charge-off date ; and A Date of First Delinquency, or date of last payment, that predates the account open date ( for non-collection accounts ).\n\nIllogical Information Relating to Consumers A consumer reporting agency 's policies and procedures should also identify logical inconsistencies in consumer information, such that, if included in a consumer report, some of the information therein would necessarily be inaccurate. Such inconsistencies may include : Impossible information about consumersfor example, a tradeline that includes a relevant date, such as a date of account opening, account closing, date of last payment, or date of first delinquency, for an account that is in the futurean obvious impossibilityor for an individual account that either predates that consumer 's listed date of birth or that is so far in the past ( e.g., XX/XX/XXXX ) that it must predate every living consumers ' date of birth, as individuals can not open an account before they are born ; [ 25 ] and Information about consumer accounts that is plainly inconsistent with other reported information, such that one piece of information must be inaccuratefor example, if every other tradeline is reporting ongoing payment activity, while one tradeline contains a deceased indicator, reasonable policies and procedures should identify the inconsistency and the consumer reporting agency should prevent the inclusion of the inaccurate information in consumer reports it generates. [ 26 ] A consumer reporting agency 's policies, procedures and internal controls should further identify and prevent reporting of illegitimate credit transactions for a minor. Minors generally can not legally enter into contracts for credit except in certain limited circumstances. It is logically inconsistent when a credit transaction is reported for a person who lacks capacity to enter into a contract because they are a minor, unless there are indicia that the credit transaction is legitimate, such as in the context of student loans, credit card authorized users, or emancipated minors. [ 27 ] The Bureau is aware of evidence showing that instances of identity theft are especially prevalent for minors, suggesting that identity thieves may target minors due to the value of unused Social Security numbers and a belief that there is a lower probability of discovery of the fraud. [ 28 ] This risk may be even more acute for minors in the United States foster care system, who often lack a permanent address and frequently have their personal information shared among numerous adults and agency databases, making them particularly susceptible to identity theft and inaccurate credit history information. [ 29 ] This heightened risk faced by minors underscores the importance for consumer reporting agencies to maintain procedures designed to identify illegitimate credit transactions reported for minors and prevent inclusion thereof when preparing consumer reports.\n\nThe Bureau is issuing this advisory opinion to remind consumer reporting agencies that the failure to maintain reasonable procedures to screen for and eliminate logical inconsistencies, to prevent the inclusion of facially false data in consumer reports, is a violation of their FCRA obligation to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy under section 607 ( b ) of the FCRA.\n\nB. Coverage This advisory opinion applies to all consumer reporting agencies as defined in FCRA section 603 ( f ). [ 30 ] C. Legal Analysis Section 607 ( b ) of the FCRA provides that [ w ] henever a consumer reporting agency prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. [ 31 ] The Bureau has interpreted this requirement in section 607 ( b ) to include as an integral component that consumer reporting agencies implement and maintain reasonable screening procedures, such as business rules, designed to identify and prevent the inclusion of facially false data, such as logical inconsistencies relating to consumer or account information, in the consumer reports they prepare. \n\nCourts have spoken on this topic. For example, in Bryant v.\n\nTRW , Inc., the court rejected a consumer reporting agency 's assertion that it had no obligation to compare facially inconsistent information contained in two of plaintiff 's consumer reports from different months because such an interpretation would make the consumer reporting agency simply a conduit and eliminate from the [ FCRA ] its emphasis on the reasonableness of the procedures followed in putting together a consumer report, contrary to Congressional intent. [ 32 ] Courts have also indicated that the inclusion of facially false data inaccuracies on a consumer report may, in certain circumstances, evidence the unreasonableness of a consumer reporting agency 's procedures. [ 33 ] It continues to be the Bureau 's interpretation as outlined in this advisory opinion that such procedures are required, consistent with the core purpose of the FCRA as described in FCRA section 602 i.e., to require consumer reporting agencies to adopt reasonable procedures for meeting the needs of commerce for consumer credit, personnel, insurance, and other information in a manner that is fair and equitable to the consumer with regard to accuracy, among other responsibilities. [ 34 ] This interpretation also aligns with the Federal Trade Commission 's 40 Years Report, which states that pursuant to 607 ( b ), a consumer reporting agency must maintain procedures to avoid reporting information with obvious logical inconsistencies, such as a credit account opened when the consumer was known to be a minor. [ 35 ] In addition to provisions authorizing Federal and State enforcement, [ 36 ] the FCRA contains two provisions relating to civil liability to consumers for noncompliance. Section 617 provides that any person who is negligent in failing to comply with any requirement imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to the consumer 's actual damages, and costs and reasonable attorney 's fees. [ 37 ] Section 616 provides that any person who willfully fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to actual or statutory damages of up to {$1000.00} per violation, such punitive damages as the court allows, and costs and reasonable attorney 's fees. [ 38 ] A violation is willful when it is inconsistent with authoritative guidance from a relevant agency. [ 39 ] As with any guidance issued by the CFPB on the FCRA, or predecessor agencies that were responsible for administering the FCRA prior to the CFPB 's creation, consumer reporting agencies risk liability under Section 616 if they violate the FCRA in a manner described in this Advisory Opinion, regardless of whether the consumer reporting agencies were previously liable for willful violations prior to its issuance.