{"took":290,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":31,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15643827","_score":13.32485,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint regarding the mishandling of unauthorized transactions on my Chime Bank account during the period of my XXXX. \n\nI was XXXX  from XX/XX/XXXX, through XX/XX/XXXX. During this entire period, my Chime debit card and account were used without my authorization, and the funds in my account were depleted. It is impossible that I made these transactions, as I was in XXXX  with no access to my card or account. \n\nUpon my XXXX, I immediately contacted Chime to dispute these charges. I provided all necessary documentation, including : Proof of XXXX  covering XX/XX/XXXX, through XX/XX/XXXX Police reports documenting the theft and misuse of my identity and personal property Supporting documentation showing I could not have accessed my account during that time Despite this clear evidence, Chime initially denied my claim and refused to reimburse me for the unauthorized transactions. However, Chime has since issued partial reimbursements for two of the payouts I disputed. This demonstrates acknowledgment that my claim is valid, yet Chime continues to withhold reimbursement for the remainder of the stolen funds. \n\nChimes failure to fully reimburse me is in direct violation of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ), Regulation E, which requires financial institutions to investigate and resolve disputes of unauthorized electronic transactions. I have complied with every request for documentation, and Chimes partial reimbursement further confirms that my claim is legitimate. \n\nI am respectfully requesting that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau investigate Chimes handling of this matter and require Chime to : 1. Reimburse me for all unauthorized transactions that occurred from XX/XX/XXXX, through XX/XX/XXXX. \n2. Provide a written explanation for why they reimbursed only part of my claim and denied the rest.\n\n3. Review and correct their dispute resolution practices to ensure compliance with Regulation E. \n\nI am seeking full reimbursement of all funds stolen during my XXXX, along with accountability from Chime for their mishandling of this matter. \n\nThank you for your time and attention to this complaint. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX Email : XXXX ps.This is XXXX  from Chime Member Services and I work alongside XXXX with regards to your closure check. \n\nThank you for confirming your address. I am pleased to inform you that your closure check amounting to {$600.00} has been successfully processed and already scheduled to be delivered to the address on file with Chime. Just know that you should receive your check in the mail within 30 days after the check was requested. \n\nIf you're unable to retrieve the check from that address, you can also ask USPS to hold it at a pickup point if you contact them. They can also see what other options for pickup are available to you. \n\nI hope this information helps and apologies for the inconvenience. \n\nWith sincere thanks, XXXX  | Member Services Specialist This was a email from chime, approving only the dispute they wont approve which shows when they approve this one I was XXXX XXXX so all of those just like this one shouldve been approved, but they dont want to because of the amount of money it would add up to, so Im asking CFPB to pre-please make sure and give me my money.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-02T01:18:36.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"89031","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15643827","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2025-09-02T00:56:37.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am seeking full reimbursement of all funds stolen <em>during</em> my XXXX, <em>along</em> with accountability from Chime for their mishandling of this matter. \n\nThank you for your time and attention to this complaint. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX Email : XXXX ps.This is XXXX  from Chime Member Services and I work alongside XXXX with regards to your closure check. \n\nThank you for confirming your address."]},"sort":[13.32485,"15643827"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6855274","_score":12.1633835,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"On Sunday XX/XX/XXXX, I noticed I had multiple missed calls from ( XXXX ) XXXX with Caller ID as USBANK, with another call coming in, I answered. The person identified themselves as XXXX XXXX with the Fraud Dept. He said there was a fraud transaction on my account and he was calling to assist in the investigation. He had explained that I would need to submit a payment through XXXX to trace where my money went. He told me that by doing this would get my money back within 48 hours, but if I didnt, I wouldnt get any money back. He said it is bank policy and is an obligation of account holders. At that point I received the request for payment through XXXX on my USBANK app, the first request came from XXXX XXXX XXXX, the next being XXXX XXXX, both requests were for {$820.00}. During this time, he was rushing me to complete the transaction as soon as it was completed, the call was disconnected. \nI immediately realized something was wrong & called USBANK Fraud Dept, they confirmed a representative from USBANK did not call me. She explained that I would receive a provisional credit to my account within 72 hours while they investigated my claim and had up to 10 days to complete. I was told that I would get a form in the mail to fill out & return. However, I did not receive any credit or forms, so on Friday XX/XX/XXXX I called USBANK again to check on the status of the situation. I was informed that my claim was processed incorrectly & that the claim would need to be resubmitted, this was 6 days after I first reported the claim. Again, I was told the investigation would take 10 days and I had to complete a form & return it as soon as possible. This time I received the form within 72 hours & took the form to the XXXX XXXX XXXX along with FTC Report # XXXX & XXXX Complaint that I filed. I also provided names, addresses & phone # s of reverse searches that I made myself online using the phone number listed on the XXXX Request, of who I believe may have been involved. \nA few days later, I received a letter from USBANK dated XX/XX/XXXX stating the transaction posted as requested, and my claim was denied. The letter also said that it is my right to request documents used in the investigation, providing a number to call to make the request. On XX/XX/XXXX I called the number given by USBANK to have the document mailed to me, after being on the line for more than 30 minutes & being transferred around from dept to dept, each representative not having a clue as to what to do or what I am even inquiring about, eventually the call was disconnected. By then, I decided to go to the local branch located at XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, to request the documents in person. I spoke to Client Relationship Consultant XXXX XXXX, who told me there is no such document to request. I asked if I could get a print screen showing that there is not any paperwork, again she stated there were no documents. This confused me, since I was told in writing that they would be available to me upon request. \nIt doesnt seem like USBANK representatives even tried to help me to retrieve any loss. I reported the situation immediately, per bank policy, twice, within time restrictions. I dont understand why the transfer could not be stopped, I received a notification stating that the deposit wasnt completed until XX/XX/XXXX. I trusted USBANK to investigate and go through their own error resolution obligations, at this point I know no one attempted to review my claim or the information that I provided since they can not provide me with any proof otherwise. USBANK is obligated to follow the law regardless and they chose not to follow standard procedure. I received no benefit from this transaction, I was sent a request for payment under false pretenses. I am asking for assistance in resolving this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-04-19T02:09:26.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Domestic (US) money transfer","zip_code":"92345","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6855274","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"U.S. BANCORP","date_received":"2023-04-19T01:41:12.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The letter also said that it is my right to request <em>documents</em> used in the <em>investigation</em>, providing a number to call to make the request. On XX/XX/XXXX I called the number given by USBANK to have the <em>document</em> mailed to me, after being on the line for more than 30 minutes & being transferred around from dept to dept, each representative not having a clue as to what to do or what I am even inquiring about, eventually the call was disconnected."]},"sort":[12.1633835,"6855274"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17293178","_score":11.979862,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"What happened in this situation is that a XXXX XXXX XXXX, identified as Ref : XXXX, has been reported on my consumer report as a negative and derogatory public record without proper verification, without original court documentation, without a complete chain-of-custody trail, and without a meaningful procedural investigation by the credit reporting agencies responsible for publishing and distributing the information. Although bankruptcy filings are public information, the manner in which this particular record was obtained, processed, verified, and reported raises significant concerns regarding compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the accuracy of the data, the methods of verification used, the involvement of third-party public-records vendors, and the overall procedural fairness of the credit bureaus practices. \n\nThe issue began when this bankruptcy record appeared on my credit file several years after the events occurred. While I understand that bankruptcies may remain reportable for a legally defined period, the problem lies not with the existence of the bankruptcy itself, but in the credit bureaus failure to verify the information using original, certified court documentation. Instead, the record appears to have been added to my file through automated data-scraping systems or third-party public-records aggregators. These automated systems frequently pull partial, outdated, or incomplete information from federal court databases and are known to pass along errors because they do not retrieve certified court documents nor perform manual verification. The presence of such a serious derogatory item on my file, without proof that the bureaus obtained or reviewed certified records, is a direct violation of the FCRAs standards requiring maximum possible accuracy.\n\nThe concerns deepened when I attempted to dispute the accuracy and verification of the bankruptcy. The credit bureaus responded with extremely generic dispute results, stating that the public record was verified. However, they failed to provide the legally required Method of Verification under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). This omission is significant because the Method of Verification must identify the party or system used to verify the information, the procedure followed, and the source contacted. Instead of providing this legally required information, the bureaus simply repeated the same automated response indicating that the item remained on the report.\n\nI also observed that the bureaus failed to provide evidence that they performed a meaningful, independent reinvestigation. Instead, the reinvestigation appeared to be automated, likely relying solely on the same third-party vendor that initially provided the bankruptcy information. The FCRA requires that a reinvestigation be reasonable, thorough, and independentnot a cursory automated confirmation. If the bureaus rely on the same automated tool or vendor that originally supplied the record, then no true reinvestigation occurred. \n\nDuring the dispute process, none of the bureaus produced any of the certified documents that would normally accompany a verified bankruptcy record. These documents include : a certified copy of the petition, certified discharge order, certified docket sheet, or any other official filings obtained directly from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court that adjudicated the case. Without these original documents, the bureaus can not legally claim that the bankruptcy has been properly verified. Bankruptcy records are complex legal filings, and verifying them requires more than a database hit or a third-party summary. A meaningful verification requires checking the exact docket number, confirming the filing dates, reviewing the case disposition, and ensuring that the record accurately matches the consumer.\n\nYet none of these steps were demonstrated by the bureaus. Instead, the responses lacked specificity, clarity, and evidence. The bureaus did not show that they contacted the court. They did not show that they accessed PACER directly. They did not demonstrate that they obtained any certified filings. Instead, all signs indicate that they relied on automated public-records scanning toolstools known to misidentify individuals or pull incomplete data.\n\nThis lack of proper verification is concerning because many third-party vendors do not gather certified documents. Instead, they gather summaries or partial listings of bankruptcy cases. These summaries are not legally sufficient for verification under the FCRA. They do not include official seals, signatures, or the full docket context required to validate accuracy. As a result, the derogatory record may be based on incomplete or outdated information, and without certified documentation, the credit bureau can not legally verify or continue reporting it. Another major issue in what happened is the failure of the credit bureaus\nto provide transparency regarding the source of the bankruptcy data. When asked who supplied the information, the bureaus did not name the third-party vendor. They did not provide the vendors address, identification number, or data-sourcing methodology. They also did not provide a chain-of-custody record, which would show when the information was received, who processed it, how it was validated, and whether the record was ever updated or reviewed.\n\nWithout this documentation, it is impossible to know whether the bankruptcy was reported accurately, whether it was reviewed properly, or whether it was even associated with the correct individual. Many consumers experience public-record mismatches due to similar names or clerical errors. A proper verification process would require the bureaus to demonstrate that they matched multiple identifiers accurately. Yet none of these steps were shown.\n\nAdditionally, the bureaus did not provide any evidence that they performed periodic updates on the bankruptcy record. Federal court dockets often update over time to include amendments, corrections, or additional entries. A credit bureau that reports public records must ensure that any updates are reflected accurately. However, the bureaus in this case did not show evidence that they ever retrieved updated docket information or reviewed updated filings.\n\nAnother concerning aspect of what happened is the lack of procedural fairness during the dispute process. When a consumer disputes a public record, the bureaus are required by law to mark the item as disputed during the reinvestigation. This notation informs lenders that the accuracy of the item is actively being reviewed. However, in this case, the bureaus did not clearly indicate that the record was marked as disputed. This failure is a procedural violation under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ). Failure to mark a record as disputed during reinvestigation can lead lenders to assume that the information is fully accurate and unchallenged, which harms the consumer.\n\nFurthermore, the bureaus failed to provide any description of the internal procedures they used during the reinvestigation. Under the FCRA, consumers have the right to know the procedures used to verify disputed information. The bureaus did not provide documentation detailing the steps taken, the systems consulted, or the training and oversight applied to the reinvestigation process.\n\nWhen reviewing this situation, it is clear that the bureaus did not conduct a meaningful investigation. No certified documents were provided. No communication with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court was demonstrated. No identity-matching procedures were disclosed. No procedural logs or audit trails were provided. The bureau simply issued a generic verification response without supporting evidence.\n\nThis situation also raises serious concerns about the accuracy of automated bankruptcy reporting systems. The credit bureaus often contract with third-party vendors who use web-scraping tools or automated database scans to pull public-record information. These tools frequently fail to distinguish between similar names, do not retrieve full docket information, and do not validate whether the extracted data is complete or current. If the bureaus rely solely on such vendors, without manual review or certified documentation, they are violating the FCRAs requirement to ensure maximum possible accuracy.\n\nAnother issue in what happened is the failure to provide a copy of any communication between the bureaus and the vendor or court. Under the FCRA, when a consumer disputes information, the bureau must forward all relevant information to the furnisher or entity that provided the data. There is no evidence that any relevant information was forwarded. There is no evidence that the court was contacted. There is no evidence that the vendor received the consumers dispute details. Without such evidence, it appears that the bureaus did not follow FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 2 ) requirements.\n\nAdditionally, the dispute outcomes did not include any specific explanation of how the bankruptcy was verified. The FCRA requires a description of the process used. However, instead of providing details, the bureaus offered a conclusory statement that the record was verified, which is legally insufficient.\n\nThis situation also raises concerns about reinsertion rules. If the bankruptcy record was ever removed due to dispute and then reinserted, the bureaus are legally required to notify the consumer within five business days. The lack of documentation and transparency makes it unclear whether reinsertion rules were followed. Failure to comply with reinsertion rules is a direct violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ).\n\nThe overall impact of what happened is that an unverified, unsupported, and potentially inaccurate bankruptcy record continues to appear as a derogatory entry on my consumer report. Because the credit bureaus did not provide original certified documents, did not disclose their verification process, did not identify the vendor, did not provide a chain-of-custody trail, and did not demonstrate independent reinvestigation, the accuracy of the record can not be trusted. Meanwhile, the presence of the bankruptcy affects creditworthiness, loan approvals, interest rates, and financial opportunities. \n\nIn summary, what happened is the following : The XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Ref : XXXX ) was reported without original certified documentation.\n\nThe bureaus relied on automated vendor systems instead of direct verification with the court.\n\nThe reinvestigation process was automated and not independent.\n\nNo Method of Verification was provided.\n\nNo certified court filings were produced.\n\nNo chain-of-custody documentation was provided.\n\nNo identity-matching procedures were disclosed.\n\nThe record may not have been marked as disputed during review.\n\nNo procedural description of the reinvestigation was shared.\n\nNo evidence of updated docket review was provided.\n\nNo compliance with FCRA reinvestigation requirements was shown.\n\nNo transparency regarding vendors or data sources was given.