{"took":248,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":19,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5790758","_score":21.640226,"_source":{"product":"Payday loan, title loan, or personal loan","complaint_what_happened":"In XX/XX/2022 I informed US Bank of a fraudulent charge to my checking account. This charge led to an advance being issued to my checking account from my US Bank Reserve line. \n\nMy first conversation with US Bank ended when the agent informed me that I was deceased, and that I would need to physically bring a copy of my own death certificate to a US Bank branch in order to have my account closed, and then hung up on me. \n\nI called back and received instructions to dispute the charge, and I submitted the necessary paperwork to dispute the charge to US Bank and it was reversed in my checking account. \n\nI instructed US Bank that I wanted to have both checking and reserve lines closed upon resolution of these items, and specifically provided instructions that any funds should be returned to the Reserve Line prior to closing the accounts. \n\nI learned afterward that US Bank disregarded my instruction to have balances resolved in the accounts prior to closing them, and the Bank began to issue me late fees for the balance of the Reserve Line account. At the time, the only balance in the Reserve account was the amount that US Bank had advanced to my checking account. They claim to have issued a cashier 's check with my funds but as their records will show that check has not been deposited. \n\nI have spoken with nearly 20 representatives of US Bank in a three month period trying to resolve their processing errors and collect the balance of my checking account- which should have been about {$7.00}. This is now between 8 - 10 hours of my own personal time.\n\nUS Bank has reversed multiple late fees, and I have personally paid the balance of the Reserve line, despite not having received any of the funds that were in my checking account at the time it was closed. I have learned that as I have worked with US Bank to try to resolve their initial error that they have reported my account as delinquent twice to credit reporting agencies. Since discovering the initial error, I have informed multiple representatives of US Bank that this error needed to be resolved definitely before any credit agencies received inaccurate information as a result of US Bank 's mistakes. \n\nI have found not a single person at US Bank that can take ownership of the mistakes that have been made to date, or drive for resolution of their inaccurate reporting to credit bureaus, or ensure that a check is sent with the amount US Bank owes to me. Every associate either informs me that I have the wrong area. Several have simply hung up on me. Multiple times I have been transferred to an area where the phone was answered and I was hung up on without anyone speaking to me. The telephone number listed for Consumer Report Disputes is not monitored. I have the direct line to a manager in their customer service area, who will not return my phone calls.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-07-20T16:58:53.000Z","issue":"Problem with the payoff process at the end of the loan","sub_product":"Personal line of credit","zip_code":"630XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5790758","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"U.S. BANCORP","date_received":"2022-07-20T16:05:55.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I called back and received instructions to dispute the <em>charge</em>, and I submitted the necessary paperwork to dispute the <em>charge</em> to US Bank and it was <em>reversed</em> in my checking account. \n\nI instructed US Bank that I wanted to have both checking and <em>reserve</em> lines closed upon resolution of these items, and specifically provided instructions that any funds should be returned to the <em>Reserve</em> Line prior to closing the accounts."]},"sort":[21.640226,"5790758"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9752888","_score":17.038177,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I as a consumer aquire a lease from XXXX XXXX if XXXX, for personal, family and household purposes, I and XXXX XXXX XXXX, agreed by contract to certain terms and conditions ( as I reserve my rights ) for a 30 month lease with a security deposit of XXXX dollars, which was express to me that I would get those security and funds back, if I dod not want to purchase said contract at the end of the lease, after 30 months of having the automobile, I enquired about taking full ownership, upon requesting, XXXX XXXX of XXXX through there agents/workers, try to make me pay over XXXX dollars, to have full ownership to the automobile, ( which was never mention or told to me or put in a contract ) after the disappointment, I asked for my security deposit of XXXX dollars, ( which was not given to me ) so after the 30 months, I and XXXX XXXX XXXX by way of telephone communication, extending the lease, to give me more time and to go elsewhere to find a financial institution to assign said contract and take full ownership, for a additional 3 months, after the 3 months a inquired about my security deposit of XXXX dollars and they brushed it off, but a month later my account was credited XXXX and then a month later, XXXX XXXX XXXX, stated that the credit was in error and reversed it, but agree to extend my lease for another 3 months, and sent a contract, that I had to sign, and upon looking at tge contract , I put my terms and faxed it to XXXX XXXX XXXX , I continue making payments for the monthly bills that XXXX XXXX XXXX sent each month, as a assumed the lease was extended until a financial institution could be found, ( XXXX XXXX XXXX , put a late payment on my credit report and after disputing that error, they reverse my late charge but did not reserve the reporting of that alleged late payment, which put a bad mark on my credit report, ) in good faith, I made and continue to make the monthly payments that was due by way of XXXX XXXX XXXX , sending me a bill each month, but to my surprise and shock, on or about XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX sent a tow truck at my daughters home that I was visiting at XXXXXXXX XXXX to seize my automobile and my possessions that were inside, with a warrant, court order, or any documents, stating that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX my automobile, or possessions that were inside without my consent and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX never gave me, due process, or notice of any such actions, I would have handle it properly if given notice, and when calling XXXX XXXX XXXX , I was told to get a lawyer and I can't talk to there legal department if I was nit a lawyer, ( given me legal advice, and I don't belive they have a license to practice law ) the woman was \" XXXX ''","date_sent_to_company":"2024-08-13T15:01:10.000Z","issue":"Repossession","sub_product":"Lease","zip_code":"067XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9752888","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION","date_received":"2024-08-08T22:59:38.000Z","state":"CT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Company communicating payment assistance or payment extension options"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["on my credit <em>report</em> and after disputing that <em>error</em>, they <em>reverse</em> my <em>late</em> <em>charge</em> but did not <em>reserve</em> the <em>reporting</em> of that alleged <em>late</em> payment, which put a bad mark on my credit <em>report</em>, ) in good faith, I made and continue to make the monthly payments that was due by way of XXXX XXXX XXXX , sending me a bill each month, but to my surprise and shock, on or about XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX sent a tow truck at my daughters home that I was visiting at XXXXXXXX XXXX to seize my automobile and my possessions"]},"sort":[17.038177,"9752888"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21477092","_score":13.913756,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Rebuttal to Onity Response / Incomplete and Nonresponsive Servicing Investigation To the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I submit this rebuttal regarding Onity Mortgage XXXX response concerning Account No. XXXX and the property located at, XXXX, TX XXXX. \n\nOnitys response remains incomplete and nonresponsive. This is not just a complaint about one incorrect phone statement. It is a record-integrity problem, a successor-in-interest handling problem, a payment-status problem, a foreclosure-expense transparency problem, and a modification-document problem. \n\nOnity admits that on XX/XX/XXXX its representative incorrectly advised that the final modification agreement had not yet been generated, even though Onity claims that agreement had already been generated and mailed on XX/XX/XXXX. That admitted misinformation goes directly to the loss-mitigation process and may have interfered with timely execution and return of the agreement. Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35, inaccurate information regarding loss mitigation, foreclosure, or other servicing issues is grounds for error resolution. \n\nOnity also states that the modification was denied on XX/XX/XXXX, then later reversed, and then reissued. Yet the modification materials state that the first modified payment would begin on XX/XX/XXXX, while Onity simultaneously demanded XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX trial payments. Those positions do not reconcile. Either the account had already moved into permanent modification status or it had not. Onitys explanation leaves the payment status unclear and prevents meaningful review of whether payments were accurately categorized, applied, and credited. \n\nThe successor-in-interest handling is equally troubling. Onitys XX/XX/XXXX successor packet confirms XXXX as a successor in interest and states that she is not personally liable unless she chooses to assume liability. However, the same packet states that the loan modification and assumption review/approval will be completed simultaneously and that if the modification is accepted she will be required to assume liability. A confirmed successor in interest must be treated as a borrower for Regulation X servicing protections. Onitys wording improperly blurs the line between borrower-status protections and personal assumption liability and appears to pressure assumption as a condition of meaningful relief. \n\nOnitys own response then confirms that XXXX  was not added as a confirmed successor until XX/XX/XXXX, that XXXX name was not updated until XX/XX/XXXX, and that XXXX was only removed after an internal review found documentation dated XX/XX/XXXX authorizing his release as a successor in interest. That means Onity had relevant successor-related documentation in its own file yet still generated and circulated modification documents using outdated or disputed party information. \n\nThe fee issue remains one of the strongest indicators that Onitys response is incomplete. The modification summary says, in plain language, NO FEES. Yet the agreement separately states that recording fees, title examination fees, and attorneys fees may be charged to the borrower, and also states that interest, costs, expenses, fees, escrow advances, and other unpaid amounts may be added to the new balance. \n\nThe XX/XX/XXXX statement makes this more serious. That statement states that the loan had been referred to an attorney to start foreclosure proceedings and directs that, before remitting payment, the borrower MUST contact the attorney for the full reinstatement amount because the amount shown may have changed. The same statement shows a large Assessed Expenses balance, along with Past Due Payments and additional unpaid late charges, returned-item charges, and shortages. It also appears to reference at least a BPO cost and an inspection fee. I am not asserting, from the face of that statement alone, that the entire assessed-expense amount is attorneys fees. I am asserting that Onity was carrying a large foreclosure-related expense bucket without a clear itemization while foreclosure counsel was already involved and while the modification file was still disputed and being reworked. Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35, a fee or charge without a reasonable basis is a covered servicing error. \n\nThe balloon terms are also internally contradictory. The packet refers to a balloon payment of {$41000.00}, elsewhere refers to {$55000.00}, and elsewhere states a total balloon obligation of {$96000.00}. Those are materially different obligations. A borrower should not be expected to sign a modification package that presents multiple inconsistent balloon amounts while also warning that failure to pay the balloon could result in foreclosure. \n\nThe agreement further contains broad lender-protective errors and omissions language allowing Onity, at its option, to void the agreement, demand corrective documents, and revert the loan to prior terms if it later claims there was an error or omission. In a file where Onity already admits misinformation, reversed decisions, and later corrections to party records, that language attempts to shift the practical risk of Onitys own record problems back onto us. \n\nOnitys materials also do not resolve the foreclosure-timing issue. The packet says foreclosure proceedings will be stopped if applicable once the modification is complete. That does not answer what happened while the application was under review, while the denial was being challenged, while the denial was being reversed, and while new documents were being reissued. Because the file shows a reversed denial and the XX/XX/XXXX statement shows attorney referral for foreclosure activity, a full foreclosure timeline is necessary. \n\nAccordingly, we demand the following relief : 1. Withdraw the current modification package and issue a corrected package with one consistent set of parties, one consistent payment timeline, one consistent balloon figure, and no contradictory NO FEES versus borrower-paid-fees language. \n\n2. Remove or expressly agree not to enforce any clause that allows Onity to void the agreement, revert to prior terms, require corrective documentation under threat of reversal, or shift back onto us the costs and consequences of Onitys own errors, rework, successor-record issues, denials, reversals, or reissued documents. \n\n3. Confirm in writing that no attorneys fees, foreclosure counsel fees, BPO charges, inspection fees, title charges, publication/posting costs, corporate advances, or other expenses generated by Onitys errors, rework, or defective records will be assessed, capitalized, collected, or preserved for future collection against us. \n\n4. Provide a complete life-of-loan payment history, including suspense and unapplied-funds history. \n\n5. Provide a full assessed-expense ledger showing every dollar by date, vendor, service, invoice amount, and contractual or legal authority, including all attorney/counsel fees, BPO charges, inspection fees, title charges, posting/publication charges, and corporate advances. \n\n6. Provide the XX/XX/XXXX mailing proof and image of the final modification package, along with all XX/XX/XXXX call logs, recordings, and agent notes. \n\n7. Provide all successor-in-interest documents, intake dates, indexing dates, and internal workflow notes showing when each party was added, removed, or corrected. \n\n8. Provide the foreclosure referral date, counsel referral date, every reinstatement quote, every notice or posting date, and every instruction sent to foreclosure counsel during review, denial, reversal, and reissuance. \n\n9. Confirm whether any derogatory credit reporting was furnished during the period of incorrect guidance, denial, reversal, disputed successor records, or disputed charges, and correct any inaccurate reporting tied to those issues. \n\nWe reject any clause, rider, summary, modification term, or servicing position that purports to shift onto us the costs, risks, consequences, or cleanup burden created by Onitys own servicing errors, successor-record failures, contradictory modification terms, denial reversal, foreclosure-counsel referral activity, reissued documents, or unexplained assessed expenses. \n\nOnitys conduct has forced us to devote extraordinary time and resources to reviewing contradictory packets, tracing successor-status errors, challenging unsupported charges, and preventing additional harm. We reserve all rights to seek reimbursement of documented out-of-pocket expenses, correction of any derogatory credit reporting, waiver and reversal of all disputed charges, actual damages, injunctive relief, restitution where available, and any additional remedies permitted by law. Nothing in this correspondence should be construed as consent to pay or capitalize any charge caused by Onitys errors, its counsels activity, or its defective records. \n\nPlease treat this response as a formal request for continued review and a supplemental response supported by actual records rather than general assurances. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-22T10:52:15.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"76039","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21477092","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","date_received":"2026-04-22T10:23:27.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Onitys conduct has forced us to devote extraordinary time and resources to reviewing contradictory packets, tracing successor-status <em>errors</em>, challenging unsupported <em>charges</em>, and preventing additional harm. We <em>reserve</em> all rights to seek reimbursement of documented out-of-pocket expenses, correction of any derogatory credit <em>reporting</em>, waiver and reversal of all disputed <em>charges</em>, actual damages, injunctive relief, restitution where available, and any additional remedies permitted by law."]},"sort":[13.913756,"21477092"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20687947","_score":11.885144,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"* * XXXX : * * XXXX XXXX * * XXXX XXXX. : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Property : XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, Florida XXXX To Whom It May Concern : This letter is submitted as a renewed and expanded consumer complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and as a formal Notice of Error and Request for Information to Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc. under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and Regulation X, including 12 C.F.R. 1024.17, 1024.35, 1024.36, and 1024.37. A servicer must comply with a written notice of error that identifies the borrower, the loan, and the asserted error, and must likewise comply with a written request for information that identifies the borrower, the loan, and the requested information. CFPBs current Regulation X pages state exactly that for notices of error and requests for information. ( [ Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ] [ 1 ] ) SPS has been on notice of these servicing problems since at least XX/XX/XXXX. In the first CFPB complaint, the borrower explained that the loan was transferred to SPS even though the loan documents and closing structure required escrow only for flood insurance, not hazard insurance, and that SPS nevertheless disbursed more than {$21000.00} for homeowners insurance policies that had either already been paid, had been rejected, or were otherwise not authorized to be escrowed. SPS purchased the loan from XXXX XXXX Mortgage which loan documents would indicate escrow for flood only, not hazard. SPS responded on XX/XX/XXXX by admitting that the account was incorrectly transferred to SPS as escrowed for both hazard insurance and flood insurance, that it advanced funds from the escrow account when an insurance policy was received, and that it had updated the account to remove hazard escrow, while still insisting that any duplicate refunds should be obtained by the borrower and then sent back to SPS. \n\nThat response did not resolve the problem ; it confirmed it. SPS admitted the servicing transfer was wrong, admitted it treated the account as escrowed for hazard and flood when it should not have, admitted it advanced funds because of that error, and then attempted to shift the financial and administrative consequences of its own mistake onto the borrower. The second CFPB complaint, submitted in XX/XX/XXXX, expressly called out that SPS had already admitted making error payments for hazard insurance, had escalated the shortage from roughly {$17000.00} to roughly {$21000.00}, and was still demanding an inflated monthly amount while telling the borrower to chase insurance-company refunds for payments SPS had no authority to make in the first place. SPSs XX/XX/XXXX response again admitted the account was incorrectly transferred as escrowed for hazard and flood, again stated it removed hazard escrow, again asserted that any duplicate insurance refunds should be sent by the borrower to SPS, and again claimed the new monthly payment was accurate. \n\nThe current records show the problem has not only continued, but worsened. SPSs XX/XX/XXXX statement reflects a regular monthly payment of {$5300.00}, consisting of principal, interest, and escrow, and states that the account is due for XX/XX/XXXX and that {$10000.00} is due by XX/XX/XXXX, effectively double-charging the borrower for a claimed past-due installment. The XX/XX/XXXX statement again lists the regular monthly payment at {$5300.00} and again states that {$10000.00} is due, while showing that SPS received a payment on XX/XX/XXXX, parked it in unapplied funds, and then posted a SHORT PAYMENT entry rather than treating the payment as satisfying the borrowers obligation in the ordinary course. The XX/XX/XXXX statement shows the same pattern. It lists {$4300.00} as unapplied funds, states a total amount due of {$6200.00}, and shows unpaid late charges of {$1300.00}, even though SPS also shows that it received payments and then moved them through suspense and SHORT PAYMENT entries. \n\nThe XXXX statement is especially revealing. It states on page 1 that Partial payments are treated as unapplied funds until we receive enough for a full principal and interest payment, while at the same time the transaction history shows SPS receiving a payment on XX/XX/XXXX, assessing a late payment charge that same day, and then the next day posting a SHORT PAYMENT entry that applied principal and interest while zeroing out the suspense balance. That is exactly why the current late-fee demand is improper. SPS can not create or preserve a delinquency by its own payment-posting choices and then monetize that servicer-created delinquency through late fees. Regulation Xs error-resolution procedures exist precisely for servicing errors of this sort, and CFPBs mortgage servicing rules also govern escrow administration and force-placed insurance practices. \n\nThe insurance charges are equally problematic. The XX/XX/XXXX statement shows XXXX separate flood-insurance disbursements in XXXX, XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX for {$2700.00} and XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX for $ XXXX XXXX Form XXXX from SPS separately reports hazard-insurance XXXX of {$22000.00} for XXXX. You have now advised that SPS also made XXXX flood-insurance payments to both XXXX XXXX and XXXX and is trying to make the borrower bear the cost of XXXX flood policies. If that is what occurred, SPS has compounded the same problem it admitted in XXXX : it is paying policies it should not pay, billing the borrower for those disbursements, and then using the resulting balance distortion to justify an inflated monthly payment and continuing late charges. \n\nThe prior SPS position that the insurance XXXX would have sent you a refund check directly, which could be sent to SPS is not a valid answer. SPS made the disbursements. SPS created the escrow shortage. SPS controls the servicing ledger. SPS is the party with the servicing obligation under federal law. Removing hazard escrow without fully unwinding the consequences of SPSs own improper disbursements does not remediate the error. It simply freezes the borrower inside a distorted ledger and then forces the borrower to act as SPSs collection agent against third-party insurers. That is not correction. It is cost shifting. \n\nXXXX anticipated defenses fail on both the facts and the law. SPS will likely repeat that the account was transferred in incorrectly, that it later removed hazard escrow, and that any duplicate refunds must come from the insurers. But that admission actually establishes the borrowers core point : SPS knows the original escrow classification was wrong and knows it paid insurance based on that wrong classification. Once SPS admitted the servicing input error, its duty was not merely to stop making XXXX category of future disbursement. Its duty was to restore the account to the position it would have occupied absent SPSs own error, correct the shortage it manufactured, remove related late fees and delinquency treatment, and cease collection of amounts caused by its own misadministration. XXXX XXXX escrow rules govern how servicers maintain and analyze escrow accounts, and CFPB guidance makes clear that escrow collections are tied to amounts the servicer reasonably anticipates paying from the account. An escrow shortage built on unauthorized or erroneous disbursements is not reasonably anticipated in the ordinary sense ; it is servicer-caused. \n\nSPS XXXX also argue, as it did before, that late fees were assessed according to the note and that reporting was accurate. That answer ignores the threshold error. If the servicer misapplies payments, holds funds in suspense, inflates the amount due through improper insurance charges, and manufactures an escrow shortage by paying policies it should not have paid, then the servicer can not rely on the notes late-charge language as if the borrower independently failed to perform. The current record shows that SPS received payments, carried unapplied funds, and still assessed or preserved late fees totaling {$1300.00}. On these facts, the borrowers position is not that SPS miscalculated a late fee by a few dollars. The position is that SPS created the conditions under which it claimed a late fee at all. \nSPS XXXX further argue that it only escrowed flood after XX/XX/XXXX and that its current flood premium is merely a pass-through amount set by the XXXX. That defense also fails if SPS is indeed carrying XXXX flood policies or paying XXXX flood carriers for overlapping periods. Even if XXXX XXXX sets the premium, SPS remains responsible for determining whether it is properly disbursing escrow funds, whether coverage is duplicative, whether the borrower already has acceptable coverage, and whether the borrower is being charged for a servicer-caused duplication. CFPBs force-placed insurance rule governs hazard insurance specifically, but the broader Regulation X framework still requires accurate servicing, proper escrow administration, and timely correction of servicing errors. \n\nThis letter therefore identifies the following servicing errors and requests corresponding information. First, SPS has erred by failing to fully correct the consequences of the improper hazard-escrow transfer that it admitted in XXXX. Second, SPS has erred by assessing, maintaining, or attempting to collect late fees, including the current {$1300.00} late-fee balance, where the alleged delinquency is tied to SPSs own misapplication of payments and insurance-related account distortion. XXXX, SPS has erred by placing funds into unapplied status and then using that treatment to roll forward past-due amounts and generate inflated monthly demands. XXXX, SPS has erred by disbursing insurance premiums in a manner that appears duplicative, including XXXX flood-insurance payments to more than XXXX XXXX, and then requiring the borrower to pay for SPSs own XXXX or to recover SPSs money from the insurers. XXXX, SPS has erred by failing to provide a true remediation after admitting the account was transferred and serviced under an incorrect escrow structure. XXXX, SPS has erred to the extent it has furnished adverse account status or maintained delinquency metrics that arise from those servicing errors. \n\nUPDATED : ( Please note that to date, in XXXX, SPS has made payment, improperly, to XXXX flood insurance companies : XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX for the same property. SPS must obtain, on its own, a refund for XXXX XXXX as this policy had been cancelled. Please also note that SPS has overpaid Selective Insurance company, sending a check in the amount of over {$2000.00} for a policy with a premium of only {$1800.00}. Such remediation is required at the expense of SPS not the borrower. This ongoing bad faith and improper disbursement of money is the servicers to remediate not the borrower. ) Please see the attached XX/XX/XXXX letter from SPS. SPSs XX/XX/XXXX correspondence further confirms the servicing errors at issue rather than resolving them. SPS continues to withhold substantial funds in suspense, fail to apply them in a reasonable manner and then claim a possible delinquency and added late fees to a problem THEY HAVE CREATED. SPS claims the borrower is short {$920.00} but that amount is derived from : improper escrow charges, improper insurance disbursements, and their own admitted servicing errors. SPS logic amounts to \" you did not pay the full amount we incorrectly calculated, and therefore you are delinquent and owe us late fees. '' This is not legally sustainable and unjust to the borrower. This is not a legitimate deficiency in payment but rather the result of SPS ' inflated monthly obligation. SPS continues to weaponize suspense accounting. SPS receives money, holds it in suspense and refuses to apply it. Then assess late fees, inflate the amount due, and threaten credit reporting. This is a violation of RESPA. \n\nSPS to their benefit completely ignore that they created the escrow imbalance, they made unauthorized insurance payments and made duplicate coverage payments for both hazard and flood in XXXX and XXXX. They shift the burden to the borrower and demands the borrower catches up. SPS can not now rely on those same improper charges to claim that the borrower has failed to make full contractual payment. XXXX suggestion that the borrower must resolve the escrow issue by paying the inflated amount or seeking assistance options is inappropriate. The borrower is not in default ; SPS has created a distorted account balance through improper insurance payments and escrow handling. SPSnot the borrowermust correct those errors. In short, SPS is attempting to require the borrower to cure a deficiency that SPS itself created. That is not permitted under federal servicing standards. \n\nThe borrower reiterates that SPS must immediately apply all unapplied funds, remove all late charges, reverse all improper escrow and insurance-related charges, and restore the account to the position it would have been in had SPS not XXXX disbursed insurance funds or misapplied payments. \n\nSPS is treating the loan as delinquent solely because the borrower has not paid amounts that SPS improperly added to the account as a result of its own escrow and insurance errors. SPS can not create a servicing error and then penalize the borrower for not curing that error. \n\nTo cure these errors, SPS must do more than simply now acknowledge the proper escrow and loan documents and remove hazard escrow in name only. \n\nSPS must reverse every late fee that was assessed or carried forward because of the servicer-created delinquency, including the currently stated {$1300.00}. SPS must immediately apply all borrower payments correctly and reconstruct the account history month by month as if SPS had not improperly advanced hazard-insurance funds and as if SPS had not posted duplicative insurance disbursements. SPS must identify every insurance disbursement made since servicing transfer, including each hazard and flood payment, the date, payee, policy number, coverage period, reason for payment, and the specific authority SPS contends permitted the disbursement. SPS must identify all XXXX flood-insurance payments, including the payments reflected on the XXXX statement, and explain whether XXXX XXXX and XXXX were XXXX paid, why both were paid, and for what coverage periods. SPS must then pursue reimbursement directly from the carriers to the extent SPS made duplicate, unauthorized, or unnecessary payments. SPS is the party that made the disbursements. The borrower is not required to underwrite SPSs remediation by fronting inflated monthly payments or by acting as SPSs recovery department. \nSPS must also produce all escrow analyses, escrow-closing notices, disbursement histories, servicing-transfer boarding records, insurance notices, XXXX communications, coverage-verification documents, payment-posting histories, suspense-account histories, fee histories, and all records relating to any force-placement, lender-placement, duplicate payment, or overlapping flood coverage. SPS must explain how it calculated the current monthly amount due, how it carried forward past-due amounts, and why it considered the borrower late while also holding unapplied funds. CFPBs current Regulation X pages confirm the borrowers right to seek both error correction and information related to mortgage servicing. \n\nThe borrowers position is straightforward. SPS admitted the account was transferred and serviced under the wrong escrow assumption. SPS then failed to unwind the damage from that admitted error. Instead, SPS preserved the account distortion, charged the borrower as though SPSs mistake were the borrowers obligation, kept or assessed late fees, and is now apparently duplicating flood-insurance disbursements while insisting that the borrower either pay the inflated balance or recover SPSs money from insurers. That is not remediation, and it is not compliant servicing. \n\nAccordingly, the borrower demands that SPS, within the timelines required by federal law, acknowledge this Complaint, Notice of Error and XXXX for XXXX, conduct a full investigation, remove the late charges it itself has created by improper servicing errors, correct the payment application history, eliminate all account balances caused by unauthorized or duplicative insurance disbursements, cease collection of any amount tied to those disbursements, correct any inaccurate credit reporting, and provide the complete servicing and insurance records described above. If SPS contends no error occurred, then SPS must identify with specificity the contractual and regulatory basis for each disputed disbursement, each late charge, each suspense posting, and each claimed monthly amount due. \n\nPlease treat this submission as both a formal CFPB complaint supplement and a formal Notice of Error / Request for Information under Regulation X. The borrower expressly reserves all rights, claims, damages, and remedies. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-26T18:50:12.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"33157","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20687947","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","date_received":"2026-03-26T18:17:45.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["SPS XXXX also argue, as it did before, that <em>late</em> fees were assessed according to the note and that <em>reporting</em> was accurate. That answer ignores the threshold <em>error</em>. If the servicer misapplies payments, holds funds in suspense, inflates the amount due through improper insurance <em>charges</em>, and manufactures an escrow shortage by paying policies it should not have paid, then the servicer can not rely on the notes <em>late</em>-<em>charge</em> language as if the borrower independently failed to perform."]