\n\nII. Regulatory Matters This advisory opinion is an interpretive rule issued under the Bureau 's authority to interpret the FCRA, including under section 1022 ( b ) ( 1 ) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, [ 40 ] which authorizes guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to enable the Bureau to administer and carry out the purposes and objectives of Federal consumer financial laws. [ 41 ] The Bureau has determined that this advisory opinion does not impose any new or revise any existing recordkeeping, reporting, or disclosure requirements on covered entities or members of the public that would be collections of information requiring approval by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act. [ 42 ] Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, [ 43 ] the Bureau will submit a report containing this interpretive rule and other required information to the United States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United Stat\nes prior to the rule 's published effective date. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has designated this interpretive rule as not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804 ( 2 ).\n\nRohit Chopra, Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. \n\nFootnotes 1.\n\n85 FR 77987 ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ). \n\nBack to Citation 2.\n\nSee15 U.S.C. 1681a ( d ) ( defining consumer report ).\n\nBack to Citation 3.\n\nFair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003, Public Law 108-159, sec. 319, 117 Stat. 1952 ( 2003 ).\n\nBack to Citation 4.\n\nSee Fed. Trade Comm'n, Report to Congress Under Section 319 of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003, at 64 ( XXXX. XXXX  )XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX \n\nBack to Citation 5. \n\n\n\nSee Syed Ejaz, Consumer Reports, A Broken System : How the Credit Reporting System Fails Consumers and What to Do About It 4 ( XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nBack to Citation 6. \n\n\n\nSee Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau, Consumer Response Annual Report, at 20 ( XXXX. XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX ; Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau, Consumer Response Annual Report, at 22 ( XXXX. XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ; Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau, Consumer Response Annual Report, at XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX ; Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau, Consumer Response Annual Report, at 19 ( XXXX. XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ; Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau, Consumer Response Annual Report, at 13 ( XXXX. XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ; Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau, Consumer Response Annual Report, at 18 ( XXXX. XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nBack to Citation 7. \n\n\n\nSee Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau, Consumer Response Annual Report, at 20 ( XXXX. XXXX )XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for more in-depth analyses. \n\nBack to Citation 8. \n\n\n\nSee XXXX XXXX. XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX Supervisory Highlights, at XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nBack to Citation 9. \n\n\n\nSee XXXX XXXX. XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX Supervisory Highlights, at XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nBack to Citation 10. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX )XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nBack to Citation 11. \n\nConsent Order at XXXX, In re XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nBack to Citation 12. \n\n\n\nSee15 U.S.C. 1681-1681x.\n\nBack to Citation 13.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1681 ( b ).\n\nBack to Citation 14. \n\n\n\nGuimond v. Trans Union Credit Info., 45 F.3d 1329, 1333 ( 9th Cir.1995 ) ( citations omitted ) ; see also S. Rep. No. 91-517, at 1 ( 1969 ) ( explaining that the FCRA was intended to prevent consumers from being unjustly damaged because of inaccurate or arbitrary inform\nation in a credit report ).\n\nBack to Citation 15.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ).\n\nBack to Citation 16.\n\nStewart v.\n\nCredit Bureau , Inc., 734 F.2d 47, 52 ( D.C. Cir. 1984 ).\n\nBack to Citation 17.\n\nCf. \n\nConsent Order at 20, In re XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) ( Respondent also reported in approximately XXXX instances that accounts had a current balance and simultaneously furnished contradictory information, such as also furnishing information indicating that the accounts were paid in full. ), XXXX  : XXXX. \n\nThe XXXX consent order, along with other CFPB consent orders cited herein, relate to furnisher obligations under section 623 of the FCRA, but the underlying logical inconsistencies involved, as described herein, are illustrative examples of the types of inconsistencies that a credit reporting agency 's reasonable policies and procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy should be designed to detect. \n\nBack to Citation 18. \n\n\n\nCf. \n\nConsent Order at 41, In re XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) ( After furnishing the correct original loan amount ( a field that should not change ), Respondent furnished increased amounts for the original loan amount, making it appear that a consumer had taken out a larger loan than they had actually taken out. ), XXXX  : XXXX. \n\nBack to Citation 19. \n\n\n\nXXXX v. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX. Mich. XXXX ) ( refusing to set aside a jury verdict finding that a consumer reporting agency failed to follow reasonable procedures under FCRA section XXXX ( b ) for failing to detect inconsistencies between a XXXX report containing derogatory information and an earlier XXXX report on which such information did not appear even though at least one of the derogatory items predated the XXXX report ). \n\nBack to Citation XXXX. \n\nThe Date of First Delinquency herein refers to the date furnished to a credit reporting agency by a furnisher that purportedly reflects the month and year on which the delinquency being reported in connection with a consumer 's account commenced.\n\nBack to Citation 21.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ).\n\nBack to Citation 22.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ), ( c ).\n\nBack to Citation 23.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). Under the FCRA, furnishers must report a Date of First Delinquency within 90 days of furnishing information regarding delinquent accounts being placed for collection, charged to profit or loss, or subjected to any similar action.\n\nId. \n\nBack to Citation 24.\n\nCf.\n\nConsent Order at 36, In re XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) ( Respondent furnished account data showing that the consumer account was current, such as reporting {$0.00} amount overdue or full payments made timely each month, but then also furnished a [ Date of First Delinquency ], a field that inaccurately indicated that the account was in an ongoing delinquency. ) ; Consent Order at XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) ( alleging XXXX violated FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) by inaccurately furnishing internally inconsistent data, including reporting [ Date of First Delinquencies ] for accounts that were current, paid in full ( and not delinquent immediately beforehand ), or previously delinquent but subsequently became current ).\n\nBack to Citation 25. \n\n\n\nSee, e.g., XXXX v. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, at XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ( referencing a consumer report that indicated both that XXXX was born in XXXX and that the account was opened in XXXX as XXXX of XXXX inconsistencies that provide [ d ] a basis from which a jury could infer that the procedures were unreasonable ). \nBack to Citation 26. \n\n\n\nXXXX v. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ; see also XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, at XXXX ( referencing the fact that only one account of approximately two dozen on a consumer 's report included the deceased notation as one of two inconsistencies that provide [ d ] a basis from which a jury could infer that the procedures were unreasonable ).\n\nBack to Citation 27. \n\nThis example is consistent with prior Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) 's 40 Years Report. See FTC, 40 Years of Experience with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( XX/XX/XXXX ) [ hereinafter, the FTC 40 Years Report ], available at XXXX : XXXX, at 68, comment 8 ( A [ consumer reporting agency ] must maintain procedures to avoid reporting information with obvious logical inconsistencies, such as a credit account opened when the consumer was known to be a minor. ). FTC staff published the 40 Years Report, an updated compilation of past FTC interpretations of the FCRA, to coincide with the transfer of authority to the Bureau. Effective XXXX XXXX XXXX, the Dodd-Frank Act transferred rulemaking authority related to most of the FCRA to the Bureau, giving the Bureau the primary regulatory and interpretive roles under the FCRA.\n\nBack to Citation 28.\n\nSee, e.g., Richard Power, XXXX XXXX XXXX, Child Identity Theft : New Evidence Indicates Identity Thieves are Targeting Children for Unused Social Security Numbers ( XXXX  ), available at XXXX  : XXXX\n\nBack to Citation 29.\n\nSee Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau, CFPB Releases Tools to Protect Foster Care Children from Credit Reporting Problems XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), available at XXXX  : //www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-releases-tools-to-protect-foster-care-children-from-credit-reporting-errors/ # : ~ : text=To % 20submit % 20a % 20complaint % 2C % 20consumers,1 % 2D855 % 2D237 % 2D2392.\n\nBack to Citation 30.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1681a ( f ).\n\nBack to Citation 31.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ).\n\nBack to Citation 32.\n\nSee Bryant v.\n\nTRW , Inc., 487 F. Supp. at 1242.\n\nSee also McKeown v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 335 F. Supp. 2d 917, 930 ( W.D. Wis. 2004 ) ( [ R ] eceiving apparently inconsistent credit reports may trigger an obligation to investigate on the part of the credit reporting agency.... [ because ] allowing credit reporting agencies to act as nothing more than mere conduits of information would eviscerate the act 's emphasis on reasonable compilation procedures. ) ( citing Bryant, 487 F. Supp. at 1242 ) ; Wright v. XXXX Info. Sols., Inc. , 805 F.3d 1232, 1239 ( 10th Cir. 2015 ) ( Courts have held [ consumer reporting agencies ] must look beyond information furnished to them when it is inconsistent with the [ consumer reporting agencies ' ] own records, contains a facial inaccuracy, or comes from an unreliable source. ). Back to Citation 33. See Stewart v. Credit Bureau , Inc., 734 F.2d at 52 ; Sheffer , 2003 WL 21710573, at *2. Back to Citation 34. 15 U.S.C. 1681 ( b ) ; see also Guimond, 45 F.3d at 1333. Back to Citation 35. FTC 40 Years Report, at 68, comment 8. Back to Citation 36. 