\n\nBecause of these failures, the reporting of the bankruptcy can not be considered reliable, accurate, verifiable, or compliant with FCRA standards.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-18T01:49:44.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"63116","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17293178","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-18T01:42:02.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["These automated systems frequently pull partial, outdated, or incomplete information from federal court databases and are known to pass <em>along</em> errors because they do not <em>retrieve</em> certified court <em>documents</em> nor perform manual verification. The presence of such a serious derogatory item on my file, without proof that the bureaus obtained or reviewed certified records, is a direct violation of the FCRAs standards requiring maximum possible accuracy."]},"sort":[11.979862,"17293178"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10944132","_score":11.792835,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"This issue began in early XX/XX/year> when I traveled to XXXX with XXXX childhood friends. We boarded a XXXX XXXX cruise around the XXXX XXXX. During the trip, XXXX displayed a hologram featuring their logo in front of approved businesses where we were encouraged to shop. \nI purchased what I was told were designer handbags as XXXX presents for my daughter and daughters-in-law, and my friends made similar purchases. The store displayed the approved XXXX XXXX logo outside its business, indicating it was a verified & trusted retailer. The store representative also assured us that the handbags were authentic. Upon returning to the XXXX, I reported my purchases to XXXX XXXX, as required. They pulled me aside, informed me that the bags were counterfeit, and confiscated them. The XXXX XXXX document from XXXX is included in the PDF along with the correspondence between me and Chase Bank. The total charge to my credit card was {$6800.00}, plus the accrued interest of 29.9 %. \nXXXX, I called the Chase Bank credit card customer service, and they temporarily removed the charge from my account while they investigated my complaint. The representative I spoke with assured me that the charges would be credited due to \" fraud of the vendor. '' As instructed by Chase, I uploaded the XXXX XXXX paperwork, which confirmed the confiscation of the items, to their website. The Chase Bank XXXX ID for this issue is XXXX. \nXXXX Chase Bank responded that stated that,... you didnt return it or make arrangements for the merchant to it up. And We cant confirm that you are due a credit because the merchandise was not returned to the merchant. Chase Bank XXXX ID. XXXX XXXX In response to Chase XXXX letter, I explained that due to XXXX XXXX XXXX the merchandise, I no longer had custody or control over the items and was unable to return them. However, I informed Chase that I had made arrangements for the merchant to retrieve the merchandise directly from XXXX XXXX. I provided Chase with the XXXX XXXX reference number and contact information that I had been provided for XXXX XXXX to pickup their merchandise. I also explained that XXXX XXXX refused to speak with me and declined to contact XXXX XXXX to retrieve the merchandise. It is unknown if Chase ever addressed the merchants decline to pick-up the merchandise with the merchant, as it has never been addressed in any correspondence by Chase. I took the necessary steps as outlined in Chase 's letter by arranging for XXXX XXXX to collect their merchandise. To support my claims, I included photos and additional documentation with this letter. Please see the attached PDF of correspondence in chronological order for further details. \nXXXX Chase mailed a letter stating they were researching my disputed charge. For some reason they issued a new claim number Chase Bank XXXX ID. XXXX XXXX Chase XXXX a letter stating my Complaint is with the merchant and no billing error occurred and put the charges back on my credit card. They failed to address the first letter stating I needed to return the merchandise or make arrangements for the merchant to pick-up their merchandise, noting my issue was with the merchant ( in XXXX ) Chase Bank XXXX ID XXXX XXXX XXXX I called Chase XXXX to spoke with a XXXX XXXX the fraud committed by the vendor. I explained the contents of my first letter to Chase, reiterating that I had made arrangements for the merchant to pick up their merchandise, as I no longer had custody or control over it. I also mentioned that I had provided Chase with the contact and reference numbers for XXXX XXXX, but the vendor was refusing to communicate with me. XXXX kept me on the phone for an extended period, during which he left to speak with a supervisor. When he returned, he confirmed that the charges would be removed from my account and stated that I should see the credit reflected by the next statement date. \nXXXX I received a letter from Chase Bank stating that they would not be removing the charges and the dispute was closed. The letter showed the {$6800.00} charge. Chase Bank XXXX ID. XXXX XXXX I wrote to Chase XXXX, addressing the conflicting responses I received from various customer service representatives and a supervisor, who had previously stated that the charges should be removed. I expressed my frustration, pointing out that Chase appeared to be protecting the counterfeiters rather than supporting their consumer. I explained that the merchant simply refused to pick up their merchandise from XXXX XXXX because doing so would have led to their arrest. Despite having the ability to retrieve the merchandise, the merchant chose not to take action. \nXXXX Chase sent its standard language form stating were researching the dispute. Chase Bank XXXX ID : XXXX XXXX Chase XXXX stating that although I have a valid complaint with the Merchant, they now are stating there is no billing error, the charges are valid. That they would report to the credit reporting agencies that I disagreed with the dispute, and they would not longer respond to any future correspondence from me. \nAt the outset of reporting these issues to Chase, I followed the steps outlined in their letter, including arranging for XXXX XXXX to retrieve their merchandise. However, they failed to do so, and I was left with no custody or control over the items. It feels as though Chase has not taken this matter seriously, has sided with the counterfeiters, and left me, the consumer, to bear the financial burden while they continue to collect 29.9 % interest in credit card charges. There should be some type of consumer protection laws or banking practices in place to guide credit card companies in situations like this. Despite the company being based in XXXX, Chase had an opportunity to protect the consumer but chose instead to prioritize the interests of the counterfeiters.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-27T05:59:17.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"99516","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10944132","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2024-11-27T05:27:01.000Z","state":"AK","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The XXXX XXXX <em>document</em> from XXXX is included in the PDF <em>along</em> with the correspondence between me and Chase Bank. The total charge to my credit card was {$6800.00}, plus the accrued interest of 29.9 %. \nXXXX, I called the Chase Bank credit card customer service, and they temporarily removed the charge from my account while they <em>investigated</em> my complaint."]},"sort":[11.792835,"10944132"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10748415","_score":11.513371,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/year>, I transferred exactly {$12000.00} from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) to an Ally bank account to be deposited into a savings/checking account. I secured my account with a strong password, two-factor authentication, and fingerprint recognition. On XX/XX/year>, I attempted to transfer an additional {$3000.00} from XXXX, and the transaction seemed to process successfully. However, a few days later, when I tried to log into the Ally app, I was informed that my account was locked for \" security reasons. '' I attempted to log in via the website, but my access was also blocked. \n\nI called Ally customer service at ( XXXX ) XXXX on XX/XX/year>, and the representative explained that the issue was related to a fraud alert. I provided all requested information, and they informed me that an investigation would be initiated. I called again and was told that an investigator had been assigned to the case and that I would receive an email requesting additional information. However, I never received such an email. \n\nAt this point, I began contacting the fraud department at ( XXXX ) XXXX for all subsequent calls. Several days and calls later, I was told that my account balance would be mailed to me via check. A few days later, I followed up to confirm that the check was on its way, only to be told that the check could not be mailed and that I needed to ask XXXX to request the return of my funds. I made several attempts to contact XXXX both by phone and in person, but they informed me they had never heard of a customer being required to request funds in this manner. \n\nWhen I reached out to Ally again for clarification, I specifically asked if they meant I should file a formal dispute to retrieve the funds. However, the representative repeated that I simply needed to ask XXXX to instruct Ally to return the funds. I relayed this instruction to XXXX once more, but they provided the same response, stating they had no knowledge of this process. \n\nAfter repeatedly having representatives forward my information to the investigator, I eventually received an email ( presumably from the investigator using the XXXX account ) instructing me to contact Ally directly. \n\nFollowing this, I was asked to provide various documents, including my Social Security card, passport, and ID. At one point, Ally customer service requested my most recent bank statement, which I provided. Then, they requested full bank statements from the period when the initial transfer occurred, which I also submitted. Each time, I was told that the investigator would be notified and would reach out to me. However, I have not received any further communication from the investigator. Despite my continued calls, I have been unable to speak to anyone above the customer service level. \n\nAfter providing all requested documentation, I contacted Ally again, and this time we arranged a group call with an XXXX representative to clarify the situation. During the call, Ally requested confirmation of the account numbers for my XXXX savings and checking accounts. They passed this information along to the investigator, but since then, no further action has been taken. \n\nWhile I was able to file a dispute for the {$3000.00} transfer within the sixty-day window, I am still unable to access my account or the funds. I have been unable to obtain any resolution or escalate my issue beyond customer service. \n\nI am seeking assistance in resolving this matter as quickly as possible and would appreciate your intervention.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-10T21:06:05.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"92126","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10748415","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ALLY FINANCIAL INC.","date_received":"2024-11-10T20:41:52.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem accessing account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>During</em> the call, Ally requested confirmation of the account numbers for my XXXX savings and checking accounts. They passed this information <em>along</em> to the <em>investigator</em>, but since then, no further action has been taken. \n\nWhile I was able to file a dispute for the {$3000.00} transfer within the sixty-day window, I am still unable to access my account or the funds. I have been unable to obtain any resolution or escalate my issue beyond customer service."]},"sort":[11.513371,"10748415"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2310644","_score":11.158147,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I would like to file a complaint against the Bank of America. I entered into a loan modification in XXXX 2016 with the Bank of America. I was provided with a trial period plan offer as of XXXX XXXX, 2016 to start a XXXX Standard Modification. The trial period covered the months of XXXX - XXXX 2016. I made all XXXX trial payments as agreed upon on time and received a final approval on XXXX XXXX, 2016 after I requested to know if the modification was approved or not since had not heard anything. However, I kept making the payments as outlined in the agreement. The issue, the Bank of America is refusing to correct my credit report to show that I made my payments as agreed. As part of the program, your credit would be impacted in the trial period, but my account was to be trued up once I received the approval and acceptance into the program. Because the bank was late in completing my administrative paperwork. I am seeking your assistance in updating my credit report to reflect the proper payment history in regards to my mortgage. The bank only true up the months of XXXX through XXXX but failed to accurately update the months of XXXX, XXXX and XXXX due to their own administrative error. My credit report is showing that I was 30-59 late during XXXX XXXX 2016 months when that is totally false. I have been trying to get Equifax and the Bank of America to fix this issue. The Bank of America is stating it would take 6 months to 1 year to correct per XXXX XXXX, BOA Home Loan Team Representative. I went into my local branch in XXXX, GA and spoke with XXXX XXXX, Bank of America Relationship Manager who agreed it was an administrative error on their part and sought assistance to get the problem fixed. I was provided with case number XXXX in XXXX 2016 and was told it would take 60 days to correct. In meeting with XXXX XXXX on XXXX XXXX, 2016, he was told I should have never been approved for a modification because I was not late on my mortgage even though I was experiencing a financial hardship after completing the Home Safe Georgia program in being unemployed than later underemployed. The program clearly states a financial hardship is eligible for entrance into the program. Next, he said, the bank had corrected my credit report with the exception of XXXX 2016 which was no true after retrieving my credit report while in his office. Finally, XXXX XXXX said I would have to prove to the Bank of America that they were responsible for correcting my credit report. In the trial period paperwork work it specifically states that the bank will continue to report the status of my loan to credit reporting agencies as well as entry into the Trial Period Plan in accordance with the requirements of the Fair Reporting Act and the Consumer Data Industry Association. Next I was given another case number XXXX to add to my credit report that I was delinquent due to the loan modification when that is still not the case since I paid what was in the agreement. I forwarded by payment history, approved loan modification document and trial period agreement documents along with my credit report and no one will fix this problem. I keep getting the run around and the bank keep asking for extensions to investigate when they should have all documents pertaining to my loan since my original loan and modification was completed through them. Each department has a different answer or stating it should be handled now by a post mortgage department. No one wants to take responsibility.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-01-25T18:12:13.000Z","issue":"Loan servicing, payments, escrow account","sub_product":"Conventional fixed mortgage","zip_code":"30101","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2310644","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2017-01-25T18:12:11.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I forwarded by payment history, approved loan modification <em>document</em> and trial period agreement <em>documents</em> <em>along</em> with my credit report and no one will fix this problem. I keep getting the run around and the bank keep asking for extensions to <em>investigate</em> when they should have all <em>documents</em> pertaining to my loan since my original loan and modification was completed through them. Each department has a different answer or stating it should be handled now by a post mortgage department."]},"sort":[11.158147,"2310644"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8367971","_score":10.790254,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"My vehicle was repossessed by Wells Fargo, who used a predatory debt collection repossession company, XXXX XXXX XXXX, in the State of New York on XX/XX/XXXX, where the car was located the driveway of my home, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, NY XXXX. As the driver of the tow truck was looking inside of my car with a flashlight, my boyfriend, XXXX XXXX, and I approached him and asked him to leave and get off of our property. He claimed he was an employee of Wells Fargo and was there to repossess the car. We protested and he became aggressive, abusive and upon XXXX getting inside of the car, the tow truck driver began to hook and jack the car up with him in it. Another man showed up, blocked access to our driveway and claimed that he was the drivers XXXX, and was also was an employee of Wells Fargo. \nThey retreated back towards the tow truck and called the police. They lied, not only to the police, but to Wells Fargo as well. According to a letter I received from Wells Fargo on XX/XX/XXXX, there were beyond several inconsistencies from Wells Fargo and the repossession agents. \nYou claimed to have tried to reach me to no avail. I had been in constant phone contact with you during this entire time, which I have recordings of. \nYou claim that the car was repossessed because you had not received payments for the months of XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX and XXXX of XXXX. On a statement dated XX/XX/XXXX you claim I owed {$2300.00}. It also shows a payment I made on XX/XX/XXXX for {$1300.00}. We had an agreement that on XX/XX/XXXX I would make a payment over the phone to you that would get me up to date with back payments and at this time you would remove the red flag for repossession from my account. You had the car repossessed on XX/XX/XXXX. \nAccording to the letter mailed to me on XX/XX/XXXX, you claimed to have received a statement from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX stating the following : In a statement provided by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, the repossession agent claims the local police department was contacted for safety reasons for assistance during the repossession. There was a breach of peace at this point and the repossession agent should have left according to the New York State and Federal laws covered by the Uniform Commercial Code. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX was not present during the repossession, XXXX XXXX XXXX was. \nThe statement continues : The response from the repossession agent stated the interaction occurred on the street of the recovery location, and the police was called due to your husband 's threatening nature, and they have responded to the claim. Their drivers only interaction with the customer was after the police came to inform you to contact us to redeem the vehicle. The stated your husband was aggressive with their driver, causing the driver to contact the police department, and at no time did the driver threaten anyone. The advised you called on XX/XX/XXXX, to make a property appointment, but has not made an actual appointment yet. They will release the lot address once the customer sets an appointment for security reasons. The repossession company stated no police report was filed of the incident. \nAccording to my personal phone recordings, home surveillance videos and the body cam videos from the XXXX XXXX Police officers, the following statements will prove to be false. The interactions occurred in my driveway, nowhere near the street. \nThe only threatening behavior was the XXXX employees blocking XXXX back into the car, after telling him to get out and blocking us in our driveway, along with degrading and deplorable comments being made to us, for example, calling us deadbeats and pay your bills. \nThey claim no police report was filed of the incident. \nA breach of peace began immediately. The minute we asked the repossession company to leave, they, by New York State and Federal law, should have, and did not. It became very heated and volatile. \nAccording to the police reports obtained by the XXXX XXXX, NY, several different addresses were given for XXXX XXXX XXXX, which I have noted above. According to a phone call I had with Wells Fargo on XX/XX/XXXX to discuss this issue, you claimed to have no relationship with XXXX XXXX XXXX, that you use XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX. When I called XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX to try and find out what to do on XX/XX/XXXX, I was hung up on. Upon contacting XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, I was told to check my email and the only way to retrieve any of my belongings was to sign a document stating that I had already received my belongings and to email them a copy of my drivers license. I refused and was told then I would not be given their address and I could not retrieve my belongings. I was hung up on. \nTo date, my license plates have not been returned to the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, my New York State XXXX XXXX has not been returned, nor any of my personal belongings that were inside of the vehicle. \nI have contacted you on several occasions to remedy these problems, been told there was an investigation into it, then told the investigation was closed, then re-opened, etc. I have gotten nowhere with you and now a repossession is listed on my credit report and I demand it be removed immediately. \nUnder the laws of the State of New York, New York States Uniform Commercial Code, as well as New York States RISA and MVISA statutes, a deficiency can not be claimed unless all of the required notices were properly and timely given and all of the allowable redemption and cure time limits were adhered to. You did not follow these laws and statutes.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-02-18T08:29:33.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Auto debt","zip_code":"10801","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8367971","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2024-02-18T08:29:31.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Seized or attempted to seize your property"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Upon contacting XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, I was told to check my email and the only way to <em>retrieve</em> any of my belongings was to sign a <em>document</em> stating that I had already received my belongings and to email them a copy of my drivers license. I refused and was told then I would not be given their address and I could not <em>retrieve</em> my belongings. I was hung up on."]},"sort":[10.790254,"8367971"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4329943","_score":9.096994,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/2021, my husband received an email from XXXX indicating that his account had been compromised and asked that he call a given telephone number for assistance. My husband called the telephone listed on the email and spoke to an agent who gave him several confusing explanations as to what and how his account had been compromised, none of which made sense to him. My husband became suspicious and told them that he was going to contact our bank, Bank of America, but the agent insisted that he not call the bank because they would not help us with his XXXX account. Further, the agent insisted that he transfer money to them to resolve the issue. Not knowing whether to believe this person or not, my husband asked me to help him, thus I took over communications with this agent. I was also given confusing explanations and warnings not to contact our bank and through demands and intimidation was convinced to create an email account thru XXXX to make money transfers to them, to a provided email address. In my confusion and efforts to rectify my husband 's XXXX account, I made three money transfers to the email provided for a total of {$3400.00}. \nI would like to emphasize that both my husband and I are senior citizens who are well educated, with graduate degrees, and have professional employment. We are well aware of scammers and are consistently vigilant, even so, this agent was so convincing and insistent that I was convinced to make three XXXX transfers to the email provided : XXXX XXXX XXXX noted on our bank statement ). With each transfer demand, I grew more and more suspicious until I was asked to make the fourth transfer of over {$5000.00}, it was then that I told him that I was hanging up and contacting the bank. When I ended the call with the agent, he called back several times but I did not answer the call anymore. \n\nNoting the telephone number from the \" agent '', I immediately called Bank of America 's XXXX Fraud department and provided them with all the information. I told the bank agent that we had been scammed and asked them to stop the money transfers. They told me they could not and I was assured that they would conduct an investigation, further, I was assured there was a high probability our money would be returned, all we had to do was wait for 90 days while the fraud department pursued their investigation. They told me that I did not have to do anything further. Several weeks went by, I got anxious and called the XXXX Fraud department to inquire about the progress, they told me that they had located the bank to which the money had been transferred and they had requested the money be returned to us but that nothing had been resolved. I was asked to continue to wait. Stressed and lacking any information on the progress of the investigation, not to mention being out of {$3400.00}, a few weeks later I called the fraud department again. This time, the bank agent who answered my call became irritated and rude with my request for information. Basically, he told me not to call again, I would be contacted at the end of the 90 days. Image how stressed that made me! I made a note on my calendar to call back after 90 days. I call for the third time after the 90 days XXXX first week of XX/XX/2021 XXXX, it was then that I was told that my claim was not approved. \n\nUnderstandably, I became agitated and demanded answers : Why? How was this determination made? What did they discover during the investigation? Especially when I had provided the fraud department with all the information necessary to track down the scammers. I had given them the email where the money was transferred, I had provided the telephone number of the person who scammed us, they knew which bank had received our money transfers, what happened? Because I had not received any letter from Bank of America, I insisted they send me a digital copy of the letter thru my email account ( BTW could not be retrieved thru XXXX XXXX, the letter provided little, if any, supporting information, only indicated that I should request the documents that support their decision by calling ( XXXX ) XXXX. This is outrageous, why not provide this information along with the letter? When I requested the information digitally, thru my email, why was this not provided? Why am I subjected to waiting for a letter thru the US Postal Service which has been so unreliable? Obviously, the agent was apologetic and thankfully empathic, but he merely advised me to contact the Police Department to report the fraud and have them investigate it further. Really? After 90 days had transpired! I immediately contacted the Pennsylvania State Police and have obtained an Incident Investigation Case Number XXXX dated XX/XX/2021. The police officer informed me that there was little they could do since it was reported 90 days after it occurred. \nWe believe that we were not properly advised by any of the agents at Bank of America. We should have been advised to a ) Immediately contact the Police Department b ) Initiate a XXXX ChargeBack with DONOTPAY to stop the transfer As of yesterday ( XX/XX/XXXX ), I have called the bank three times to request the supporting documents for the rejection of my claim. No information has been sent to me. However, the agent finally told me that they would not release that information to me. Call the Police department or get recourse thru the courts was his reply.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-04-27T14:46:04.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Domestic (US) money transfer","zip_code":"19355","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4329943","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2021-04-27T14:06:07.000Z","state":"PA","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":["Because I had not received any letter from Bank of America, I insisted they send me a digital copy of the letter thru my email account ( BTW could not be <em>retrieved</em> thru XXXX XXXX, the letter provided little, if any, supporting information, only indicated that I should request the <em>documents</em> that support their decision by calling ( XXXX ) XXXX. This is outrageous, why not provide this information <em>along</em> with the letter?"]},"sort":[9.096994,"4329943"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15187303","_score":8.943683,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Introduction : I respectfully submit this complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) to report American Expresss unfair, deceptive, and inconsistent business practices in connection with the handling of a billing dispute and fraud investigation concerning my American Express Business Platinum Account. As detailed below, American Expresss conduct reflects serious procedural failures, including poor customer service, a lack of transparency, inconsistent instructions, disregard for legal representation, and the reversal of credits without justification. These failures caused me significant financial and emotional hardship. \n\nJurisdiction : I understand that the CFPB has authority under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) to investigate complaints related to unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices by financial institutions. This complaint involves billing dispute mismanagement and potential violations of those standards by American Express. \n\n\nFactual Background : 1. On XX/XX/XXXX, my legal counsel submitted a letter to American Express regarding a series of unauthorized charges on my American Express Business Platinum account, including 4 subaccounts. The purpose of this letter was to clarify what steps American Express had taken to investigate my billing dispute submitted on XX/XX/XXXX, the evidence they used to reach their conclusion of my dispute, and what actions they intended to take in response to my XX/XX/XXXX letter. \n\n2. American Express had acknowledged my initial dispute, which I submitted in XX/XX/XXXX, through letters issued by its XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, XXXX, letters were sent to me, and XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX as sub-account cardholders, confirming that the dispute had been opened. \n\nXXXX. Additional acknowledgment letters were issued on XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, XXXX, again to me, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX, confirming that credits had been applied and stating that unless more information was needed before XX/XX/XXXX, the cases would be considered closed. Letters from XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, XXXX, reiterated that investigations were ongoing. Further letters dated XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, XXXX, stated that more credits had been issued and the XX/XX/XXXX, deadline remained in effect. \n\nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, XXXX, American Express, through its XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, sent me letters confirming that the related dispute inquiries were under investigation. \n\nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received another letter confirming that a credit had been applied and that the case would closed if no additional information was needed before XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX. After that, American Express did not contact me or request any additional information from me. I understood my dispute to be closed and resolved. \n\nXXXX. Despite previously confirming that my account had been credited for the disputed charges and that the case would be considered closed after XX/XX/XXXX if no additional information was needed, American Express reversed the credits in XX/XX/XXXX without any notice or explanation. When I called to inquire about the reversal, no one could explain why the charges had been reapplied to my account. \n\nXXXX. After receiving no response to the XX/XX/XXXX letter, I followed up in early XX/XX/XXXX by calling American Express Customer Service. A representative instructed me to resend the letter, along with an authorization for my attorney to represent me, via fax to ( XXXX ) XXXX. My attorney complied with this request and sent the documents on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX. Additionally in XX/XX/XXXX, during another follow-up call to American Express Customer Service XXXX XXXX was instructed by a representative to resend the same documentation ( my XX/XX/XXXX letter and attorney authorization ) to American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX, and to XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX NY XXXX. My attorney mailed the documents to both addresses as instructed. \n\nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX from the General Counsels office confirmed receipt and said that American Express would begin investigating the allegations set forth in my letter but requested additional time due to the need to retrieve records stored in various, hard-to-access locations. \n\nXXXX. I received no other update until XX/XX/XXXX, when XXXX XXXX XXXX from the American Express Mitigation Division contacted my attorney, not about the pending dispute, but to talk about possibly reinstating my personal credit card account ending in XXXX. \n\nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, my attorney called American Express Customer Service to follow up on a response to my original billing dispute, as detailed in my letter dated XX/XX/XXXX regarding my American Express Account. The call was answered by someone identified as employee XXXX, who refused to share any information with her, saying that no valid authorization was on file, even though it had been submitted several times. The agent instructed my counselor to send the documents again to a different address : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, Texas XXXX. My attorney sent the requested documentation again on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX and again on XX/XX/XXXX, American Express sent letters directly to me at home, even though they knew I was represented by counsel. The letters said they could not proceed with the investigation because they lacked information, and they claimed they couldnt reach me. They closed the investigation and instructed me to call the American Express Fraud Department. \n\nXXXX. Following those instructions, on XX/XX/XXXX, my attorney and I called American Express Customer Service. We spoke to someone identified as XXXX. The agent told me I could not speak to them directly because I had legal representation, and refused to speak with us. She informed us that all future communication had to go through the email address XXXX. The agent then instructed us to submit all further inquiries via email to the address : XXXX. \n\nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, my attorney sent a detailed email to that address explaining all prior efforts made by me to obtain a substantive response to my original billing dispute, as detailed in her letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. The email sought clarification regarding the steps American Express had taken, the results of any investigations conducted, and any additional action required to resolve my claim. \n\nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, I called the American Express Customer Service and asked to speak with a representative of the Fraud Department. I spoke with someone named XXXX XXXX employee XXXX ), a representative of the Fraud Department, who said she wasnt familiar with my case and counld not further assist me but that someone else would contact me. \n\nXXXX. I later called American Express two more times, but their system was down. \n\nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, my attorney sent additional follow-up correspondence to American Express via email at XXXX, reiterating her request for a response to the issues outlined in her prior communications. \n\nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, Attorney XXXX XXXX contacted my attorney to schedule a meeting to address the additional correspondence originally submitted on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, Attorney XXXX and my attorney conducted a virtual meeting. During the meeting, Attorney XXXX shared American Expresss general position on my billing procedure dispute regarding unauthorized charges and said that they do not normally share internal investigation results unless they involved in a lawsuit. She said they do not have the resources to provide detailed explanations. She promised to follow up with a summary of the discussion and a copy of my Card Member Agreement. As of the date of this complaint, neither has been provided.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-09T19:19:22.000Z","issue":"Other features, terms, or problems","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"009XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15187303","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2025-08-09T18:49:41.000Z","state":"PR","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Other problem"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["A representative instructed me to resend the letter, <em>along</em> with an authorization for my attorney to represent me, via fax to ( XXXX ) XXXX. My attorney complied with this request and sent the <em>documents</em> on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX."]},"sort":[8.943683,"15187303"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19799621","_score":8.777106,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint regarding a wrongful repossession caused by my auto lenders internal error, failure to provide notice, and inconsistent information provided by their representatives. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Mazda Financial Services to request a payment extension. I was sent an extension agreement and instructed to complete it using XXXX. The document itself suggested the use of an electronic signature. I signed the document via e-signature and submitted it. At no point was I informed that an e-signature was unacceptable or that a wet signature was required. I was never notified that the agreement was rejected, reversed, or incomplete. I relied on the lenders instructions and reasonably believed the extension had been approved. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, my vehicle was repossessed without warning. When I first contacted the lender, I was told the repossession occurred because my XXXX extension payment was reversed on XX/XX/XXXX. I explained that I made a payment on XX/XX/XXXX, and simply forgot to cancel a scheduled payment for XX/XX/XXXX. I was told this did not matter and that the extension was denied due to a reversal, despite the successful payment on XX/XX/XXXX. During this call, I was also told I would need to pay the full payoff amount to retrieve my vehicle, which is not financially feasible for me. \n\nLater that day I called again to see if another representative could see my payment. I was told the same thing about the reversal multiple times until I specifically asked if she could see any payment on XX/XX/XXXX. Finally she stated that she had seen a payment but only for {$250.00}. I immediately debunked this by stating I had my bank statements open and could see I made a payment of {$380.