},"sort":[11.885144,"20687947"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9377507","_score":11.585311,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/year> my car payment for XXXX XXXX  was submitted to my account at Current XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and the payment shows it cleared on XX/XX/year>. XXXX financial initially had my account credited for the payment, but then a week afterwards it was added back to the balance on my car loan. XXXX financial insisted my payment failed, and was returned unpaid. One of the support ticket responses from XXXX said it was returned due to a check truncation entry return, but I have no idea what that means. Ive been jumping through hoops for over two months trying to get it fixed. Ive contacted my bank by chat and email multiple times ( no phone number available ) I disputed the charge, they said they investigated the matter, but wouldnt credit me back the money because they found no error on their part. I emailed the dispute team back and asked for the documents used in the investigation. The email about the dispute said it was my right to request any documentation, and a written explanation of it. I also requested the dispute be escalated, as XXXX still wasnt crediting me for the payment. I didnt receive anything for a while, and asked a few times about the issue. I did finally receive an ACH report from the dispute team that they got from the federal reserve ACH system. No explanation or any other information was included. I asked about escalating the dispute, and got no answer about it. I sent the ACH report to XXXX XXXX and after faxing, and submitting to them with a support ticket I finally had to get the guys at the dealership involved again, because I couldnt get any cooperation. They said they were sending my documents to their resolution team, and it would take five days. Almost two weeks later, on XX/XX/year> I finally got a phone call from XXXX, and I was told that my payment had initially been paid to XXXX, but that my bank reversed the charge on XX/XX/year>, and the money was sent back to my bank account on XX/XX/year>. I never received any money back. They could see this already as my bank statement I sent them shows no returned money, but XXXX still said that is what happened. Ive emailed Current support, and the dispute team since then and received no response from either. XXXX claims they also have an XXXX report that is from XX/XX/year> showing the {$500.00} payment being returned to the bank. I asked for the report on XX/XX/year> and was told I would receive it in XXXX days. I still havent received it from XXXX, and its been 4 days. At this point I have no idea what to do. My money is missing somewhere between XXXX XXXX, and Current ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ), and both companies are blaming the each other. I obviously dont have access to any of these systems, I only know that {$500.00} was taken, nobody can tell me where it is, and Im currently behind on my car loan, getting late fees, and tanking my credit score. XXXX wont stop reporting it as late or stop charging me fees because they claim they arent responsible, and that my money was returned. An ACH reversal doesnt seem like something that happens without the customer requesting it for some serious reason like fraud, and I asked XXXX why it was returned, but they said they dont know why, and I have to ask my bank. My bank wont respond to me, and they claim the transaction was successful, so I cant get any further answers about what happened and why. I really need help with this matter, as Ive done everything I can do besides move forward with my attorney. I would rather not have to do that, but Im not receiving much cooperation from either company. Thank you for your time.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-06-28T20:27:55.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"97526","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9377507","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"FinCo Services Inc DBA Current","date_received":"2024-06-28T19:17:08.000Z","state":"OR","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Money was taken from your account on the wrong day or for the wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I obviously dont have access to any of these systems, I only know that {$500.00} was taken, nobody can tell me where it is, and Im currently behind on my car loan, getting <em>late</em> fees, and tanking my credit score. XXXX wont stop <em>reporting</em> it as <em>late</em> or stop <em>charging</em> me fees because they claim they arent responsible, and that my money was returned."]},"sort":[11.585311,"9377507"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3130757","_score":11.138854,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Chase stole {$3600.00} from me and they won '' t give it back.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX I wrote a check for full amt of my Chase bill {$2300.00} and mailed it in.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX Chase posted a {$3600.00} debit to my XXXX  account.Causing me {$100.00} in bank fees for insufficient funds. I immediately transferred funds from another XXXX  account to prevent further damage.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX I called XXXX  to try to resolve the Chase error of debit of {$1000.00} over what I authorized. I talked to XXXX  @ XXXX XXXX per phone.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX XXXX, I called XXXX  and talked to XXXX  to try to resolve Chase debit of {$1000.00} over what I authorized and resolve bank fees.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Called XXXX  to resolve Chase debit error and resolve bank fees. I talked to XXXX, who emailed me a \" Written Statement of Unauthorized Debit '' form. I immediately filled it out, according to her instructions, and drove to a facility I could fax it. XXXX  emailed me back and wanted me to resubmit it as her initial instructions were wrong. Unable to fax from my home, I refused to transport to fax again, so she told me to send through XXXX website communication. I sent corrected form \" Statement of Unauthorized Debit '' to XXXX website communication.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX XXXX   Email from XXXX  with confirmation received corrected form. She stated she forwarded the corrected form to XXXX  's EFC department, to process request for correction with Chase Bank.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX I was in XXXX   area caring for a sick family member. Some time during this week, I get a call from Chase Bank that my check was returned. Now my Chase account payment was late with an additional {$35.00} late fee, and needed to be paid immediately. Unable to make transaction in my situation, I informed them I would investigate the situation when I return to California.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX I received written notice from Chase Bank, by mail, of returned check and that my payment was overdue.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX. I talk in person to XXXX   branch manager, XXXX XXXX, fully explaining the series of events with Chase Bank. She assured me XXXX  would follow through with Chase Bank to resolve.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX I go to XXXX  branch of Chase Bank and talk to branch manager, XXXX XXXX for about 2 hours. Because she \" thought '' my funds were returned to XXXX  and late charges were reversed, I wrote a check for the \" late '' balance.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX approx XXXX XXXX I return home and look up my XXXX  account and realized funds were not returned as XXXX  had said. I immediately returned to the XXXX XXXX   branch. I talked to branch manager XXXX XXXX, since XXXX   needed to leave. So again I spend approx 1 more hour talking to XXXX. XXXX said the check was returned on XX/XX/XXXX by electronic transfer and he had no clue as to why it did not show as received by XXXX.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX XXXX I texted XXXX XXXX to request any update to my missing funds.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX XXXX. I texted XXXX  that if this matter was not resolved by XX/XX/XXXX, I would report Chase Bank to the Federal Reserve Consumer Help line.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX Funds still not returned to XXXX  from Chase Bank. Thus, I am writing this report.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-01-22T21:11:37.000Z","issue":"Other features, terms, or problems","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"94087","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3130757","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2019-01-22T19:32:33.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Other problem"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I texted XXXX  that if this matter was not resolved by XX/XX/XXXX, I would <em>report</em> Chase Bank to the Federal <em>Reserve</em> Consumer Help line.\n\nXX/XX/XXXX Funds still not returned to XXXX  from Chase Bank. Thus, I am writing this <em>report</em>."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[11.138854,"3130757"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13946439","_score":10.935747,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is submitted following Wells Fargo Banks failure to remedy a series of unlawful, retaliatory, and procedurally flawed actions taken in response to a valid billing dispute filed under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ), 15 U.S.C. 1666, and Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. 1026.13.\n\nI. Factual Background The dispute concerned a {$350.00} charge from XXXX XXXX for merchandise never received. Wells Fargo initially denied the billing dispute despite the clear criteria for non-receipt of goods under FCBA. Following submission of documentation and a CFPB complaint, the bank reversed its position on XX/XX/XXXX, confirming that I was not liable for the charge. \n\nDespite this, Wells Fargo closed both credit card accounts associated with the dispute : XXXX ending in XXXX XXXX XXXX ending in XXXX Both accounts were in good standing, with no history of late payments, misuse, or credit risk indicators. \n\nThese closures : Occurred during or immediately after the dispute process, Were justified only with vague risk-based language, Were executed before resolution of the billing error, in apparent violation of Regulation Z, And have not been corrected despite reversal of the underlying charge. \n\nRepeated efforts to clarify internal flags, confirm reinstatement eligibility, and resolve reputational harm were ignored. Wells Fargo failed to respond to a formal escalation submitted to its Executive Office on XX/XX/XXXX, which requested corrective action by XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n\n\nII. Legal and Regulatory Violations Wells Fargos actions reflect a systemic disregard for consumer protection obligations under multiple laws : 1. Fair Credit Billing Act 15 U.S.C. 1666 Creditors may not penalize or retaliate against a cardholder for asserting a valid billing dispute. Closing an account during the pendency of a dispute or after a dispute is resolved in the consumers favor constitutes a prima facie violation of this statute.\n\n2. Regulation Z 12 C.F.R. 1026.13 ( d ) Expressly prohibits creditors from accelerating, restricting, or closing accounts while a billing error investigation is pending.\n\n3. UDAAP 12 U.S.C. 5531 Wells Fargos conduct constitutes an unfair and abusive act or practice under the Consumer Financial Protection Act. It chills protected consumer rights and leverages discretionary contract language to retaliate against dispute activity. \n4. In re CFPB v. Fifth Third Bank, N.A., Case No. 1:20-cv-01683 ( S.D. Ohio ) CFPB enforcement against retaliatory internal account practices establishes precedent. This case reflects a similar pattern of institutional retaliation and opaque internal blacklisting after dispute activity.\n\n5. Gambardella v. G. Fox & Co., 716 F. Supp. 67 ( D. Conn. 1989 ) Federal court ruled that retaliation for exercising FCBA rights constitutes an independent violation, regardless of contractual account closure rights.\n\n6. FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 Wells Fargo acknowledged reporting minor inconsistencies, yet failed to disclose what reputational or coded data may remain internally, which may continue to harm access to credit and services.\n\nIII. Pattern of Harm and Escalation Justification This matter has escalated due to Wells Fargos continued refusal to engage, despite the following : The original denial was overturned, confirming the banks initial investigation was flawed or conducted in bad faith ; The account closures occurred during a protected dispute, in direct contradiction of FCBA and Regulation Z ; The bank continues to withhold any justification, declines to confirm or deny internal reputational flags, and has failed to respond by the consumer-provided deadline ; All evidence points to a pattern of automated or retaliatory closures used to deter future billing challenges.\n\nThis behavior undermines the intent of federal consumer laws. If allowed to persist without enforcement intervention, it signals to all consumers that exercising legal rights under the FCBA may result in closed accounts, lost credit access, and reputational damagewith no recourse. \n\n\n\nRequested Relief I request the following corrective actions : 1. Reopen the credit card accounts ending in XXXX and XXXX, or provide written confirmation that all internal flags, blacklist indicators, and reputational restrictions have been removed. \n2. Provide a written explanationwith internal notes or decision criteriaof the basis for account closures after the billing dispute was reversed in my favor.\n\n3. Affirm that all credit reporting has been corrected, and that no derogatory metadata or coded status remains with any credit bureau or internal Wells Fargo system.\n\n4. Refer this matter for regulatory review as a potential case of UDAAP retaliation, FCBA process failure, and pattern-level suppression of billing rights.\n\nFinal Statement and Reservation of Rights Wells Fargo has now failed to engage with multiple formal communications. Their internal investigation was overturned, yet they persist in denying reinstatement, clarity, or correction. The use of discretionary risk-based language as a post hoc defense for punitive action following protected activity violates both the letter and spirit of consumer law. \n\nIf resolution is not forthcoming, I reserve the right to initiate formal arbitration under the cardholder agreement and seek discovery on account closure protocols, internal reputational coding, and retaliation metrics tied to dispute behavior. \n\nAll rights remain fully reserved. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-06T06:39:59.000Z","issue":"Closing your account","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"89118","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13946439","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2025-06-06T06:37:04.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Company closed your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Factual Background The dispute concerned a {$350.00} <em>charge</em> from XXXX XXXX for merchandise never received. Wells Fargo initially denied the billing dispute despite the clear criteria for non-receipt of goods under FCBA. Following submission of documentation and a CFPB complaint, the bank <em>reversed</em> its position on XX/XX/XXXX, confirming that I was not liable for the <em>charge</em>."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[10.935747,"13946439"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3156484","_score":9.984084,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"After many phone calls to XXXX XXXX they refuse to answer the phone on a Charge that i never sign or had any dealings with! From a Merchant with no consent nor was any card swipe or used!!!!  THIS MERCHANT STOLE FUNDS MY ACCOUNT CALLED XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, NY Transportation Edit - $ XXXX-Under the FCBA, your liability for unauthorized use of your credit card tops out at {$50.00}. However, if you report the loss before your credit card is used, the FCBA says you are not responsible for any charges you didnt authorize. If your credit card number is stolen, but not the card, you are not liable for unauthorized use.If your credit, ATM, or debit card is lost or stolen, federal law limits your liability for unauthorized charges. The XXXX XXXX place a fake charge on the account. But Why??? Credit Card Loss or Fraudulent Charges Under the FCBA, your liability for unauthorized use of your credit card tops out at {$50.00}. However, if you report the loss before your credit card is used, the FCBA says you are not responsible for any charges you didnt authorize. If your credit card number is stolen, but not the card, you are not liable for unauthorized use.If you report an ATM or debit card missing before someone uses it, the EFTA says you are not responsible for any unauthorized transactions. If someone uses your ATM or debit card before you  report it lost or stolen, your liability depends on how quickly you report it : The liable for those transactions are XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, NY not so superior! \nPlease Note : Most fraud prevention features are designed for card-present environments. Visa, for example, has deployed a number of anti-fraud measures designed to make card reproduction extremely difficult, including holograms and embossed security characters on the face of the card. Moreover, the signature and magnetic strip on the back of the card are designed to ensure that the person using the card is the actual cardholder. Merchants are not liable for fraud when card-present transactions are properly authenticated. \nOnline platforms, however, typically facilitate card-not-present transactions ( card payments made without physically swiping a card ). On a website, buyers enter credit card data into a form they do not hand their card to a cashier. Unfortunately, card-not-present transactions are highly susceptible to fraud and abuse, for which merchants and payment facilitators are held liable. \nChargebacks. \nWhen a cardholder disputes a charge with their bank ( the issuing bank ), the bank may reverse the payment and refund the cardholder, after an investigation. This is called a chargeback. \nCardholders are protected from the financial liability of unauthorized credit card transactions by Regulation Z of the Truth in Lending Act and unauthorized debit card transactions by Regulation E of  the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. Card Associations have even broader rules with further added protections. When fraudulent transactions do occur, a well-defined chain of liability determines who is ultimately responsible for making restitution to the cardholder. Payment facilitators must recover chargebacks from merchants who generate them, or else write off the full amount of the chargeback as a loss. \nFor chargebacks resulting from card-not-present transactions, the issuing bank recovers the funds from the merchants bank ( the acquiring bank ), and the acquiring bank recovers the funds from the merchant. \nSince most chargebacks are received weeks or months after the original payment, it is sometimes difficult to recover the funds from the merchant. This is why acquirers are so conservative in their underwriting : an acquirer will typically research the financial stability, creditworthiness, and underlying riskiness of a business ; it will implement special funding policies ( such as reserves or holdbacks ) to  mitigate loss ; and it will require personal guarantees from business owners, whom it will hold personally liable for the businesss financial obligations. \nConsumer Protections Available Regulation Z The Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), as implemented by Regulation Z, provides a billing error dispute process for open-end credit, such as credit cards. In order to take advantage of the protections offered by Regulation Z, you must notify the lender of any billing errors by : providing the notice in writing, enabling the lender to identify your name and account number, stating why you believe there is a billing error, including the type, date, and amount of the error, and sending the notice in a timely manner so that the lender receives it, at the address specified for billing inquiries, no later than 60 days after the lender sent the first billing statement reflecting the error. \nOnce you properly notify the lender about an error on your statement, it must acknowledge that it received this notification within 30 days, unless the problem has been resolved. The lender must investigate and resolve the issue within two complete billing cycles ( but in no event later than 90 days ) after receiving the billing error notice.\n\nWhile the lender conducts its investigation into the billing error : You may withhold payment of the disputed amount and related charges ( but any part of the bill not in question, including finance charges on undisputed amounts must be paid in accordance with account terms ).\n\nThe lender may not take legal or collection action on the disputed amount.\n\nThe lender may not report your account as delinquent, accelerate your debt, restrict your account, or close your account.\n\nIf the lender confirms there is a billing error on your account, it must send you a written explanation of the corrections made to your account. In addition to crediting your account for the disputed amount, the lender must also remove all finance charges, late fees, or other charges related to the error. If the investigation reveals no error occurred, it must send you a written explanation of the amount you owe, and you are responsible for paying the disputed amount, plus any finance charges that accumulated during the investigation. \nYou may request copies of relevant documents used in the lenders investigation. If you disagree with the results of the investigation, you may write to the lender within 10 days after receiving the explanation, and you may indicate that you refuse to pay the disputed amount. The lender may begin collection procedures and may report your account as delinquent to credit reporting agencies, but it must also note that you disagree with the amount owed.\n\nIn addition to the consumer protections associated with billing errors, Regulation Z also contains special credit card provisions that limit your liability for unauthorized use of a credit card. A credit card holders liability is limited to {$50.00} for unauthorized use before the cardholder notifies the card issuer. Notification may be given in person, by telephone, or in writing.\n\nRegulation E The Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ), as implemented by Regulation E, provides basic protections for consumers with electronic direct deposits or who use debit cards to access their deposit account held directly or indirectly at a bank. These protections include timeframes by which a bank must investigate and determine whether an error occurred when you notify your bank of an error and, in some cases, requirements to provide provisional credit while the investigation is performed. \nFor example, if you notify your bank of a potential account error, Regulation E requires a bank to investigate and determine whether an error occurred within 10 business days of receiving your notice ( or 20 business days for new accounts ). If a bank is unable to complete its investigation within the appropriate timeframe, it may take up to 45 days to determine whether an error occurred. But in these cases, banks must generally provide consumers with a provisional credit to their account within 10 days of the bank receiving the error notice. Also, banks must notify consumers about the provisional credit within two days of providing the credit.\n\nSome banks may require you to submit an error notice in writing after you provide notice orally. If the bank does not receive written confirmation within 10 business days of receiving the initial notice of an error, the bank is not required to provide provisional credit. The time period for the investigation may be extended to 90 days if the error involved an electronic transfer initiated outside of the United States, a point-of-sale debit card transaction, or a transaction involving a new account within 30 days of being opened.\n\nIf the bank determines there is an error on your account, it must correct the error within one business day after confirming it and report the results to you within three business days after completing its investigation ( including, if applicable, notice that a provisional credit has been made final ).\n\nIf a bank determines that no error occurred or that an error occurred in a manner or amount different from that described in your notice, the bank must send a written explanation of its findings and note your right to request the documents the bank relied on for its investigation. When the bank debits the funds provisionally credited to your account during the investigation, it must provide you with the date and amount debited. In addition, the bank must inform you that it will honor checks, drafts, or similar instruments payable to third parties and preauthorized transfers from your account ( without charge as a result of an overdraft ) for five business days after the notification.\n\nDisputing a Credit Card Billing Error Many credit card issuers have policies against sellers charging a credit card account before shipment. If you think a seller charged your account too soon, report it to the credit card issuer. Otherwise, the issuer has no way to know the seller isnt following its policies.\n\nTo dispute the billing error with your credit card issuer, you must : write to the credit card issuer at the address given for billing inquiries, not the address for sending your payments, and include your name, address, account number, and a description of the billing error. Use our sample letter.\n\nsend your letter so that it reaches the credit card issuer within 60 days after the first bill with the error was mailed to you. Its a good idea to send your letter by certified mail ; ask for a return receipt so you have proof of what the credit card issuer received. Include copies ( not originals ) of sales slips or other documents that support your position. Keep a copy of your dispute letter.\n\nThe credit card issuer must acknowledge your complaint, in writing, within 30 days after receiving it, unless the problem has been resolved. The issuer must resolve the dispute within two billing cycles ( but not more than 90 days ) after getting your letter.\n\nYou may withhold payment on the disputed amount ( and related charges ) during the investigation. You must pay any part of the bill not in question, including finance charges on the undisputed amount.\n\nThe credit card issuer may not take any legal or other action to collect the disputed amount and related charges ( including finance charges ) during the investigation. While your account cant be closed or restricted, the disputed amount can be applied against your credit limit.\n\nBut what if You placed an order with a catalog company and they charged your credit card immediately. The catalog company contacts you two weeks later and says the shipment will be delayed 60 days. You agree to the delay. The 60 days have passed, and you may be outside of the time to dispute the charges. Can you still dispute the charge?\n\nMaybe. When a shipment is delayed, credit card issuers often are more generous when they calculate the time for allowing disputes, and may extend the 60-day period. To take advantage of this flexibility, include the following information in your dispute letter.\n\nTell the credit card issuer if you didnt expect to be charged for the merchandise before it was shipped. Some credit card issuers make an exception to the general industry rule against sellers charging before shipping if the seller tells you about its practice at the time of sale. If youre sure the seller said nothing or wasnt clear about its charge practice, the credit card issuer is more likely to allow the dispute.\n\nTell the credit card issuer when delivery was expected. Some issuers use the expected date of delivery rather than the charge date as the start time for you to dispute charges. If you dispute the charge within a reasonable time after the expected delivery date passes, chances are good that the card issuer will honor the dispute. When you order or when a seller notifies you of delayed shipment, its important to keep a record of the promised shipment or delivery date. Include a copy of any documentation of the shipment or delivery date when disputing the charge with your card issuer.\n\nDisputing a Debit Card Charge The consumer protections for a debit card differ from protections for a credit card. You may not be able to dispute a debit and get a refund for non-delivery or late delivery. Still, some debit card issuers may voluntarily offer protections and solutions to problems like not getting merchandise you bought with a debit card. See our sample letter, and contact your debit card issuer for more information.\n\nYour Rights When Shopping by Phone, Mail or Online The Mail, Internet, or Telephone Order Merchandise Rule applies to most goods you order by mail, phone, fax, or online. It requires sellers to have a reasonable basis for claiming they can ship an order within a certain time and details what sellers should do if there is a delay.\n\nShip Dates By law, a seller should ship your order within the time stated in its ads or over the phone. If the seller doesnt promise a time, you can expect it to ship your order within 30 days.\n\nThe shipment clock begins when the seller receives a properly completed order. That includes your name, address and payment ( check, money order or authorization to charge an existing credit account whether the account is charged at that time or not ).\n\nIf the seller doesnt promise a shipping time, and you are applying for credit to pay for your purchase, the seller has an additional 20 days ( 50 days total ) to establish the account and ship the merchandise.\n\nDelays If the seller is unable to ship within the promised time, it must notify you, give a revised shipping date and give you the chance to cancel for a full refund or accept the new shipping date. The seller also must give you some way to exercise the cancellation option for free for example, by supplying a prepaid reply card or staffing a toll-free telephone number.\n\nIf you dont respond and the delay is 30 days or less its assumed that you accept the delay and are willing to wait for the merchandise.\n\nIf you dont respond and the delay is more than 30 days the order must be canceled by the 30th day of the delay period and a full refund issued promptly.\n\nIf the seller cant meet the revised shipping date, it must notify you again by mail, email or telephone and give you a new shipping date or cancel your order and give you a refund.\n\nThe order should be canceled and a refund issued promptly unless you indicate by the revised shipping date that you are willing to wait.\n\nIf you dont respond to the second notice, the seller should assume that you are not willing to wait issue a full refund promptly.\n\nRefunds If you pay by cash, check or money order, or a non-seller credit card, the seller must give you a refund within seven working days after the order is canceled.\n\nIf you pay by credit card where the seller is the card issuer, the seller must credit your account within one billing cycle after the order is canceled.\n\nShopping Tips Follow these tips for hassle-free shopping.\n\nConsider your experience with the company or its general reputation before you order. If youve never heard of the seller, enter its name in a search engine with words like complaint or scam, and read about other peoples experiences with the company. In addition, contact your state Attorney General, and local consumer protection agency to see if any complaints are on file.\n\nCheck out the companys refund and return policies, the items availability, and the total cost of your purchase before you place your order.\n\nGet a shipment date.\n\nKeep records of your order, like the website, ad or catalog from which you ordered ; the companys name, address and phone number ; any promises the company made about shipping and when they were made ; the date of your order ; and a copy of the order form you sent to the company. If youre ordering by phone, keep a list of the items, their stock codes, and the order confirmation code ; your canceled check or the charge or debit statement showing the charge for your order ; and any communications to or from the company.\n\nTrack your purchases. When you order online, keep printouts of the web pages with the details of the transaction, including the sellers return policies, in case youre not satisfied.Complaints help the FTC and other law enforcement agencies bring scam artists to justice and put an end to unfair and misleading business practices. If you have a complaint, file it online or call XXXX. \nCredit Cards, Personal Finance At XXXX, we adhere to strict standards of editorial integrity to help you make decisions with confidence. Many or all of the products featured here are from our partners. Heres how we make money. \n\nIf you see a purchase on your credit card statement that you didnt make, be sure to correct the mistake right away. It could be a simple mistake like a double swipe of your card, for example or it could be someone trying to make a little extra money off of a restaurant bill. Heres how to fix a mistake on your statement, and to make sure youre safe. \n1. Talk to the merchant Before you get yourself involved in a lengthy formal dispute, speak with the merchant. Bring your receipt and credit card statement, and take the time to explain the discrepancy. The merchant may clear up the mistake without having to involve the credit card company. If not, take your complaint to the next level. \n2. Prepare your paperwork While the error on your statement might seem obvious to you, you still need to make a strong case. Keep a record of the receipts, credit card statement and anything else that can add to the paper trail. Errors to look out for include : Returns that didnt lead to a credit on your statement.\n\nErroneous dates.\n\nBills sent to the wrong address ( so long as youve notified your creditor of your address change within 20 days ).\n\nMathematical errors. \nAnd, of course, charges for purchases you didnt make. \n\nGather any relevant receipts and documents supporting your claims and make copies. Keep the originals for your records, and gather the copies for your creditor. \n\nRemember : Never give your account information to someone you dont know, and avoid emailing sensitive data like your account number or Social Security number. Also, never give your information when a caller claims to represent your bank or card issuer. Instead, say youll call back, then call the customer service number listed on the banks website or the back of your card. Dont fall victim to a scam! \nWrite to your creditor Within 60 days of receiving the bill in question, send a letter outlining your objection and copies of your proof in an envelope addressed to your creditors department for billing inquiries. To be on the safe side, send the letter by certified mail, so you receive a receipt when it arrives at your creditors headquarters. Save the receipt proving they received your dispute with the other documents youre using to make your case. \n\nYou can also choose to dispute electronically, if the creditors website allows for that. Save any emails you get in return saying your dispute was received. \nFinal stretch : waiting for a response You creditor is required to respond within 30 days of your complaint, and the dispute must be resolved within 90 days, or two billing cycles.\n\nIn the meantime, you dont have to pay for the purchase in question, you must only pay for everything else on your statement. However, keep in mind that if your creditor finds your evidence insufficient, youll have to pay for the purchase in question, plus any interest that has accrued since. \n\nIf your creditor accepts your claim, all charges related to the error will be removed from your statement. If it does not accept your claim, it has to explain to you in writing exactly why the mistake is in fact a not a mistake, and youll have 10 days to challenge that conclusion.