15 U.S.C. 1681s. Back to Citation 37. 15 U.S.C. 1681o ( emphasis added ). Back to Citation 38. 15 U.S.C. 1681n ( emphasis added ) ; Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47, 57-58 ( 2007 ) ( construing meaning of willful ). Back to Citation 39. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47, 70 ( 2007 ) ; Fuges v. Sw. Fin. Servs., Ltd. , 707 F.3d 241, 253 ( 3d Cir. 2012 ). Back to Citation 40. Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 ( 2010 ). Back to Citation 41. 12 U.S.C. 5512 ( b ) ( 1 ). Back to Citation 42. 4 U.S.C. 3501-3521. Back to Citation 43. 5 U.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-07-28T17:39:45.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"460XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7320697","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CITIBANK, N.A.","date_received":"2023-07-28T17:26:41.000Z","state":"IN","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Consent Order at 41, In re XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) ( After furnishing the correct original loan <em>amount</em> ( a field that should not change ), Respondent furnished increased <em>amounts</em> for the original loan <em>amount</em>, making it <em>appear</em> that a consumer had taken out a larger loan than they had actually taken out. ), XXXX  : XXXX. \n\nBack to Citation 19. \n\n\n\nXXXX v. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX. Mich."]},"sort":[7.3994493,"7320697"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4176876","_score":6.901537,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint for Review The Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681, Att : Federal Trade Commission & Consumer Financial Protection Bureau This Complaint is Against the 3 major Credit reporting Agencies as well as the XXXX XXXX, and/or any entity that generates Credit Scores.\n\nFrom our research and/or looking into the ongoing matters and/or correspondences and/or informations obtained from others and/or correspondences it appears that FICO and/or Credit Scores are a way to circumvent credit protection laws in place and/or are a model thats used to manipulate the outcomes of percentage rates given to consumers. And its being communicated and/or represented appearances are itself is without any rules or regulations or oversight and/or is there any dispute processes available in relation to the same. \nThat it is adversely effecting economics and the wellbeing of all entities as well as consumers and/or is part of the economic system collapses, past and future, affecting financing, businesses, households as well as the average persons etc. \nIt appears it is controlled by the creditors & credit reporting agencies and/or others generating FICO and/or credit scores model 's and/or entities without any compliance to consumer protections laws, and dispute processes. \nFor example, being able to obtain what the 3 reporting agencies are reporting at no cost within limitations ( Currently more than one free report per year ) in references to an consumers FICO and/or credit score without being charged by the reporting agencies. You can not obtain a free copy f your credit score from any of the reporting agencies and/or or the summaries they are providing to creditors and/or amongst themselves and/or FICO and/or credit score generating entities compliances to regulations requirements in references free reports and/or by the 3 reporting agencies. \nThis pertains to their availability being provided to consumers in references to FICO and/or credit scores and/or summaries prior to and/or by the 3 reporting agencies as per known consumers protection regulations. This makes it so that requirements are being circumvented as well as a mystery with 100 's of variables. \n\nFurthermore, the credit reporting agencies and/or those generating FICO and/or credit scores claim that they dont provide credit scores to consumers and when consumers enquire are made, they are alluded to any such request in writing and/or are circumventing them. \n\n\nFor example, TransUnion ( Please note we are not picking on any one particular we are presenting this about all of them and/or those involved in what the topics we are presenting to you ). \nIt clearly States \" if you like to receive your \" TransUnion Credit Score \" please provide payment then they state \" score if applicable. '' This creates an atmosphere where consumers aren't able to know which of the 100 's of models will be used and/or are applicable to them at any time or during times they are considering financing. \nThis in turn is manipulated by creditors while forcing consumers to have, numerous hard inquiries which lower their scores. \nBecause of the classic tactic used by creditors is, that your rate payments and/or if you qualify is dependence of your FICO and/or credit score which is not free of charge and good luck on that one. The FICO score is a shame and its part of the shell game and it needs to be addressed by this agency and/or the agency needs to forward this complaint to whoever has jurisdiction and/or legislators and/or those who handle Fair Credit Act Violations. Our last complaint fell on death ears and we hope and pray that the new administration will review this complaint and take proper actions to put an end to the Credit Score Shell Game Shame. \nThe Credit Score Which is a secrete between the reporting agencies entities and/or the creditors and the circumvention is the 100 's of models used and even according to TransUnion and the other 3 Credit reporting agencies is a mystery. \nIt also eliminates any prequalification processes excused by the FICO and/or scorecard entities and/or elimination of numerous hard credits inquires instead it increases the need for hard inquiries. \nWhen in fact the same entities have the ability to do soft credit inquires without any consumers consents. All while putting consumers at a disadvantage while opening the door for manipulation of the same and/or rates, credibility