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. With this I was instructed to email a merchant agreement to XXXX XXXX team to prove a payment was made and hopefully get my car back due to their system error. \n\nI complied but due to business hours I could not confirm that they had received the email. The next day I called to get a status update and was told they still had not received it and to resubmit the email and input Urgent into the subject. I did this on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX. Later that day I called to see if they had received the email and explained the situation. After further follow-up, the lender changed their explanation and stated that she sees a successful payment of {$380.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. Then proceeds to say that the {$250.00} payment was made this year. I have not made any payments this year especially not of that amount as it isnt even a full payment. When stating this she then trails off and says no thats something else but never clarified. \n\nWith her now seeing the payment correctly I ask again why was my agreement denied and eventually she found the repossession occurred because my extension agreement was invalid due to an e-signature. This is the first time I was informed that e-signatures were not accepted, despite the lender directing me to use XXXX to sign. I asked if she had seen the wet signature requirement on the document and she stated she did not know. I replied with I was never informed before or after signing the agreement that there was an issue. In face after facing the agreement I called and got clarification that it was successful along with checking the automated payment system that also corresponded with the agreement being effective. Hence why repossession came as a surprise. She began to grow agitated at my questioning while not giving any clear answer so I respectfully disconnected. \n\nI immediately checked my documents saw nothing indicating for a physical signature only. Also to my knowledge there is a law called the E-Sign law which grants legal recognition of electronic signatures ensuring that they can not be denied solely due to it being electronic The same day I spoke with another rep who told me that they do not tell people not to sign electronically and understands how misleading it is due to the document opening in XXXX and suggesting an e signature option. As he was only a rep I requested to speak with a supervisor and was told I would receive a callback within 12 business days. To this day XX/XX/XXXX I have had no supervisor contact. \n\nIn the meantime I sent an urgent email requesting a dispute and reinstatement review and have yet to receive any response. On the 3rd business day I called to check in on my supervisor call back and was told again to wait 24-48 hours. I confirmed my contact info and continued to call almost every day and was told the exact same thing each time. Meanwhile I sent another urgent email ( XX/XX/XXXX ) about a dispute but also asking for a hold on the auction of my car due to active investigation. No response. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, the day before the pay off deadline. I was able to speak with a resolutions team member. I told her the information and she proceeded to say she could not do anything despite the lack of communication and unorganized Ive witnessed from the start of this. As I push that I was not notified she began to say I received mail that my agreement was incomplete. When I said I have not received any mail and came about that I am paperless she contradicts and states I had a email. I continued to state I did not receive one and asked for specific dates. I checked for the date she told me ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and saw absolutely nothing. I let her know this and she grew agitated and said something about it being in the XXXX app. I do not use the app. When I have a late payment, declined payment, upcoming payment etc. I get an email yet when it comes to this I received nothing and have yet to see proof of the mail or email she claims to see. She continued to be short and say she cant help me with anything so I asked for her to keep my supervisor call back, and to notate that I have active dispute and trying to get a hold. Along with this call I was able to get a 7 day extension on the auction. \n\nDespite the lack of notice, conflicting explanations, and internal errors, the lender has continued to move forward with auction proceedings. I was only able to obtain a temporary 7-day auction extension after repeated calls and requests. The auction deadline is now XX/XX/XXXX, and I have still not received supervisor contact, written confirmation of an auction hold, or meaningful resolution. \n\nThis situation has caused significant financial and personal harm. The repossession resulted from the lenders procedural errors, failure to provide notice, conflicting explanations, and failure to properly escalate my dispute. I relied on the lenders instructions to use XXXX for the signature and was never informed that this would invalidate the agreement. The lenders handling of this matter has been disorganized, inconsistent, and unresponsive. \n\nAll I request is to have my vehicle reinstated and my extension agreement honored. Thank you for your assistance in investigating this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-02-26T05:59:15.000Z","issue":"Repossession","sub_product":"Lease","zip_code":"77066","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19799621","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION","date_received":"2026-02-26T05:49:02.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account reinstatement or redemption after repossession"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Thank you for your assistance in <em>investigating</em> this matter."]},"sort":[8.777106,"19799621"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8749018","_score":8.188485,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"I reached out to Chase Bank to report unauthorized fraudulent activity on my account XX/XX/XXXX in the amount of {$14000.00} and to request a new Chase card. I informed Chase of all transactions that were unauthorized and added that I have not used my other Chase Card in over 6 months and the card that I am reporting I only used the XXXX XXXX The representative noted on the account that I was still in possession of my card, which was false. I made it very clear that I did not physically have the card on my persons. I even called back to verify with Chase that I did not physically have the card in my possession and that it was stolen. Chase reversed the charges upon my initial report. On XX/XX/XXXX, Chase reposted the charges of {$14000.00} to my account stating that I was liable for the charges due to benefiting. I called and asked what documentation Chase needed because I did not make these fraudulent charges, 99 % of fraudulent charges were made anywhere from 30 minutes to 4 hours my location. The representative stated I needed to prove my whereabouts. I gathered 8-15 receipts showing appointments that lasted over 60 minutes and store receipts with location and time stamps. In addition, I sent my work schedule. The case was reopened and I requested the {$14000.00} in fraudulent charges be removed again due to the payment due minimum being raised from {$300.00} to {$600.00}. Chase Bank refused to removed the charges again while my case was reopened pending investigation and stated as long as the charges on the account I will have to pay the new minimum $ XXXX {$700.00} a month, which included the fraudulent charges until it is resolved. At that time I would be refunded the amount over paid each month. Chase refused a stop payment and refused my request to only pay my original minimum for the amount that previously on the card while the investigation was being conducted. \n\nSince XX/XX/XXXX, I have made payments to Chase in the amount of {$3900.00}, this includes payments after their refusal for payment stop or request to only pay original minimum. \n\nI communicated with Chase Fraud Department via email on XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX. Submitting several forms of documentation showing I could not have made these fraudulent charges. Along with several phone calls on and in between these dates with Chase representatives. Even requested camera footage. \n\n\nUpon submitting my first set of documentation, Chase stated if they needed more information they would request it via phone call and would not close my case. \nInstead, they closed out my case without notice. I reached out to Chase and representative stated my work schedule did not show an address, when in fact my work schedule showed a store number and city location. I then resubmitted my companys entire 3,000 store directory showing store number, store name, address, phone number, fax, and region ; documentation showing my position with the company alongside the address, and Human Resource documentation for verification. Along with additional receipts and mapping out my whereabouts in written form to make it easier for their team. \n\nDue to the lack of research being done, I requested a list of all fraudulent activities time stamped with location on XX/XX/XXXX via email. I was ignored so I called about a week later. The representative stated she could not email me the list, that she had to request it from the fraud department for approval and if they approved it can only be mailed within 15 days. I confirmed the request to be submitted. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I emailed chase more documentation and notify them I was awaiting the list I requested. I called Chase two weeks later requesting an update on my request for the time stamped documentation only to find out my case was closed again without notice on XX/XX/XXXX. I requested to speak with a supervisor and I was told someone would contact me in 5 days. No one contacted me. I reached out to Chase again no solution. They refused to connect me with a agent in the actual fraud review department who was overseeing my case. I submitted more documentation to reopen my case. \n\n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I finally received the time stamp unauthorized fraudulent charges from XXXX. Chase excluded all dates but the charges that were done on XX/XX/XXXX that showed the actual city I live. They didnt include the charges made in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX all 30 minutes to 4 hours from my location. I still have not received the full list with time stamps and locations from all fraudulent activities. I then tried to reopen my case showing proof that I was no near these places or I was at work or appointments. \n\nI reached out to Chase again, this time the representative stated she could see I was not in these locations during the time of the fraudulent charges. I asked could she review my account to get this situation resolved and she stated thats not her department to give approvals. However, she did make the proper corrections on my account stating once again I did not have my card, I was using XXXX XXXX, and it was stolen. The representative stated Chase sent text alerts and I approved them. I stated I did not receive any text alerts nor did I approve any. Furthermore, I never received my new card in the mail. The representative stated they shipped my new card the week I reported. I confirmed I did not receive it once again. \n\nThe representative then stated that I needed to get proof from my cell phone company that I did not receive text message from Chase Fraud. I called my cellphone company to get a list of my text message and a agent stated that they can not release text messages, they dont have them. I called Chase back immediately, stating why would your team tell me to go retrieve text messages from my phone company when that is illegal and can not be done. A new representative agreed that you can not get text messages and doesnt know why I was told that. My case was closed again XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nFinally in mid XXXX, a supervisor reached out to me stating that there was nothing I can do and that the charges of {$14000.00} would stay on my account. The supervisor stated usually if fraudulent charges arent resolved immediately it is harder to prove or retrieve evidence. That even a police report could not remove the charges until they completed their investigation, which could take over a year. I stated clearly your team didnt investigate properly on the case. Restated I did not receive nor approve any text alerts, nor receive my new credit card. I stated I have given your team every document that was requested over the last two month and you are still holding my liable when representatives not in charge of resolving this case have agreed with me. The fraudulent review team claims I benefits from the charges when I have proven countless times I did not or could not have made those charges. \n\n\nFinally, on XX/XX/XXXX I went to the Chase branch located XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX to speak with a desk representative who attempted to help with the problem. After Chase transfer us to three different representatives. The final representative stated that I would need to write a letter to the Chase Cooperate office explaining the situation to see if they could rectify it.\n\nUpon officially closing my case, Chase never mailed or emailed me an explanation letter stating their reasoning for closing the case and holding me liable for the charges.\nI am at the point where the only next step is legal action against Chase for lack of investigation these charges, the repeat closure of my case after sufficient documentation they requested was submitted, Chase employees agreeing that I could not have made these charges, Chase not wanting to accept liability after this same card has been stolen on several occasions due to lack of security. Legal action for not only the amount of the fraudulent charges but also stress and time spent on me trying to prove my innocence in this case. Chase has harmed my credit record, thus making my score drop over XXXX points and dismissed me several times as loyal customer for over 10 years. I am looking to get this matter resolved in a timely fashion for this issue is significantly impacting my way of life.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-04-12T05:03:42.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"32771","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8749018","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2024-04-12T04:26:04.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The supervisor stated usually if fraudulent charges arent resolved immediately it is harder to prove or <em>retrieve</em> evidence. That even a police report could not remove the charges until they completed their <em>investigation</em>, which could take over a year. I stated clearly your team didnt <em>investigate</em> properly on the case. Restated I did not receive nor approve any text alerts, nor receive my new credit card."]},"sort":[8.188485,"8749018"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4174968","_score":8.026115,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX of XXXX XXXX XXXX- I have been having issues with my prior mortgage servicer AND the credit reporting agencies who've failed to properly investigate and don't allow me an option to submit more then one complaint once they've claimed to have investigated. \n\nTo begin, I was the victim of the XXXX XXXX, a designated Presidentially declared disaster in XX/XX/XXXX. I was current on my mortgage payments and in XX/XX/XXXX, I informed my mortgage servicer of the XXXX, of the situation and requested assistance in the form of a forbearance while we waited for our homeowners insurance. \n\nThis is where the games began. The extent of assistance received from XXXX was a loss mitigation package which required hundreds of documents, ( obviously we didn't have any ) instead of just offering payment refilled as a courtesy for DISASTER victims for 3 or 6 months. It's not that difficult to offer assistance to disaster victims while awaiting insurance pay outs. \n\nWe continued to make mortgage payments as we couldn't bear to deal with more headache and were hopeful our homeowners insurance would pay. Well, when insurance didn't pay and we found ourselves out of pocket hundreds of thousands we called XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  again and requested a 12 month forbearance. Once again they mailed a loss mitigation package and requested the same paperwork along with a hardship letter. We were XXXX XXXX. \n\nWe filled out all the forms, wrote all the sad letters, did everything they requested and would call in daily to get an update as to if they would grant us this relief. We were not given a single point of contact so we spoke with whomever answered the phone and each gave us the run around and no answer. \nDuring this time we couldn't make the mortgage payments, living in a XXXX  with 2 kids, animals in boarding and re purchasing clothing and the the most basic of necessities. \n\nXXXX of XXXX XXXX started to report our account as past due to the credit agencies even though they said they wouldn't because we were in an active Loss Mitigation. \n\nThey began reporting in XX/XX/XXXX and they kept on going despite our pleas and fulfillment of ridiculous requests. \nWe finally were assigned to a LOSS DRAFT representative named XXXX but apparently tLOSS Mitigation and Loss Draft don't speak and well our representative left for the day at about XXXX XXXX pacific time so getting ahold of her wa n't easy. \nWe asked daily about the status of our application and would be told it was under review. We were never told it wasn't complete, we were never told they were going to foreclose on our property, we were never told anything. \n\nWe received a letter stating we were in default ( even though we were supposedly in loss mitigation ) so we reached out to XXXX XXXX XXXX housing counselors who stepped in to help. XXXX XXXX was our HUD rep and would call XXXX XXXX  XXXX on our behalf with us on the line and she was given the same run around we were given. \nShe was told they would not be sending us into foreclosure, and she was told they received ALL requested documents and they were being reviewed. \nStill no point of contact 3 months later. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, the same day the HUD counselor spoke to XXXX and was told they would not be sending us to foreclosure, XXXX XXXX XXXX forwarded our account to the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  to begin foreclosure proceedings, on WILDFIRE VICTIMS. At this point LOSS DRAFT was holding a check from insurance but would not release it even though it was for personal property ...\n\nWe received the foreclosure letter and notice of acceleration from The XXXX XXXX XXXX with {$1000.00} late fees, {$510.00} foreclosure fee, {$210.00} for FORCASTED late fees and {$14.00} property inspection. A reinstate bill of {$38000.00} due by 10-15 and payable only to the XXXX XXXX \n\nAfter selling my wedding ring, we called XXXX XXXX  XXXX who said they couldn't speak to us since it's been turned over to the foreclosure team at XXXX and so we paid the XXXX {$38000.00} on XX/XX/XXXX by wire. \n\nWe asked so many times to get verification of this payment and that is was made by the due date as we could not bear another late reporting to our once 800 plus credit now ruined. We were only verbally told it should be fine.. Not reassuring. \n\nMoving on, XXXX XXXX XXXX, like clockwork reported us late to all XXXX agencies. They said we didn't pay them. Well here 's my receipt! Right here! Still refused to fix their mistakes. \n\nThen again they marked us late in XX/XX/XXXX, even though we have documentation of proof of on time payment. Only then were we told our LOSS MITIGATION application was not complete and that's why it was sent to foreclose. Mind you the same day they told HUD and us that is was complete. We were never given an option for any other work arounds. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX we received a letter saying our loan had been sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( My god I was happy ) to never speak to XXXX XXXX  XXXX again and on our welcome letter it states that for 60 days following the transfer of a loan there will be no negative reporting because the previous lender XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX stopped taking payments. \n\nWell guess what? My credit is marked LATE in XX/XX/XXXX! THEY CLOSED AND SOLD MY LOAN AND ARE STILL REPORTING ME LATE! \n\nI have begged EXPERIAN to investigate again and because I have already complained I'm not allowed to again. \n\nMy CREDIT IS DESTROYED BECAUSE OF XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXA! I AM NOW DIVORCED after 20 years because of XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX AND HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE FAILURE. \n\nI am only asking for someone to do their job and FIX the MESS they've caused me. I had to pay a {$20000.00} up front payment on a rental because my credit is a disaster. It wasn't enough I was an innocent victim of a wildfire, I'm the victim of ABUSE by Banks and credit agencies. And GET THIS!. There was NEVER any NOD filed on my home, they just claimed there was. So how did they sent to an attorney and why was I charged thousands when it's not legal? \n\nXXXX was also set to release our personal property insurance payment in XXXX but that got transferred along to the new mortgage servicer too. And we were locked out of our account and unable to retrieve any correspondence from them. Last communication was XXXX NOTE : The Hardship letter dated XXXX was not original, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  made us change the date as they said letter would only be good for 30 days at a time. We questioned re dating original and they told us to do it.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-03-01T20:24:41.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"91302","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4174968","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2021-03-01T20:24:37.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX was also set to release our personal property insurance payment in XXXX but that got transferred <em>along</em> to the new mortgage servicer too. And we were locked out of our account and unable to <em>retrieve</em> any correspondence from them. Last communication was XXXX NOTE : The Hardship letter dated XXXX was not original, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  made us change the date as they said letter would only be good for 30 days at a time. We questioned re dating original and they told us to do it."],"issue":["Problem with a credit reporting company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["<em>Investigation</em> took more than 30 days"]},"sort":[8.026115,"4174968"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16161971","_score":7.8881445,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"This is a new, subsequent, and independent complaint from the first. Navy Federal is now stating, without specifying a date or time period, that they concluded their investigation XXXX days ago and performed a chargeback. Now, it has been XXXX XXXX and NFCU states that I am again not receiving a provisional credit because they are waiting to see how the other bank and vendor will react. I have requested and captured all requests, both present and prior, made for the NFCU policy and procedures, as well as the standard operating guidelines, and have been denied every time. This is not the first instance where NFCU has treated me inequitably, denying services and products without cause. XXXX things can not be true here : either the Navy Federal Credit Union offers services and products under uniform, industry standard, equitable, \" as to all, '' equitable opportunities, based on \" DOCUMENTED, NFCU XXXX, XXXX, and/or XXXX, '' including the permanently XXXX, and other protected classifications, as well as the overall customer base, or they are making discriminatory, XXXX, CFPB, XXXX, XXXX, protected. If NFCU does not provide, or can not provide, documents maintained by every business and corporation within consumer finance, * * Complaint Concerning Discriminatory Practices and Failure to Provide Equitable Treatment by Navy Federal Credit Union * * This complaint delineates distinct and newly articulated grievances that are independent from my previous submissions. Navy Federal Credit Union ( NFCU ) has announced that its investigation concluded XXXX days ago, without specifying the exact timeframe involved, and has reportedly executed a chargeback. Despite this, it has now been XXXX XXXX, and NFCU asserts that I am still not receiving provisional credit as they await the reactions from the merchants bank and the vendor. \n\nI have meticulously documented all requests made to procure NFCUs policy and procedures, standard operating guidelines ( SOP ), and other operational protocolsall of which have been systematically denied. This ongoing situation is not an isolated incident ; it echoes prior experiences where NFCU has exhibited inequitable treatment, restricting access to services and products without justifiable cause. \n\nThe crux of the matter lies in the inconsistency of NFCUs application of its own policies, which are ostensibly designed to ensure equitable service to all customers regardless of their status, including those who are permanently XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  mandates that individuals with XXXX receive equitable opportunities in all areas of public life. The treatment I have experienced raises significant concerns regarding compliance with XXXX provisions that prohibit discrimination against individuals based on XXXX. \n\nXXXX. * * Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ) * * : Under 15 U.S.C. 1666, consumers are entitled to provisional credit during the investigation of billing disputes. NFCUs failure to provide such credit contravenes federal law, especially when they have already acknowledged possession of the funds recovered from the merchant. \n\nXXXX. * * Regulation E ( 12 C.F.R. Part 1005 ) * * : Notably, Section 1005.11 establishes requirements for creditors regarding provisional credit. NFCUs refusal to issue provisional credit or disclose the chargeback filing date constitutes a violation of this regulation, as they have not provided valid grounds for withholding funds that are rightfully mine. \n\nXXXX. * * Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ) * * : The ECOA, found at 15 U.S.C. 1691, prohibits discrimination in credit transactions. The regulatory framework outlined in 12 C.F.R. 1002.4 reinforces this prohibition by requiring creditors to abstain from any form of discrimination based on arbitrary characteristics. The disparity in how NFCU handles disputes potentially contravenes these standards and suggests a pattern of discriminatory practice that undermines fundamental tenets of equitable treatment. \n\nXXXX. * * Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices ( UDAAP ) * * : The actions of NFCU in withholding funds while acknowledging their existence provide a basis for a claim of engaging in unfair or deceptive practices. This behavior has resulted in an ongoing injury, given that I, as a permanently XXXX individual, am being denied access to funds that are crucial for my day-to-day living. \n\nXXXX. * * Common Law Principles * * : Recognized principles of good faith and fair dealing necessitate that financial institutions operate in a manner that upholds the trust and confidence placed in them by their clients ( UCC 1-302 ). The disproportionate treatment of my case by NFCU signals a potential breach of this duty, raising questions about their commitment to ethical banking practices. \n\n* * Conclusion and Request for Remedial Action : * * In light of the outlined legal infractions and ethical considerations, it is evident that Navy Federal Credit Union has violated my rights as a permanently XXXX consumer by withholding funds, failing to provide necessary documentation, and not affording me the equitable treatment mandated by law. Therefore, I seek immediate remediation, including the release of the withheld funds, provision of all requested documentation about my case, and an assurance that NFCU will re-evaluate its practices to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations in the future. \n\nThe persistence of these issues necessitates an urgent and thorough review of NFCUs operational policies and their alignment with federal consumer protection laws, particularly those aimed at safeguarding the interests of individuals with XXXX. \n\nNavy Federal Credit Unions Repeated Denial of Equitable, Standard, and Treatment of a Permanently XXXX Individual, Refusal to Provide Documents of Policy, Procedures, and Standard Operating Protocols, and Ineffective, Dismissive, and Uninformative Communications : This complaint presents distinct and novel issues that are not merely duplicative of existing complaints. The concerns arise specifically from Navy Federal Credit Unions actions after XX/XX/year>, where it wrongfully withheld funds that had already been retrieved from the merchant, coupled with a glaring lack of transparency regarding its processes. Such conduct constitutes new violations that have inflicted additional harm, thereby distinguishing this complaint from my initial grievance. \nKey Facts ( New Developments ) : On XX/XX/year>, Navy Federal informed me that it had already debited the merchants bank ( initiated chargeback ). \nAt the same time, Navy Federal stated it would not credit my account and was only waiting to see if the merchant disputes. \nAs of XX/XX/year>, Navy Federal continues to withhold the funds, despite acknowledging that it already controls the money. \nWhy This Is a Separate Violation : My first complaint covered the missed XXXX provisional credit deadline under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( c ) ( 2 ).\n\nThis complaint concerns Navy Federals XXXX XXXX conduct : XXXX. Refusing to release funds already recovered from the merchants bank. \nXXXX. Refusing to disclose the chargeback filing date, the merchants response deadline, or any merchant documentation, in violation of 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ).\n\n3. Engaging in an unfair and deceptive practice ( UDAAP ) by admitting it has the funds but denying me access, creating an ongoing injury. \n\nRepresentatives from NFCU, including XXXX frontline staff and a supervisory agent, have dismissed my inquiries, claiming that NFCU is not obligated to provide provisional credit or documentation regarding our decisions. This stance represents a clear violation of the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ), specifically 15 U.S.C. 1666, which affirms the consumer 's entitlement to provisional credit during the investigation of disputes related to unauthorized charges. Furthermore, as stipulated in 12 C.F.R. 1026.13, creditors are required to grant provisional credit unless they can unequivocally establish a favorable resolution within the mandated investigation period. NFCU 's non-compliance with this regulatory obligation is both unlawful and untenable. \nThere is compelling evidence that NFCU has handled similar disputes in a manner that reflects bias and potential discriminatory practices. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ), 15 U.S.C. 1691, prohibits discrimination in any aspect of credit transactions. The relevant regulatory framework, as outlined in 12 C.F.R. 1002.4, requires creditors to refrain from engaging in discrimination based on arbitrary factors. The inconsistent application of policies observed at NFCU raises serious concerns about their adherence to the ECOA and suggests a troubling disregard for principles of fairness and equitable treatment. Moreover, common law principles regarding good faith and fair dealing require financial institutions to treat their customers fairly ( see UCC 1-302 ). The evident inconsistencies in NFCU 's treatment of disputes underscore a potential breach of this fiduciary duty, which threatens the trust fundamental to the banking relationship. \nNavy Federal Credit Union XXXX NFCU ) violated federal law and consumer protection by withholding funds already recovered from the merchants bank while refusing to disclose relevant dates or documentation, thereby breaching obligations under Regulation E ( 12 C.F.R. Part 1005 ), engaging in unfair or deceptive practices, and imposing inequitable treatment on a XXXX consumer. This complaint differs materially from my earlier CFPB filing ; however, it is not precluded in its entirety. In combination with all the facts, NFCU conducts its business practices recklessly, autonomously guided by its own interests, openly undermining regulatory and governmental oversight. Representatives from NFCU, including XXXX frontline employees and a supervising agent, dismissed my inquiries with the assertion that NFCU is not required to provide provisional credit ( XXXX ) or documentation regarding our decisions. This dereliction is a clear violation of the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ), especially 15 U.S.C. 1666, which establishes the consumer 's right to receive provisional credit while disputes concerning unauthorized charges are under investigation. According to 12 C.F.R. 1026.13, creditors are mandated to issue provisional credit unless they can conclusively demonstrate a resolution favoring their position within the stipulated investigation timeframe. NFCU 's refusal to adhere to this regulatory requirement is both unlawful and indefensible. \nI have formally submitted XXXX requests for documentation that elucidates the rationale behind NFCUs decisions regarding my dispute. To date, the responses received have been markedly insufficient and evasive. As stipulated by 12 C.F.R. 1026.13 ( b ), a creditor is obligated to provide documentation once it determines that the charge in question is not erroneous. NFCU 's vague assertions that decisions are made internally without corresponding documentation are wholly unacceptable and represent an apparent infringement of consumer rights. I hereby demand immediate remedial action to address these violations. I expect a comprehensive response from NFCU, including all pertinent documentation that justifies its actions, along with the prompt issuance of the provisional credit that is due to me, inclusive of all fees paid for returned items during the period from XX/XX/year>, through XX/XX/year>. Should there be a continued failure to meet these requests, I will be compelled to explore further legal remedies. \n\nThere is compelling evidence that NFCU has handled similar disputes in a manner that reflects bias and potential discriminatory practices. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ), 15 U.S.C. 1691, prohibits discrimination in any aspect of credit transactions. The relevant regulatory framework, as outlined in 12 C.F.R. 1002.4, requires creditors to refrain from engaging in discrimination based on arbitrary factors. The inconsistent application of policies observed at NFCU raises serious concerns about their adherence to the ECOA and suggests a troubling disregard for principles of fairness and equitable treatment.\n\nMoreover, common law principles regarding good faith and fair dealing require financial institutions to treat their customers fairly ( see UCC 1-302 ). The evident inconsistencies in NFCU 's treatment of disputes underscore a potential breach of this fiduciary duty, which threatens the trust fundamental to the banking relationship.\n\nVII. Conclusion : In conclusion, the actions and policies of Navy Federal Credit Union in relation to my dispute reveal significant failures in their adherence to consumer protection laws and in providing equitable treatment to their members. The glaring inconsistencies in their practices, lack of transparency, and potential bias require immediate action. I demand a comprehensive review of my case, focusing on consumer rights, equitable procedures, and strict adherence to applicable legal standards, to address these issues and rectify any discriminatory practices, thereby ensuring fairness in financial services for all consumers. \n\nXXXX. XXXXlectronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ), 15 U.S.C. 1693 et seq. Implemented by Regulation E ( 12 C.F.R. Part 1005 ), engaging in unfair or deceptive practices, and imposing inequitable treatment on a XXXX consumer. \nXXXX. 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ) : If the institution determines no error occurred, it must provide an explanation and copies of documents relied upon. \nXXXX. Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ), 12 U.S.C. 5531, 5536.\n\nFinancial institutions supervised by the CFPB are prohibited from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices, including failing to provide clear disclosures or withholding funds without a valid legal justification. \nXXXX. Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ), 15 U.S.C. 1691 ; ADA, 42 U.S.C. 12101. \nRequire financial institutions to provide fair and equal treatment without discrimination, including to XXXX consumers relying on public assistance. \nXXXX. Common Law Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. \nFinancial institutions must act fairly, reasonably, and in good faith when dealing with members and their funds. \nB. Lack of Transparency Despite repeated requests, NFCU has not disclosed : o The date the chargeback was filed, o The merchants deadline to respond, or o Any documentation received from the merchant. \nUnder 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ), NFCU must explain and provide supporting documentation if it denies a consumers claim. The lack of disclosure is noncompliant and deceptive. \nXXXX Withholding Funds Already Retrieved NFCU admits it already recovered funds from the merchants bank. \nHolding these funds without crediting them to the consumer lacks any statutory or contractual basis. \nThis constitutes an unfair practice under the CFPBs UDAAP authority and a breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. \nXXXX Disparate Impact on XXXX XXXX As a permanently XXXX consumer on a fixed income, denial of access to lawfully protected funds imposes disproportionate harm. \nNFCUs refusal to apply standard protections may implicate ECOA and XXXX principles of equity and nondiscrimination, especially if such practices are applied inconsistently across consumer classes. \nFormal Request for Action Against Navy Federal Credit Union : XXXX ) Immediate Release of Recovered Funds : We demand that Navy Federal Credit Union promptly release the funds successfully retrieved from the merchants banking institution. The credit union must uphold its obligation to expedite the reinstatement of these funds to the appropriate account, as this is a fundamental expectation and a critical aspect of its fiduciary duties to its members. Additionally, an immediate refund of all return fees charged during the period from XX/XX/year>, through XX/XX/year>. Following XX/XX/XXXX, I have been systematically denied access to funds that Navy Federal has already recovered. This situation transcends mere delays ; it constitutes an ongoing deprivation of funds to which I have a rightful claim. As a permanently XXXX individual reliant on a fixed income, the compounded effects of this inability to access my resources exacerbate my financial hardship, creating new challenges that are separate from the initial violation regarding provisional credit. \nXXXX ) Documentation of Chargeback Process : We require Navy Federal to furnish a comprehensive account of the chargeback process in writing. This documentation must include the date on which the chargeback was filed, the deadline for the merchants response, and all relevant documentation received throughout the process. Our request is firmly grounded in consumer protection laws that mandate transparency in dispute processes, including the Fair Credit Billing Act and essential provisions of Regulation E. \nXXXX ) Clarification of Fund Retention Practices : We insist that Navy Federal provide a clear and thorough explanation as to why it continues to withhold funds after acknowledging their retrieval. Additionally, we demand an immediate response regarding the refusal to provide the requested documentation that supports its determinations related to the chargeback. This lack of transparency is unacceptable and potentially violates consumer protection statutes and internal compliance standards. Navy Federal must articulate the legal basis for its actions and demonstrate how they align with established regulatory frameworks, particularly Regulation E. \nXXXX ) Review of Dispute-Handling Policies for Compliance : We call for an immediate and comprehensive review of Navy Federals dispute resolution policies to ensure their compliance with Regulation E and applicable fairness standards. This review aims to determine whether Navy Federal 's practices meet regulatory expectations regarding the timely processing of accounts, clear communication, and the ethical treatment of account holders. Evaluating these policies against industrys best practices is essential to protecting consumer rights and maintaining transparency throughout the dispute resolution process. Further, NCUA summarily dismissed my first complaints against NFCU, Conclusion : If NFCU refuses equitable opportunities and fairness to a permanently XXXX individual, and repeatedly, on a \" provisional credit, '' twenty-four days after the dispute was filed, XXXX days after they draw down funds from another bank, having denied me my initial provisional credit twice, and then states they are \" in-waiting '' for the other bank to dispute, and as you will witness attached, offers not a single date, time, estimation, and all while acting and treating me in a manner that clearly is a discriminatory, biased, non-documented lawful or internal policy, when I can not even receive medicine, then by what reasonable discernment does the CFPB believe they operate based on fairness and equitable, uniform and standard treatment? I am requesting a review of NFCU 's internal policies and procedures, which will be analyzed by the actual compliance team. I am requesting that Navy Federal provide me with all the documents, including the reasons why I have been repeatedly denied. every request ever made, while protecting vendors of other banks. Navy Federal has, in a rapid period of time, declined substantially, and I am betting there are thousands of classes of of similar treatment who would love to take action.