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-02-20T07:42:14.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","sub_product":"General-purpose prepaid card","zip_code":"14228","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3156484","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2019-02-20T02:03:12.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["If the lender confirms there is a billing <em>error</em> on your account, it must send you a written explanation of the corrections made to your account. In addition to crediting your account for the disputed amount, the lender must also remove all finance <em>charges</em>, <em>late</em> fees, or other <em>charges</em> related to the <em>error</em>."]},"sort":[9.984084,"3156484"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6724763","_score":8.444105,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX **** XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Bluebird by American Express Account XXXX XXXX Gentlemen I am extremely perturbed by your recent communication that my fraud claim was \" Declined '' How you made this decision needs to be 1. Explained and 2. Reversed. \n\nBackground. \n\nDuring a routine review of my account on XX/XX/XXXX I noticed a large number of fraudulent ATM transactions on my account. \nI telephoned you immediately and spoke to a representative who deliberately made it difficult for me to make my claim. I endured dealing with this person for 60 minutes and later e mailed a statement of fraud to you. \n\nI subsequently made a Police Report to my local police department in XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nRef # XXXX. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I received a email that stated : Hi, XXXX, Recently you inquired about your charge ( XXXX ) from your Bluebird Prepaid Debit Account in the total amount of {$4300.00}. Based upon our investigation we have determined that no error occurred and that transaction ( XXXX ) in question was authorized. Therefore the transaction ( XXXX ) is not eligible for credit to your Account. \nYou have the right to review any documents we relied upon in making our determination. \nYou may request this information by writing to us at the following address : Bluebird Customer Care XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX  XXXX Thanks, The Bluebird Team Discussion. \n\nIt is simply incomprehensible how you reached this \" determination. '' The transaction pattern is obviously fraudulent, it is obviously vastly dissimilar from my typical transaction patterns, and it should have triggered some sort of notice to me that it was occurring. Indeed, it looks like the daily transaction limit for the card was just being recklessly ignored by you. \n\nYou are responsible for this. You failed to provided chip and pin security - easily available. You failed to identify the atypical transaction pattern - every other bank does this. You failed to notify me - every other bank does this. You failed to stop the ongoing fraud, as any competent bank would do. \n\nTherefore I demand : XXXX that you immediately reverse the \" determination '' you made that \" no error occurred '' XXXX that you immediately reinstate the funds stolen. \nXXXX that you take steps to better protect my funds in future and that you describe these steps to me. \nXXXX that you compensate me for my time and expenses incurred dealing with your failure. \nXXXX that you send me all documents relied upon in making this decision including any manuals, policies, internal memorandums, training materials, meeting notes, telephone records, recordings and transcripts, together with the full legal names and addresses of all persons, employed by you or by any other entity, who participated in your investigation and decision. \n\nI am attaching a new Declaration of Fraud related to the claim.\n\nI reserve all rights and remedies available to me under California and United States Law, common law, and equity in this matter should I determine that further enforcement action is necessary. \n\nI further demand an IMMEDIATE response addressed to me particularly addressing the precise and specific issues I raise here. \n\nThis letter is the required demand for payment prior to filing a complaint. I will reject any pro forma or boilerplate response. I will treat any such response as non-responsive and take immediate legal action. \n\nVery truly yours XXXX XXXX Bluebird by American Express Account Number XXXX Date Transaction Value XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$200.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$83.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} XX/XX/XXXX {$2.00} TOTAL {$4400.00}","date_sent_to_company":"2023-03-20T23:33:05.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","sub_product":"General-purpose prepaid card","zip_code":"92240","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6724763","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2023-03-20T23:14:06.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Charged for a purchase or transfer you did not make with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Reversed</em>. \n\nBackground. \n\nDuring a routine review of my account on XX/XX/XXXX I noticed a large number of fraudulent ATM transactions on my account. \nI telephoned you immediately and spoke to a representative who deliberately made it difficult for me to make my claim. I endured dealing with this person for 60 minutes and <em>later</em> e mailed a statement of fraud to you. \n\nI subsequently made a Police <em>Report</em> to my local police department in XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nRef # XXXX."]},"sort":[8.444105,"6724763"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10668585","_score":8.01054,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"This is a new issue. This complaint specifically addresses Freedom Mortgage 's current actions. They have refused to correct their credit bureau reporting of inaccurate late payments from XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. They inflated the amount of time marked as late, although this is disputed. They prematurely removed my VA-backed mortgage from CARES Act protections, and on the first statement they sent me post-forbearance, they indicated I was already 30 days behind and then reported to the credit bureau that I was 60 days behind. \n\nThese protections were intended to ensure a transition out of forbearance without penalizing borrowers, even before the first payment was due. However, from my very first statement after HAF funds were received and after exiting the loss mitigation program, I was reported as 30 days late. I received a statement showing a past-due balance of one month, while they reported both 60- and 30-day lates to the credit bureau. \n\nFreedom Mortgage has not only inaccurately reported seven alleged late payments from XXXX but has also exaggerated the length of the claimed delinquency to credit bureaus from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This misrepresentation has impacted my credit profile and does not reflect my actual payment history. \n\nThe issue stems from their own incorrect statements starting with the first one post-forbearance issued on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX In fact, they have intentionally reported to the credit bureaus that they have no data for XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX This is directly related to their decision to delete payments made timely. \n\nNotably, Freedom Mortgage 's reporting is inconsistent and contradictory. In their \" payments made '' section, they indicate that I have paid the amount owed up until XX/XX/XXXX. However, they simultaneously report the account as delinquent with 30, 60, and 90-day late marks. I have documented this erroneous and contradictory reporting across all three credit bureaus with a screenshot. The only consistent element in their reporting is the claim of having no data for XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX This is significant because XX/XX/XXXX marks the month when they first removed both \" Unapplied Funds '' and \" Partial Payments Applied - Paid to Date '' from my record, initiating a pattern of reporting my account as perpetually 60 days behind. \n\nTimeline of Misreported Payments Freedom Mortgages actions have consistently distorted my payment history. Below is the timeline as reflected in my account statements, showing a pattern of erroneous reporting : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  : Statement shows {$0.00} owed. \n\nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX First statement with a balance post-forbearance. Indicates that in just 10 days, two months of mortgage payments are due.\n\nLists one month of Unapplied Funds still available.\n\nReflects one payment under Partial Payments Applied - Paid to Date, but this is not recorded in the \" Balance Due. '' XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : Shows two months of the mortgage as due. \nNo payment reflected in the Balance Due amount.\n\nOne payment is recorded in the transaction activity.\n\nRecords of both \" Unapplied Funds '' on reserve and \" Partial Payments Applied - Paid To Date '' have disappeared from the record, erasing any trace of two months ' worth of payments from the official record and creating a discrepancy between what was paid and whats being reported. \nThis is the month that they have consistently reported to the credit bureaus that they have NO XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  : Statement now shows three months due, with no history of any applied payments in the balance due.\n\nNo record of the \" Unapplied Funds '' or \" Partial Payments Applied - Paid to Date '' are listed or applied to reduce the balance. \nLate fees are added. \nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  : Statement shows three months due.\n\nPayment is not included in the balance due amount.\n\nThe transaction activity reflects one months payment. \nNo record of the \" Unapplied Funds '' or \" Partial Payments Applied - Paid to Date '' are listed or applied to reduce the balance. \nThis pattern demonstrates a clear attempt by Freedom Mortgage to misrepresent my payment history and create artificial delinquencies. \n\nFreedom Mortgage has mishandled payment reporting, recording payments in transaction activity but failing to include them in the balance due. They later reversed the late fees but refused to acknowledge the Unapplied Funds or the Partial Payments Applied to Date, which would cover two months of mortgage payments but decided to still report these missing payments to the credit bureau. \n\nFreedom Mortgage also retroactively altered statements, erasing past payment history. On a recent statement, the Recent Account History section reads as follows : Payment due XX/XX/XXXX : Fully paid on XX/XX/XXXX Payment due XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX  Fully paid on time Payment due XX/XX/XXXX : Fully paid on XX/XX/XXXX Payment due XX/XX/XXXX : Unpaid balance of {$83.00} Payment due XX/XX/XXXX : Unpaid balance of {$2000.00} Payment due XX/XX/XXXXXXXX  : Unpaid balance of {$2100.00} However, the statements issued on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX do not reflect this payment history : No statement was issued on XX/XX/XXXX with a due date of XX/XX/XXXX, which is standard. \nInstead, an XX/XX/XXXX statement claimed two months were due on XX/XX/XXXX, creating an artificial delinquency. \nContradictory entries show payments as \" fully paid '' on XX/XX/XXXX, yet with an unpaid balance for the same period. \nThe statement dated XX/XX/XXXX shows two months due, even though only one months mortgage payment was actually outstanding on XX/XX/XXXX. \nThis inflated delinquency has been reported to credit bureaus, which severely distorts my payment history. \n\nExaggeration of Late Payments and VA Protections Freedom Mortgage then reported to credit bureaus based solely on inflated amounts shown in their statements, disregarding accurate transaction activity that reflects my actual payments. To worsen the impact, they exaggerated the severity of late payments by reporting 60-day late payments for months that should have been, at most, 30 days late, if at all. \n\nThis occurred while my VA-backed mortgage should have been protected under VA guidelines during post-forbearance. Freedom Mortgage has blatantly ignored these protections, compromising my financial standing and credit history. \n\nThese actions followed a series of prior errors by Freedom Mortgage, beginning with an erroneous foreclosure marking and mishandling of Homeowner Assistance Fund ( HAF ) funds. After accepting my HAF funds, Freedom Mortgage retroactively charged foreclosure fees for services that were never rendered. \n\nIn my direct inquiries with XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX firm Freedom Mortgage said was assigned to handle my foreclosurethe firm confirmed that they never received my file or conducted any foreclosure-related work on behalf of Freedom Mortgage because Freedom Mortgage canceled the request before they even received my file. Likewise, an appraiser confirmed on XX/XX/XXXX that Freedom Mortgage had canceled the appraisal without billing for any services. \n\nDespite no foreclosure services being rendered, Freedom Mortgage retroactively applied {$770.00} in fees after receiving my HAF funds, which led to a deficit amount in my Unapplied funds which impacted my expected month of coverage. I was always i in compliance with the loss mitigation program, yet Freedom Mortgage erroneously marked me as non-compliant, a status they later acknowledged as incorrect. \n\nDespite my consistent compliance, Freedom Mortgage 's repeated errorssuch as deleting unapplied funds, issuing contradictory statements, and imposing retroactive feeshave led to an ongoing and distorted representation of my payment history. \n\nFreedom Mortgage compounded this by reporting exaggerated delinquency timelines to the credit bureaus, disregarding the CARES Act protections that should have shielded my VA-backed mortgage. This complaint specifically addresses these recent actions, including their refusal to correct inaccurately reported late payments and the premature removal of my mortgage from protections due under VA guidelines as of XX/XX/XXXX. These actions have severely and unfairly impacted my credit profile, fabricating a delinquency history from XXXX to XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX \n\nFreedom Mortgage continues to report an inflated delinquency timeline to the credit bureaus, further harming my financial standing. This persistent pattern of mismanagement, inflated charges, and inaccurate reporting violates VA post-forbearance protections.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-04T02:46:44.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"VA mortgage","zip_code":"77584","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10668585","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Freedom Mortgage Company","date_received":"2024-11-04T01:50:19.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Freedom Mortgage has mishandled payment <em>reporting</em>, recording payments in transaction activity but failing to include them in the balance due. They <em>later</em> <em>reversed</em> the <em>late</em> fees but refused to acknowledge the Unapplied Funds or the Partial Payments Applied to Date, which would cover two months of mortgage payments but decided to still <em>report</em> these missing payments to the credit bureau. \n\nFreedom Mortgage also retroactively altered statements, erasing past payment history."],"sub_issue":["Their investigation did not fix an <em>error</em> on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[8.01054,"10668585"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9151536","_score":7.7813215,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"The following is the letter I sent to Citibank XX/XX/XXXX Principal Nodal Officer Citibank Headquarters XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXk, NY XXXX Re : XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX {$2400.00} XXXX transaction Pay id XXXX XX/XX/XXXX {$2500.00} XXXX transaction Pay id XXXX XX/XX/XXXX {$2500.00} XXXX transaction Pay id XXXX  Dear Sir/Madame, Please read the explanations below, as well as the transcript/s for the above R numbers. I have contacted Citibank, on numerous dates in an effort to settle this dispute. I am hopeful that you can escalate this case, and get it cleared up. This accounting of events is from my memory today. Please refer to the initial accounting I had with the Fraud department on XX/XX/XXXX or XX/XX/XXXX. They told me I was being recorded. \n\nThe following is an accounting of fraudulent transactions on my checking account listed above : On XX/XX/XXXX I received a text message. The message said it was from Citibank. It asked if I was trying to process a transaction of XXXX tickets for approximately {$300.00}. The message instructed me to answer Y for yes, and N for No. I was not trying to purchase these tickets, so I answered N. \n\nI then received a subsequent message that read, someone from Citibank would be contacting me within an hour to go through the process of blocking the charges for the airline tickets. \n\nApproximately 45 minutes later I indeed received a phone call. The person that called me represented himself as being from Citibank. He started the conversation by saying he would make sure that the airline tickets had been blocked, and that I would not be charged for them. \n\nThen he ( Citibank employee ) started talking about XXXX. He said I also had a large XXXX charge which was going to be charged on my account the next day. I responded I do no have any XXXX charges pending, and I had no idea what he was saying. Then he ( Citibank employee ) started to read off actual payments on XXXX that I had made, saying did you make these charges. Yes, indeed they were transactions I had made. \n\nI had not questioned that he was from Citibank as it was obvious that he was looking in my account and naming other transactions that I had made. He obviously had full access to my account, or he would have never known about those specific transactions. \n\nHe said in order to block or reverse a XXXX charge, he ( Citibank employee ) would have to call XXXX while putting me on hold and explain to a supervisor at XXXX the issue at hand. Moments later he got back on to the phone and said he had spoken the XXXX Supervisor. She ( XXXX XXXX ) instructed him ( Citibank employee ) to have me ( XXXX XXXX ) follow these instructions. \nGo to the ICON of XXXX in my XXXX profiles I dont remember clearly, but I think he set the profile it up because I used the Citibank app, to see my account. Then on my screen while I was in my bank account there was an ICON in XXXX for XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ). \n\nHe instructed me to enter {$7500.00} to XXXX XXXX. When I tried to do it, a message came back saying it was over the daily limit. He then said we would have to break it up into three transactions as follows : XX/XX/XXXX {$2400.00} and to mark it as Reversal number 1. The next two transactions would have to be dated the following two days. \nXX/XX/XXXX {$2500.00} Reversal number XXXX XX/XX/XXXX {$2500.00} Reversal number 3 As I was doing these transactions, it would ask me for an authorization code. I would then get a text message from Citibank and have to enter that code number the text was saying to enter. When I completed the transactions, he ( Citibank employee ) asked if there was anything else he could do for me. I asked his name. I knew it in XXXX, but you will have to go back to transcript for exact name. \n\nI was following my account the next couple of days. When I saw there was not a credit given back for these XXXX charges, I called the Citibank number on the back of my card. \n\nI told them what had happened. They transferred me to the Fraud Department. The person in the Fraud department said he took a full report which included the telephone number of the incoming call of the person representing himself as the Citibank employee. He said the funds should be back into my account in about 10 days. \nThe money was returned to my bank account. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX the charges were then taken back out of my account, and I received a letter saying that Citibank could not honor the request for reimbursement, stating it was consistent with your normal banking activities. Also included in the letter was a statement saying I have the right to request copies of the information used in the investigation.\n\nI immediately contacted Citibank Fraud department. I was told over and over that I could ONLY leave a message, and that I could not talk directly with them. I then left a message saying I needed to get a transcript of my initial reporting to the Fraud Department. I wanted to make sure that there wasnt anything that was incorrect or omitted. Days later in the mail I received a letter called XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nAll this report had on it was the exact three lines of the XXXX transfers. It was hardly a transcript that anyone could make any kind of decision! \n\nI am demanding that this money be put back into my account immediately! This could have never happened if my account at Citibank was safe from hackers. I do not know these scammers. I had absolutely NO involvement in this case other than following directions from someone representing themselves at an employee of Citibank. I have been short {$7500.00} in my account since XXXX. I have had an account with Citibank for 30 years. \n\nI thought my money would be safe! \n\nPlease confirm receipt of this letter, as well as what steps will be taken to get this resolved. \n\nXXXX XXXX This is the email I received from them. I have emailed them asking for a status 3 times, with no response from them. \n\nPlease use this email and unique reference number for all future correspondence *** Dear Client, Thank you for your email. \n\nWe have received your inquiry under reference number XXXX. Your CitiService Officer will respond to your inquiry as soon as possible. \n\nPlease quote the above reference number on all future correspondence relating to this inquiry. \n\nFor any urgent matters, please call us on below given helpline numbers. \n\nPhone : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Toll Free Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX You can also check the progress of your payment and inquiry through our CitiDirect Portal Want to track a payment : In 3 Simple Steps, access Citi Payments Insights ( CPI ) CitiDirect -> Payments -> Payment Insights Need a quick status on your payment : Use our Citi Inquiry Resolution Portal Need answers to frequently asked questions : Visit our Client Knowledge Centre For us to assist with your inquiry in the most efficient and best manner, please provide the applicable information below, if you have not already included it in your original inquiry. \n\nAccount Number or XXXX ID : Transaction or XXXX XXXXeference : Amount and currency : Value Date : Sincerely, CitiService Team Treasury & Trade Solutions | CitiService Do you know you can now search for any transaction Inquiry and get an instantaneous status response via our new self service capability Citi Inquiry Resolution Portal IMPORTANT NOTE : The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments ( the \" Message '' ) is intended for one or more specific individuals or entities, and may be confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, delete this Message and do not disclose, distribute, or copy it to any third party or otherwise use this Message. Electronic messages are not secure or error free and can contain viruses or may be delayed, and Citi and its affiliates and/or the sender is not liable for any of these occurrences. Citi and its affiliates and/or the sender have no responsibility for unauthorized access and/or alteration to this communication, nor for any consequence based on or arising from your use of information that may have been illegitimately accessed or altered. The Citi and its affiliates and/or the sender reserve the right to monitor, record, transfer cross border and retain electronic messages.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-06-02T19:32:06.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"27858","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9151536","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CITIBANK, N.A.","date_received":"2024-06-02T18:59:56.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["He said in order to block or <em>reverse</em> a XXXX <em>charge</em>, he ( Citibank employee ) would have to call XXXX while putting me on hold and explain to a supervisor at XXXX the issue at hand. Moments <em>later</em> he got back on to the phone and said he had spoken the XXXX Supervisor. She ( XXXX XXXX ) instructed him ( Citibank employee ) to have me ( XXXX XXXX ) follow these instructions."]},"sort":[7.7813215,"9151536"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10398224","_score":6.9817295,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX AGENT/BENEFICIARY/SECURED PARTY XXXX Highway XXXX # XXXX XXXX, AL XXXX To : XXXX XXXX XXXX SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Inquiries XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Credit Reports and Account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX Certified Mail Number XXXX CFPB XXXX ID FOR COMPLAINT SENT TO SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL XXXX RE : PayPal Credit ACCT # XXXX XXXX NOTICE OF DISPUTE Dear XXXX XXXX XXXX Or acting representative It has come to my attention that I have been making payments in error pursuant to 12 CFR 1026.13.\n\nYou have been requiring Federal Reserve Notes as payment, when in fact the original application with financial information ( Utilizing my social security exemption account ) served as an asset, which also satisfies the alleged monthly obligation. \n\nSince XX/XX/year> I attempted to establish a new course of dealing utilizing the notice sent to me every month. XXXX XXXX replied and demanded payment in a specific type of coin or currency. Your demand for a specific type of currency is unlawful and unenforceable. \n\nProvisional Credits were given and then reversed which damaged my credit score and caused me serious financial harm in the process.\n\nThis Notice is to confirm that your claim is disputed under 15 USC 1692 et seq. Please verify under oath that this claim is valid, free from any claims and defenses including but not limited to : any breach of agreement, failure of consideration or material alterations, and that the original lender provided value. Further, that the alleged account was transferred in good faith and by the consent of all parties involved.\n\nTHE TRANSACTION In a credit card securitization transaction only the receivables are sold, not the accounts that generate the receivables. The financial institution retains legal ownership of the credit card accounts and can continue to change the terms on the accounts. Accounts corresponding to securitized loans are typically referred to as the designated accounts ( or sometimes trust accounts ). The initial outstanding balances on the designated accounts are sold to the trust as are the rights to any new charges on the designated accounts. Subsequently, as cardholder purchase activity generates more receivables on the designated accounts, these new receivables are purchased by the trust from the originating institution/seller/transferor. The trust uses the monthly principal payments received from the cardholders to acquire these new charges or receivables. When the securitization is initially set up, the originating institution/seller adds sufficient receivables to support the principal balance of the certificates plus an additional amount ( seller 's interest ) that serves to absorb fluctuations in the outstanding balance of the receivables. The originating institution/seller will make subsequent additions to the trust in order to keep the seller 's interest at the required level. ( Emphasis added ) See : https : //www.fdic.gov/regulations/examinations/credit_card_securitization/ch2.html After reasonable inquiry I have concluded that SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL is in breach of the alleged agreement. The following facts support my position in this matter : 1. SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL failed to disclose to the alleged consumer XXXX XXXX XXXX ( hereinafter XXXX ) that SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL used consumers note, capital, funds, money or money equivalent to fund a note, check or similar instrument that was used to fund the charges on the alleged account, whereby SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL did not perform under the agreement and risked nothing of value. \n\n2. SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL has not used any of their own capital, funds, money or money equivalents to pay for any charges on the alleged account.\n\n3. SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL received something-for-nothing by using the consumers note ( s ) to fund charges to the credit card account while retaining payments from consumer.\n\n4. So, a breach occurred due to the fact that SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL failed to disclose the above information in their credit card agreement prior to soliciting applicant to become bound by it.\n\n5. Due to the breach, and lack of disclosure, SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL has, directly or indirectly, used false, deceptive, or misleading representations or means, in violation of Section 807 of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692e, which constitutes fraud.\n\n6. Due to the securitization of the initial outstanding balances of the alleged account, SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL is not a holder in due course, and therefore can not have incurred a loss or make a valid claim.\n\n7. When accounts are 90 days or more overdue, SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL receives a payoff of the amount due from insurance, whose premiums were unknowingly funded by the so-called borrower.\n\nI want to receive absolute assurance from SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL that they did not breach the agreement.\n\nIn order to settle this matter, please sign or have an authorized officer sign the enclosed affidavit, confirming that you have read the agreement, that you understand GAAP, the bookkeeping entries, accounts receivables and deposits, the banking laws, and the Federal Reserve banks policies and procedures.\n\nIn addition, please furnish me with the following information : 1. A complete statement of Damages, including each and every loss that SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL incurred under the alleged agreement.\n\n2. A copy of any insurance claim having been made by SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL regarding this account.\n\n3. A front and back, true and correct copy of the alleged signed agreement bearing my signature ( full & complete disclosure ), and a detailed copy of the alleged account.\n\n4. A true and correct copy of the transfer instrument that was used to transfer the initial outstanding balances from this alleged account into the Special Purpose Entity ( SPE ) trust, as described on the FDIC website.\n\n5. The name, address and telephone number of SYNCHRONY FINANCIALs CPA auditor.\n\n6. Verification if this debt has been assigned or sold to a debt collector.\n\n7. If this debt has been assigned to a debt collector, please provide the commission amount if collection efforts are successful.\n\n8. If this debt has been sold to a debt collector, please provide the price for which it was sold.\n\nIt would be constructive for you to note that the FCRA ( Fair Credit Reporting Act ) section 609 ( c ) ( 2 ) ( E ) states : \" a consumer reporting agency is not required to remove accurate derogatory information from a consumer 's file, unless the information is outdated under section 605 or can not be verified.\n\nThe can not be verified is the key phrase, as you can see. Since I challenged you and your staff to verify, and you can not, that means all financial institutions and credit reporting agencies concerned with my account are required to remove any derogatory information. It can not be deemed accurate if it can not be verified. If it can not be verified, then it is required to be removed, according to the FCRA.\n\nYou are required by federal law to furnish the credit bureaus with the required disclosure by placing a notice of dispute on my account within ( 30 ) days after receiving this dispute letter. I am maintaining a careful record of dates as well as time-stamped copies of my credit reports, which will show that you have violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Section 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) [ 15 USC 1681s-2 ] if you do not place the disclosure within the required ( 30 ) day period.\n\nAlso, during this validation period, if any action is taken which could be considered detrimental to any of my credit reports, I will consult with legal counsel for suit. This includes any listing of any information to a credit-reporting repository that could be inaccurate or invalidated. If your offices have or continue to report invalidated information to any of the three major credit bureaus ( XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ), this action might constitute fraud under both federal and state laws and directly violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Due to this fact, if any negative mark is found or continues to report on any of my credit reports by your company or any company that you represent, I will not hesitate in bringing legal action against you for the following : Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and Defamation of Character, Bank Fraud, Aggravated Identity Theft and Conspiracy.\n\nI am sure your legal staff will agree that non-compliance with this request could violate Fair Credit Reporting Act, Section 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) - Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [ 15 USC 1681s-2 ], putting your company in serious legal trouble with the FTC and other state or federal agencies.\n\nAll communications and omissions will be made part of and incorporated into any litigation arising from this matter. Failure to verify and validate the debt within thirty ( 30 ) days by signing the enclosed affidavit confirms that no further action will be taken and an absolute waiver of any right to collect the alleged debt. Furthermore, all references to this account must be deleted and completely removed from my credit file and a copy of such deletion request shall be sent to me immediately.\n\nYou must contact me in writing and request an extension in the event that you need more than thirty ( 30 ) days to verify and validate the debt. Failure to do so confirms that the time limit is reasonable.\n\nThis notice also constitutes a Notice to Cease Telephonic Communications. Non-compliance with this request will violate the Telephone Consumer Protection Act 47 USC 227.\n\nIf you can not verify and validate this debt by the above listed means, then what right do you have, under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 15 USC 1692, to even send me a letter? Are you committing mail fraud?\n\nNOTICE THIS IS NOT A REQUEST FOR CONFIRMATION THAT YOU HAVE A COPY OF AN AGREEMENT OR COPIES OF STATEMENTS. THIS IS A DEMAND FOR PROOF THAT YOU HAVE THE REQUISITE KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS, AND THAT THE ALLEGED CREDITOR PROVIDED ADEQUATE CONSIDERATION AND INCURRED A FINANCIAL LOSS UNDER THE FULL & COMPLETE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT.\n\nNotice to the Principal is Notice to the Agent, and Notice to the Agent is Notice to the Principal.\n\nClaim for which relief can be granted 1. Reopen Account Ending XXXX with XXXX balance. Or provide new account with XXXX balance. \nXXXX. Remove the Credit Limit ( S ) 3. Accept Negotiable Instrument for setoff payable in US dollars monthly.\n\n4. Remove all ( see highlighted sheet ) adverse information from my consumer credit report. Including ALL late payments.\n\nThank you very much I declare under penalty of perjury without the United States that the above statements are the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.\n\nSincerely, ________________________________________ Signed without prejudice by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Please be aware that dependent upon your response. I will be taking steps to initiate proceedings in federal court, I believe this is necessary for a fair resolution, and I am committed to pursuing this matter to its fullest extent. Also, the following companies have been notified of this situation. \n\nCc : XXXX. XXXX Corporate Headquarters Attention : XXXX XXXX/ Chairman XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX CA XXXX XXXX. XXXX Corporate Headquarters Attention : XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX IL XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX TX XXXX XXXX. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX : Enforcement Division XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Washington DC XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2024-10-10T06:49:20.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"357XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10398224","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","date_received":"2024-10-10T06:39:43.000Z","state":"AL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["to my attention that I have been making payments in <em>error</em> pursuant to 12 CFR 1026.13."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[6.9817295,"10398224"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4403106","_score":6.225864,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"THIS COMPLAINT IS FOR ME. IT IS NOT A THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT. I have been trying to get XXXX and XXXX to remove the erroneous information reported by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX from my credit report. The information reported by XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX were positive but I also wanted these removed from my credit report because they also were not valid. I decided that the only logical thing I could do was learn the Fair Debt and Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) because of their continued refusal to remove the information. The FDCPA referenced other Federal Acts and Statues. Eventually and inadvertently I found out about numerous violations of state and federal laws. They include but are not limited to : The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, ( RESPA ), Fair Debt and Collection Practices Act, Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008 ( SAFE Act, Dodd-Frank Act, Illinois Notary Public Act 5 ILCS 312/Art. I, The Sherman Act and other anti-trust laws, TITLE 86 : REVENUE CHAPTER I : DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE PART 120 REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX, etc. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX., XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Guaranteed Rate, Ravenswood Title, XXXX XXXX XXXX Ravenswood Title, XXXX XXXX  etc. filed Instruments ( Deeds, Mortgages, etc. ) that violated both state and federal laws with the XXXX County Recorder of Deeds. Numerous unknown employees of the XXXX County Recorder of Deeds accepted these void instruments for filing also in violation of law. I decided to check to see if the alleged mortgages were legal before, during and after the alleged mortgages were issued. Had the credit reporting agencies removed the information as they are legally required to do and if the Title was not clouded, I would have never found about the number violations committed by : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Guaranteed Rate, Ravenswood Title , XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and others. One of the most important things I learned was 5 ILCS 312/1-101 ) ( from Ch. 102, par. 201-101 ) Sec. 1-101, Illinois Notary Public Act particularly ( 5 ILCS 312/6-104 ) Which states as follows : ( h ) NO NOTARY PUBLIC SHALL BE AUTHORIZED TO PREPARE ANY LEGAL INSTRUMENT, OR FILL IN THE BLANKS OF AN INSTRUMENT, OTHER THAN A NOTARY CERTIFICATE ; however, this prohibition shall not prohibit an attorney, who is also a notary public, from performing notarial acts for any document prepared by that attorney. To check to see if the Legal Instrument such as a HUD-1 Settlement Statement was prepared by attorney go to the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission ( ARDC ) website and type in the name of the Settlement/Closing/Escrow Agent listed on the HUD-1 form. Sometimes a name will not be listed in that case check to see if the person who signed on the line that states, Settlement Agent is an attorney. After doing this you will find that legal Instruments such as the Mortgage, Note, HUD-1, etc were filled out and signed by a Notary meaning the none of the alleged documents are legally binding and are void without legal effect. What I have learned if one document fraudulent other documents are fraudulent too. FRAUDULENT MORTGAGE PROCEEDINGS At the time of this alleged mortgage closing allegedly took place Title Company, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX used a fraudulent form that : ( i ) that was not a valid HUD-1 Settlement Statement form, ( ii ) lacked an OMB Approval Number ( iii ) was not completed according to law ( iv ) is dated 3/86 ( XXXX XXXX ) ( in a tiny font ) ( v ) the pages are not numbered, etc. as EXHIBIT 4. This form was approximately 23 years old at the time the alleged XX/XX/XXXX mortgage was obtain. This would serve as a Red Herring because no legitimate title company would use a 23-year-old form. It should be noted that the HUD-1 Settlement Statements all contain a footer that states, previous edition are obsolete as shown below : Even if XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX form was valid and it was not even a second grader know that an obsolete form can not be used. It is common practice for people engaged in corrupt activities to use obsolete forms, therefore I checked the date. A check of the OMB website shows that between XXXX XXXX XXXX* that they were no 2502 HUD Settlement forms issued in XXXX. Form ( iii ) lacked page numbers, etc. I was not aware of the foregoing and following information for many reasons ( i ) I had an attorney. I recently found out that my attorney XXXX XXXX also works for XXXX XXXX XXXX as title agent, which is conflict of interest. He received money from me and from XXXX. Attorneys that buyers and sellers have to have at closing are a waste of money. Most are affiliated of XXXX XXXX XXXX and get kickbacks. Further, because of the fraud committed by the Title Insurance Companies and the banks they are required by law to pay for the cost of the home and any other costs incurred. THE SETTLEMENT PROCESS Settlement means the process of executing legally binding documents regarding a lien on property that is subject to a federally related mortgage loan*. This process may also be called \" closing '' or \" escrow '' in different jurisdictions. *Federally related mortgage loan means : ( 1 ) Any loan ( other than temporary financing, such as a construction loan ) : ( 2 ) Any installment sales contract, land contract, or contract for deed on otherwise qualifying residential property is a federally related mortgage loan if the contract is funded in whole or in part by proceeds of a loan made by any maker of mortgage loans specified in paragraphs ( 1 ) ( ii ) ( A ) through ( D ) of this definition. 1024.8 USE OF HUD-1 OR HUD-1A SETTLEMENT STATEMENTS HUD -- 1 or HUD -- 1A settlement statement ( also HUD -- 1 or HUD -- 1A ) means the statement that is prescribed in this part for setting forth settlement charges in connection with either the purchase or the refinancing ( or other subordinate lien transaction ) of 1- to 4-family residential property. ( a ) Use by settlement agent. The settlement agent shall use the HUD-1 settlement statement in every settlement involving a federally related mortgage loan in which there is a borrower and a seller. For transactions in which there is a borrower and no seller, such as refinancing loans or subordinate lien loans, the HUD-1 may be utilized by using the borrower 's side of the HUD-1 statement. THE SETTLEMENT PROCESS Settlement means the process of executing legally binding documents regarding a lien on property that is subject to a federally related mortgage loan. This process may also be called \" closing '' or \" escrow '' in different jurisdictions. Settlement service means any service provided in connection with a prospective or actual settlement, including, but not limited to, any one or more of the following : ( 1 ) Origination of a federally related mortgage loan ( including, but not limited to, the taking of loan applications, loan processing, and the underwriting and funding of such loans ) ; ( 2 ) Rendering of services by a mortgage broker ( including counseling, taking of applications, obtaining verifications and appraisals, and other loan processing and origination services, and communicating with the borrower and lender ) ; ( 3 ) Provision of any services related to the origination, processing or funding of a federally related mortgage loan ; ( 4 ) Provision of title services, including title searches, title examinations, abstract preparation, insurability determinations, and the issuance of title commitments and title insurance policies ; ( 5 ) Rendering of services by an attorney ; ( 6 ) Preparation of documents, including notarization, delivery, and recordation ; ... ( 9 ) Conducting of settlement by a settlement agent and any related services ; ( 10 ) Provision of services involving mortgage insurance ; ( 11 ) Provision of services involving hazard, flood, or other casualty insurance or homeowner 's warranties ; ... ( 13 ) Provision of services involving real property taxes or any other assessments or charges on the real property ; ( 14 ) Rendering of services by a real estate agent or real estate broker ; and ( 15 ) Provision of any other services for which a settlement service provider requires a borrower or seller to pay. BACKGROUND REAL ESTATE SETTLEMENT PROCEDURES ACT The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ( RESPA ) was a law passed by the United States Congress in 1974 and codified as Title 12, Chapter 27 of the United States Code, 12 U.S.C. 26012617. The main objective was to protect homeowners by assisting them in becoming better educated while shopping for real estate services, and eliminating kickbacks and referral fees, which add unnecessary costs to settlement services. RESPA requires lenders and others involved in mortgage lending to provide borrowers with pertinent and timely disclosures regarding the nature and costs of a real estate settlement process. RESPA was also designed to prohibit potentially abusive practices such as kickbacks and referral fees, the practice of dual tracking, and imposes limitations on the use of escrow accounts. RESPA was created because various companies associated with the buying and selling of real estate, such as title insurance companies lenders, real estate agents, construction companies were often engaging in providing undisclosed kickbacks to each other, inflating the costs of real estate transactions and obscuring price competition by facilitating bait-and-switch tactics. RESPA outlines requirements that lenders must follow when providing mortgages that are secured by federally related mortgage loans. This includes home purchase loans, refinancing, lender approved assumptions, property improvement loans, equity lines of credit and reverse mortgages. Under RESPA, lending institutions must : Provide certain disclosures when applicable, including a Good-Faith Estimate of Settlement Costs ( GFE ), Special Information Booklet, HUD-1/1A settlement statement1 and Mortgage Servicing Disclosures. Provide the ability to compare the GFE to the HUD-1/1a settlement statements at closing Follow established escrow accounting practices Not proceed with the foreclosure process when the borrower has submitted a complete application for loss mitigation options, and Not pay kickbacks or pay referral fees to settlement service providers ( e.g., appraisers, real estate brokers/agents and title companies ) Good-Faith Estimate of Settlement Costs For closed-end reverse mortgages, a lender or broker is required to provide the consumer with the standard Good Faith Estimate ( GFE ) form. A Good Faith Estimate of Settlement Costs is a three-page document that shows estimates for the costs that the borrower will likely incur at settlement and related loan information. It is designed to allow borrowers to shop for a mortgage loan by comparing settlement costs and loan terms. These costs include, but are not limited to : Origination charges Estimates for required services ( e.g., appraisals, credit report fees, flood certification ) Title insurance Per diem interest Escrow deposits, and Insurance premiums The bank or mortgage broker must provide the GFE no later than three business days after the lender or mortgage broker received an application, or information sufficient to complete and application. A person may not give or receive a fee or anything of value for a referral of mortgage loan settlement business. This includes an agreement or understanding related to a federally related mortgage. Fees paid for mortgage-related services must be disclosed. Additionally, no person may give or receive any portion, split, or percentage of a fee for services connected with a federally related mortgage except for services actually performed. Permissible Compensation, Fees, salaries, compensation, or other payments. ( 1 ) Section 8 of RESPA permits : ( i ) A payment to an attorney at law for services actually rendered ; ( ii ) A payment by a title company to its duly appointed agent for services actually performed in the issuance of a policy of title insurance ; ( iii ) A payment by a lender to its duly appointed agent or contractor for services actually performed in the origination, processing, or funding of a loan ; ( iv ) ... In XXXX XXXX Congress amended RESPA to cover subordinate lien loans. Congress, when it enacted the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996, it further amended RESPA to clarify certain definitions, including controlled business arrangement, which was changed to affiliated business arrangement. 1024.8 USE OF HUD-1 OR HUD-1A SETTLEMENT STATEMENTS ( a ) Use by settlement agent. The settlement agent shall use the HUD-1 settlement statement in every settlement involving a federally related mortgage loan in which there is a borrower and a seller. For transactions in which there is a borrower and no seller, such as refinancing loans or subordinate lien loans, the HUD-1 may be utilized by using the borrower 's side of the HUD-1 statement. ( b ) Charges to be stated. The settlement agent shall complete the HUD-1 or HUD-1A, in accordance with the instructions set forth in appendix A to this part. ( 1 ) In general. The settlement agent shall state the actual charges paid by the borrower and seller on the HUD-1, or by the borrower on the HUD-1A. The settlement agent must separately itemize each third party charge paid by the borrower and seller. All origination services performed by or on behalf of the loan originator must be included in the loan originator 's own charge. Administrative and processing services related to title services must be included in the title underwriter 's or title agent 's own charge. The amount stated on the HUD-1 or HUD-1A for any itemized service can not exceed the amount actually received by the settlement service provider for that itemized service, unless the charge is an average charge in accordance with paragraph ( b ) ( 2 ) of this section ... ( ii ) The settlement service provider shall define the particular class of transactions for purposes of calculating the average charge as all transactions involving federally related mortgage loans for : ( A ) A period of time as determined by the settlement service provider, but not less than 30 calendar days and not more than 6 months ; ( B ) A geographic area as determined by the settlement service provider ; and ( C ) A type of loan as determined by the settlement service provider. ( iii ) A settlement service provider may use an average charge in the same class of transactions for which the charge was calculated. If the settlement service provider uses the average charge for any transaction in the class, the settlement service provider must use the same average charge in every transaction within that class for which a GFE was provided. ( iv ) The use of an average charge is not permitted for any settlement service if the charge for the service is based on the loan amount or property value. For example, an average charge may not be used for transfer taxes, interest charges, reserves or escrow, or any type of insurance, including mortgage insurance, title insurance, or hazard insurance. ( c ) Violations of section 4 of RESPA ( 12 U.S.C. 2603 ). A violation of any of the requirements of this section will be deemed to be a violation of section 4 of RESPA. An inadvertent or technical error in completing the HUD-1 or HUD-1A shall not be deemed a violation of section 4 of RESPA if a revised HUD-1 or HUD-1A is provided in accordance with the requirements of this section within 30 calendar days after settlement. VIOLATIONS OF SECTION 4 OF RESPA ( 12 U.S.C. 2603 ) A violation of any of the requirements of this section will be deemed to be a violation of section 4 of RESPA. In 2008, HUD issued a RESPA Reform Rule ( 73 Fed. Reg. 68204, XXXX XXXX XXXX ) that included substantive and technical changes to the existing RESPA regulations and different implementation dates for various provisions. Substantive changes included a standard Good Faith Estimate ( GFE ) form and a revised HUD-1 Settlement Statement. TechnicaXXXX changes, including streamlined mortgage servicing disclosure language, elimination of outdated escrow account provisions and a provision permitting an average charge to be listed on the GFE and HUD-1 Settlement Statement, took effect on XXXX XXXX XXXX. Key XXXX RESPA Reform Enhancements to the HUD- 1/1A Settlement Statement While the XXXX RESPA Reform Rule did not include any substantive changes to the first page of the HUD-1/1A form, there were changes to the second page of the form to facilitate comparison between the HUD-1/1A and the GFE. Each designated line on the second page of the revised HUD- 1/1A includes a reference to the relevant line from the GFE. With respect to disclosure of no cost loans where no cost refers only to the loan originators fees ( see Section L, subsection 800 of the HUD-1 form ), the amounts shown for the origination charge and the credit or charge for the interest rate chosen should offset, so that the adjusted origination charge is zero. In the case of a no cost loan where no cost encompasses loan originator and third-party fees, all third-party fees must be itemized and listed in the borrowers column on the HUD- 1/1A. These itemized charges must be offset with a negative adjusted origination charge ( Line 803 ) and recorded in the columns. To further facilitate comparability between the forms, the revised HUD-1 includes a third page ( second page of the HUD-1A ) that allows borrowers to compare the loan terms and settlement charges listed on the GFE with the terms and charges listed on the closing statement. The first half of the third page includes a comparison chart that sets forth the settlement charges from the GFE and the settlement charges from the HUD-1 to allow the borrower to easily determine whether the settlement charges exceed the charges stated on the GFE. If any charges at settlement exceed the charges listed on the GFE by more than the permitted tolerances, the loan originator may cure the tolerance violation by reimbursing to the borrower the amount by which the tolerance was exceeded. A borrower will be deemed to have received timely reimbursement if the financial institution delivers or places the payment in the mail within 30 calendar days after settlement. Inadvertent or technical errors on the settlement statement are not deemed to be a violation of Section 4 of RESPA if a revised HUD-1/1A is provided to the borrower within 30 calendar days after settlement. The second half of the third page sets forth the loan terms for the loan received at settlement in a format that reflects the summary of loan terms on the first page of the GFE, but with additional loan related information that would be available at closing. Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act The Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008 ( SAFE Act ) was enacted on XXXX XXXX XXXX  and mandates a nationwide licensing and registration system for residential mortgage loan originators ( MLOs ) The SAFE Act prohibits individuals from engaging in the business of a residential mortgage loan originator without first obtaining and maintaining annually : For individuals who are employees of covered financial institution, registration as a registered mortgage loan originator and a unique identifier ( federal registration ), or For all other individuals, a state license and registration as a state-licensed mortgage loan originator, and a unique identifier ( state licensing/registration ). The SAFE Act requires that federal registration and state licensing and registration be accomplished through the same online registration system, the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry ( Registry ). The objectives of the SAFE Act include aggregating and improving the flow of information to and between regulators ; providing increased accountability and tracking of MLOs ; enhancing consumer protections ; supporting anti-fraud measures ; and providing consumers with easily accessible information at no charge regarding the employment history of and publicly adjudicated disciplinary and enforcement actions against MLOs. On XXXX XXXX XXXX, the OCC, Board, FDIC, OTS, NCUA, and FCA ( collectively the Agencies ) published substantively similar regulations implementing the SAFE Act federal registration requirements for the institutions they supervise and the institutions MLO employees ( SAFE Act regulation ). On July 21, 2011, Title X of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ( Dodd-Frank Act ) transferred rule-making authority for the SAFE Act from the Agencies to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). On December 19, 2011, the CFPB restated the implementing SAFE Act regulations to 12 CFR 1007 ( 76 Federal Register 78483 ), establishing a new Regulation G, SAFE Mortgage Licensing ActFederal Registration of Residential Mortgage Loan Originators. These examination procedures lay out the background and requirements of the SAFE Act and the SAFE Act regulation concerning federal registration. Mortgage loan originator or MLO means an individual who ( 1 ) takes a residential mortgage loan application and ( 2 ) offers or negotiates terms of a residential mortgage loan for compensation or gain. Registry means the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry, or NMLS system, developed and maintained by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors and the American Association of Residential Mortgage Regulators for the state licensing and registration of state- licensed MLOs, and through which federal MLO registrations must be accomplished. Registered mortgage loan originator or registrant means any individual who ( 1 ) meets the MLO definition ; ( 2 ) is an employee of a covered financial institution ; ( 3 ) is registered pursuant to the regulation with the Registry ; and ( 4 ) maintains a unique identifier through the Registry. Residential mortgage loan means any loan primarily for personal, family, or household use that is secured by a mortgage, deed of trust, or other equivalent consensual security interest on a dwelling ( as defined in Section 103 ( v ) of the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1602 ( v ) ) or residential real estate upon which is constructed or intended to be constructed a dwelling ( including manufactured homes ) and includes refinancings, reverse mortgages, home equity lines of credit, and other first and additional lien loans. Unique identifier means a number or other identifier that : ( 1 ) permanently identifies a registered MLO ; ( 2 ) is assigned by protocols established by the Registry and the Bureau to facilitate electronic tracking of MLOs, as well as uniform identification of, and public access to, the employment history of and the publicly adjudicated disciplinary and enforcement actions against MLOs ; and ( 3 ) must not be used for purposes other than those set forth under the SAFE Act. ; TILA, GSE, and HUD Requirements Title XIV, Section 1402 of the Dodd-Frank Act amended the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) to require ( 1 ) MLOs to include on all loan documents any unique identifier of the MLO provided by the NMLS, and ( 2 ) the CFPB to issue implementing regulations requiring depository institutions to establish and maintain procedures reasonably designed to assure and monitor compliance with the SAFE Acts federal registration requirements. Illinois Notary Public Act ( Source : P.A. 86-1475 ( 5 ILCS 312/Art. I heading ) ARTICLE I ) to promote, serve, and protect the public interest. XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX both work for Illinois Secretary of States Office XXXX XXXX XXXX is employed as the Chief Judge for the Illinois Court of Claims. XXXX XXXX is XXXX XXXX boss. XXXX has donated hundreds of thousand dollars to his campaigns. XXXX has also been CEO of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX attends XXXX parties, etc. XXXX XXXXe was elected as the XXXX County Recorder of Deeds in XXXX and XXXX. The foregoing is important because the Illinois Secretary of State is responsible of issuing notary licensees and disciplinary actions against. Needless, to say the notaries that work for most of these banks and title agencies are fully aware that, XXXX XXXX  Attorney General XXXX XXXX  and so many others work for the interest of the banks and XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( 5 ILCS 312/1-104 ) ( from Ch. 102, par. 201-104 ) Sec. 1-104. Notary Public and Notarization Defined. ( a ) The terms \" notary public '' and \" notary '' are used interchangeably to mean any individual appointed and commissioned to perform notarial acts. ( b ) \" Notarization '' means the performance of a notarial act. ( 5 ILCS 312/2-102 ) ( from Ch. 102, par. 202-102 ) Sec. 2-102. Application. Every applicant for appointment and commission as a notary shall complete an application in a format prescribed by the Secretary of State to be filed with the Secretary of State, stating : ( a ) the applicant 's official name, as it appears on his or her current driver 's license or state-issued identification card ; ( b ) the county in which the applicant resides or, if the applicant is a resident of a state bordering Illinois, the county in Illinois in which that person 's principal place of work or principal place of business is located ; ( c ) the applicant 's residence address, as it appears on his or her current driver 's license or state-issued identification card ; ( c-5 ) the applicant 's business address if different than the applicant 's residence address, if performing notarial acts constitutes any portion of the applicant 's job duties ; ( 5 ILCS 312/3-102 ) ( from Ch. 102, par. 203-102 ) Sec. 3-102. Notarial Record ; Residential Real Property Transactions. ( a ) THIS SECTION SHALL APPLY TO EVERY NOTARIAL ACT IN ILLINOIS INVOLVING A DOCUMENT OF CONVEYANCE THAT TRANSFERS OR PURPORTS TO TRANSFER TITLE TO RESIDENTIAL REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN COOK COUNTY ( b ) As used in this Section, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them : ( 1 ) \" Document of Conveyance '' shall mean a written instrument that transfers or purports to transfer title effecting a change in ownership to Residential Real Property. ( 3 ) \" Notarial Record '' shall mean the written document created in conformity with this Section by a notary in connection with Documents of Conveyance. SEE THE ATTACHED PDF 'S","date_sent_to_company":"2021-05-25T05:33:48.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"60630","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4403106","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"GUARANTEED RATE INC.","date_received":"2021-05-25T00:47:23.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["These costs include, but are not limited to : Origination <em>charges</em> Estimates for required services ( e.g., appraisals, credit <em>report</em> fees, flood certification ) Title insurance Per diem interest Escrow deposits, and Insurance premiums The bank or mortgage broker must provide the GFE no <em>later</em> than three business days after the lender or mortgage broker received an application, or information sufficient to complete and application."],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"]},"sort":[6.225864,"4403106"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2931328","_score":6.222952,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"This is the only specialty of Ocwen. This is the only duplicate their lair rep mentions about. The send criminals to XXXX on your property stole your private property using forge documents, lying to clients, deceiving clients and if they see that this I not working they used death threats tactics in order to intimidate people. This criminal organization must close soon permanently. I get death treats from XXXX 18 to 28 per days. Since I am not scare of this criminal behavior as I discover some IP addresses of those criminals I will go to XXXX to file criminal charges and close the doors of those hate-Americans criminals forever. This is the only expertise this pirate mortgage company has. \nServiced loans using error-riddled information : Ocwen uses a proprietary system called XXXX to process and apply borrower payments, communicate payment information to borrowers, and maintain loan balance information. Ocwen allegedly loaded inaccurate and incomplete information into its XXXX  system. And even when data was accurate, XXXX  generated errors because of system failures and deficient programming. To manage this risk, Ocwen tried manual workarounds, but they often failed to correct inaccuracies and produced still more errors. Ocwen then used this faulty information to service borrowers loans. In XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwens head of servicing described its system as ridiculous and a train wreck. \nIllegally foreclosed on homeowners : Ocwen has long touted its ability to service and modify loans for troubled borrowers. But allegedly, Ocwen has failed to deliver required foreclosure protections. As a result, the Bureau alleges that Ocwen has wrongfully initiated foreclosure proceedings on at least 1,000 people, and has wrongfully held foreclosure sales. Among other illegal practices, Ocwen has initiated the foreclosure process before completing a review of borrowers loss mitigation applications. In other instances, Ocwen has asked borrowers to submit additional information within 30 days, but foreclosed on the borrowers before the deadline. Ocwen has also foreclosed on borrowers who were fulfilling their obligations under a loss mitigation agreement. \nFailed to credit borrowers payments : Ocwen has allegedly failed to appropriately credit payments made by numerous borrowers. Ocwen has also failed to send borrowers accurate periodic statements detailing the amount due, how payments were applied, total payments received, and other information. Ocwen has also failed to correct billing and payment errors. \nBotched escrow accounts : Ocwen manages escrow accounts for over 75 percent of the loans it services. Ocwen has allegedly botched basic tasks in managing these borrower accounts. Because of system breakdowns and an over-reliance on manually entering information, Ocwen has allegedly failed to conduct escrow analyses and sent some borrowers escrow statements late or not at all. Ocwen also allegedly failed to properly account for and apply payments by borrowers to address escrow shortages, such as changes in the account when property taxes go up. One result of this failure has been that some borrowers have paid inaccurate amounts. \nMishandled hazard insurance : If a servicer administers an escrow account for a borrower, a servicer must make timely insurance and/or tax payments on behalf of the borrower. Ocwen, however, has allegedly failed to make timely insurance payments to pay for borrowers home insurance premiums. Ocwens failures led to the lapse of homeowners insurance coverage for more than 10,000 borrowers. Some borrowers were pushed into force-placed insurance. \nBungled borrowers private mortgage insurance : Ocwen allegedly failed to cancel borrowers private mortgage insurance, or PMI, in a timely way, causing consumers to overpay. Generally, borrowers must purchase PMI when they obtain a mortgage with a down payment of less than 20 percent, or when they refinance their mortgage with less than 20 percent equity in their property. Servicers must end a borrowers requirement to pay PMI when the principal balance of the mortgage reaches 78 percent of the propertys original value. Since XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen has failed to end borrowers PMI on time after learning information in its XXXX system was unreliable or missing altogether. Ocwen ultimately overcharged borrowers about {$1.00} XXXX for PMI premiums, and refunded this money only after the fact. \nDeceptively signed up and charged borrowers for add-on products : When servicing borrowers mortgage loans, Ocwen allegedly enrolled some consumers in add-on products through deceptive solicitations and without their consent. Ocwen then billed and collected payments from these consumers. \nFailed to assist heirs seeking foreclosure alternatives : Ocwen allegedly mishandled accounts for successors-in-interest, or heirs, to a deceased borrower. These consumers included widows, children, and other relatives. As a result, Ocwen failed to properly recognize individuals as heirs, and thereby denied assistance to help avoid foreclosure. In some instances, Ocwen foreclosed on individuals who may have been eligible to save these homes through a loan modification or other loss mitigation option. \nFailed to adequately investigate and respond to borrower complaints : If an error is made in the servicing of a mortgage loan, a servicer must generally either correct the error identified by the borrower, called a notice of error, or investigate the alleged error. Since XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen has allegedly routinely failed to properly acknowledge and investigate complaints, or make necessary corrections. Ocwen changed its policy in XX/XX/XXXX to address the difficulty its call center had in recognizing and escalating complaints, but these changes fell short. Under its new policy, borrowers still have to complain at least five times in nine days before Ocwen automatically escalates their complaint to be resolved. Since XX/XX/XXXX, Ocwen has received more than 580,000 notices of error and complaints from more than 300,000 different borrowers. \nFailed to provide complete and accurate loan information to new servicers : Ocwen has allegedly failed to include complete and accurate borrower information when it sold its rights