and/or for the shell game to occur. The days of Soft inquiries are over and/or The Credit Score Shell Game Scam is the new norm no matter how unfair and biased it is as well as flawed. \nAccording to TransUnion response 100 's of models are used throughout the United States and there are so many variables to generate any one FICO and/or credit score so the XXXX are plentiful. \nAnd if that wasn't bad enough every hard credit inquires drops consumers scores because of the 100 's of models used predicts consumers credit unworthiness and/or that a consumer is less credible due to any given models prediction. \nAlthough some may consider it as one inquiry or lower ones scores less while other 's may not. And again, because there is 100 's of methods used one agency may not of consider it so while others may again its presented as a mystery with many variables created to circumvent any regulatory protections put in place. \nIt also allows the creditors to play the shell game all while raising the price and/or interest rates available to the average consumers and/or denying average consumers of the reserves available at such times that usurping is occurring by scrupulous individuals and/or a limited partnership. \nWhile doing so impacting the overall economy by creating a negative impact on it in the long term by forcing the Fed to drop interest rates creating usurping of scrupulous individuals of those drops which most everyone else is not eligible because of these matters we are reporting about. \nWho then are benefitting from them through a limited partnership of investors that uses high risk methods, such as investing with borrowed money, in hopes of realizing large capital gains and/or through manipulation and/or circumventing preventive measures legislated and/or put in place? \nMeanwhile its usurping the reserves and/or creating higher payments and/or restricting availability of reserves to a limited partnership of investors. Creating a situation where as themselves exclusives in possession of and/or control of the supply of and/or trade in a commodity or services and/or rates reserves etc. available at any given in any point of time. \nAll while having an overall negative impact on the economic systems creating collapses by making such reserves unavailable to consumers and just available to the scrupulous limited individuals who are usurping them. \nWhom also are profiteering from the crashing of the financial economics systems while placing the burdens or bankrupting companies, which may be for-profit, non-profit or government-owned, that sells the promise to pay for certain expenses in exchange for a regular fee, called a premium? All of which is creating the need for an act of giving financial assistance to a failing business or economy to save it from collapse. \n\nThe same situations occur when the 100 's of models used predicts one who has the capacity to enter a binding contract has and/or wants to increase the amount of merchant accounts or creditors by lowering their scores. Which is a clear violation of the Fair Credit Act it is discrimination at its best and it based on models that those who are circumventing the Fair Credit Act have willful designed with the purpose to do such. Its not based on your actual history or records it based on a model that most people dont actually fit in. A one size fits all. Its based on other people or some model that some annalist concocted. We will get into some specific situations that occurs in my instances and/or complaint. \nThis also forces and/or opens the door for consumers and/or entities go outside of the United States for financing or to scrupulous or shady characters and/or those engaged in money laundering. \nCreating a negative impact in doing so also creates jitters in the stock markets. And a domino effect of selling of stocks again it impacts the overall economy based on predictions created by a computer prediction system. \nThis is full of unknown variables, which in any given time could change. This in fact in the past has caused the markets to crash. Creating regulatory changes where human interaction is required and/or other safeguards had to be put in place. \nSo basically, it appears their circumventing credit laws that are applicable and are in cohorts with financial institutions and/or FICO and/or other such entities being without any oversight, guidance and/or standards. \nNor can consumers dispute what they are reporting in references to consumers credit scores and/ or their summaries and/or FICO and/or Credit Scores assigned by them and/or any entity. \nWhich the amount of interest rates or availability of credit and/or is the gauge of consumers credibility along with a summary as in the copy we provided to the regulatory oversight agencies and/or ones credibility is determined by and/or based on The Credit Score Shell Scam. \nOr can consumers know what the methods used were or can consumers have any FICO and/or credit scores that are incorrect fixed because there is \" hundreds '' and those methods no one can know except those using them at any given point of time and they can vary. \nSo therefore, they are correct as well as the process according to such by appearance. \nThis should be an indicator that something is wrong and/or of no consistency due to errors and/or data, predictions and/or validity and/or 100 % accuracy isnt occurring properly. \nCreating variables that can be manipulated and/or have an adverse effect on a consumers credit rating, is considered it appears, to be represented as the norm by them which concocted by some analysis based according to them what other people have done. \nAnd as they will state and/or have stated its up to the financial and credit reporting agencies and/or FICO and/or an entity to determine what that is by manipulating and/or generating the \" 100 's of scoring models used today '' Which predicts & profiles, that is discriminatory by its very nature. And uses analysis of hundreds of others prior billing payments made and/or historical data. And not by the individual