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-24T12:36:15.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"38053","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16161971","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2025-09-24T11:22:35.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This stance represents a clear violation of the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ), specifically 15 U.S.C. 1666, which affirms the consumer 's entitlement to provisional credit <em>during</em> the <em>investigation</em> of disputes related to unauthorized charges. Furthermore, as stipulated in 12 C.F.R. 1026.13, creditors are required to grant provisional credit unless they can unequivocally establish a favorable resolution within the mandated <em>investigation</em> period."]},"sort":[7.8881445,"16161971"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8230551","_score":7.7771072,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, On the XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX XXXX, I went to XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX DC XXXX bank of america to deposit a sum of XXXX XXXX  through ATM machine. All my money was XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX XXXX  ). There are two ATM machines in the XXXX, one on the left ( placed lower ) and the other on the right ( placed higher ). I deposited the Money in the ATM in the right ( the higher one ). The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Assistant vice president XXXX XXXX, XXXX. greeted me and said i want to make a deposit. So i went to the ATM machine and made the deposit. I inserted the entire sum together but the machine rejected it, so I tried again by inserting XXXX by XXXX then XXXX bills. I saw on the screen the count as XXXX ( which I thought it's the number of bills i inserted ). i clicked ok ( confirming ). I check my app and found nothing deposited yet. I said to myself it might need sometime to update.So i went for a walk near the washington monument. I checked my app ( bank of america app ) again and again. by then i realized there is something wrong. So I went to straight forward to the same branch. The manager ( XXXX ) again geeted me \" weclome again ''. I told him what happened and showed him the receipt. he looked at it and said i have to call the phone number on the ATM ( fraud Department ). I did. The customer service agent told me that my claim is registered and that they will issue a \" provisional credit '' within XXXX hours while they continue the investigations. Initially i was leaving XXXX  that day, but because of this I had to extend my stay for another day hoping they will resolve the issue. I waited 24 hours, checking the app the time, but nothing happened. the next day, I went back to see the manager who again told me that they are still on that 48 hours window so all what i have to do is wait! I nothing happened he will call himself and ask \" what's going on '' and I have recording of our conversations. \nI called customer service to accelerate my claim and vow for quick credit release while they solve the issue, only to realize that the customer service actually created a new claim, which mean she duplicated my claim. and that cost me to wait untill money because we where on XXXX  by now. On the XXXX, XXXX I went back to see the manager ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) again, he made few calls. I also saw him opening the ATM machine along side the front desk guy who I don't know his name ( a tall white guy empolyee ). When i saw them opening the ATM and retrieving it's content in a XXXX  XXXX. I though they are going to find my money. Only to again be frustrated that he said they will need 45 days to 3 months to finish the investigation. But he also said, \" I will personally apply for provisional credit for you because I can see you have an upcoming travel '' he asked me how much do I need : \" I said at least XXXX XXXX  to cover my expenses during my wait time '' I was counting on the 10 days legal timeframe that they have to respond to my claim. but he lied to me. I then asked when will this be placed on my account. He said XXXX to XXXX hours. he gave me his number and said if not released by XXXX XXXX, call me. Indeed, nothing released so I called multiple times without a response. so he lied and could not even answer my calls and tell me the reality. next week I called frond desk and asked to speak with him. they always say he is in a meeting ( a lie of course ) and they said leave us your number so he can call you back. he never called me back. anyway, I went to bank of america XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, VA XXXX, to ask what can i do. they said you can only call customer service again. this time the customer service said that my provisional credit was denied without giving me a reason and assured me that i can only wait XXXX business days to receive a resolution. on the XXXX XXXX i received a message online saying that my claim was denied without further explanation. I called back customer service to appeal the decision, the lady sweared she will take care of my case and said they will issue credit ... ( the same story told again ). I knew she got it wrong. i asked for an appeal not to file a new claim. So i called another agent and asked him about my case and what the former customer service did : did she file and appeal or a new claim. he said she filed a new claim. which in of itself is wrong. so I told him to cancel it and file an appeal to the decision instead. he did cancel the new claim but referred me to another department to appeal the decision. the new agent said she reoppened the case which according to her is an appeal. the next day ( XX/XX/XXXX morning ) less than XXXX hours, I received this message : XXXX, we're unable to approve your recent claim. \n\nOur research included the information you provided with your claim, your account history, the monthly account statements we sent you and if available, information from the merchant, such as a signed receipt or contract. We made this decision because : We found the transaction you referenced but were unable to locate any record of cash or additional cash being deposited at the ATM for {$3100.00} between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nFor updates on your claim If you'd like copies of the documents we used to make this decision, please call us at XXXX, XXXX  through XXXX, from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. Please have your claim number when you call. \n\nThank you for your patience during our review. '' I email the bank manager to ask what should I do but never received a response. Having exhausted all my solutions and procedures with the bank, I can only resort to CFPB authorities to make a throughout, deep, transparent and independent investigation to resolve my issue.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-01-26T16:52:28.000Z","issue":"Problem caused by your funds being low","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"20110","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8230551","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2024-01-26T15:03:18.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Overdrafts and overdraft fees"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I also saw him opening the ATM machine <em>along</em> side the front desk guy who I don't know his name ( a tall white guy empolyee ). When i saw them opening the ATM and <em>retrieving</em> it's content in a XXXX  XXXX. I though they are going to find my money. Only to again be frustrated that he said they will need 45 days to 3 months to finish the <em>investigation</em>."]},"sort":[7.7771072,"8230551"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6990709","_score":7.2260075,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Re : AND Ally Bank ( owned by Ally Financial ) XXXX ( owned by XXXX XXXX ) XXXX, Utah XXXX, Arizona XXXX XXXX www.ally.com XXXX To whom it may concern, I would like to submit a complaint regarding Ally Bank and XXXX. I was a customer of Ally from XXXX XX/XX/XXXX until XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. I often used XXXX via the Ally phone application to transfer money with friends and family during that time. \n\nHowever, in XX/XX/XXXX, Ally and XXXX terminated my access without any cause over unfounded suspicion about fraudulent activity. Ally conducted an inadequate investigation that failed to take into account the relevant facts and circumstances and has caused me financial distress and harm by abruptly, and tortiously, preventing my access to my money. I have been conferring with legal counsel and sent letters to Ally and XXXX via the XXXX to establish the facts surrounding this situation and to 1. seek confirmation that neither Ally nor XXXX will be reporting any of my activity as fraudulent externally 2. for XXXX to reverse their decision and 3. for Ally to provide me with an accurate and complete statement of accounting of the last months transactions in light of the extensive evidence provided. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, I began planning a trip to XXXX XXXX with my friend of over ten years, XXXX XXXX. XXXX and I met in the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX and have been very close ever since. A mutual friend from XXXX is getting married in XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX currently lives in XXXX, Colorado and works as a dermatology physician assistant. I currently live in XXXX XXXX, California and work as a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX performing reconstructive surgeries for children born with XXXX XXXX. XXXX and I began planning our trip in XX/XX/XXXX, and I paid for the following for both XXXX and myself : 1. Hotel in XXXX XXXX booked through XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX by XXXX booked for XXXX XX/XX/XXXX paid with my XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX totaled {$520.00} 2. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX booked for XXXX XXXX paid with my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX totaled XXXX XXXX as quoted by the lodge on- {$4200.00} was charged to my XXXX XXXX  - I quoted XXXX {$4200.00} via text on Monday ( see screenshot of conversion below ) 3. Hotel in XXXX XXXX booked directly through the hotel website The XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX booked with my XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX totaled XXXX ( equivalent to approximately {$1800.00} USD on the date of purchase ) In turn, my friend XXXX XXXX XXXX for my round-trip flights from XXXX XXXX to XXXX for the XXXX in XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX for flights on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX XX/XX/XXXX totaling XXXX XXXX ( equivalent to approximately {$560.00} USD on the date of purchase ). \n\n( Please see attached document for original complaint submitted including screenshots and receipts. ) Because we split the costs of the hotels and safari lodge, XXXX owed me {$3300.00}, and we subtracted the {$560.00} I owed him for my flight, totaling {$2700.00} that XXXX owed me. \nXXXX XXXX is a XXXX customer who had never used XXXX before. I asked him to pay me via XXXX because I felt that it was more secure than XXXX, and far more efficient than mailing a check. On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX tried signing up for XXXX. He had some difficulty doing so. At the end of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, he was able to submit a {$2000.00} payment to me via XXXX due to daily limits, and he stated that he would send the remaining {$750.00} the following day. XXXX also mentioned issues with XXXX trying to verify his identity and he stated that the {$2000.00} payment was initially pending review, but that it did go through on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. On XXXX XXXX, XXXX texted me that his account had been locked. However, by the end of XXXX XXXX, XXXX account was unlocked, the payment had been reviewed, and the payment was completed to me. I confirmed on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX via text that Gregs final payment of {$750.00} to complete the {$2700.00} he owed me was complete. ( Please see screenshots on attached document. ) Text chain between XXXX XXXX and myself discussing the costs and payments. ( Please see screenshots on attached document. ) XXXX and I thought that the issues had been resolved as the payments had gone through and what we owed one another was settled, since I had received email confirmations from Ally that both the {$2000.00} XXXX transaction had gone through on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX and that the {$750.00} XXXX transaction had gone through on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. ( Please see screenshots on attached document. ) However, on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX I received two separate emails from Ally stating that XXXX had been deactivated for both my email address ( XXXX ) and my phone number ( XXXX ). ( Please see screenshots on attached document. ) I was in the midst of a very busy week of XXXX and was caring for my XXXX XXXX dog, so I was not able to call Ally right away. I figured that there had been some confusion since XXXX had trouble submitting the payments and that it would be easily resolved once I called Ally and/or XXXX particularly because they had approved the transactions and had fully deposited the funds into my Ally account. My dog passed away the night of Thursday, XXXX XXXX and I did not go to work on Friday, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nOn XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, I received an extremely alarming email from Ally, which stated : Ally Bank AlertYour telephone banking PIN has been changedIf you didnt make this change, call us immediately at XXXX. I also received three separate emails from Ally with the same message in triplicate asking me to call to verify information. ( I assumed corresponding to the three accounts I had open with Ally my checking account, a small stock checking account, and my savings account. ) ( Please see screenshots on attached document. ) I called the Ally Customer Care number ( as the Loss Prevention Line was closed after XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX time ) immediately after I saw the emails I was extremely concerned that someone was trying to hack me, since I had not changed my banking PIN. I called spoke with Ally Customer Care at XXXX for 8 minutes at XXXX PM on Saturday, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. At this time, Ally told me that Ally had actually changed the PIN themselves. I asked why and they said that there was a concern with my account and that they had locked all three accounts ( my checking, my stock checking, and my savings ). I was told to call the Ally Fraud Department the following day, since they were closed at that point. I was given the number XXXX. \n\nI called the Ally Fraud Department at XXXX several times on Sunday, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX to try to figure out what was happening. I called the Ally Fraud Department at XXXX XXXX and spoke with them for 4 minutes, called again at XXXX XXXX and spoke with them for 6 minutes, again at XXXX XXXX for 2 minutes, and XXXX XXXX for 5 minutes. On Sunday, I was told that all three accounts would remain locked pending an investigation, and that the investigative team did not work on weekends. I was instructed to give them a few days to complete their investigation and to call back at that point. I was concerned as my Ally accounts were my only source of funds. \n\nI called XXXX Customer Service at XXXX on Sunday, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX for 6 minutes. I was told that because I was not using the XXXX application, they could not give me any information and that everything needed to go through the bank that was connected to XXXX. \n\nMy jobs direct deposit went to my Ally Checking account and my entire savings was in the Ally Savings account. All of my autopays were linked to the Ally Checking account. However, because I had already paid my mortgage that month, because I had recently made some credit card payments, and because from what I could recall without access to my online account ( all three were paperless accounts ) most of my autopays went through around the XXXX of the month, I decided to be patient. \n\nTherefore, I followed Allys instructions and gave the Fraud Department three days to investigate. I called the Fraud Department at XXXX on Wednesday, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX after work at XXXXXXXX XXXX and spoke with someone for 10 minutes. At this time, I was told that either my friend XXXX XXXX or his bank, XXXX, had marked the transaction as fraud and this was why my account was locked. I called XXXX XXXX on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX and spoke with him for 19 minutes. XXXX stated that he had not marked anything as fraudulent and that he would call his bank, XXXX, immediately to see if anything had accidentally been marked as fraud. XXXX called me back on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX and we spoke for 6 minutes at this time, XXXX stated that he had spoken with XXXX and that nothing had been marked fraudulent on their end. Apparently, the {$2000.00} payment was attempted once, and the {$750.00} payment was attempted three times, once successfully, but that nothing had been marked fraudulent at all on their end. Therefore, XXXX told my friend XXXX that there was nothing else they could do on their end. \n\nDuring one conversation, I asked Ally if they would accept a letter from XXXX bank, XXXX, sent directly to Ally stating that nothing had been marked fraudulent with these transactions on their end. The Ally representative stated that this would be very helpful, and to please have XXXX email the documentation to XXXX. I told this to XXXX, who called