to service thousands of loans to new mortgage servicers. This has hampered the new servicers efforts to comply with laws and investor guidelines. \nOperations Targeted Financially Distressed Consumers in Danger of Losing Their Homes XXXX XXXX The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau today announced actions to halt two alleged mortgage loan modification scams it believes ripped-off thousands of struggling homeowners across the country. In total, these operations took in more than {$10.00} XXXX by charging consumers for services that falsely promised to prevent foreclosures or renegotiate troubled mortgages. \nWe are taking on schemes that prey on consumers who are struggling to pay their mortgages or facing foreclosure, said CFPB Director XXXX XXXX. We are especially concerned with those who misrepresent government programs or websites to divert distressed homeowners from needed assistance. \nAt the request of the CFPB, U.S. District Court Judges in the State of XXXX have ordered a halt to both operations, the XXXX Law Firm and the National Legal Help Center, and frozen their assets while the CFPB moves forward with the cases. The case involving the National Legal Help Center was initially referred to the CFPB by the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program ( SIGTARP ) and Treasurys Office of Financial Stability, which have coordinated closely with the Bureau throughout the investigation. \nIt is absolutely unacceptable for unscrupulous con artists to take advantage of our nations housing crisis by targeting homeowners looking for help from TARPs Home Affordable Modification Program, said XXXX XXXX, Special Inspector General for TARP ( SIGTARP ). We thank the CFPB for protecting homeowners. SIGTARP will continue to stop these scams and educate homeowners that mortgage modifications through HAMP are free. \nThe CFPB is targeting loan modification operations that attempt to disguise their false promises of relief for struggling homeowners with claims that they are performing legal work or are a law firm. The Bureau is also particularly concerned with schemes that attract victims with false claims that they are endorsed by or represent the government. These tactics are used by mortgage relief scams to attract victims, add credibility to their schemes, or exploit certain legal exemptions for the practice of law. \nThe CFPB complaints allege that the defendants in both cases violated the Dodd-Frank Act and Regulation O, formerly known as the Mortgage Assistance Relief Services Rule. These laws prohibit unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices and protect distressed homeowners from mortgage relief scams. \nViolations of the law alleged in the CFPBs complaints in both cases include : Illegally charged large upfront fees : It is against the law for mortgage relief providers to charge fees before services are provided. However, the defendants in both cases collected fees early on, typically ranging between {$1000.00} and {$4500.00} from each distressed homeowner, for services that rarely if ever materialized. \nDeceptively claimed to be affiliated with government agencies and/or programs : Defendants in both cases used deceptive language and mailings with government logos, letterhead, and/or marks to mislead consumers into believing that their mortgage relief services were sponsored by or associated with government agencies or programs. \nMisrepresented that they would secure loan modifications for consumers : Defendants misled consumers that the defendants were experienced negotiators who would substantially reduce mortgage payments, and that defendants would identify legal violations by consumers banks or mortgage companies to use as leverage in loan modification negotiations. However, it appears that defendants failed to provide meaningful relief for consumers. \nInstructed consumers to stop paying their mortgages and stop contacting their lenders : Financially distressed consumers were told to avoid interactions with their lenders and to stop mortgage payments because the defendants would provide relief, potentially putting the consumers unknowingly at risk of losing their homes and/or ruining their credit scores. \nThe CFPB also alleges that, after pocketing thousands of dollars in illegal fees from one distressed homeowner after another, the defendants in both cases typically stopped returning consumers phone calls and emails. In the end, many consumers learned that the defendants had not contacted their lenders or obtained any meaningful relief for them. Ultimately, homeowners across the country lost thousands of dollars each and suffered significant economic injury, including losing their homes. \nNational Legal Help Center The more recent of the two actions involves XXXX   residents XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX and their operation, National Legal Help Center, which appears to target consumers in all 50 states with false promises of mortgage relief. According to the CFPB, National Legal Help Center falsely claimed that they would provide legal representation for consumers even though the individual defendants are not attorneys and consumers received no actual legal representation. \nDefendants falsely claimed that, for a fee, they could assist consumers in getting benefits from government-affiliated programs, including the recent nationwide mortgage servicing settlement between state attorneys general and the federal government, and the five largest mortgage servicers. Defendants also falsely claimed that they were associated with the Independent Foreclosure Review program overseen by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( OCC ) and the Federal Reserve. In reality, the defendants were not affiliated with either of the programs or in a position to provide the promised benefits to consumers. In fact, on XX/XX/XXXX, the OCC issued an alert on its website about this scam. \nThis is the trophy activity of Ocwen In one case, a former in-home caregiver and her husband who were indicted in XXXX  for allegedly defrauding an elderly veteran with XXXX out of about {$180000.00}. More charges are expected, and police say the couple took about {$500000.00} from the XXXX-year-old man. \nIn another case, a handyman convinced an elderly woman to give him power of attorney. He took out a reverse mortgage on the home which the woman had owned since the XX/XX/XXXX, and she never saw any of the money. She almost lost her home due to the scam. \nWe also heard a troubling story about how the CEO and CFO of a XXXX investment firm were charged with 66 felony counts of elder abuse, securities fraud, and conspiracy for bilking older investors of more than {$2.00} XXXX over an eight-year period. \nThe Government Accountability Office report on combatting elder financial abuse identified cases that are particularly thorny for social service, criminal justice, and consumer protection agencies. These cases involve exploitation by in-home caregivers, agents with power of attorney, and financial service providersexactly the kinds of cases mentioned above. These cases also demonstrate why family members or others who have close contact with older adults can play an important role in spotting and preventing elder financial abuse and exploitation. \nAt the inaugural meeting of the Elder Justice Coordinating Council last fall, we heard concerns that echo what the XXXX reported. We shared those concerns with Congress shortly after the report came out. We also detailed the work our Office for Older Americans is doing to combat some of these problems. We are : Developing guides for family members and others with legal authority to handle money for older relatives or friends, but who may not have formal training. The guides will help people understand proper record keeping, good frameworks for investing, and other basics of managing a vulnerable adults money. They also will help people recognize and respond to financial exploitation. \nProducing a guide for people who operate group living centers dedicated to serving older adults, such as XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX XXXX. We are also establishing partnerships with organizations to help distribute this information. \nPartnering with the FDIC to create XXXX XXXX for Older Adults, a community education and training program for older adults and for caregivers. \nCoordinating with stakeholders in several states to create and sustain multi-disciplinary older American protection networks. We are also developing strategies to communicate that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act generally does not prohibit companies from reporting suspected elder financial exploitation. For many of them, this is often a point of confusion.\n\nThe Bureau also alleges that Ocwen has failed to remediate borrowers for the harm it has caused, including the problems it has created for struggling borrowers who were in default on their loans or who had filed for bankruptcy. For these groups of borrowers, Ocwens servicing errors have been particularly costly. \nThrough its complaint, filed in federal district court for the XXXX District of XXXX, the CFPB seeks a court order requiring Ocwen to follow mortgage servicing law, provide relief for consumers, and pay penalties. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendants have actually violated the law. \nThe lawsuit is available at : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX The Bureau also alleges that Ocwen has failed to remediate borrowers for the harm it has caused, including the problems it has created for struggling borrowers who were in default on their loans or who had filed for bankruptcy. For these groups of borrowers, Ocwens servicing errors have been particularly costly. \nThrough its complaint, filed in federal district court for the XXXX District of XXXX, the CFPB seeks a court order requiring Ocwen to follow mortgage servicing law, provide relief for consumers, and pay penalties. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendants have actually violated the law. \n\nOperations Targeted Financially Distressed Consumers in Danger of Losing Their Homes XXXX XXXX. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau today announced actions to halt two alleged mortgage loan modification scams it believes ripped-off thousands of struggling homeowners across the country. In total, these operations took in more than {$10.00} XXXX by charging consumers for services that falsely promised to prevent foreclosures or renegotiate troubled mortgages. \nWe are going to have 150,000 demonstrating in XXXX against those criminal activity of Ocwen After it the doors of this filthy pirate mortgage company will be close permanently This is the prce for this {$100000.00} property stolen temporary from me. In XX/XX/XXXXand XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX in order to intimidate me they put XXXX criminals to call me 15-20 a day, making even death threats or claiming they are from US Gov. Grants Dept. or from IRS or from Justice Dept. or even FBI or Police Dept. I suspect that a low-level clerk XXXX XXXX from XXXX XXXX  is directly responsible for organizing this XX/XX/XXXX looting perform by XXXX since Ocwen and XXXX was the only Institution informed about my trip to XXXX and this action was in ravage to my opposition to their fraudulent and criminal activity. Low level Ocwen clerk XXXX XXXX from XXXX XXXX  and the low lever worker XXXX from XXXX knew I will be in XXXX ( documenting Ocwens and XXXX forge documents ) informed XXXX  that used XXXX, that used looter XXXX XXXX to loot, vandalize destroy my property in XX/XX/XXXX. Again in a top secret close door knowing that I will not be home to protect from such a criminal attack","date_sent_to_company":"2018-06-09T15:54:08.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"11375","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2931328","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","date_received":"2018-06-09T15:44:09.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["More <em>charges</em> are expected, and police say the couple took about {$500000.00} from the XXXX-year-old man. \nIn another case, a handyman convinced an elderly woman to give him power of attorney. He took out a <em>reverse</em> mortgage on the home which the woman had owned since the XX/XX/XXXX, and she never saw any of the money. She almost lost her home due to the scam."]},"sort":[6.222952,"2931328"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4402901","_score":6.2180357,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"THIS COMPLAINT IS FOR ME. IT IS NOT A THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT. \n\nI have been trying to get XXXX and Experian to remove the erroneous information reported by XXXX dba XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX and XXXX Bank XXXX my credit report. The information reported by XXXX XXXX Bank and XXXX were positive but I also wanted these removed from my credit report because they also were not valid. \n\nI decided that the only logical thing I could do was learn the Fair Debt and Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) because of their continued refusal to remove the information. The FDCPA referenced other Federal Acts and Statues. Eventually and inadvertently I found out about numerous violations of state and federal laws. They include but are not limited to : The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, ( RESPA ), Fair Debt and Collection Practices Act, Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act of XXXX ( SAFE Act, Dodd-Frank Act, Illinois Notary Public Act 5 ILCS 312/Art. I, The Sherman Act and other anti-trust laws, TITLE 86 : REVENUE CHAPTER I : DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE PART 120 REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX, etc. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, etc. filed Instruments ( Deeds, Mortgages, etc. ) that violated both state and federal laws with the XXXX County Recorder of Deeds. Numerous unknown employees of the XXXX County Recorder of Deeds accepted these void instruments for filing also in violation of law. \n\nI decided to check to see if the alleged mortgages were legal before, during and after the alleged mortgages were issued. Had the credit reporting agencies removed the information as they are legally required to do and if the Title was not clouded, I would have never found about the number violations committed by : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX/ dba XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX  , XXXX  XXXX XXXX  , XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX and others. \n\nXXXX of the most important things I learned was 5 ILCS 312/1-101 ) ( from Ch. 102, par. 201-101 ) Sec. 1-101, Illinois Notary Public Act particularly ( 5 ILCS 312/6-104 ) Which states as follows : ( h ) NO NOTARY PUBLIC SHALL BE AUTHORIZED TO PREPARE ANY LEGAL INSTRUMENT, OR FILL IN THE BLANKS OF AN INSTRUMENT, OTHER THAN A NOTARY CERTIFICATE ; however, this prohibition shall not prohibit an attorney, who is also a notary public, from performing notarial acts for any document prepared by that attorney. To check to see if the Legal Instrument such as a HUD-1 Settlement Statement was prepared by attorney go to the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission ( ARDC ) website and type in the name of the Settlement/Closing/Escrow Agent listed on the HUD-1 form. Sometimes a name will not be listed in that case check to see if the person who signed on the line that states, Settlement Agent is an attorney. After doing this you will find that legal Instruments such as the Mortgage, Note, HUD-1, etc were filled out and signed by a Notary meaning the none of the alleged documents are legally binding and are void without legal effect. What I have learned if one document fraudulent other documents are fraudulent too.\n\nFRAUDULENT MORTGAGE PROCEEDINGS At the time of this alleged mortgage closing allegedly took place Title Company, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX used a fraudulent form that : ( i ) that was not a valid HUD-1 Settlement Statement form, ( ii ) lacked an OMB Approval Number ( iii ) was not completed according to law ( iv ) is dated XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX, XXXX XXXX ( in a tiny font ) ( v ) the pages are not numbered, etc. as EXHIBIT 4. This form was approximately 23 years old at the time the alleged XX/XX/XXXX mortgage was obtain. This would serve as a XXXX XXXX because no legitimate title company would use a 23-year-old form. \nIt should be noted that the HUD-1 Settlement Statements all contain a footer that states, previous edition are obsolete as shown below : Even if ATG/XXXX XXXX XXXX form was valid and it was not even a second grader know that an obsolete form can not be used. \n\nIt is common practice for people engaged in corrupt activities to use obsolete forms, therefore I checked the date. A check of the OMB website shows that between XXXX to XXXX that they were no 2502 HUD Settlement forms issued in XXXX. Form ( iii ) lacked page numbers, etc. I was not aware of the foregoing and following information for many reasons ( i ) I had an attorney. I recently found out that my attorney XXXX XXXX also works for ATG/XXXX XXXX XXXX as title agent, which is conflict of interest. He received money from me and from ATG. Attorneys that buyers and sellers have to have at closing are a waste of money. Most are affiliated of XXXX XXXX XXXX and get kickbacks. \n\nFurther, because of the fraud committed by the Title Insurance Companies and the banks they are required by law to pay for the cost of the home and any other costs incurred. \n\nTHE SETTLEMENT PROCESS Settlement means the process of executing legally binding documents regarding a lien on property that is subject to a federally related mortgage loan*. This process may also be called \" closing '' or \" escrow '' in different jurisdictions.\n\n*Federally related mortgage loan means : ( 1 ) Any loan ( other than temporary financing, such as a construction loan ) : ( 2 ) Any installment sales contract, land contract, or contract for deed on otherwise qualifying residential property is a federally related mortgage loan if the contract is funded in whole or in part by proceeds of a loan made by any maker of mortgage loans specified in paragraphs ( 1 ) ( ii ) ( A ) through ( D ) of this definition.\n\n1024.8 USE OF HUD-1 OR HUD-1A SETTLEMENT STATEMENTS HUD -- 1 or HUD -- 1A settlement statement ( also HUD -- 1 or HUD -- 1A ) means the statement that is prescribed in this part for setting forth settlement charges in connection with either the purchase or the refinancing ( or other subordinate lien transaction ) of 1- to 4-family residential property.\n\n( a ) Use by settlement agent. The settlement agent shall use the HUD-1 settlement statement in every settlement involving a federally related mortgage loan in which there is a borrower and a seller. For transactions in which there is a borrower and no seller, such as refinancing loans or subordinate lien loans, the HUD-1 may be utilized by using the borrower 's side of the HUD-1 statement.\n\nTHE SETTLEMENT PROCESS Settlement means the process of executing legally binding documents regarding a lien on property that is subject to a federally related mortgage loan. This process may also be called \" closing '' or \" escrow '' in different jurisdictions.\n\nSettlement service means any service provided in connection with a prospective or actual settlement, including, but not limited to, any one or more of the following : ( 1 ) Origination of a federally related mortgage loan ( including, but not limited to, the taking of loan applications, loan processing, and the underwriting and funding of such loans ) ; ( 2 ) Rendering of services by a mortgage broker ( including counseling, taking of applications, obtaining verifications and appraisals, and other loan processing and origination services, and communicating with the borrower and lender ) ; ( 3 ) Provision of any services related to the origination, processing or funding of a federally related mortgage loan ; ( 4 ) Provision of title services, including title searches, title examinations, abstract preparation, insurability determinations, and the issuance of title commitments and title insurance policies ; ( 5 ) Rendering of services by an attorney ; ( 6 ) Preparation of documents, including notarization, delivery, and recordation ; ...\n\n( 9 ) Conducting of settlement by a settlement agent and any related services ; ( 10 ) Provision of services involving mortgage insurance ; ( 11 ) Provision of services involving hazard, flood, or other casualty insurance or homeowner 's warranties ; ...\n\n( 13 ) Provision of services involving real property taxes or any other assessments or charges on the real property ; ( 14 ) Rendering of services by a real estate agent or real estate broker ; and ( 15 ) Provision of any other services for which a settlement service provider requires a borrower or seller to pay. \n\nBACKGROUND REAL ESTATE SETTLEMENT PROCEDURES ACT The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ( RESPA ) was a law passed by the United States Congress in XXXX and codified as Title 12, Chapter 27 of the United States Code, 12 U.S.C. 26012617. The main objective was to protect homeowners by assisting them in becoming better educated while shopping for real estate services, and eliminating kickbacks and referral fees, which add unnecessary costs to settlement services. RESPA requires lenders and others involved in mortgage lending to provide borrowers with pertinent and timely disclosures regarding the nature and costs of a real estate settlement process. RESPA was also designed to prohibit potentially abusive practices such as kickbacks and referral fees, the practice of dual tracking, and imposes limitations on the use of escrow accounts. \n\nRESPA was created because various companies associated with the buying and selling of real estate, such as title insurance companies lenders, real estate agents, construction companies were often engaging in providing undisclosed kickbacks to each other, inflating the costs of real estate transactions and obscuring price competition by facilitating bait-and-switch tactics. \n\nRESPA outlines requirements that lenders must follow when providing mortgages that are secured by federally related mortgage loans. This includes home purchase loans, refinancing, lender approved assumptions, property improvement loans, equity lines of credit and reverse mortgages. \n\nUnder RESPA, lending institutions must : Provide certain disclosures when applicable, including a Good-Faith Estimate of Settlement Costs ( GFE ), Special Information Booklet, HUD-1/1A settlement statement1 and Mortgage Servicing Disclosures.\n\nProvide the ability to compare the GFE to the HUD-1/1a settlement statements at closing Follow established escrow accounting practices Not proceed with the foreclosure process when the borrower has submitted a complete application for loss mitigation options, and Not pay kickbacks or pay referral fees to settlement service providers ( e.g., appraisers, real estate brokers/agents and title companies ) Good-Faith Estimate of Settlement Costs For closed-end reverse mortgages, a lender or broker is required to provide the consumer with the standard Good Faith Estimate ( GFE ) form. \n\nA Good Faith Estimate of Settlement Costs is a three-page document that shows estimates for the costs that the borrower will likely incur at settlement and related loan information. It is designed to allow borrowers to shop for a mortgage loan by comparing settlement costs and loan terms. These costs include, but are not limited to : Origination charges Estimates for required services ( e.g., appraisals, credit report fees, flood certification ) Title insurance Per diem interest Escrow deposits, and Insurance premiums The bank or mortgage broker must provide the GFE no later than three business days after the lender or mortgage broker received an application, or information sufficient to complete and application.\n\nA person may not give or receive a fee or anything of value for a referral of mortgage loan settlement business. This includes an agreement or understanding related to a federally related mortgage. Fees paid for mortgage-related services must be disclosed. Additionally, no person may give or receive any portion, split, or percentage of a fee for services connected with a federally related mortgage except for services actually performed.\n\nPermissible Compensation, Fees, salaries, compensation, or other payments. ( 1 ) Section 8 of RESPA permits : ( i ) A payment to an attorney at law for services actually rendered ; ( ii ) A payment by a title company to its duly appointed agent for services actually performed in the issuance of a policy of title insurance ; ( iii ) A payment by a lender to its duly appointed agent or contractor for services actually performed in the origination, processing, or funding of a loan ; ( iv ) ... \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, Congress amended RESPA to cover subordinate lien loans. \nCongress, when it enacted the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of XXXX, it further amended RESPA to clarify certain definitions, including controlled business arrangement, which was changed to affiliated business arrangement. \n\n\n1024.8 USE OF HUD-1 OR HUD-1A SETTLEMENT STATEMENTS ( a ) Use by settlement agent. The settlement agent shall use the HUD-1 settlement statement in every settlement involving a federally related mortgage loan in which there is a borrower and a seller. For transactions in which there is a borrower and no seller, such as refinancing loans or subordinate lien loans, the HUD-1 may be utilized by using the borrower 's side of the HUD-1 statement.\n\n( b ) Charges to be stated. The settlement agent shall complete the HUD-1 or HUD-1A, in accordance with the instructions set forth in appendix A to this part. \n\n( 1 ) In general. The settlement agent shall state the actual charges paid by the borrower and seller on the HUD-1, or by the borrower on the HUD-1A. The settlement agent must separately itemize each third party charge paid by the borrower and seller. All origination services performed by or on behalf of the loan originator must be included in the loan originator 's own charge. Administrative and processing services related to title services must be included in the title underwriter 's or title agent 's own charge. The amount stated on the HUD-1 or HUD-1A for any itemized service can not exceed the amount actually received by the settlement service provider for that itemized service, unless the charge is an average charge in accordance with paragraph ( b ) ( 2 ) of this section ...\n\n( ii ) The settlement service provider shall define the particular class of transactions for purposes of calculating the average charge as all transactions involving federally related mortgage loans for : ( A ) A period of time as determined by the settlement service provider, but not less than 30 calendar days and not more than 6 months ; ( B ) A geographic area as determined by the settlement service provider ; and ( C ) A type of loan as determined by the settlement service provider. \n\n( iii ) A settlement service provider may use an average charge in the same class of transactions for which the charge was calculated. If the settlement service provider uses the average charge for any transaction in the class, the settlement service provider must use the same average charge in every transaction within that class for which a GFE was provided.\n\n( iv ) The use of an average charge is not permitted for any settlement service if the charge for the service is based on the loan amount or property value. For example, an average charge may not be used for transfer taxes, interest charges, reserves or escrow, or any type of insurance, including mortgage insurance, title insurance, or hazard insurance.\n\n( c ) Violations of section 4 of RESPA ( 12 U.S.C. 2603 ). A violation of any of the requirements of this section will be deemed to be a violation of section 4 of RESPA. An inadvertent or technical error in completing the HUD-1 or HUD-1A shall not be deemed a violation of section 4 of RESPA if a revised HUD-1 or HUD-1A is provided in accordance with the requirements of this section within 30 calendar days after settlement.\n\nVIOLATIONS OF SECTION 4 OF RESPA ( 12 U.S.C. 2603 ) A violation of any of the requirements of this section will be deemed to be a violation of section 4 of RESPA. \n\nIn XXXX, HUD issued a RESPA Reform Rule ( 73 Fed. Reg. 68204, XX/XX/XXXX ) that included substantive and technical changes to the existing RESPA regulations and different implementation dates for various provisions. Substantive changes included a standard Good Faith Estimate ( GFE ) form and a revised HUD-1 Settlement Statement.\n\nTechnical changes, including streamlined mortgage servicing disclosure language, elimination of outdated escrow account provisions and a provision permitting an average charge to be listed on the GFE and HUD-1 Settlement Statement, took effect on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nKey XXXX RESPA Reform Enhancements to the HUD- 1/1A Settlement Statement While the XXXX RESPA Reform Rule did not include any substantive changes to the first page of the HUD-1/1A form, there were changes to the second page of the form to facilitate comparison between the HUD-1/1A and the GFE. Each designated line on the second page of the revised HUD- 1/1A includes a reference to the relevant line from the GFE. \n\nWith respect to disclosure of no cost loans where no cost refers only to the loan originators fees ( see Section L, subsection 800 of the HUD-1 form ), the amounts shown for the origination charge and the credit or charge for the interest rate chosen should offset, so that the adjusted origination charge is zero.\n\nIn the case of a no cost loan where no cost encompasses loan originator and third-party fees, all third-party fees must be itemized and listed in the borrowers column on the HUD- 1/1A. These itemized charges must be offset with a negative adjusted origination charge ( Line 803 ) and recorded in the columns. \n\nTo further facilitate comparability between the forms, the revised HUD-1 includes a third page ( second page of the HUD-1A ) that allows borrowers to compare the loan terms and settlement charges listed on the GFE with the terms and charges listed on the closing statement. The first half of the third page includes a comparison chart that sets forth the settlement charges from the GFE and the settlement charges from the HUD-1 to allow the borrower to easily determine whether the settlement charges exceed the charges stated on the GFE. If any charges at settlement exceed the charges listed on the GFE by more than the permitted tolerances, the loan originator may cure the tolerance violation by reimbursing to the borrower the amount by which the tolerance was exceeded. A borrower will be deemed to have received timely reimbursement if the financial institution delivers or places the payment in the mail within 30 calendar days after settlement.\n\nInadvertent or technical errors on the settlement statement are not deemed to be a violation of Section 4 of RESPA if a revised HUD-1/1A is provided to the borrower within 30 calendar days after settlement.\n\nThe second half of the third page sets forth the loan terms for the loan received at settlement in a format that reflects the summary of loan terms on the first page of the GFE, but with additional loan related information that would be available at closing. \n\nSecure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act The Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act of XXXX ( SAFE Act ) was enacted on XX/XX/XXXX and mandates a nationwide licensing and registration system for residential mortgage loan originators ( MLOs ) The SAFE Act prohibits individuals from engaging in the business of a residential mortgage loan originator without first obtaining and maintaining annually : For individuals who are employees of covered financial institution, registration as a registered mortgage loan originator and a unique identifier ( federal registration ), or For all other individuals, a state license and registration as a state-licensed mortgage loan originator, and a unique identifier ( state licensing/registration ). \n\nThe SAFE Act requires that federal registration and state licensing and registration be accomplished through the same online registration system, the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry ( Registry ). \n\nThe objectives of the SAFE Act include aggregating and improving the flow of information to and between regulators ; providing increased accountability and tracking of MLOs ; enhancing consumer protections ; supporting anti-fraud measures ; and providing consumers with easily accessible information at no charge regarding the employment history of and publicly adjudicated disciplinary and enforcement actions against MLOs. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, the OCC, Board, FDIC, OTS, NCUA, and FCA ( collectively the Agencies ) published substantively similar regulations implementing the SAFE Act federal registration requirements for the institutions they supervise and the institutions MLO employees ( SAFE Act regulation ). \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, Title X of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ( Dodd-Frank Act ) transferred rule-making authority for the SAFE Act from the Agencies to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, the CFPB restated the implementing SAFE Act regulations to 12 CFR 1007 ( 76 Federal Register 78483 ), establishing a new Regulation G, SAFE Mortgage Licensing ActFederal Registration of Residential Mortgage Loan Originators.\n\nThese examination procedures lay out the background and requirements of the SAFE Act and the SAFE Act regulation concerning federal registration. \n\nMortgage loan originator or MLO means an individual who ( 1 ) takes a residential mortgage loan application and ( 2 ) offers or negotiates terms of a residential mortgage loan for compensation or gain.\n\nRegistry means the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry, or NMLS system, developed and maintained by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors and the American Association of Residential Mortgage Regulators for the state licensing and registration of state- licensed MLOs, and through which federal MLO registrations must be accomplished.\n\nRegistered mortgage loan originator or registrant means any individual who ( 1 ) meets the MLO definition ; ( 2 ) is an employee of a covered financial institution ; ( 3 ) is registered pursuant to the regulation with the Registry ; and ( 4 ) maintains a unique identifier through the Registry.\n\nResidential mortgage loan means any loan primarily for personal, family, or household use that is secured by a mortgage, deed of trust, or other equivalent consensual security interest on a dwelling ( as defined in Section 103 ( v ) of the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1602 ( v ) ) or residential real estate upon which is constructed or intended to be constructed a dwelling ( including manufactured homes ) and includes refinancings, reverse mortgages, home equity lines of credit, and other first and additional lien loans. \n\nUnique identifier means a number or other identifier that : ( 1 ) permanently identifies a registered MLO ; ( 2 ) is assigned by protocols established by the Registry and the Bureau to facilitate electronic tracking of MLOs, as well as uniform identification of, and public access to, the employment history of and the publicly adjudicated disciplinary and enforcement actions against MLOs ; and ( 3 ) must not be used for purposes other than those set forth under the SAFE Act. ; TILA, GSE, and HUD Requirements Title XIV, Section 1402 of the Dodd-Frank Act amended the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) to require ( 1 ) MLOs to include on all loan documents any unique identifier of the MLO provided by the NMLS, and ( 2 ) the CFPB to issue implementing regulations requiring depository institutions to establish and maintain procedures reasonably designed to assure and monitor compliance with the SAFE Acts federal registration requirements. \n\nIllinois Notary Public Act ( Source : XXXX. XXXX ( 5 ILCS 312/Art. I heading ) ARTICLE I ) to promote, serve, and protect the public interest. \n\nXXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX both work for Illinois Secretary of States Office XXXX XXXX XXXX is employed as the Chief Judge for the Illinois Court of Claims. XXXX XXXX is XXXX XXXX boss. ATG has donated hundreds of thousand dollars to his campaigns. XXXX has also been CEO of the XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX attends XXXX parties, etc. \n\nXXXX XXXX was elected as the XXXX County Recorder of Deeds in XXXX and XXXX. The foregoing is important because the Illinois Secretary of State is responsible of issuing notary licensees and disciplinary actions against. Needless, to say the notaries that work for most of these banks and title agencies are fully aware that, XXXX XXXX Attorney General XXXX XXXX and so many others work for the interest of the banks and XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n( 5 ILCS 312/1-104 ) ( from Ch. 102, par. 201-104 ) Sec. 1-104. Notary Public and Notarization Defined.