themselves. \nThen they are allowed to place whomever they want however they want in any category they want without any consistency creating variables in a category whether applicable or not. \nLets look at an example of that if you pay off a Mortgage in full your credit score drops because you paid and account and closed it. ( See Attached copy of Screen Shot ) So, if you borrow and pay back, youre punished by having to pay higher rates and/or even not being able to be granted credit. Because of the Credit Score Shell Game Scam. \nIn this example I had a few different mortgages for different properties al that were paid on time. As well as at times refinanced and/or paid in full. \nLets review some of that the 1st unfair and/or inaccuracy that occurs by the analysis model is that when you refinance a mortgage to get a lower interest rate which increases your income to debt ratio your credit score drops. That is not appropriate and opposite of what should occur. People who do smart money management or lower interest rates lower the length a mortgage are put into the Credit Score Shell Game Scam. And their credit score drops instead of going up. \nNext, they also totally act as though there is no history of mortgage payments for example when you refinance to increase your income to debt ratio the prior mortgage is paid in full. Your then placed in the category which is not correct for the asset and/or the property and/or what has occurred your Credit Score Shell Scam drops. The reason explained is because 2 things one you closed an account. So, are people supposed to keep a mortgage account open that was paid off? Being paced in that category is erroneous and not correct and/or should it be allowed and/or applicable. \nLets look at another worse example. If you pay off your mortgage then own the property outright and have no more mortgage payments on that property. Once again, your wrongfully paced in the Credit Score Shell Scam. \nFor example, your mortgage that you paid off was XXXX a month and you have a duplex that is renting for XXXX a month and a property that you own ( Asset ) Worth Approximately XXXX and you just increased your income to debt ration your credit score drops again because of the Credit Score Shell Scam. \nAgain, its unfair not accurate and is erroneous and/or not based on your actual situation. And/or credit worthiness. Its based on the Unfair Credit Score Shell Scam. \nYoure also punished if you use cash to make purchase and/or pay off bills to avoid interest charges and/or fees. That again punishes and literally fines people for smart management of money and/or their credit to debt ratios. \nFor example, you got a credit card from XXXX XXXX at 0 % interest to work on another duplex so you could lower the mortgage payment and get a better rate as well as pull equity out while updating improving the property to make it so that an apartment income that was not prior could occur. Then you pay off that card because the original agreement you made with the creditor and/or XXXX XXXX was you had to pay the bill off by a certain time to avoid interest cost and be at 0 %. Afterwards your credit score drops again and why well because of the Unfair Credit Score Shell Scam. \nSo, if you have no credit cards and/or have mortgages they dont matter because you dont have credit cards. If you get a credit card for a certain reason then pay it in full and close that account you are again punished because of your good money management and/or keeping your cost down and increasing cash flow and/or savings. You score will go down because Consumer Closed Account. \nYour supposed to keep accounts open so they can charge you fees and/or membership fees and/or in hopes that you max it out and can not pay it seems be the hidden agenda and/or how it is in appearance all of which is hidden and allowed by the so-called Fair Credit Act. \nAnd its all, up to all of them, by doing such manipulative things like the % rates a consumer will be eligible for and/or is based on and/or calculated at any given point of time and/or even afterwards they dont have to correct it. \n\nThen when new data occurs and/or when the previous data predictions were incorrect and/or one of the hundreds of models used predictions was wrong and/or no ones held accountable nor is it fixed and/or adjusted.\n\nThey also dont have to show consumers nor can consumers dispute what them secrete clubs summaries are in references to the ones generated until afterwards ( you apply for credit and then you get a reason of any action and/or rates based on the credit score in that model ) and there is no process or oversight for such a dispute. \nFurthermore, conveniently they dont have to provide such to consumers because they are circumventing the laws in place to protect the consumers and/or are manipulators by proxies. Or can consumers know and/or or request what those methods are because there is hundreds \" of them. \nThis is a clear violation of consumers rights and protections laws under many areas and we are notifying you so you can fix this and/or send to those who can. \nIn the past we asked reporting agencies in writing witnesses by this consumer protection agency about this and/or their processes and they alluded time and time again and/or play a game of words that cleverly talks their way around it in writing. Lack of action made it so I have to pay a higher interest rate then what my actual rate should have been all because of the Unfair Credit Score Shell Game Scam. \nWe remind everyone of them that doesn't elevate their having to complying with the laws. Or is it an acceptable excuse in having not too. That these reporting agencies have discriminated against me and its costing me money as well as making it difficult to do anything in an ecconmy that needs stimulus packages. It also forces people to have higher payments and rates that all of whom qualify for such and again the reason being the Unfair Credit Score Shell Scam. \nFrom the beginning they played coy ; We had no choice except to file complaints that in the prior administration fell on death ears we hope and pray this will not be the case with the current administration we dont need free credit reports every moth we need an overhaul of the processes we are reporting on. \n( Those report case numbers can be provided at request you will note everything we are reporting now ). You already had them and the record of actions are very clear to anyone who wants to do the proper credit analyses.