XXXX to ask for such documentation. Per XXXX, he was transferred three different times and spoke with two managers about this proposition and was ultimately informed that this would be illegal due to privacy issues, that they had never been asked for such a letter, and that they had never heard of the XXXX email address. \n\nOn Thursday, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, I called the Ally XXXX Department back for an update during a break at work. I was stuck on the call for 31 minutes. The very helpful representative said that he had escalated the issue to his manager to try to help the decision along, since I was unable to access any of my money, pay any of my bills, receive my paycheck from work, or pay my mortgage while this was being investigated/my accounts were locked. I asked if he could see if the accounts that the XXXX transaction was not deposited into could be unlocked so that I could at least pay my bills. He was very understanding and said it was a great idea, that he would see if that was possible. \n\nWhile on the phone with this agent, I missed a call from an Ally number of XXXX at XXXX XXXX. A woman at Ally left a voicemail stating This is an important message for XXXX XXXX from Ally Financial please give us a call back at XXXX I called the number back immediately at XXXX XXXX and spoke with Ally for 11 minutes. During this time, I was told that there was some movement on the investigation and that the investigator may give me a call soon. \n\nAt XXXX XXXX  on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, the investigator for the case called me and we spoke for 7 minutes. He, like previous Ally agents, asked me if I had ever given my Ally login or pin information to anyone else ( which I had not ), he asked me if I knew XXXX XXXX personally ( I stated that yes, we were longtime friends who were planning a trip together ), and I explained the situation. The investigator seemed understanding and stated that he would call XXXX right after this call and that I could likely expect a call back from him within an hour. I had to scrub into XXXX right after that call, but had our nurse watching the phone in case he called back. We finished XXXX and he had not called back as of XXXX XXXX, so I called Ally back at that time and spoke with them for 15 minutes. During this conversation, I was informed that a decision had been made within the last hour and that Ally Financial was terminating our relationship with you. I asked them to clarify how this decision was made I was told that XXXX told Ally that day that the XXXX XXXX transactions were fraudulent. I asked the Ally representative how XXXX and Ally had come to that conclusion, since no one had asked either XXXX or myself for any kind of supporting documentation that could prove our relationship and that a trip was currently being planned together. I was told that after receiving the information from XXXX, Ally had conducted their own internal investigation during the afternoon and that Ally had made the final decision to terminate our relationship. The Ally representative also stated that this sudden, unilateral termination was within their rights due to our agreements ( which I believe is true ), and that a check would be mailed to the address on file with the remaining funds in the account. \n\nBecause Ally locked me out of all accounts, I was not able to verify that the amount I received back was correct. I was unsure if they were planning to return the previously deposited XXXX amounts from XXXX XXXX to him. ( As of XXXX XXXX, XXXX states that the funds have not been returned to him. ) I asked Ally how long it would take for me to receive the check I was told that it would be sent via regular mail and would likely take 7-10 days once it was mailed by Ally, and that Ally may take a few days to issue the final check. On Friday, XXXX XXXX, I discovered via my credit card and mortgage apps that all credit card payments and the mortgage payments I made on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX from my Ally account were returned, and now none of my bills or mortgage were paid, and the money will not be returned to me until after these were due. \n\nWhen the checks finally arrived, they arrived with no statement and zero explanation. I received three checks, one for each of my Ally accounts ( one savings and two checking ). None included a statement. They simply ( and deceitfully ) stated that the checks reflect the amount of the account at time of closure. I had to request statements through the XXXX  multiple times and via mail before receiving any. Eventually Ally disclosed via the XXXX that {$2000.00} was withheld on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Ally stated that On XX/XX/XXXX, the XXXX XXXX noted that the {$2000.00} XXXX payment was reported as fraud. On XX/XX/XXXX, the funds were withdrawn from your XXXX and placed in a holding account and will be processed in accordance with any instructions received from XXXX and in compliance with the law. Ally also stated in their XXXX XX/XX/XXXX letter that my account closure will be reported to XXXX as a closed account and refused to discuss the future of the withheld {$2000.00}. They closed the BBB dispute on that date without resolution. \n\nI have many issues with how this issue was handled by both Ally and XXXX and have serious concerns with what may happen to me, my credit, and my ability to open bank accounts going forward. I have submitted these complaints via the XXXX without resolution - I have attached Ally and XXXX responses. \n\nIssues with Ally : - I feel that the investigation conducted by Ally was minimal effort. Their investigation changed the story multiple times. ( First it was that XXXX or XXXX had reported a transaction as fraudulent, then it was that XXXX XXXX was the one considered fraudulent, then finally it was that XXXX had determined that I was the fraudulent individual. ) Allys investigation ultimately relied solely on what XXXX stated - even though neither XXXX XXXX nor XXXX had reported the transactions fraudulent - without contacting me, XXXX XXXX, or Chase to provide any kind of documentation that could prove that XXXX and I were friends, that there was a trip planned, that he made the transactions, that the transactions were never reported as fraud. I could have provided all of the receipts, texts, and documentation of years of friendship with identity proof for both XXXX and myself. \n- I believe that Ally locking me out of all access of all accounts during their investigation, not just the account that received the transaction in question, was unfair and could have caused me undue harm and financial distress. Without access to any of my funds from the time they locked my account on XXXX XXXX until I received the check, I would have missed a payment on my mortgage, my student loans, several on my various credit cards, many autopays, and I would not have been able to receive at least one paycheck from my job as a physician assistant. This could have caused serious damage to my credit score and cost me huge amounts in late fees and APR charges, lasting for years, affecting my ability to open accounts, take out loans, etc. I believe that they should have solely locked the account into which the XXXX transaction was deposited and that there was not sufficient justification for locking all three accounts ( which I informed them during every single call were my only available accounts ). Fortunately, I have an extremely supportive family and job and my family helped me open another bank account and lent me money to pay my bills and mortgage in the meantime, and my job quickly changed my autopay before the next check was issued. For anyone without this kind of extreme support, this would have been financially devastating. \n- Ally has confirmed via the XXXX that they will be reporting this completely unsubstantiated account closure to XXXX ( and did not state that this would be the only report ). From what I know, XXXX gives consumers a credit rating that can make it extremely difficult for me to open other bank accounts for up to five years. As a young, single person with student debt and a mortgage, I could be extremely damaged by such unfair actions, since this alleged fraudulent transaction was not properly investigated. \n- Ally has unjustly withheld {$2000.00} of my funds without cause and with no communication about process for release. \n\nIssues with XXXX : - XXXX refused to speak directly with either XXXX XXXX or me, since we used XXXX through our banks. While I understand that this is their policy, I take issue that they clearly did not confirm with XXXX that neither XXXX XXXX nor XXXX had marked these XXXX transactions to me as fraudulent. \n- According to Ally, they were told definitively by XXXX that I had somehow committed a fraudulent transaction and that my email ( XXXX ) and cell ( XXXX ) were marked fraudulent/could no longer be used at XXXX. This is what turned the investigation, which had been sounding fairly promising Thursday morning after speaking with the investigator, immediately south. \n- Why was I, and not XXXX XXXX ( the one that made the transaction- which was reviewed, approved, and completed by XXXX ) marked as fraudulent? XXXX was cleared and his account was unlocked within one day. Why was only my end marked fraudulent and why was there no actual investigation/neither myself, XXXX XXXX , nor XXXX were asked to provide any documentation in defense? \n- I am also concerned that XXXX could report this completely unsubstantiated suspected fraud to federal or state officials and/or XXXX or any other consumer disclosure reporting agencies, again affecting my credit and life going forward. They did not specifically state via the XXXX even after I specifically asked multiple times that they would not be reporting me to any agencies, rather just stated that my account was active on XXXX. \n- According to Ally, XXXX is involved in the future of the withheld {$2000.00}. \n\nAlly has unjustly withheld {$2000.00} and have offered me no information about release, claiming XXXX will be involved. I am reaching out to California state and federal reporting agencies, and plan to take Ally ( and XXXX, if necessary ) to small claims court to retrieve the {$2000.00} I am owed. The distributed funds should also include the ~4 % interest these funds would have accumulated if in my savings since XXXX, as they would have in my possession. I also plan on disputing the closed account report directly with XXXX. \n\nIdeally, I would like governmental agencies to investigate Ally and XXXX actions in order to prevent similar issues from happening to others in the future its unlikely that most people have the support systems I am lucky enough to have, so they would be even more damaged by such unjust banking actions. \n\nI am able and happy to supply screenshots and verified cellular information from XXXX about all calls if needed. I have also included the most relevant XXXX communications as attachments. My friend XXXX and I have since gone on this trip, which I can also provide proof of, if needed. \n\nThank you so much for your time. If the \" Pray Ally XXXX XXXX Final '' document doesn't open properly please let me know and I can find another way to submit. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-05-17T21:34:59.000Z","issue":"Closing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"90046","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6990709","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ALLY FINANCIAL INC.","date_received":"2023-05-17T20:46:29.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Funds not received from closed account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>During</em> this time, I was told that there was some movement on the <em>investigation</em> and that the <em>investigator</em> may give me a call soon. \n\nAt XXXX XXXX  on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, the <em>investigator</em> for the case called me and we spoke for 7 minutes."]},"sort":[7.2260075,"6990709"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15310236","_score":6.7930202,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX I discovered a financial amount of {$1400.00} was taken out of my bank account at Citizens Bank. I immediately called them to inform them that this was a fraudulent transaction. I talked to the supervising customer service agent who informed me that it was the IRS service that took my money and they refused to do any investigation on it nor let me make a report on it. \n\nSeveral phone calls later between the bank, a trip to the bank and IRS I discovered there was no transaction from the IRS authorizing money to be removed from my account. The bank still refused to let me file a fraudulent report. Eventually I initiated a small claims suit against the bank. During this time Citizens Bank admitted they misspoke and it was the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that had contacted them and gave me a copy of the demand letter. Eventually my case was dismissed as the bank broke several federal laws and the court had no jurisdiction over federal laws. \n\nUpon examination of the demand letter, see attachment, the person who initiated this is XXXX XXXX who is an XXXX  at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. So here is the back story and this is why I am reporting this as a crime because he did commit a crime. Back in year XXXX and XXXX we discussed about process XXXX IRS forms so they can collect their covid relief checks for a fee. They all agreed to this including XXXX XXXX. I went ahead and processed their forms, the money came in and was dispersed according to their wishes and everyone was happy and still are to this day except XXXX XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX needed money to pay for an appelet attorney and needed {$2500.00}. I told him I would only loan him that amount in exchange that I get to keep XXXX of his covid checks, the {$600.00} and {$1400.00}. It was the only way I knew for sure I would get paid back for at least some of it. He agreed to this. Please see attachments. He started to renege on the {$1400.00} because I reminded him that he overdrew his balance from his last check by XXXX cents and had a pretty good temper tantrum. I reminded him that if I did that the bank would fine my account {$33.00} if I so much over drew my account by a penny so he just needs to shut up and accept that hes out of money. Eventually he calmed down and said for me to go ahead and keep the money as payment for the loan. The covid checks came and he got his loan. Everything was just peachy fine until XXXX last year. Doing some investigative work XXXX XXXX lost his appeal and he had an actual worthy appeal too, shame. He apparently contacted the IRS and lied to them that he never got his money. Now that is where the crime comes in. He provided false testimony to a federal agency for which I am the victim of.\n\n18 U.S.C. 1001.. Statements or entries generally ( a ) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -- ( 1 ) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact ; ( 2 ) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or ( 3 ) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry ; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.\n\n( b ) Subsection ( a ) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party 's counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate judge in that proceeding.\n\n( c ) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection ( a ) shall apply only to -- ( 1 ) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or ( 2 ) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.\n\nWell that is not true at all. Upon my multiple discussions with the department for which I do have a recording of and can be provided upon request along with my discussion with a very rude customer service supervisor at the bank this is exactly how it goes. The tax refunds go into whatever account is put onto the forms. It doesnt matter whose name is on the account nor does the tax payers name have to be on the account. If you screw up the IRS is not duty bound to retrieve it. Its only a courtesy they will go find it and try to get it back for you. Surprise! Yes I was shocked by that admission. So to try to get the funds back the IRS will notify the account holder that funds have been accidently deposited into their account and to please sign a preauthorization form and send it back to them. The account holder is not legally obligated to sign the form. If the account holder does not sign it, the IRS can not move forward and seize it as it has no legal basis to do so. It would then be between the tax payer and account holder to fight it out in court in a civil suit. So frankly, if the IRS are bound by these rules and laws so does the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nI have since filed an IRS XXXX XXXX to report fraud and have no idea if that is the proper method as the agent was very rude and short with me on the phone. I am also concerned with all the going ons in XXXX with XXXX kicking XXXX ( Yea go XXXX go! ) I have no idea if and when my little plea for help will ever be noticed and acted upon. I dont know which authority has jurisdiction over such matters, is it the state AG , FBI XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or the IRS XXXX unit. So here I sit writing this amusing but serious letter of complaint about one of your problem childs being a problem child. Good thing he isnt an XXXX  XXXX. As things stand now nothing has been done. The bank is still being uncooperative, I still dont have my money, finding an attorney has been impossible as to finding out what classification of crime this is has been difficult. \n\nThe bank did violate the following : 15 U.S. Code 1693c - Terms and conditions of transfers ( a ) Disclosures ; time ; form ; contents ( 1 ) the consumers liability for unauthorized electronic fund transfers ( 4 ) any charges for electronic fund transfers or for the right to make such transfers ; 15 U.S. Code 1693h - Liability of financial institutions ( 1 ) the financial institutions failure ( 2 ) the financial institutions failure to stop payment 15 U.S. Code 1693e - Preauthorized transfers ( a ) A preauthorized electronic fund transfer from a consumers account may be authorized by the consumer only in writing, 15 U.S. Code 1693f - Error resolution ( b ) Correction of error ; interest If the financial institution determines that an error did occur, it shall promptly, but in no event more than one business day after such determination, correct the error, subject to section 1693g of this title, including the crediting of interest where applicable.\n\n( b ) Provisional recredit of consumers account ( f ) Acts constituting error For the purpose of this section, an error consists of ( 1 ) an unauthorized electronic fund transfer ; 15 U.S. Code 1693m - Civil liability ( 2 ) ( A ) in the case of an individual action, an amount not less than {$100.00} nor greater than {$1000.00} ; or","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-15T17:17:53.000Z","issue":"Other transaction problem","sub_product":"Domestic (US) money transfer","zip_code":"48076","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15310236","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.","date_received":"2025-08-15T17:05:07.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Upon my multiple discussions with the department for which I do have a recording of and can be provided upon request <em>along</em> with my discussion with a very rude customer service supervisor at the bank this is exactly how it goes. The tax refunds go into whatever account is put onto the forms. It doesnt matter whose name is on the account nor does the tax payers name have to be on the account. If you screw up the IRS is not duty bound to <em>retrieve</em> it."]},"sort":[6.7930202,"15310236"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6711637","_score":6.688807,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing this complaint against SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union and it's Loss Mitigation Department in response to their abusive and negligent loan servicing practices. Despite the length of this complaint, it is by no means a comprehensive accounting of my experience and I am willing to elaborate and/or provide additional documentation if requested.