\n\n( a ) The terms \" notary public '' and \" notary '' are used interchangeably to mean any individual appointed and commissioned to perform notarial acts.\n\n( b ) \" Notarization '' means the performance of a notarial act.\n\n( 5 ILCS 312/2-102 ) ( from Ch. 102, par. 202-102 ) Sec. 2-102. Application. Every applicant for appointment and commission as a notary shall complete an application in a format prescribed by the Secretary of State to be filed with the Secretary of State, stating : ( a ) the applicant 's official name, as it appears on his or her current driver 's license or state-issued identification card ; ( b ) the county in which the applicant resides or, if the applicant is a resident of a state bordering Illinois, the county in Illinois in which that person 's principal place of work or principal place of business is located ; ( c ) the applicant 's residence address, as it appears on his or her current driver 's license or state-issued identification card ; ( c-5 ) the applicant 's business address if different than the applicant 's residence address, if performing notarial acts constitutes any portion of the applicant 's job duties ; ( 5 ILCS 312/3-102 ) ( from Ch. 102, par. 203-102 ) Sec. 3-102. Notarial Record ; Residential Real Property Transactions. ( a ) THIS SECTION SHALL APPLY TO EVERY NOTARIAL ACT IN ILLINOIS INVOLVING A DOCUMENT OF CONVEYANCE THAT TRANSFERS OR PURPORTS TO TRANSFER TITLE TO RESIDENTIAL REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN XXXX COUNTY ( b ) As used in this Section, the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them : ( 1 ) \" Document of Conveyance '' shall mean a written instrument that transfers or purports to transfer title effecting a change in ownership to Residential Real Property.\n\n( 3 ) \" Notarial Record '' shall mean the written document created in conformity with this Section by a notary in connection with Documents of Conveyance.\n\nSEE THE ATTACHED PDF 'S","date_sent_to_company":"2021-05-25T04:01:35.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"60630","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4402901","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2021-05-25T00:01:32.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["( iv ) The use of an average <em>charge</em> is not permitted for any settlement service if the <em>charge</em> for the service is based on the loan amount or property value. For example, an average <em>charge</em> may not be used for transfer taxes, interest <em>charges</em>, <em>reserves</em> or escrow, or any type of insurance, including mortgage insurance, title insurance, or hazard insurance.\n\n( c ) Violations of section 4 of RESPA ( 12 U.S.C. 2603 )."],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports"],"issue":["Problem with a credit <em>reporting</em> company's investigation into an existing problem"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"]},"sort":[6.2180357,"4402901"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8615308","_score":6.1734023,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX verified and provided proof that my loan & closing documents have been altered from originals without my knowledge or permission. XXXX, my 1st Servicer informed me, \" she had recvd 5-7 different disclosures none of the matched, had signatures nor were notarized. I stated that's what I have as well there was no notary at closing and I signed my documents on the way to closing because my lender kept sending me someone else 's information all the way up to close, I kept responding back to the lender, wrong customer, wrong purchase price. I have a XXXX XXXX loan these are FHA 's, my interest rate is locked in, its 3 %! Though fell on deaf ears. Night before close, the lender answered my call I called from a friend 's phone I never ever had the lender respond or answer my calls. I lost my temper and stated I came to you wanting one loan it's the only one I prepared for with my counselor for over 8 months I have a grant and down payment assistance they've been trying to get a hold of you you were supposed to lock me in at 2.86 % and you forgot gave me 3 % I'm still not happy about and I can't afford this loan if you're thinking that this is for me. The rush was on. A document now states that I made changes causing everything to be rewritten. Docs were reused including the contract to purchase real estate by agent from home I almost bought with another lender. registered amount of home now the purchase price from the prior property I almost purchased and didn't applied to the home I did buy registered on the wrong date by the title company, knowingly. Day before underwriting lender asked for my XXXX  letter. I was on XXXX but I found it odd that she didn't even have proof of my income yet, though didn't matter the amount she used was inflated. I made a dispute with a cfpb regarding the lender running my credit prior to me even knowing her, she ran my credit on that she ran my credit stating I had provided paycheck stubs on XXXX and my driver 's license which I did n't drive due date XXXX. I had another lender at the time it was closing on the other house just checking prices. I use the lender because I was on XXXX low income and was relying on my credit score and great payment history. I had to use her because she'd already ran my credit I couldn't risk a third hit when my orig lender backed out. I asked the lender if I should unfreeze my credit prior to underwriting I received no response like normal from her. the lender stated that there was no change although after speaking to XXXX and XXXX XXXX it was noted on my credit report changes had occured, there have been a significant rise on my credit the lender stated that no changes had occurred even in a cfpb response to a dispute. XXXX verified the lender lied. my credit was frozen she never even checked my credit again I feel just out of breed she did this so that I would have to pay PMI cuz I wouldn't have had to if she would applied my grant and down payment assistance that she just ignored like she did me and then she also altered the seller credit I was receiving verified by the seller he never reduced it but my lender did twice from XXXX down to XXXX. I asked the lender if she was familiar with applying the down payment assistance and home ready loans she stated she was very familiar with all of that and it would not be a problem. the lender never applied my gift money properly and then applied prepaid homeowners insurance removed it and then added it back in knowing it was prepaid and then used it towards my cash to close that I should have got a refund on. I was forced to pay for the XXXX taxes for the seller which I had stated profusely I did not want on my mortgage loan and that he had to pay it prior to close along with his overdue water bill I was ignored and my agent showed up even though he had been fired just to tell me he had never negotiated the price or got me my survey or even the repairs that I had stated had to happen I had required a home inspection the agent was so green and didn't have anybody to guide him that he thought a home occupancy was the same thing he didn't do these things because he had public anxiety he didn't even know who my lender was. I kept stating I'm under duress and I don't understand this but I was handed a phone with my lender just screaming at me that she'd explained everything I only talked to her a couple times and it was usually her screaming at me for something never did she answer any of my questions or give me any options or provide me with documents when they were supposed to be provided she had no idea who I was and nothing about my mortgage loan and then wanted me to sign to keep her out of trouble documents and then told me that the sellers lived out of state and to make everything easy and not delay the process go ahead and sign things and then they have the seller sign his signature and terms or whatever and they give me a copy later we can discuss it if there was anything I didn't like. the grandson down payment assistance never applied that I already had confirmed compatible I was told by my lender that I was turned down for the XXXX XXXX  loan and also that I had a XXXX property I don't have that either no government backing also I was told I had. I have a thing called a shared driveway and there was no agreement put in place for my XXXX XXXX  loan that I was approved for and lied to about. this is a constant problem and I'm constantly being threatened by the person who owns the driveway and now served with a cease and desist from the city I'm not allowed to step in the driveway and have to pay for a curb to be cut.. lender refused to answer the many messages of the grantee and then just never applied so desperately needed assistance for reasons unknown not even the 3 % Fannie Mae offers. I did not receive a loan estimate that I even thought it was mine because it had a different kind of loan the wrong seller wrong amounts I just thought since you never got back with me ever she was so busy she was sending the wrong person 's information or filling it out wrong she never would answer me when I would stay this is, XXXX I'm the XXXX XXXX loan. I have spent 3 years and nothing less arguing fighting begging with my Mortgage Services regarding which documents are real and which ones are not. I'm charged improperly, I have servicing errors that occurred the first day I had the loan yet no one ever updates are corrects this information even with proof provided. I did not have a reserve and escrow yet I'm being charged for one. APR changed. and part of my CDs were used from the other loan she was trying to stick me with. she required a gift from my mother who couldn't afford it but didn't want me to be homeless not once but twice. infuriated me I prepared and had enough money with the assistance for 20 % down I repeatedly asked for how much that would be and never receive that information. somewhere between my first service or my second the documents were corrected and put in the possession of servicers. although the service are still had the old ones as well. at 6 mo after closing I received altered documents stating that the seller 's wife now was one of the sellers and on disclosures the seller was now a corporation, the sellers business that I can't find any corporation listed at that time. I had made a complaint because the person I bought the house from was listed on over XXXX different houses as owner occupied and remained on mine while I paid his XXXX taxes. I was supposed to get a tax credit for XXXX on time seller lived her but that disappeared this is a rental home one of many of the sellers. I received an amendment page six closing disclosure they only change was the wife 's name listed at the top and this address of the home I purchased. The parcel for my County now blocked out any prior owners and deductions they recvd. I found out that the managing broker for my real estate agent wasn't licensed at the time of purchase. I had refused to give my agent cash for a quick and guaranteed sale on a he was flipping. I reported them to my lender and her response back was well they are adding additional commission to your mortgage loan are we adding it or not closing? so the money I wouldn't pay them under the table was added to my 30-year loan. I reported the lender, real estate agent title company and managing broker even the seller but no one did anything. I don't know why. I have had an attorney look over it and what they did was illegal. I don't have the money for an attorney and there is no attorney that will sue a lender because those are just cases that don't win or they want so much money to start I do not have. I have contacted all the freebie attorneys with land of XXXX nothing available closest one over 8 to 10 hours away. I have over 19 missing payments, I've had five servicers, equity principal interest and escrow accounts are completely off. I have 3 different times the escrow balance that's transferred it is listed as a bounced check, the wired escrow balance, and I start from zero every time. I have filled out notice of error after notice of error they are ignored or I get back no servicing errors have occurred or promises that these items will be fixed, sometimes they are and then somebody changes it all back sometimes they're not fixed it all. I have even had the help from Secretary of State Senators office and many others even not for profits these things get corrected and all reverted back to the errors they were before. I was a victim of XXXX card swapping identity theft there were multiple people who were attached to my sims card and had access to all my personal and financial information and records. multiple payments with every one scheduled bill pay by me all of my billers were receiving five, six, even seven different payments on the same day. my bank stated it wasn't happening they didn't see it, it wasn't happening yet all the companies receiving the checks definitely could see it that information provided to the bank and I was hard closed. XXXX XXXX I was with at the time never would assist me and told me I was not getting any bank statements unless I hired a lawyer and had them requested. FOIA request ignored. I still didn't know that my cell phone information was being shared on a 24-hour basis with internet criminals. I opened an account at XXXXXXXX XXXX. everything started happening again. I had the account for 9 months, I endured over {$9000.00} in XXXX charges every 30 seconds for 32 days straight never informed from the bank and locked out. at the time I was caring for my father who was in hospice, my attention was elsewhere. I wasn't concerned at the time I didn't know I had placed {$20000.00} in the account and thought it to be safe it was the first month I opened the account. the banker at regions didn't understand what was going on I didn't either but he kept reporting three of the charges for the charges five of the charges here and there never all of them like I had disputed all at once immediately. XXXX closed again. the 9 months of payments I had paid with XXXX XXXX not one payment is listed as still paid. that money was never returned to my account for all of them in fact most of them it was not, all payments were reversed and it was stated that I made fraud claims for every payment that I had made. then eventually stating that I had never even had an account at the bank until I made a better business complaint about the situation and they responded we are now in arbitration. my new servicer stated that I made zero payments since XX/XX/XXXX I have made many I've never been late. the prior service serve still has it listed even though fraud report and police report was provided that every month I had had bounced checks for reasons of post-dated Bill pays, customer listed the wrong account or wrong amount with entered silly reasons that would never happen. my second servicer didn't investigation and found out they were all coming from bill pay. I demand it no ACH transactions whatsoever on my account at the time and even when my account was froze they still were receiving these payments. I'm requesting that as a victim of fraud those negative notations on my account that I had no control over being removed from XXXX. my current mortgage servicer States I haven't made any payments since XX/XX/XXXX and has been applying modifications that I keep having removed as well as payment plans and stating them in default issuing and charging for property inspections on top of all the fees. I was speaking to my current servicer specialized Loan Servicing and the agent informed me on Friday that I must have spoke to someone who was on the ball because here 's 6 months of payments that have been in your file and never applied since XX/XX/XXXX. I've sent proof of payment over 29 times of the 19 payments missing on my account I've had the bank librarian send them attorneys not for profits I have fax them mailed them and even emailed them to date SLS has stated not one proof of payment usable or updated because of missing corners in the picture ink dot smudges even told they were thrown in the trash because I had put attention escrow department instead of just my loan number. I'm currently in default and have been told I have to come up with all the money due during the whole time that my mortgage servicer for over 11 months has had proof that the payments they're stating weren't paid are sitting in a file and looked at every time I call which is about 4 to 5 times a week. I've been forced to pay huge amounts and they refused to give me the amount paid or receipts for those paid payments cutting them up and putting them in suspense accounts and applying amounts that I can't even figure out what I paid. I have sent proof that I am in arbitration with the bank yet wouldn't have mattered if they would have just applied the 6 months of payments beginning XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX stated on my XX/XX/XXXX specialized Loan Servicing statement the first one with them it states first payment default dated XX/XX/XXXX I've never been late or missed a payment and shouldn't be treated as such if they've had proof stating the same month they're back charging me for. the agent stated that they would be applied but they haven't been and they're still pushing for foreclosure on my home. I don't know what to do. I have only paid this mortgage on time multiple payments sometimes a month trying to cover all the additional payments made while fraud was occurring. my current servicer SLS has stated they are fully aware that documents have been forged and altered on originals but are refusing to report these documents specifically to loan applications that were falsified with all the wrong information even stating something different than the credit report received the lender stated there was debt that wasn't listed on the credit report she provided me. so I thought last refuses to report these documents or apply any payments until I provide them with a fraud packet please report and a copy of my driver 's license so they can compare it to the digital signatures the XXXX and XXXX verified someone else applied to the closing document originals by use of my accounts with them. I'm an arbitration my banking situation has nothing to do with their responsibility and requirements by federal and state laws to report illegal documents that they are fully aware of criminal altered that they are enforcing and keeping in their possession. I can not provide that information at this time I'm in court case that any information that is released regarding my case could damage my chances of ever having a life again and also not necessary. I reported this to XXXX XXXX they did nothing. I've asked for what my equity is and they will not tell me. requesting what payments were paid only to receive the same payment history after sending proof of 19 bank statements. I have sent the wrong things I didn't know it at the time but I corrected them and then sent the correct information yet it didn't matter. I need help before I lose my home. I don't know where else to turn no one 's following the laws or regulations and nobody cares. even the police here State the identity theft is a waste of their time refuse to give me police reports I had to go through the city 's attorney in order to get them 2 years later and then they don't even State what happened. is there anybody in Illinois who follows the law? I've done all the right things I've contacted and reported all of these things no one 's doing anything who is there to get help from. they didn't even have licensing that is required I made the payments why are they not applied. even my payment histories keep dwindling to less payments made why is that changing?","date_sent_to_company":"2024-04-30T17:27:47.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"62040","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8615308","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC","date_received":"2024-03-25T05:04:15.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I'm charged improperly, I have servicing <em>errors</em> that occurred the first day I had the loan yet no one ever updates are corrects this information even with proof provided. I did not have a <em>reserve</em> and escrow yet I'm being charged for one."]},"sort":[6.1734023,"8615308"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10717011","_score":5.458155,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"OUR COMPLAINT\nI XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  United States of\nAmerican I XXXX, have look at my credit report and see that there are\ninaccurate reports on my account child support dont not report to credit reporters and by\nlawful cancellation all contracts and remove theses accounts off my credit profile I will like a\ncontract to show that me a living soul that me and them the other party showed in contact\nwhere we both agreed upon on all disclosure must be showed its a invalid contract please\nremove from my credit report it have hinder me from my future benefits. UCC 1-308 without\nprejudice Please remove these accounts immediately. I Recently viewed my credit report\nand saw that there is incorrect information on my credit report. In accordance with the Fair\nCredit Reporting act. These accounts is inaccurate and dont have no contract with me or\ndid not notify me or put me on notice that was going to report these accounts on my credit\nreport. I have the rights to private I will love equity for all the inaccurate accounts on my\ncredit report.The List of accounts below has violated my federally protected consumer rights\nto privacy and confidentiality under 15 USC 1681. I HAVE NOTICE THESE NAMES AND\nADDRESSES XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is not my address DO NOT BELONG TO ME CAN YOU\nPLEASE REMOVE THIS ADDRESS FROM MY INFORMATION ON MY CREDIT REPORT\nIMMEDIATELY. : I have tried time after times delete this\noff my credit report immediately this is not acting in good Faith by law to delete this account immediately yes deleted this account IMMEDIATELY . (XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and Trans Union have removed and deleted this child support. I would this is my XXXX  time contacting \nXXXX  to deleted it and they put it back in my credit report its a VIOLATION by law thats\nillegal I will like for these accounts to be deleted and remove this account immediately. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, has\nviolated my rights. 15 U.S.C 6802 (B) The consumer is given the opportunity, before the time\nthat such information is initially disclosed, to direct that such information not be disclosed to\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nPage XXXX of XXXX  such XXXX  party; and (C)the consumer is given an explanation of how the consumer can\nexercise that nondisclosure option. 15 U.S.C 1681 section 602 A. States I have the right to\nprivacy. 15 U.S.C 1681 Section 604 A Section 2: It also states a consumer reporting agency\ncannot furnish an account without my written instructions. 15 U.S.C 1681c. (a)(5) Section\nStates: no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the\nfollowing items of information Any other adverse item of information, other than records of\nconvictions of crimes which antedates the report by more than seven years. 15 U.S.C 1681\nsection 623 If a consumer notifies a furnisher, at an address specified by the furnisher for\nsuch notices, that specific information is inaccurate, and the information is, in fact,\ninaccurate, the furnisher must thereafter report the correct information to CRAs. Section\n623(a)(1)(B). 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 (A)(1) A person shall not furnish any information relating to a\nconsumer to any consumer reporting agency if the person knows or has reasonable cause\nto believe that the information is inaccurate. Also the credit bureaus failed to do a complete\na full investigation here is my certified cfpb complaint number. I HAVE TRYING CALLING\nAND MORE AND HAVE NOT GOT NOT MAIL TO UPDATE ME ON MY credit profile and I\ndont not want the reporting any thing for me on my credit account I am a living man I can\nconduct my own business and have the right to privacy bay law UCC I SEE THEY ARE FAILED TO COMPLETE A FULL investigation. You have 4 days to delete this from my account immediately its hurt my credit profile from getting a response please to live and depender automobile to travel XXXX XXXX XXXX is my correct name this is a\nviolation. I want this these account CLOSE\n WITH MONETARY RELIEF. They had fail to mail or\nemail me a FRA Letter explaining my rights and show me proof of my wet signature.. Please\nremove ALL HARD INQUIRIES I DUD NOT RECEIVED ANY THING FOR TRANSACTION \n\nTN XXXX XXXX XXXX HAVE VIOLATED MY RIGHTS [TRANSUNION PLEASE DELETE OR UPDATE LATE PAYMENT TO PAID XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX HAVE VIOLATED MY RIGHT XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have VIOLATED MY RIGHTS I WIL LIKE XXXX dollar for every violation its stopped me from gettIng a place to live and I have already sent letters and emails no response back delete these accounts immediately IMMEDIATE AND SEND CHECK BY MAIL. These accounts dose not match on all credit reports please delete 15 US\n\n15 U.S. Code  1681i\n- Procedure in case of disputed accuracy (5) Treatment of inaccurate or unverifiable\ninformation (A) In general If, after any reinvestigation under paragraph (1) of any information\ndisputed by a consumer, an item of the information is found to be inaccurate or incomplete\nor cannot be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall (i) promptly delete that item of\ninformation from the file of the consumer, or modify that item of information, as appropriate,\nbased on the results of the reinvestigation; and (ii) promptly notify the furnisher of that\ninformation that the information has been modified or deleted from the file of the\nconsumer. 15 U.S. Code  1681q - Obtaining information under false pretenses Any person\nwho knowingly and willfully obtains information on a consumer from a consumer reporting\nagency under false pretenses shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than XXXX\nyears, or both. 15 U.S. Code  1666b - Timing of payments (a) Time to make payments A\ncreditor may not treat a payment on a credit card account under an open end consumer\ncredit plan as late for any purpose, unless the creditor has adopted reasonable procedures\ndesigned to ensure that each periodic statement including the information required by\nsection 1637(b) of this title is mailed or delivered to the consumer not later than XXXX  days\nbefore the payment due date. (b) Grace period If an open end consumer credit plan\nprovides a time period within which an obligor may repay any portion of the credit\nextended without incurring an additional finance charge, such additional finance charge\nmay not be imposed with respect to such portion of the credit extended for the billing cycle\nof which such period is a part, unless a statement which includes the amount upon which\nthe finance charge for the period is based was mailed or delivered to the consumer not\nlater than XXXX  days before the date specified in the statement by which payment must be\nmade in order to avoid imposition of that finance charge. 15 U.S. Code  1638 -\nTransactions other than under an open end credit plan a) Required disclosures by creditor\nFor each consumer credit transaction other than under an open end credit plan, the creditor\nshall disclose each of the following items, to the extent applicable: (1) The identity of the\ncreditor required to make disclosure. (2) (A) The amount financed, using that term, which\nshall be the amount of credit of which the consumer has actual use. This amount shall be\ncomputed as follows, but the computations need not be disclosed and shall not be\ndisclosed with the disclosures conspicuously segregated in accordance with subsection (b)\n(1): (i) take the principal amount of the loan or the cash price less downpayment and trade-\nin; (ii) add any charges which are not part of the finance charge or of the principal amount\nof the loan and which are financed by the consumer, including the cost of any items\nexcluded from the finance charge pursuant to section 1605 of this title; and (iii) subtract any\ncharges which are part of the finance charge but which will be paid by the consumer before\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nPage XXXX of XXXX\nor at the time of the consummation of the transaction, or have been withheld from the\nproceeds of the credit. (B) In conjunction with the disclosure of the amount financed, a\ncreditor shall provide a statement of the consumers right to obtain, upon a written request,\na written itemization of the amount financed. The statement shall include spaces for a yes\nand no indication to be initialed by the consumer to indicate whether the consumer wants\na written itemization of the amount financed. Upon receiving an affirmative indication, the\ncreditor shall provide, at the time other disclosures are required to be furnished, a written\nitemization of the amount financed. For the purposes of this subparagraph, itemization of\nthe amount financed means a disclosure of the following items, to the extent applicable: (i)\nthe amount that is or will be paid directly to the consumer; (ii) the amount that is or will be\ncredited to the consumers account to discharge obligations owed to the creditor; (iii) each\namount that is or will be paid to third persons by the creditor on the consumers behalf,\ntogether with an identification of or reference to the third person; and (iv) the total amount\nof any charges described in the preceding subparagraph (A)(iii). XXXX The finance charge,\nnot itemized, using that term. XXXX The finance charge expressed as an annual percentage\nrate, using that term. This shall not be required if the amount financed does not exceed $XXXX  and the finance charge does not exceed XXXX, or if the amount financed exceeds $XXXX  and the\nfinance charge does not exceed XXXXXXXX XXXX) The sum of the amount financed and the finance\ncharge, which shall be termed the total of payments. XXXX) The number, amount, and due\ndates or period of payments scheduled to repay the total of payments. XXXX XXXX XXXX, 520 U.S. 329 (1997) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  TO THE UNITED STATES COURT\nOF APPEALS FOR THE XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Argued XXXX XXXX XXXX-Decided XXXX XXXX XXXX Respondents, five Arizona mothers whose children are eligible for state child\nsupport services under Title IV -D of the Social Security Act, filed this 42 U. S. C.  1983 suit\nagainst petitioner, the director of the state child support agency, claiming, among other\nthings, that they properly applied for child support services; that, despite their good faith\nefforts to cooperate, the agency never took adequate steps to obtain child support\npayments for them; that these omissions were largely attributable to staff shortages and\nother structural defects in the State's program; and that these systemic failures violated their\nindividual rights under Title XXXX  to have all mandated services delivered in substantial\ncompliance with the title and its implementing regulations. They requested broad relief,\nincluding a declaratory judgment that the Arizona program's operation violates TitlXXXX XXXX XXXX\nprovisions creating rights in them that are enforceable through a  1983 action, and an\ninjunction requiring the director to achieve substantial compliance with Title IV-D\nthroughout all programmatic operations. The District Court granted summary judgment for\npetitioner, but the XXXX XXXX  reversed. Without distinguishing among the numerous\nprovisions of the complex XXXX XXXX program or the many rights those provisions might\nhave created, the latter court held that respondents had an enforceable individual right to\nhave the State achieve \"substantial compliance\" with XXXX XXXX. It also disagreed with the\nDistrict Court's conclusion that Congress had foreclosed private XXXX XXXX enforcement\nactions by authorizing the Secretary of Health and Human Services (Secretary) to audit and\ncut off funds to States whose programs do not substantially comply with XXXX XXXX\nrequirements Held: XXXX XXXX does not give individuals a federal right to force a state\nagency to substantially comply with XXXX XXXX XXXX  (a) A plaintiff seeking  XXXX  redress must assert the violation of a federal right, not merely of federal lawXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 493 U. S. 103, 106. XXXX  principal factors determine whether a\nstatutory provision creates a privately enforceable right: XXXX whether the plaintiff is an\nintended beneficiary of the statute; (XXXX  whether the plaintiff's asserted interests are not so\nvague and amor- XXXX  Syllabus phous as to be beyond the competence of the judiciary to\nenforce; and (3) whether the statute imposes a binding obligation on the State. SeeXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, 496 U. S. 498, 509. Even if a plaintiff demonstrates such a\nright, however, there is only a rebuttable presumption that it is enforceable under  XXXX.\nDismissal is proper if Congress specifically foreclosed a  XXXX  remedy, XXXX XXXX XXXX,\n468 U. S. 992, 1005, XXXX XXXX XXXX, either expressly, by forbidding recourse to  XXXX  in the\nstatute itself, or impliedly, by creating a comprehensive enforcement scheme that is\nincompatible with individual  XXXX  enforcement, XXXX XXXX XXXX, 512 U. S. 107, 133. XXXX XXXX  (b) Respondents have not established that XXXX XXXX gives them individually\nenforceable federal rights. In prior cases, the Court has been able to determine whether or\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nPage XXXX of XXXX\nnot a statute created such rights because the plaintiffs articulated, and lower courts\nevaluated, welldefined claims. See, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 479 U. S. 418, 430. Here, respondents have not identified with particularity the\nrights they claim, and the XXXX XXXX has not engaged in the requisite methodical inquiry.