\n\nWhen inquiries were generated, they would tell us about financial agencies FICO score models or any non-pertinent information about themselves are part of the process or summarizing consumers reports. \n\nThey were also well versed on them we continued and/or are repeating that request and/or results of such investigations into those previous requests made in writing or investigations of all of which they alluded to. They also play the blame game or the loop hole well we are just reporting what the 100s of models that are used to give a credit score so therefore we are not responsible for them and/or either are they and good luck trying to dispute it and/or request accuracies. \nSo even though you may get that from them or some entity or one of the 100 's of models used and report it to anybody its not their ( The 3 credit reporting agencies ) responsibility if its wronged its theirs ( the 100s of models being used ) and/or because there are 100s of ways scores can be determined and/or models used all which can vary. When in fact they are charging for such reports? \nFor example, for vehicle purchases a different model is used then for a Mortgage the so-called credit Karma and others Credit Score Shell Scam can be different so there is no way for any consumer to get a report thats applicable to any given instance and/or accurate. You can pay for one but it may not serve the purpose of why you paid to know it because it may not be used by the lender. Lenders dont have to tell you what one they will use and you have to let them do a hard inquiry which drops your Credit Score Shell Scam.\n\nOr is it that consumers aren't allowed to know by whomever what methods were used or is there any regulatory guidelines standards and/or any way to dispute them. Because the way to circumvent and/or manipulate such protections is to scapegoat the topic by saying we just report information provided by creditors and/or or FICO Credit Scores and/or one of the hundreds of models used ''.\n\nAnd consumers can just dispute anything except FICO or credit scores which is the most important part of your credit report. \nAnd just those who produce credit scores and/or credit reports know those processes and/or the 3 credit reporting agencies just have to give consumers information on those things that they are willing to and/or they dont have to verify the validity of it? As well as address disputes related to them and/or methods used during such processes based on their reporting? Does not seem like a Fair Credit Act to me. \nSome if you do their jobs and/or give them information thats not included will boost your scores while others will charge you to do so. Experian is a perfect example of that Credit Score Shell Scam.\n\nThe scores for sale trend and good luck with that one because even if you use it the creditor can use any model they want and/or make a new one. All of it is allowed and there is no oversite and the Fair Credit Act is circumvented once again. \n\nWhen you address it, they respond by shifting the blame to FICO and/or the credit scores and/or 100s of models used. \nWhich again we ask all involved in this report we are generating. What are the processes to dispute that aspect of consumers reports ( credit scores and with whom? And/or how ) which determines what consumers interest rates will be at any given point of time and/or consumer 's credibility rating is?\n\nIts the most important part of your credit reports and its not covered in the Fair Credit Act and is a way to circumvent it.\n\nWe also became aware of another violation if you try to get pre approvals and make any statement on such requests that is supposed to be a soft inquiry that information is used to lower your Unfair Credit Score Shell Scam. \nI was discriminated during such a process and as well as became aware of an error that was put on my account as well as to how they discriminate against anyone who retires. If you retire you Credit Score Shell Scam drops. It doesnt matter what your actual status is. \nThat is discriminatory most people who retire their homes and cars are paid off they have a pension and/or social security which is a violation The Fair Credit Act. However, it is allowed to occur because of the Unfair Credit Score Shell Scam. \nAnd which we remind the reporting agencies of your purpose for generating reports are based on which your companies are profiting from. And the law is they must be accurate which they are not because of the Unfair Credit Score Shell Game Scam. \nWhat are the consumer protections requirements etc.? What are the consumers rights protection laws dispute processes or governing processes for those matter 's? Why is there no required information that must be given to consumers during such processes about it? Or is it that those requirements have been willfully circumvented? \nBe forewarned the 3 reporting agencies are directly involved in these proceedings and should be held accountable no matter how it chooses to try to scapegoat its responsibilities under the law. \n\nAnd as you are witnessing it will be addressed and/or reported too and/or by the proper authorities and us as well as legislative branches when applicable and as per our request during filing this report. \nWe also now request that an analysis of the markets be done by an independent consumers rights agency since the introduction of FICO and/or Credit Scores to determine what extent its effects are and/or what the impact is. \nWe will not tolerate such activities from anyone who is engaging in such practices as the mentioned appearances are apparent. \nAnd we will work together with anyone who wants to comply and conform and/or address any pending matters and/or shortfalls of consumer protections and rights as well as the reporting agencies and everyone else 's rights in an applicable manner. \nTogether we should all be concerned about the heartbeat of the financial economics mentioned above together we stand divided we fall. If the stability of economics crashes all will suffer including those worldwide. \nLets get to the meat and potatoes of things and review this topic. \n\nFrom our research and/or looking into the ongoing matters and/or correspondences and/or informations obtained from others and/or our correspondences it appears that FICO and/or Credit Scores is a way to circumvent credit protection laws in place and/or are a model thats used to manipulate the outcomes of percentage rates given to consumers. \n\nAnd it's being communicated and/or represented appearances are itself is without any rules or regulations or oversight and/or is there any dispute processes available in relation to the same. And its in non-compliances and/or appearances are its circumventing SUBCHAPTER IIICREDIT REPORTING AGENCIES 1681. \n\nCongressional findings and statement of purpose as it pertains to Accuracy and fairness of credit reporting and also Reasonable procedures ( b ) ( a ) 1-4 specifically in references to consideration or lack of consideration of certain factors by credit scoring systems resulting in negative or differential treatment of protected classes under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, as well as many others. ( Note we are not going to list through all the codes and/or infractions at this time and they are very clear and obligatory. ) That it is adversely effecting economics and the wellbeing of all entities as well as consumers and/or is part of the economic system collapses, past and future, affecting financing, businesses, households as well as the average persons etc. It appears it is controlled by the creditors & credit reporting agencies and/or others generating FICO Credit Scores models and/or entities without any compliance to consumer protections laws, and dispute processes. \n\nFor example, being able to obtain what the 3 reporting agencies are reporting at no cost within limitations in references to an consumers FICO score without being charged by in this example TransUnion and/or or the summaries they are providing to creditors and/or amongst themselves and/or FICO generating entities compliances to regulations requirements in references free reports and/or by the 3 reporting agencies ( which includes the scores and/or 100s of models scores ). In references to it pertaining to the availability being provided to consumers in references to FICO scores and/or summaries prior to and/or by the 3 reporting agencies as per known consumers protection regulations.\n\nThat making it so that requirements are being circumvented as well as a mystery with 100 's of variables in 1681c1 2 Access to free reports. And it is obvious that things 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq addresses needs to occur. Furthermore, their claims are that they dont provide credit scores to consumers yet on page 3 of their prior response ( and it appears they are trying to again elude these requests in writing and/or are circumventing them ). It clearly States if you like to receive your \" Credit Score please provide payment then it states \" score if applicable. '' Thank you for your time and reviewing this report.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-03-02T18:30:21.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"080XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4176876","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2021-03-02T18:15:46.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The same situations occur when the 100 's of models used predicts one who has the capacity to <em>enter</em> a binding contract has and/or wants to increase the <em>amount</em> of merchant accounts or creditors by lowering their scores. Which is a clear violation of the Fair Credit Act it is discrimination at its best and it based on models that those who are circumventing the Fair Credit Act have willful designed with the purpose to do such."],"sub_issue":["Their investigation did not fix an <em>error</em> on your report"]},"sort":[6.901537,"4176876"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":7,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":7}]}},"product":{"doc_count":7,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CD (Certificate of Deposit)","doc_count":1},{"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 prepaid card","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":7,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":1},{"key":"Deposits or withdrawals","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble using the card","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem adding money","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":7,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":7}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":7,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":5},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":2}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":7,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":7}]}},"company":{"doc_count":7,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":2},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Freedom Mortgage Company","doc_count":1},{"key":"PNC Bank N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":7,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":2},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"GA","doc_count":1},{"key":"IN","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":7,"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":5}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":7,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":2}]}}},"_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":{}}}