\nThat court erred in apparently holding that individuals have an enforceable right to\n\"substantial compliance\" with XXXX XXXX in all respects. The statutory \"substantial\ncompliance\" requirement, see, e. g., 42 U. S. C.  609(a)(8) (1994 ed., Supp. II), does not give\nrise to individual rights; it was not intended to benefit individual children and custodial\nparents, but is simply a yardstick for the Secretary to measure the systemwide performance\nof a State's XXXX XXXX  program, allowing her to increase the frequency of audits and reduce\nthe State's federal grant upon a finding of substantial noncompliance. The Court of Appeals\nalso erred in taking a blanket approach to determining whether XXXX XXXX creates rights: It is\nreadily apparent that many of the provisions of that multifaceted statutory scheme,\nincluding its \"substantial compliance\" standard and data processing, staffing, and\norganizational requirements, do not fit any of the traditional criteria for identifying statutory\nrights. Although this Court does not foreclose the possibility that some XXXX XXXX  provisions\ngive rise to individual rights, the XXXX XXXX  did not separate out the particular rights it\nbelieved arise from the statutory scheme, the complaint is less than clear in this regard, and\nit is not certain whether respondents sought any relief more specific than a declaration that\ntheir \"rights\" were being violated and an injunction forcing petitioner to \"substantially\ncomply\" with all of XXXX XXXX provisions. This defect is best addressed by sending the case\nback for the District Court to construe the complaint in the XXXX  instance, in order to\ndetermine exactly what rights, considered in their most concrete, specific form, respondents\nare asserting. Only by manageably breaking down the 42 U.S. Code  1983 - Civil action for\ndeprivation of rights Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation,\ncustom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to\nbe subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof\nto the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and\nlaws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper\nproceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act\nor omission taken in such officers judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted\nunless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the\npurposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of\nColumbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia. Credit card Code\n15 U.S. Code  1692k - Civil liability Amount of damages Except as otherwise provided\nby this section, any debt collector who fails to comply with any provision of this subchapter\nwith respect to any person is liable to such person in an amount equal to the sum of (1) any\nactual damage sustained by such person as a result of such failure; (2) (A) in the case of any\naction by an individual, such additional damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding\n$XXXX; or (B) in the case of a class action, (i) such amount for each named plaintiff as could\nbe recovered under subparagraph (A), and (ii) such amount as the court may allow for all\nother class members, without regard to a minimum individual recovery, not to exceed the\nlesser of $XXXX  or XXXX  per centum of the net worth of the debt collector; and (3) in the case\nof any successful action to enforce the foregoing liability, the costs of the action, together\nwith a reasonable attorneys fee as determined by the court. On a finding by the court that\nan action under this section was brought in bad faith and for the purpose of harassment, the\ncourt may award to the defendant attorneys fees reasonable in relation to the work\nexpended and costs. (b) Factors considered by court In determining the amount of liability\nin any action under subsection (a), the court shall consider, among other relevant factors\n(1) in any individual action under subsection (a)(2)(A), the frequency and persistence of\nnoncompliance by the debt collector, the nature of such noncompliance, and the extent to\nwhich such noncompliance was intentional; or (2) in any class action under subsection (a)(2)\n(B), the frequency and persistence of noncompliance by the debt collector, the nature of\nsuch noncompliance, the resources of the debt collector, the number of persons adversely\naffected, and the extent to which the debt collectors noncompliance was intentional. (c)\nIntent A debt collector may not be held liable in any action brought under this subchapter if\nthe debt collector shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not\nintentional and resulted from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of\nprocedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error. (d) Jurisdiction An action to\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nPage XXXX of XXXX\nenforce any liability created by this subchapter may be brought in any appropriate United\nStates district court without regard to the amount in controversy, or in any other court of\ncompetent jurisdiction, within one year from the date on which the violation occurs. (e)\nAdvisory opinions of Bureau No provision of this section imposing any liability shall apply to\nany act done or omitted in good faith in conformity with any advisory opinion of the Bureau,\nnotwithstanding that after such act or omission has occurred, such opinion is amended,\nrescinded, or determined by judicial or other authority to be invalid for any reason. 15 U.S.\nCode  1642 - Issuance of credit cards No credit card shall be issued except in response to\na request or application therefor. This prohibition does not apply to the issuance of a credit\ncard in renewal of, or in substitution for, an accepted credit card. 15 U.S.C 1692g Validation\nof debts (a) Notice of debt; contents Within XXXX  days after the initial communication with a\nconsumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the\nfollowing information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid\nthe debt, send the consumer a written notice containing (1) the amount of the debt; (2) the\nname of the creditor to whom the debt is owed; (3) a statement that unless the consumer,\nwithin thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion\nthereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector; (4) a statement that if the\nconsumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or\nany portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a\ncopy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will\nbe mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and (5) a statement that, upon the\nconsumers written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the\nconsumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current\ncreditor. (b) Disputed debts If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the\nthirty-day period described in subsection (a) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is\ndisputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the\ndebt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the\ndebt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and\naddress of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and\naddress of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. Collection\nactivities and communications that do not otherwise violate this subchapter may continue\nduring the XXXX-day period referred to in subsection (a) unless the consumer has notified the\ndebt collector in writing that the debt, or any portion of the debt, is disputed or that the\nconsumer requests the name and address of the original creditor. Any collection activities\nand communication during the XXXX-day period may not overshadow or be inconsistent with\nthe disclosure of the consumers right to dispute the debt or request the name and address\nof the original creditor. (c) Admission of liability The failure of a consumer to dispute the\nvalidity of a debt under this section may not be construed by any court as an admission of\nliability by the consumer. (d) Legal pleadings A communication in the form of a formal\npleading in a civil action shall not be treated as an initial communication for purposes of\nsubsection (a). (e) Notice provisions The sending or delivery of any form or notice which\ndoes not relate to the collection of a debt and is expressly required by XXXX  XXXX, title V of\nGramm-Leach-Bliley Act [15 U.S.C. 6801 et seq.], or any provision of Federal or State law\nrelating to notice of data security breach or privacy, or any regulation prescribed under any\nsuch provision of law, shall not be treated as an initial communication in connection with\ndebt collection for purposes of this section. 15 U.S. Code  1681q - Obtaining information\nunder false pretenses U.S. Code Notes prev | next Any person who knowingly and willfully\nobtains information on a consumer from a consumer reporting agency under false\npretenses shall be fined under XXXX XXXX imprisoned for not more than XXXX  years, or both. To\nwho it may concern , After viewing a copy of my credit report, I noticed a collection account\nplaced on my credit report from you in XXXX  I am requesting that you allow me to validate\nthe alleged debt. I am unaware of any outstanding medical bills that I possess, and I am\nseeking the name and hospital/medical provider to which I owe the debt and a detailed\nbreakdown of the fees that I owe. Additionally, I am allowed under the Heath insurance\nPortability and Accountability Act (HIPAA] to protect my privacy and medical records from\nthird parties. I did not give permission to any of my current or prior medical providers to\nrelease any of my medical information to a third party. I am aware that the HIPAA does\nallows the release of limited information about me but anything more is to only be revealed\nwith the patient's authorization. Therefore, my request is twofold-validation of debt and\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nPage XXXX of XXXX  HIPAA authorization.  Please provide breakdown of fees including any collection costs and\nmedical charges.  Provide a copy of my signature with the provider of service to release my\nmedical information to you.Cease any credit bureau reporting until the debt has been\nvalidated by me, Please send this information to my address listed above and accept this\nletter, sent certified mail, as my formal debt validation request, which I am allowed under the\nFDCPA. Please note that withholding the information you received from any medical\nprovider in an attempt to be HIPAA compliant can be a violation of the FDCPA because you\nwill be deceiving me after my written request. I request full documentation of what you\nreceived from the provider of service in connection with this alleged debt. Additionally, any\nreporting of this debt to the credit bureaus prior to allowing me to validate it is a violation of\nthe Fair Credit Reporting Act, which can allow me to seek damages from a collection\nagency. I will await your reply with above requested proof. Upon receiving it, I will\ncorrespond back by certified mail.\nI reserved all my rights to amend this Contract the Finance Manager Requested that I give it to the Dealership I have advised the Seller  told the buyer that I XXXX XXXX XXXX Private Individual Banker is a Beneficiary Of my trust and this is a Purchase for my trust XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX request that they  will accept my TENDER OF PAYMENT for settlement of this account to be (balance to .00) on the books and to file IRS FORMS 1099s to properly balance the United States Treasury Debt I have signed this contract and I have not give my rights to amended this contract on Date:XXXX signed by the Beneficiary XXXX XXXX Private Individual Banker ESTATE /TRUST Exempt Form Levy I reserve all my rights WITHOUT RECOURSE UCC1-308 I will be using my credit for this transaction and not paying in cash and I have send my letter to the Finance Manager by email he requested they I send a tender of payment to retrieve my property I need to have cash or a check and which he have received and told me to send it to bank and it been over XXXX  and I have the right to receive my property and use my credit for this transaction and dont have to use cash or and any other payment of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  We the people have the right to use credit or a tender of payment and if its not accepted by the party or Leander or vendor it is discharged by law all debt is obligation to the United States. Your company didnt disclose any truth in lending or cannot show me where I can send it to panties with cash, and I was trying to pay with my internal credit and not actual funds this is my GOD Giving rights and by law show me where it stated in law where I cant use my credit for this transaction or cant use negotiable instruments. I do not consent to your contract for FCRAAs a federal protected consumer, I am now opting out of any and all authorization I the consumer may have given you written unwritten, verbal and nonverbal 15 USC 1602. And I would like conversation for all the violations.\n16 CFR  313.1 - Purpose and scope. \n\tCFR \n\tTable of Popular Names\nprev | next\n XXXX  Purpose and scope.\n(a) Purpose. This part governs the treatment of nonpublic personal information about consumers by the financial institutions listed in paragraph (b) of this section. This part: \n(1) Requires a financial institution in specified circumstances to provide notice to  customers about its privacy policies and practices; \n(2) Describes the conditions under which a financial institution may disclose  nonpublic personal information about consumers to nonaffiliated third parties; and \n(3) Provides a method for consumers to prevent a financial institution from disclosing that information to most nonaffiliated third parties by opting out of that disclosure, subject to the exceptions in XXXX XXXX, and 313.15. \n(b) Scope. This part applies only to nonpublic personal information about individuals who obtain financial products or services primarily for personal, family or household purposes from the institutions listed below. This part does not apply to information about companies or about individuals who obtain financial products or services for business, commercial, or agricultural purposes. This part applies to those financial institutions over which the Federal Trade Commission(Commission) has rulemaking authority pursuant to section 504(a)(1)(C) of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. An entity is a financial institution if its business is engaging in an activity that is financial in nature or incidental to such financial activities as described in section 4(k) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, 12 U.S.C. 1843(k), which incorporates activities enumerated by the Federal Reserve Board in 12 CFR 225.28 and 225.86. The financial institutions subject to the Commission's rulemaking authority are any persons described in 12 U.S.C. 5519 that are predominantly engaged in the sale and servicing of motor vehicles, the leasing and servicing of motor vehicles, or both. They are referred to in this part as You. Excluded from the coverage of this part are motor vehicle dealers described in 12 U.S.C. 5519(b) that directly extend to consumers retail credit or retail leases involving motor vehicles in which the contract governing such extension of retail credit or retail leases is not routinely assigned to an unaffiliated third party finance or leasing source.\n[65 FR 33677, XXXX XXXX XXXX  as amended at 86 FR 70025, XXXX XXXX XXXX\n16 CFR  433.2 - Preservation of consumers' claims and defenses, unfair or deceptive acts or practices. \n\tCFR \n\tTable of Popular Names\nprev | next\n XXXX  Preservation of consumers' claims and defenses, unfair or deceptive acts or practices.\nIn connection with any sale or lease of goods or services to consumers, in or affecting commerce as commerce is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, it is an unfair or deceptive  act or practice within the meaning of section XXXX of that  Act for a  seller, directly or indirectly, to:\n(a) Take or receive a consumer credit contract which fails to contain the following provision in at least ten point, bold face, type:\nNOTICE\nANY HOLDER OF THIS CONSUMER CREDIT CONTRACT IS SUBJECT TO ALL CLAIMS AND DEFENSES WHICH THE DEBTOR COULD ASSERT AGAINST THE SELLER OF GOODS OR SERVICES OBTAINED PURSUANT HERETO OR WITH THE PROCEEDS HEREOF. RECOVERY HEREUNDER BY THE DEBTOR SHALL NOT EXCEED AMOUNTS PAID BY THE DEBTOR HEREUNDER.\nor,\n(b) Accept, as full or partial payment for such sale or lease, the proceeds of any purchase money loan (as  purchase money loan is defined herein), unless any consumer credit contract made in connection with such  purchase money loan contains the following provision in at least ten point, bold face, type:\nNOTICE\nANY HOLDER OF THIS CONSUMER CREDIT CONTRACT IS SUBJECT TO ALL CLAIMS AND DEFENSES WHICH THE DEBTOR COULD ASSERT AGAINST THE SELLER OF GOODS OR SERVICES OBTAINED WITH THE PROCEEDS HEREOF. RECOVERY HEREUNDER BY THE DEBTOR SHALL NOT EXCEED AMOUNTS PAID BY THE DEBTOR","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-06T18:03:26.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"68502","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10717011","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2024-11-06T17:25:23.000Z","state":"NE","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["(b) Grace period If an open end consumer credit plan\nprovides a time period within which an obligor may repay any portion of the credit\nextended without incurring an additional finance <em>charge</em>, such additional finance <em>charge</em>\nmay not be imposed with respect to such portion of the credit extended for the billing cycle\nof which such period is a part, unless a statement which includes the amount upon which\nthe finance <em>charge</em> for the period is based was mailed or delivered to the consumer not\n<em>later</em> than"],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em> or other personal consumer reports"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Reporting</em> company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[5.458155,"10717011"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10741046","_score":4.1583247,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX Equifax XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for XXXX XXXX IVE submitted updated drivers license my minor children, DOJ FBI VNS FTC REPORTS CFPB XXXX XXXX ORDERED DOCUMENTS FROM THE JUDGE STAMPED AND SEALED AMENDED BIRTH CERTIFICATE IM BEING RETAILITATED AGAINST DUE TO MY DL SSN NAME ALL CHANGED. My kids and. Sufffered medical malpractice due to misuse of our XXXX TAX FRAUD IVE ATTACHED EVERYTHING DUE TO DEVICES MAILED COMPRMOSED BEFORE I GET THEM IT APPEARS IM THE CRIMINAL THEY REFUSE TO REMOVE THE FRAUD NEGATIVE INFO ON MY REPORT. \nIn recent years, my family and I have been victims of numerous data breaches, fraudulent activities, and ongoing issues with medical, financial, and personal information. We were notified of a medical data breach through XXXX, impacting me and my XXXX children. Since then, I have received no settlement payments from major breaches, including XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Equifax, or Bank XXXX XXXX. Additionally, neither my children nor I have received any victims compensation from the Department of Justice, despite proof of victimization, which I have attached. \nIn XXXX, due to issues with our XXXX, our XXXX numbers were changed in an emergency by the South Carolina XXXX XXXX XXXX. The inspector assigned to the case was XXXX XXXX. After this change, I was accused of XXXX fraud. Initially, officials claimed it was a systematic error but later reversed their stance, suggesting I committed fraud, which I categorically deny. Despite my honesty and record-keeping, this accusation was sent to addresses where suspects, such as my mother XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and my sister, reside. This systematic error negatively impacted my financial situation and my familys stability. The address XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, SC, has been linked to XXXX and other records with fraudulent updates, despite never being associated with me personally. \n\nFurther, in XXXX of this year, unauthorized access to my and my childrens medical and financial records was documented, with information accessed monthly. I have had to repeatedly request the removal of a middle initial mistakenly added to my name on South Carolina XXXX XXXX. Despite assurances each time that it would be corrected, the issue persists. This is compounded by issues with phone numbers linked to breached accounts from XXXX, such as XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. These breaches and unauthorized uses of my personal information have been verified through phone provider records. \n\nNotably, the Department XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) appears connected to some discrepancies. For example, while my XXXX benefits and associated records display my updated legal name, my benefits recertification information was suddenly switched back to my old name without explanation. Despite showing evidence of these discrepancies to officials, my benefit records have been manipulated to misrepresent my identity and financial standing. \n\nSimilarly, changes in records have affected my insurance and federal records. Unauthorized individuals manipulated my XXXX account and benefits, compromising my IP address, email authentication, and even my insurance with XXXX XXXX. Recently, fraudulent XXXX charges appeared on my insurance on XX/XX/XXXX, despite my lack of involvement. \n\nAdditional fraud has involved relatives. For instance, my sons father recently won a settlement of {$190000.00} in XX/XX/XXXX in XXXX, yet child support adjustments have been erratic, likely due to changes in XXXX and health information. XXXX XXXX noted my mothers involvement in our records, despite my request to remove her due to misuse of my information. \n\nIn XXXX, I observed unusual financial XXXX among relatives who were previously in debt but suddenly gained perfect credit. I suspected fraud, involving a XXXX associate and manipulation of XXXX records, which at XXXX point falsely listed me as the owner of a hotel with foreign employees. My former business, XXXX XXXX XXXX, was taken from me after presenting a multi-million-dollar entertainment concept to XXXX XXXX. Following this meeting, my devices were compromised, stolen, and accessed without authorization, severely impacting my career. \n\nMy current employer, XXXX XXXX XXXX, has also mishandled my compensation and benefits. After suffering a XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX, I qualified for medical leave but have yet to receive payment. Similarly, after my emergency hysterectomy in XXXX, I did not receive my full XXXX pay. In XXXX, I was shorted XXXX hours. Equipment issues were frequent, and the company appeared to hinder my ability to work by sending defective towers and assigning me to classes with inadequate resources. At XXXX point, a neighbor brought a box of equipment that XXXX confirmed had been sent to the wrong address by XXXX, compromising my security. Despite following all protocol and returning faulty equipment, the company claimed they had not received it, affecting my employment eligibility. \n\nEarlier this year, I faced issues with Concentrixs recruiter, who falsely claimed I needed a drug test, which I passed. Despite my repeated attempts to follow up, I never received responses or job confirmation. Meanwhile, XXXX unlawfully reported incorrect wages to the Social Security XXXX, resulting in a decrease in my sons XXXX benefits. Furthermore, the XXXX has provided inconsistent information about these reports, adding to our ongoing hardship. \n\nMy and my childrens medical records have also been tampered with. For example, despite having XXXX XXXX XXXX listed in my XXXX XXXX records, my primary care provider has said otherwise, leading to medical misdiagnoses. Billing inconsistencies, such as the erroneous {$80000.00} charges to XXXX for services I never received, illustrate these fraudulent practices. When I reported these discrepancies, the primary care provider unjustly dismissed me from her practice. \n\nOn several occasions, our personal records and belongings have been stolen from our home. Mail theft, unauthorized entries, and missing personal documents are regular occurrences. Recently, when XXXX requested my high school diploma, I discovered it had been stolen, along with my childrens report cards and certifications. \n\nWith evidence of multiple orchestrated financial crimes and unauthorized access to our personal, financial, and medical records by various individuals and organizations, I am seeking immediate action. This includes : XXXX. Changes to my and my childrens names. \nXXXX. Sealing of our medical record numbers, clinical records, and account histories to prevent further misuse. \nXXXX. Investigation into companies involved, including XXXX, XXXX, and other associated agencies. \n\nThese actions, constituting fraud, identity theft, unauthorized access, XXXX violations, discrimination, and retaliation, have created an unsafe environment for my family and inflicted significant financial, emotional, and physical distress. I request that immediate steps be taken to secure our information and hold responsible parties accountable. \nOver the past year, I have experienced an orchestrated pattern of financial, employment, and medical mismanagement by various organizations and individuals. The cumulative effects of these incidents have led to severe personal, medical, and financial hardship for my family and me. I implore you to address these issues with the utmost urgency, as they have impacted my health, my childrens well-being, and our financial stability. \nPersonal Background and Employment Issues with XXXX XXXX XXXX I am a single mother of XXXX children, and until recently, I was employed with XXXX XXXX XXXX. I experienced multiple incidents of payroll inconsistencies, mismanagement, and unaddressed medical leave issues due to my XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX and a prior emergency hysterectomy in XX/XX/XXXX. Despite being eligible for medical leave under federal law, I encountered severe delays and missing paychecks, including errors in my XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX payroll. XXXX withheld portions of my income during these times, creating significant financial strain. Despite my best efforts to resolve these issues internally, I was encouraged by my supervisor, XXXX XXXX, to file for unemployment, which led to additional complications. \n\nOn top of that, I faced unusual and unethical recruitment practices in XX/XX/XXXX, when I was asked to take a drug screening for a new assignment that was, according to XXXX, urgent. During this process, I encountered irregularities, including late-night calls from the recruiter, delays, and unreturned messages. Although I passed the test, the recruiter stopped responding after confirming the validity of my prescription medications. I was left without employment, and my attempts to reach XXXX or XXXX XXXX about this recruiter were met with dismissal. This left me stranded financially and emotionally, as I felt I was being set up to fail without any recourse. \n\nMoreover, I discovered frequent alterations to my tax withholding information within the XXXX system between XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. Despite repeatedly adjusting my XXXX to reflect my head-of-household status with XXXX dependents, it was changed back to XXXX allowances without my consent. I provided proof to XXXX, but this continued unchecked. \n\nMedical and XXXX XXXX XXXX I have a complex medical history, including childhood XXXX XXXX and XXXX concerns, which have been mishandled and misdiagnosed by both XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. Following my XXXX, which was initially recorded as a mild XXXX ( TIA ), my medical records were altered to indicate a diagnosis of hemiplegic migrainesa condition my son, not I, suffers from. This falsification has led to additional complications in my treatment and care, as my true medical needs have not been addressed. \n\nMy children and I have also faced issues with XXXX and XXXX. There are records falsely listing XXXX as XXXX, and despite requesting corrections, the errors persist. Our medical charts contain inaccurate information, including previous diagnoses, and unauthorized changes to my name and other details have resurfaced despite multiple updates. The confusion around these records has not only impacted our ability to receive proper medical care but has caused my sons XXXX benefits to decrease based on false wage reporting by XXXX. The inaccuracies in our medical histories have left us without essential treatments and correct medical advice, placing our health in jeopardy. \n\nMail Theft, Identity Theft, and XXXX XXXX I have experienced repeated mail theft, including the unauthorized removal of important documents such as my high school diploma, my childrens report cards, and various personal identification papers. On XXXX occasion, my home was left open, and my childs football game folder, which contained sensitive identification documents, was disturbed. These repeated invasions have left my family feeling vulnerable and unsafe. \n\nIn addition, I have encountered false tax documents and compromised IRS returns. XXXX forms showing electronic signatures have appeared without my knowledge, and previous years returns were tampered with, creating suspicion that I completed forms I did not. Concerningly, Ive noticed unusual discrepancies involving the Federal Reserve, where records tied to my settlements and victims compensation have been altered, preventing those funds from reaching me. Compounding this, my tax information has been altered to show false wages that caused financial setbacks, such as my sons XXXX reduction. \n\nOn multiple occasions, I have observed unauthorized changes to our benefits, accounts, and medical information from unidentified foreign sources in the XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. Ive seen indicators suggesting that my documents are being manipulated and sold, including when XXXX documentation unexpectedly appeared on my personal devices. The situation has escalated to XXXX XXXX that my familys personal and financial records are being remotely accessed and modified, creating continual disruption to our financial and medical security. \n\nUrgent Request for Action These interconnected actions have violated numerous federal laws, including : XXXX Violations : Unauthorized access and alteration of medical records, resulting in misdiagnoses and incorrect medical treatment. \nXXXX XXXX Violations : Wrongful termination and mishandling of medical leave rights and pay by XXXX. \nSocial Security XXXX Violations : False reporting of wages to the XXXX, leading to wrongful reductions in XXXX benefits. \nIdentity Theft and XXXX XXXX : Manipulation of personal information, tax records, and financial data, impacting access to settlements and benefits. \nVictims Rights Violations : Withholding of victims compensation and child support deposits, likely due to altered banking records. \n\nThe cumulative impact of these issues is more than financial ; it has placed my familys health, well-being, and sense of security at grave risk. I request immediate intervention to investigate these ongoing issues, enforce accountability among involved parties, and ensure that our recordsmedical, employment, and financialare corrected and secured. \n\nThank you for your attention to this matter. I am prepared to provide any additional documentation needed and am hopeful that with your assistance, my family and I can regain control over our health, financial stability, and personal security. \n\nI am urgently reaching out to address suspected fraud and identity misuse affecting my account and linked records, with the goal of correcting these errors and ensuring the privacy and safety of my familys energy services. This situation has caused significant concern for our household security, and I request your immediate assistance in investigating and removing fraudulent data associated with my account. \n\nSuspected Fraudulent Activity and Urgent Concerns There are multiple emails, addresses, and phone numbers that I have discovered associated with my XXXX XXXX account and records, which I did not authorize. The following emails in XXXX and XXXX fraudulent. I am asking for them to be immediately deleted from any association with my XXXX XXXX account or records. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I requested that the account for meter XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, SC reflect my updated information, including my new name, Social Security number, and drivers license number. However, my records do not show this update, and neither do they list other addresses I have lived at under my old name. These addresses include : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, SC XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, SC XXXX Lakecrest Apartments in XXXX, SC XXXX XXXX XXXX in Taylors, SC XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX?, XXXX, SC XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, SC XXXX This discrepancy is a serious issue, as it leaves my new identity information unlinked, while fraudulently assigned addresses remain on record. I request either the removal of XXXX XXXX XXXX from my account or the addition of my legitimate, previous addresses under my old identity. Currently, my consumer report lists a fraudulent address that was never mine and that I believe was being used by others while I maintained my own separate residence. \n\nFraudulent Use of My Identity and That of My Children Between XX/XX/XXXX and now, there have been individuals who have repeatedly used my name and my minor childrens names to obtain services and hide behind our identities. Specifically, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, SC XXXX appears fraudulently in my records as an address someone else used to access my information and receive my drivers license. \n\nThose I believe responsible for using my identity fraudulently include : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX These individuals have misused my identity and that of my minor children, XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, in various financial schemes, manipulating records and identities linked to XXXX XXXX. It is essential that no accounts, direct deposits, or service addresses associated with these names, or variations like XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX, be linked to my XXXX XXXX account. \n\nXXXX XXXX and Billing Concerns It has come to my attention that fraudulent deposits marked as child support are being associated with my XXXX XXXX account. I also see discrepancies in my billing statements, with statements showing XXXX, OH as the merchant location, while my receipts indicate XXXX, NC. This inconsistency raises serious concerns about the integrity of these charges and possible unauthorized use. \n\nFurthermore, I have noted unusually high energy bills when our lights are on, which directly affects my familys health, as we experience symptoms of sickness when lights are used for extended periods. This unusual billing and possible connection with external deposits must be investigated, as it suggests potential fraudulent activity that could jeopardize our energy security. \n\nRequest for XXXX XXXX I am asking XXXX XXXX to take immediate steps to : XXXX. Remove fraudulent emails ( XXXX and XXXX ) and phone numbers associated with my account. \nXXXX. Correct my address history by either removing XXXX XXXX XXXX or adding legitimate past addresses under my old identity. \nXXXX. Investigate and remove unauthorized accounts or deposits connected to names used fraudulently, including aliases associated with my childrens names. \nXXXX. Examine discrepancies in billing statements and merchant location data, as these XXXX indicate unauthorized activity affecting my account. \n\nMy family depends on XXXX XXXX secure and reliable service, and any errors or fraud in our records directly impact our daily lives and well-being. I trust that XXXX XXXX will investigate and resolve these issues quickly to ensure the integrity of our account and the safety of our home. \nI am detailing the complex misuse of my identity and records by family members, which has led to financial and legal confusion. \n\nXXXX. Address and XXXX Records : Although my sister does not use my address with XXXX, XXXX with the Department of XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX her under my address. This has led to a mix-up, as the court records show payments from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX the determination of who is responsible for certain obligations. \nXXXX. Medical Record Number ( XXXX ) Discrepancies : At the hospital, I am listed under XXXX separate MRNsone for XXXX XXXX and another for XXXX XXXX XXXX. My sons XXXX was also changed without my consent. These discrepancies suggest attempts to use our medical records to forge identities or claim benefits fraudulently. \nXXXX. IRS Form XXXX Corrections : In XX/XX/XXXX, I received XXXX corrected IRS Forms XXXX, despite no legitimate reason for such changes. This suggests manipulation of our records, possibly to alter tax or insurance status. \nXXXX. Tax Filing Irregularities : I filed with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and expected a refund of {$6200.00} ; however, I only received {$5100.00}. I believe my sons father manipulated tax information, possibly claiming benefits as the head of household. Despite records showing my daughter is the head of household, corrections continue to misclassify this status. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX and XXXX Discrepancies : My sons financial deposit history begins with XXXX, identical to numbers found in XXXX records for liens and judgments related to me as a victim. Previous checks issued to me as restitution for victimization are now missing, and XXXX Carolinas Disbursement Unit ( SC SDU ) is not recording deposits to my account ( XXXX ), though some deposits appear in FHE format ( indicating possible child support or benefits for family household expenses ). \n\nThe extensive misuse of my personal information, medical and tax records, and financial deposits has caused both personal and financial harm. I am seeking thorough investigation and corrective action. \nI am filing this complaint to report extensive fraud involving forged medical and financial records linked to my family. Specifically, my sons XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and other family members have allegedly altered my childrens medical records at XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX under my former name, XXXX XXXX. Theyve manipulated record numbers and listed incorrect dates of service, even though XXXX XXXX lived in XXXX since XXXX. Furthermore, I have evidence showing XXXX distinct medical record numbers for XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX recently won a {$200000.00} lawsuit at XXXX XXXX. Additionally, when he falsely accused me of criminal domestic XXXX ( XXXX ), the public index records show my name twice instead of his, further indicating fraudulent misuse of my identity. I have also found evidence that XXXX signed as my sons birth parent, using fraudulent documents to access benefits and funds without my consent. \nI also uncovered misuse of XXXX benefits in our medical records, falsely indicating absent parent support. In the Child Support Portal, over {$1000.00} in payments meant for my son has been held by the South Carolina State Disbursement Unit without explanation. Additionally, it appears my tax returns were forged and intercepted, with {$5100.00} issued on a fraudulent check from XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX instead of the original {$6200.00} owed. \nI have evidence suggesting a XXXX XXXX account was linked to my Treasury XXXX account under my new identity without my authorization. Despite removing certain addresses, XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX records show XXXX continued to use my address. The ongoing manipulation of my records has been substantiated by documents, and my XXXX data was also accessed without permission. I am seeking corrective action and an investigation into these fraudulent activities, which have left me financially compromised. \n\n\nSubject : Urgent Report of Financial and Privacy Violations, Medical Record Manipulation, and Fraudulent Activity To Whom It XXXX Concern, I am writing to urgently bring to your attention a series of serious violations and fraudulent activities that have caused significant financial hardship, emotional distress, and breaches of privacy for both myself and my children. We have become victims of what appears to be a carefully orchestrated scheme involving unauthorized access to medical records, misuse of personal information, and the misallocation of benefits. The following outlines in detail the specific violations, the individuals involved, and the detrimental impact this has had on our lives. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX and Misdiagnosis My sons medical records at XXXX XXXX reveal troubling discrepancies, particularly an instance where his father, XXXX XXXX XXXX, signed as the patient for a visit. He did not sign as the legal guardian or authorized representativehe signed as if he were my son, which is neither accurate nor authorized. Additionally, my sons medical record number for this visit does not match the number assigned to him at birth. This inconsistency raises serious concerns about tampering and unauthorized access to our medical records. \n\nFurther, I suffered a XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX. However, records at XXXX XXXX XXXX ( connected to XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX ) indicate my son was admitted for hemiplegic migraines on the exact dates of my hospitalization, suggesting either gross error or intentional misrepresentation. This not only complicates my own diagnosis but has led to an inappropriate medical history being attached to my son. \n\nXXXX. Financial Hardship and Incorrect XXXX Benefit Allocation Recently, the Social Security XXXX reduced my sons XXXX benefits, citing funds he supposedly received from his father, who has not made any child support payments for over XXXX months. Despite my providing evidence of this nonpayment, the XXXX has continued to decrease his benefits. This financial burden has caused me great hardship and confusion, especially as my sons fathers unpaid child support was supposed to be offset against my tax refund, which was delayed for XXXX months and ultimately arrived short by over {$2000.00}. \n\nAdditionally, the Department XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) has been deducting child support for XXXX, yet only for my son, XXXX, and not my other child. XXXX claimed no offset was done, which conflicts with earlier communications. It has also come to my attention that my insurance through XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX assurances from XXXX administrators XXXX I owe no TANF obligations. This misrepresentation of benefits further amplifies my financial distress. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX Evidence suggests that someone XXXX have gained unauthorized access to my online records and accounts. My IP address has shown unusual access points from XXXX, where my sons father resides. In XXXX, someone using a XXXX device accessed my XXXX account without my authorization, specifically connected to XXXX XXXX. I have explained these issues to the Department of Treasury and the Department of XXXX, but the concerns persist. \n\nAdditionally, a detective revealed that my sister had used my address with the Department XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, although her name does not appear in the XXXX system. Her use of my address for state services could be contributing to the financial and identity confusion affecting us. This misuse of my address and personal information by family members, combined with unauthorized access to my accounts, suggests a significant compromise of my personal privacy and civil rights. \n\nXXXX. Forgery, Misrepresentation, and Potential Financial Gain On XX/XX/XXXX, my sister reportedly forged my signature, making it appear that my son was in the hospital at the same time I was. This forged record enabled further manipulation of our medical history and potentially allowed for financial claims I did not authorize. In addition, school records have inexplicably reversed the roles between myself and my daughter, listing me as the student and her as the parent, which further indicates identity tampering and misrepresentation. \n\nSubjects Involved and Methods Used XXXX XXXX XXXX : Used my sons medical information, signing as the patient at XXXX XXXX without authorization. The motives appear to be tied to manipulating medical records and possibly accessing benefits fraudulently. \nMy Sister : Forged my signature, used my address with the Department XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX, and XXXX have contributed to the ongoing misrepresentation issues with the XXXX and state agencies. \nDepartment XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) : Deducted child support for XXXX but failed to apply it correctly, resulting in unexplained benefit misallocations and tax offset confusion. \n\nThese actions have collectively created a web of complications that leave XXXX vulnerable, financially strained, and emotionally distressed. Our rights to privacy, fair treatment, and accurate benefits allocation have been compromised. The effects of these ongoing issues are profound and have disrupted every aspect of our lives, leading to financial instability and unwarranted emotional trauma. \n\nRequest for Urgent Intervention I urge your office to investigate the following : Unauthorized Medical Record Access and Forgery : Violations under XXXX due to unauthorized changes and access to medical records. \nSocial Security XXXX : Manipulation of XXXX benefits and associated financial documents, resulting in incorrect benefit allocation. \nXXXX XXXX : Potential manipulation of child support payments, XXXX misallocation, and missing tax offsets. \nIdentity Theft and Impersonation : Fraudulent use of my address and unauthorized access to my records, resulting in compromised privacy and civil rights violations. \nWe have become victims treated as criminals, facing unwarranted scrutiny and reduction in necessary benefits. I respectfully ask for an in-depth investigation to provide relief, clarity, and accountability for those responsible. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to your prompt response.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-09T19:30:12.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"296XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10741046","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2024-11-09T18:41:16.000Z","state":"SC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Initially, officials claimed it was a systematic <em>error</em> but <em>later</em> <em>reversed</em> their stance, suggesting I committed fraud, which I categorically deny. Despite my honesty and record-keeping, this accusation was sent to addresses where suspects, such as my mother XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and my sister, reside. This systematic <em>error</em> negatively impacted my financial situation and my familys stability."],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em> or other personal consumer reports"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Reporting</em> company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[4.1583247,"10741046"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14018989","_score":3.1855817,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"# COMPREHENSIVE REGULATORY COMPLAINT # # Chase Bank Criminal Enablement Causing Foreclosure Crisis Through Systematic Fraud * * Complainant : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Primary Defendant : * * JPMorgan Chase Bank , N.A . \n* * Secondary Impact : * * XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) * * Property Address : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX * * Date : * * XX/XX/XXXX -- - # # * * EMERGENCY FORECLOSURE DEMAND * * * * CHASE BANK MUST ACT BY XX/XX/XXXX : * * Chase Bank 's criminal enablement has created a foreclosure emergency requiring immediate intervention : 1. * * RESTORE ALL STOLEN FUNDS * * ( {$22000.00} ) to prevent foreclosure 2. * * COMPENSATE XXXX XXXX * * for all fraud-related defaults and fees 3. * * EMERGENCY CREDIT REPAIR * * to restore mortgage payment capacity 4. * * DIRECT COMMUNICATION * * with XXXX XXXX acknowledging Chase 's fraud enablement 5. * * FORECLOSURE INTERVENTION * * - Chase must contact XXXX XXXX immediately to resolve the crisis their negligence created * * DEADLINE : * * XX/XX/XXXX - or face liability for foreclosure of {$520000.00} home due to Chase 's criminal negligence. \n\n-- - # # EXECUTIVE SUMMARY * * CHASE BANK IS THE PRIMARY CRIMINAL ENABLER * * of a {$22000.00} fraud operation that has cascaded into a foreclosure crisis. Chase 's systematic failures to detect obvious fraud, combined with bad faith claims handling, has created a direct causal chain leading to the threatened loss of my family home.\n\n* * Chase Bank 's Criminal Enterprise Enablement : * * - * * {$14000.00} * * in fake mortgage payments processed without verification - * * {$4800.00} * * in unauthorized ATM withdrawals through compromised phone - * * {$750.00} * * in fraudulent XXXX utility charges processed for months - * * {$1800.00} * * in stolen business funding - * * {$560.00} * * in clawback schemes stealing provisional credits - * * {$910.00} * * total in clawback theft ( {$350.00} + {$560.00} ) * * TOTAL CHASE-ENABLED THEFT : {$22000.00} * * * * Direct Consequence : * * Foreclosure deadline XX/XX/XXXX on {$520000.00} home due to fraud-induced payment disruptions. \n\n-- - # # PRIMARY REGULATORY VIOLATIONS - CHASE BANK # # # * * Bank Secrecy Act Violations ( 31 USC 5311 ) * * * * Systematic Anti-Money Laundering Failures : * * - * * Failed to file SARs * * for obvious $ XXXX organized fraud operation - * * No CTR reporting * * for structured criminal transactions - * * Enabled money laundering * * through fake mortgage payment processing - * * Ignored red flags * * including identical fake payments over 14+ months # # # * * Regulation E Violations ( 12 CFR 1005 ) * * * * Electronic Fund Transfer Act Violations : * * - * * Delayed fraud investigation * * beyond regulatory deadlines - * * Bad faith provisional credit clawbacks * * totaling {$910.00} - * * Failed to complete investigations * * within required timeframes - * * Systematic denial * * using identical language regardless of evidence # # # * * UDAAP Violations ( 12 USC 5531 ) * * * * Unfair, Deceptive, and Abusive Practices : * * * * UNFAIR : * * - Processing obvious fraud for 14+ months without detection - Clawing back provisional credits through bad faith investigations- Enabling criminal enterprise while denying victim relief * * DECEPTIVE : * * - * * Cookie-cutter denial letters : * * \" Transaction was authorized '' for obvious fraud - * * Form letter responses : * * \" No adjustment will be made '' regardless of evidence quality - * * False investigation claims : * * Using identical language suggests no individual review - * * Misrepresenting transaction legitimacy : * * Calling clear fraud \" authorized '' * * ABUSIVE : * * - Exploiting identity theft victim 's financial distress - Using identical denial language regardless of evidence quality - Enabling criminals while punishing victims # # # * * Fair Credit Reporting Act Violations ( 15 USC 1681 ) * * * * Inaccurate Credit Reporting : * * - Reporting fraud-induced NSF incidents as legitimate defaults - Failing to investigate credit report disputes- Continuing negative reporting during active fraud investigation -- - # # CHASE BANK 'S CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE ENABLEMENT # # # * * The {$14000.00} Fake Mortgage Payment Scheme * * * * Systematic Processing of Fraudulent Transactions : * * * * Pattern Analysis : * * - * * XX/XX/XXXX : * * {$2900.00} fake XXXX XXXX payment - * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Multiple {$2500.00} payments - * * XXXX XXXX : * * Continued processing of identical fake amounts - * * Total Fake Mortgage Payments : * * {$14000.00} * * Red Flags Chase Ignored : * * 1. * * Identical amounts * * repeated monthly for 14+ months 2. * * No mortgage account verification * * with actual servicer 3. * * Timing coincides * * with reported identity theft 4. * * Victim 's repeated fraud reports * * ignored 5. * * No payee verification * * for \" XXXX XXXX '' payments 6. * * Utility fraud pattern : * * Multiple unauthorized service signups and cancellations 7. * * Geographic impossibility : * * Utility services at addresses victim never lived 8. * * Service pattern abuse : * * Immediate cancellations by victim of all fraudulent services # # # * * The {$4800.00} ATM Fraud Operation * * * * Phone Cloning Enabled Systematic Theft : * * - * * Method : * * Criminals cloned phone to access banking apps- * * Pattern : * * Back-to-back ATM withdrawals not flagged by Chase - * * Amount : * * {$4800.00} in unauthorized cash withdrawals- * * Chase Failure : * * No velocity checks or geographic verification # # # * * The {$750.00} XXXX  Utility Fraud * * * * Chase Processed Months of Obvious Fraudulent Utility Services : * * * * Detailed XXXX Fraud Timeline : * * - * * XX/XX/XXXX : * * {$110.00} unauthorized service signup - * * XX/XX/XXXX : * * {$25.00} return fee when service canceled - * * XX/XX/XXXX : * * {$130.00} unauthorized service + {$25.00} return fee = {$150.00} - * * XX/XX/XXXX : * * {$130.00} return fee for canceled service - * * XX/XX/XXXX : * * {$130.00} unauthorized service activation - * * XX/XX/XXXX : * * {$130.00} final fraudulent charge - * * Total XXXX Fraud : * * {$750.00} * * Chase 's Criminal Facilitation of Utility Fraud : * * - * * Multiple utility services * * fraudulently signed up using victim 's identity - * * Return fees charged * * when victim canceled unauthorized services - * * Overlapping charges * * for services never requested - * * Chase provided {$560.00} provisional credit then STOLE IT BACK * * - * * No verification * * with XXXX that victim authorized services - * * Obvious fraud pattern * * ignored for months # # # * * The {$910.00} Clawback Theft Operation * * * * Chase 's Systematic Theft of Provisional Credits : * * - * * First Clawback : * * {$350.00} stolen from victim - * * Second Clawback : * * {$560.00} stolen after providing provisional credit - * * Method : * * Provide credits initially, then reverse through bad faith \" investigations '' - * * Result : * * Chase stole {$910.00} from identity theft victim # # # * * Chase 's Cookie-Cutter Denial Letters * * * * Identical Bad Faith Responses Regardless of Evidence : * * - * * Standard Language : * * \" Transaction was processed according to information you provided or was authorized '' - * * Universal Denial : * * \" No adjustment will be made '' - * * Bad Faith Pattern : * * Same denial language used for obvious fraud and legitimate transactions - * * Evidence Ignored : * * Detailed fraud documentation dismissed with form letters- * * Regulatory Violation : * * Failed to conduct individual investigations as required -- - # # CASCADING EFFECT : CHASE FRAUD FORECLOSURE CRISIS # # # * * Direct Causal Chain * * * * Chase 's negligence created a systematic chain of harm : * * 1. * * Chase Enables {$22000.00} Fraud * * Depletes victim 's financial resources 2. * * Genuine Mortgage Payments Intercepted * * Criminals redirect real payments while Chase processes fake ones 3. * * Payment Disruptions to XXXX XXXX * * NSF reversals when fraud-diverted payments fail 4. * * XXXX XXXX Penalties Accumulate * * Late fees and charges due to Chase-enabled fraud 5. * * Credit Destruction * * Chase reports fraud as legitimate, destroying creditworthiness 6. * * Foreclosure Threat * * XX/XX/XXXX deadline due to Chase 's fraud enablement # # # * * Current Foreclosure Crisis - Caused by Chase * * * * XXXX XXXX Account Status ( Loan # XXXX ) : * * - * * Amount Due : * * {$8600.00} ( fraud-related ) - * * Foreclosure Deadline : * * XX/XX/XXXX - * * Root Cause : * * Chase-enabled fraud depleted payment capacity - * * Chase Liability : * * Direct causation from criminal enablement to foreclosure -- - # # SPECIFIC CHASE VIOLATIONS BY REGULATION # # # * * BSA/AML Violations ( 31 USC 5311 , 12 CFR 21.21 ) * * * * REQUIRED : * * File SARs for suspicious activity patterns * * CHASE 'S VIOLATION : * * No SARs filed for $ XXXX organized fraud operation * * Evidence of Suspicious Activity : * * - Identical fraudulent amounts over 14+ months - Payments to non-existent mortgage servicer accounts- Structured transactions designed to avoid detection - Organized criminal operation using victim 's identity * * Penalty Exposure : * * Up to {>= $1,000,000} per violation ( 31 USC 5321 ) # # # * * Regulation E Violations ( 12 CFR 1005.11 ) * * * * ERROR RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS : * * - 10 business day investigation deadline - Provisional credit within 1-2 business days - Written findings required * * CHASE 'S VIOLATIONS : * * - Extended investigations beyond regulatory deadlines- Clawed back provisional credits without proper basis - Failed to provide detailed investigation findings- Used identical denial language regardless of evidence - * * Particularly egregious : * * Processed utility fraud despite easy verification methods- * * Failed basic verification : * * Never confirmed victim lived at service addresses- * * Ignored cancellation pattern : * * Victim immediately canceled all fraudulent services # # # * * FCRA Section 623 ( 15 USC 1681s-2 ) * * * * FURNISHER ACCURACY REQUIREMENTS : * * * * CHASE 'S VIOLATIONS : * * - Reported fraud-induced NSF as legitimate defaults - Failed to investigate credit disputes properly - Continued negative reporting during fraud investigation - Refused to correct obviously inaccurate information -- - # # DAMAGES DIRECTLY CAUSED BY CHASE # # # * * Ongoing Financial Reconstruction * * * * Current Status : Certified Public Bookkeeper Analysis in Progress * * * * CRITICAL NOTE : * * A certified bookkeeper is currently conducting a comprehensive three-year financial reconstruction ( XXXX ) due to the extensive damage caused by Chase Bank 's fraud enablement. This process involves : - * * Recreating accurate financial records * * from Chase 's compromised/fraudulent transactions - * * Verifying legitimate vs. fraudulent transactions * * across 36+ months - * * Quantifying additional hidden damages * * not yet discovered - * * Documenting the full scope * * of Chase 's criminal facilitation - * * Estimated completion : * * 30-60 days due to complexity of Chase 's fraud enablement * * ANTICIPATED ADDITIONAL DAMAGES : * * Based on preliminary analysis, the bookkeeper expects to uncover : - Additional fraudulent transactions not yet identified - Hidden fees and charges resulting from fraud - Compounding interest and penalty calculations- Business accounting irregularities caused by payment disruptions- * * Potential total damages may EXCEED current {>= $1,000,000} estimate * * * * BURDEN ON VICTIM : * * Chase 's systematic fraud enablement has forced the victim to : - * * Hire professional accountant * * ( $ XXXX expense ) - * * Dedicate hundreds of hours * * to financial reconstruction - * * Recreate three years of records * * due to Chase 's contaminated data - * * All while facing XX/XX/XXXX foreclosure deadline * * * * SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT FORTHCOMING : * * Upon completion of the financial reconstruction, a supplemental complaint will be filed documenting any additional damages discovered during the comprehensive analysis. \n\n# # # * * Chase 's Specific Liability for XXXX XXXX Crisis * * - * * Partial Claim Required : * * {$30000.00} due to fraud-induced defaults - * * Current Delinquency : * * {$8600.00} directly traceable to Chase fraud XXXX * * Late Fees/Penalties : * * Hundreds in fees from fraud-disrupted payments - * * Foreclosure Costs : * * All legal fees and costs from Chase-caused crisis # # # * * Punitive Damages Warranted * * Chase 's conduct demonstrates : - * * Willful blindness * * to obvious criminal activity - * * Bad faith * * in claims handling and investigation - * * Reckless disregard * * for customer safety and regulatory requirements- * * Criminal facilitation * * through systematic failures * * Total Damages : * * $ XXXX with punitive damages appropriate -- - # # EMERGENCY DEMANDS- XX/XX/XXXX DEADLINE # # # * * IMMEDIATE CHASE ACTIONS REQUIRED * * * * 1. EMERGENCY FUND RESTORATION ( By XX/XX/XXXX ) * * - Restore all {$22000.00} in stolen funds immediately - * * NEW ACCOUNT REQUIREMENT : * * Funds must be deposited into a completely new, secure account with no links to previously compromised accounts - * * Preferred client status * * with enhanced fraud protection and dedicated support - Wire transfer to prevent foreclosure deadline - * * Account security guarantee * * with advanced monitoring and alerts * * 2. XXXX XXXX INTERVENTION ( By XX/XX/XXXX ) * * - Direct communication with XXXX XXXX acknowledging Chase 's fraud enablement - Payment of all fraud-related fees, penalties, and charges to XXXX XXXX - Guarantee of mortgage account protection during fraud resolution * * 3. CREDIT REPAIR ( By XX/XX/XXXX ) * * - Emergency deletion of all fraud-related negative marks - Restoration of pre-fraud credit scores- Letter to all credit bureaus acknowledging Chase 's fraud enablement * * 4. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE * * - File required SARs for the $ XXXX criminal operation - Cooperate with law enforcement investigation - Implement enhanced fraud detection for similar cases - * * Establish new secure banking relationship * * with victim using fresh accounts and preferred client protections- * * Enhanced monitoring protocols * * for victim 's new accounts with dedicated fraud prevention team * * 5. VICTIM COMPENSATION * * - Full reimbursement for all cascading damages - Compensation for business losses caused by fraud - Payment of all legal and recovery expenses- * * Coverage of ongoing bookkeeper costs * * for 3-year financial reconstruction - * * Compensation for victim 's time * * spent recreating records due to Chase 's fraud - * * Reserve fund * * for additional damages being discovered in ongoing analysis - * * NEW SECURE BANKING RELATIONSHIP : * * All restitution funds placed in new accounts with no connection to compromised accounts - * * Preferred client designation * * with enhanced fraud protection, dedicated support team, and priority customer service # # # * * CONSEQUENCES OF CHASE INACTION * * * * If Chase fails to act by XX/XX/XXXX : * * - Full liability for foreclosure and loss of {$520000.00} home - Escalation to DOJ for criminal facilitation investigation - Class action exposure for systematic fraud enablement - Maximum regulatory penalties for BSA/AML violations -- - # # SUPPORTING EVIDENCE # # # * * Chase Fraud Documentation * * - Bank statements showing {$22000.00} in fraudulent transactions - * * Fraudulent utility bills and unauthorized service agreements : * * - XXXX service agreements victim never signed - Utility bills for services at addresses victim never lived - Documentation of victim canceling unauthorized services - Evidence of Chase processing payments for fraudulent utility accounts- * * Multiple identical denial letters using cookie-cutter language : * * - \" Transaction was authorized '' claims for obvious fraud - \" No adjustment will be made '' responses regardless of evidence - Same form letter responses for different fraud types- Evidence of provisional credit clawbacks totaling {$910.00} - Pattern analysis of systematic fraud processing over 14+ months - Documentation of Chase 's refusal to conduct individual investigations # # # * * Identity Theft Documentation * * - FTC Report # XXXX - Police Report - XXXX XXXXXXXX Police Department - XXXXXXXX Support Case # XXXX ( account hijacking confirmation ) - Technical evidence of device compromise and phone cloning # # # * * Foreclosure Documentation * * - XXXX XXXX demand letter with XX/XX/XXXX deadline - Payment history showing fraud-induced NSF reversals- Partial claim documentation ( {$30000.00} ) due to fraud # # # * * Business Impact Documentation * * - Financial statements showing business closure - Revenue loss calculations directly tied to fraud - Client loss documentation due to payment disruptions- * * ONGOING : * * Certified bookkeeper conducting 3-year financial reconstruction - * * Preliminary findings : * * Additional damages expected beyond current estimates - * * Professional analysis : * * Comprehensive accounting review of Chase 's fraud impact -- - # # REGULATORY PRECEDENT FOR CHASE LIABILITY # # # * * Similar CFPB Actions Against Chase * * - * * XXXX : * * {$380.00} XXXX penalty for credit card debt collection - * * XXXX : * * {$210.00} XXXX for credit card billing violations- * * XXXX : * * {$65.00} XXXX for unsafe practices during pandemic - * * Pattern : * * Chase repeatedly violates consumer protection laws # # # * * BSA/AML Enforcement Actions * * - * * XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) : * * {$3.00} XXXX for AML failures- * * XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX  ( XXXX ) : * * {$75.00} XXXX for BSA violations- * * XXXX ( XXXX ) : * * {$1.00} XXXX for money laundering facilitation * * Chase 's Exposure : * * $ XXXX organized crime facilitation warrants maximum penalties -- - # # CONCLUSION : CHASE BANK CRIMINAL LIABILITY Chase Bank is not merely negligent- they are * * criminal enablers * * who : 1. * * Facilitated organized crime * * through systematic fraud processing 2. * * Violated federal banking laws * * repeatedly and willfully 3. * * Stole from identity theft victims * * through clawback schemes 4. * * Created foreclosure crisis * * through fraud enablement 5. * * Ignored regulatory requirements * * for suspicious activity reporting * * This case demands : * * - * * Immediate foreclosure intervention * * by XX/XX/XXXX - * * Full victim restitution * * of all fraud and cascading damages - * * Criminal investigation * * of Chase 's role in facilitating organized crime - * * Maximum regulatory penalties * * for systematic violations - * * Industry-wide reforms * * to prevent similar victim abuse - * * Ongoing damage assessment * * as bookkeeper completes 3-year financial reconstruction * * ADDITIONAL DAMAGES EXPECTED : * * The current $ XXXX damage estimate represents only the damages discovered to date. A certified bookkeeper 's ongoing analysis of three years of Chase-contaminated financial records is expected to reveal additional substantial damages, requiring supplemental regulatory action. \n\nChase Bank has crossed the line from negligence to criminal facilitation. Their systematic enablement of a $ XXXX fraud operation while stealing provisional credits from the victim demands the full force of regulatory and criminal action. \n\n* * The XX/XX/XXXX foreclosure deadline makes this an emergency requiring immediate Chase intervention to prevent the loss of my family home due to their criminal enablement. * * -- - # # CONTACT INFORMATION * * Complainant : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Address : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX * * Phone : * * ( XXXX ) XXXX * * Landline : * * ( XXXX ) XXXX * * Email : * * XXXX * * Secondary : * * XXXX * * EMERGENCY FORECLOSURE DEADLINE : * * XX/XX/XXXX * * Chase Account Information : * * Available upon request * * XXXX XXXX Loan : * * # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  * * Certification : * * I certify under penalty of perjury that the information in this complaint is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that Chase Bank 's criminal enablement has directly caused the foreclosure crisis threatening my family home. \n\n* * Signature : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Date : * * XX/XX/XXXX * * URGENT ACTION REQUIRED BY XX/XX/XXXX * *","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-12T00:00:31.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"92307","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14018989","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2025-06-11T23:50:40.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Act Violations ( 15 USC 1681 ) * * * * Inaccurate Credit <em>Reporting</em> : * * - <em>Reporting</em> fraud-induced NSF incidents as legitimate defaults - Failing to investigate credit <em>report</em> disputes- Continuing negative <em>reporting</em> during active fraud investigation -- - # # CHASE BANK 'S CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE ENABLEMENT # # # * * The {$14000.00} Fake Mortgage Payment Scheme * * * * Systematic Processing of Fraudulent Transactions : * * * * Pattern Analysis : * * - * * XX/XX/XXXX : * * {$2900.00} fake XXXX XXXX payment"]},"sort":[3.1855817,"14018989"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":19,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":19}]}},"product":{"doc_count":19,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":5,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":4},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose prepaid card","doc_count":2},{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":2,"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":2}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mobile or digital wallet","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Payday loan, title loan, or personal loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Personal line of credit","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Lease","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":19,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer","doc_count":1},{"key":"Charged for a purchase or transfer you did not make with the card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance","doc_count":1},{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing your account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Other features, terms, or problems","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other problem","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a 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":"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":"Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Money was taken from your account on the wrong day or for the wrong amount","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with the payoff process at the end of the loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Repossession","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company communicating payment assistance or payment extension options","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":19,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":19}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":19,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":15},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":3},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":19,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":19}]}},"company":{"doc_count":19,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":2},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","doc_count":2},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FinCo Services Inc DBA Current","doc_count":1},{"key":"Freedom Mortgage Company","doc_count":1},{"key":"GUARANTEED RATE INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":1},{"key":"Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"U.S. BANCORP","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":19,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":3},{"key":"IL","doc_count":3},{"key":"NY","doc_count":2},{"key":"TX","doc_count":2},{"key":"AL","doc_count":1},{"key":"CT","doc_count":1},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"MO","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NE","doc_count":1},{"key":"NV","doc_count":1},{"key":"OR","doc_count":1},{"key":"SC","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":19,"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":9}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":19,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":4},{"key":"Older American","doc_count":3},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{}}}