\n\nAfter falling behind on my mortgage due to a COVID related hardship, I was contacted by a representative from SchoolsFirst who recommended enrolling into their COVID-19 Forbearance program. I was initially hesitant at the idea of a lump sum payment, but agreed after being reassured that I would have multiple options upon conclusion of the forbearance such as a forbearance extension, reduced monthly payments via a loan modification, as well as a deferral. Prior to this hardship I had maintained over 200 consecutive mortgage payments that spanned 12 years of owning one home and six years of owning two homes. Having never been in this sort of situation before, I felt that I could trust SchoolsFirst and appreciated their offer of a reprieve. \n\nAs my forbearance was drawing to a close, SchoolsFirst once again reached out to me to discuss my options. I remember this call vividly because it was such an unusual occurrence for them to contact me through my work number. We discussed my intention to remain in forbearance for the full year with an expected start payment date of XXXX XXXX XXXX, as well as the plan to defer the past due amount. Upon the conclusion of the extended forbearance I resumed making my regular monthly payment. After encountering an issue with making the payment in the third month, I called SchoolsFirst and was informed that my payment had been refused because I had a past due balance of over XXXX XXXX  dollars, which was due in full. I recalled the plan that we had discussed in the fall of XXXX  at which point SchoolsFirst informed me that a deferral was not something that was granted automatically as the forbearance had been, and that I needed to process the paperwork. Although I was alarmed to learn that the suspended payments had not been deferred like I'd been led to believe, I was told not to worry because they would work with me to restructure any arrearage once I'd submitted my application.\n\nIt then took several weeks for their application packet to arrive in the mail in spite of their claims that they had already sent it out multiple times. The weeks evolved into months (and eventually years) of an endless cycle of my application being denied any sort of consideration, and returned to me as \"incomplete\". Reasons for being deemed \"incomplete\" included but were not limited to: Document not received (even though I had confirmations of receipt),  expired documents required resubmittal (among them documents with no expiration date and documents that had not expired, such as a w-2 form in XXXX), document missing a signature (it was not) (see attachment 1), incorrect form entirely (even though they were the ones who had provided the form to me in the first place), and the list goes on. I was repeatedly required to submit documentation that I'd already resubmitted multiple times. On more than one occasion they claimed they hadn't received the required \"missing\" documentation in time, closing out my application, and forcing me to start the application process all over again.  At the same time I was also inundated with a barrage of (what I would describe in retrospect as) XXXX  from SchoolsFirst which appeared to not be written with any context whatsoever, as they would request that I submit an entirely new application from scratch (along with requesting the exact same information and documentation all over again), as if that had been our very first and only communication thus far. These letters would also ignore any of the phone call transactions I'd had with them during that time. This all served to further confound my understanding of where I was at in the process, and what was being asked of me, thus hindering my ability to jump through their absurd hoops. \n\nAccording to SchoolsFirst, they are the owner, assignee, and servicer of my loan. Despite the fact that SchoolsFirst provides services exclusively to California, they contract with a New Jersey-based third party subservicer. SchoolsFirst uses this distance as an excuse for the delay in sending and receiving time-sensitive mail. It would often take several weeks for them to notify me in writing of whatever new barrier existed now. Considering today's technology, their decision to utilize antiquated methods of communication like this speaks volumes. This is all undoubtedly by design, as it had originally taken only one phone call with an incomplete application for SchoolsFirst to agree to \"assist\" me with a forbearance in the first place. And of course when I initially applied for the loan, and when I opened a Home Equity Line of Credit on my home I was immediately notified through a Single Point of Contact via direct phone call and/or email- of exactly what was missing and exactly what they still needed, even going so far as to meet me in person to retrieve these documents. Naturally the severity of my delinquency, my perceived creditworthiness, and the fate of my home (my most valuable asset and investment to date), have been held as a hostage along a timeline that SchoolsFirst has moved forward only to their benefit and at their leisure. \n\nI had eventually begun calling Loss Mitigation almost daily, sometimes multiple times throughout the day just to check on the status of my application. I learned to take every conversation with a grain of salt, as the sheer volume and scope of the downright lies, misinformation, and misrepresentations I've been provided from one representative to the next has been truly inconceivable. Among the representatives I have spoken to I have been: yelled at, hung up on, lied to, told that there is simply nothing that they can do to help me and to just \"sit tight\", spoken to in a condescending manner, left on hold for an obscene amount of time often just to be hung up on anyway, and my personal favorite- being hung up on and (when I called back) finding out my file had been notated as a \"Spanish-Speaker only\". Information I have been given has varied between unhelpful, incorrect, inconsistent, and illegal. For example, one of the more innocuous lies I'd been told was that my actual lender was XXXX XXXX. According to XXXX XXXX and SchoolsFirst, it is not. \n\nEven when these agents were competent enough to understand the issue at hand, or considerate enough to pretend like they cared, there was still no point in talking to them because they did not have any decision making authority. They had no ability to rectify errors, and they could not (or would not) transfer you to anyone who did. On more than one occasion I requested to be provided a Single Point of Contact under the California Homeowner Bill Of Rights. In response I was either outright refused, ignored, or told that they were simply unable to transfer me. During one phone call in particular I spoke with a lady who specifically introduced herself as my Single Point of Contact. When I requested to be transferred to her in a subsequent phone call, I was told that I could not be transferred, and I have never heard from that woman again. \n\nIn fact, there was no escalation process. Their scam is to hide behind a seemingly incompetent and undertrained call center that is ultimately incapable of providing accurate information, and incapable of providing any actual assistance to distressed homeowners. I've had to take off what's amounted to weeks from work in an attempt to find a resolution on this matter (being restricted to east coast business hours while living in a west coast time zone has made this all the more difficult). A review of two months of cell phone bills showed that I had called in 27 times and spent 343 minutes on the phone in that span alone. And yet my time has just been wasted away while on the phone for hours, with no resolution in sight. \n\nFor a while I could not even figure out who my servicer was because that answer varies depending on who you ask or which documents you're looking at. The information is obfuscated by the fact that SchoolsFirst misleads their borrowers by referring to their third party subservicer as simply their \"Loss Mitigation Department\". It took some time (over two years) and some serious investigating just for me to even figure out that I was dealing with two entirely different businesses because both businesses claim only one name. I have only ever received mail from \"SchoolsFirst\" and never \"XXXX\" even when the letter has indeed been sent by XXXX. XXXX  employees specifically introduce themselves as SchoolsFirst employees (despite the fact that their company exists on the opposite side of the country). Its not just via telephone conversations; they do this on legal documents as well. The woman who filed the Substitution Of Trustee appointing XXXX XXXX XXXX as the new trustee for my loan- swore to a notary in Missouri that she was the \"Vice President Document Execution\" for \"SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union\". Yet this same woman represented herself with the exact same title in the Notice of Default that was recorded in my county in California, but instead working for \"XXXX XXXX, servicer for SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union (see attachments 2 and 3). Another person I spoke with refused to even confirm whether he worked for XXXX  or SchoolsFirst. They would not confirm which company they worked for, and yet SchoolsFirst both gives free access to and forces me to furnish private and confidential information to every random work-from-home low level call center employee who picks up the call, just to get information on my own loan. Their misrepresentations have made it nearly impossible to know who it is I should be in contact with and who it is that I have been in contact with. \n\nTheir fraudulent and obscured identity has also made it easier for SchoolsFirst to provide varying degrees of conflicting information, and nobody to be held accountable. One example of this was on one occasion in particular I had called Loss Mitigation while at my wits end, wanting answers to a myriad of questions, and during this conversation I received the following information (information in italics) which contradicted the information I had been given previously: The forbearance I had been granted had been a \"regular\" forbearance. I had not been granted a \"COVID forbearance\" because my \"hardship did not qualify.\". (Prior to this I had no idea that there was more than one type, I've since been told that there isn't, and I'm still not sure where the truth is in either of those statements. None of the CARES act had applied to me because my loan was/is not federally backed, and therefore my loan had not been protected under any state or federal guidelines. Learning that I did not have a federally backed loan was both shocking and infuriating as this was in direct conflict with what I had been previously told by another agent and with what SchoolsFirst had communicated in writing. These communications were therefore intentionally misleading, as they had made it very clear to me at the time that I did in fact have a federally backed loan (see attachments 4,5 and 6). It was during this conversation that I was informed for the first time that the forbearance I had entered into had only been for a total of 3 months (XXXX XXXX and XXXX of XXXX), not for the year as we had discussed. According to their records, the phone call I had with Loss Mitigation in which I extended the forbearance never happened. While I am unable to retrieve my employer's phone records from nearly 3 years ago, I have attached the loan statement that had been prepared in the month following what would have been the end of the forbearance that clearly stated You accepted a forbearance. (see attachment 7). After being confronted with this shocking disregard for any truth, I requested an investigation into the recordings of my conversations. I was initially told that they do not keep recordings. I've since been told that they only keep up to six months worth of recordings. These conversations took place two and a half years ago.\n\nI was recently provided a copy of the Loan Activity correspondence between Loss Mitigation and I. I've attached a few of those excerpts to this complaint (See attachments 8, 18, and 31). It serves as a window, but it is not complete. This is because the \"complete\" report omits information, and omits entire conversations such as the one in which I extended the forbearance (as well as others that can be substantiated through my cell phone records). For example, it logs numerous attempts to call me often followed by \"customer hung up\", but omits that when these calls actually did occur, they were in fact robocalls that did not lead to a live person, but instead an automated message informing me to call SchoolsFirst. Each time I would return the call, the agent would have no idea why I'd been told to call. There were several instances upon which I would receive this notice mere minutes before the close of business, which left me no time to call back even if I'd wanted to. I thought this was a particularly cruel sort of call to receive, as I was already being held captive in a desperate and indefinite state of worry and XXXX  over my home. The notes also log their attempts to contact me via email, but they omit how I cannot view whatever was written in that email because my \"account status\" prevents it. There are also several notations on there that are very clearly not related to me. For example on XXXX \"POSTDATED CHECK.. TAD XXXX MADE PMNT XXXX DATED FOR FRIDAY XXXX RFD LOSS OF EMPLOYMENT THANK YOU FOR CALLING BCU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR MEMBERSHIP\" (see attachment 8). I do not own checks; its XXXX  for Gods sake. I have never owed nor paid specifically XXXX to SchoolsFirst, I have never even heard of XXXX, and I have never  been let go from my place of employment. While this meticulous record keeping has nothing to do with me, perhaps they should find and review the notes of the person who wrote that post dated check (if they even exist) to see if my notes are with theirs.\n\nOn XXXX XXXX XXXX, over a year after I had exited the forbearance, I finally received a letter from SchoolsFirst which stated, \"A review on XXXX determined the application is complete and no further information is needed at this timeWe will not initiate any foreclosure actions or proceedings by sending first notice or filing first legal documents until your complete assistance package has been evaluated.\" (see attachment 9). The following day, like a sick joke, I received another letter from SchoolsFirst which stated \"Please be informed your mortgage loan has been referred for foreclosure proceedings. We did not receive a response to the previous letters we sent regarding foreclosure prevention alternatives, but if you are still interested, it is not too late\" (see attachment 10). I received two additional letters dated XXXX XXXX XXXX from XXXX XXXX XXXX informing me that a Notice of Default had been recorded against my property. In response I sent three separate Qualified Written Requests via certified mail in which I contested the Notice of Default and requested an itemized statement, but those letters have never been acknowledged (see Attachment 11). The Notice of Default specifically indicated \"XXXX XXXX XXXX\" as \"the date contact with the borrower was accomplished pursuant to Civil Code Section XXXX\". However, according to the loan activity notes as provided by Loss Mitigation,  no such contact ever occurred on that date.\n\nImmediately leading up to the filing of the Notice of Default my application had been refused for months as SchoolsFirst kept refusing my application and repeatedly asking me to submit a \"signed financial form\". This was several months of me calling back in a perpetual state of confusion and having them look through my application to verify that it was: a.Received b.The correct form and c.Not missing a signature. This would be followed up with receiving yet another letter from SchoolsFirst informing me to submit a \"signed financial form\". They finally let me know months later that I had been submitting the wrong form the entire time because they had sent the wrong form to me. I've attached one of my latter responses to SchoolsFirst that directly addressed this (attachment 1). Coincidentally, this had lasted right up until they had filed the Notice of Default. \n\nSoon after, SchoolsFirst resumed their \"missing documents game. Their new document request was originally posted with such a vague description that I was forced to call Loss Mitigation in an attempt to get clarification on what was even being asked of me. Loss Mitigation's original interpretation of the request was wrong of course, which prolonged the delay even further. Even after I had successfully submitted the requested document, SchoolsFirst continued to refuse acceptance of the document for weeks. Attached is my 3rd submission to them regarding this (see attachment 12). Despite the multi-colored map I drew outlining how this document was indeed what they asked for, it was also rejected.\n\nIn spite of my tireless efforts to meet their demands and in spite of their promises to work with me, on XXXX XXXX  my request for assistance was denied. The three programs I was considered for were  FORBEARANCE PLAN, REPAYMENT PLAN  and  LOAN MODIFICATION. I was denied a forbearance because my hardship reason does not meet program guidelines. The repayment plan was denied because after they reviewed my financial information, it was determined that your income is insufficient to qualify for any foreclosure alternative programs at this time. And lastly I was denied a loan modification because after reviewing my housing expense to income ratio we determined that it does not meet the requirement for a loan modification (see attachment 13). Using my \"housing expense to income ratio\" to deny assistance is a highly self-seeking decision for a lender to make after playing a significant role in shredding the figure before evaluating it. My income is also XXXX higher now than it was when I originally qualified to both refinance and open a HELOC in XXXX. It is approximately XXXX higher now than it was when they approved a forbearance in XXXX. But now my income is no longer a \"sufficient amount\"? More importantly, a deferment was not even included among the list of loss mitigation options I was considered for despite my request in my application and repeated assurances from SchoolsFirst. Attachment 14 is just one of many emails Ive sent to SchoolsFirst about a deferral and attachment 15 is a screenshot from SchoolsFirst's website that unequivocally states that you can defer payments after the forbearance period. Denied any assistance, my only option now was to pay the full amount in one lump sum.\n\nTaking a comprehensive accounting of my loan has been a nearly impossible task since I do not have access to my full mortgage payment history. I am no longer sent monthly paper statements, and my website access and app access to all past and current statements have been blocked by SchoolsFirst due to my \"account status\" (see attachment 16). SchoolsFirst states that you can have 24/7 access to your loan and updates regarding your loss mitigation requests online at loansolutioncenter.com. That is yet another lie (see attachment 16). Whatever numbers I have been able to retrieve are extremely unclear and inconsistent. Lack of access and equivocal information is problematic since throughout this time I have had the financial ability to resume my monthly payment, and I have made multiple attempts to make those payments. Despite these attempts, my payment history appears hit-or-miss as SchoolsFirst has either accepted or refused my payments at-random. There were several months where I was prohibited from making a payment because I was told that it was considered a \"partial payment\" and they would \"not accept anything less than the full amount of the delinquency\". One representative stated that they would not accept the payment because \"it was not going to cure the delinquency\". Of course neither were my interest-only HELOC payments (that were secured by the same collateral), and they've had no problem regularly removing that payment from my account every month.\n\nWhen my payments were accepted, I breathed a sigh of relief and did not realize at the time that I should scrutinize where my payments were going after I'd been provided confirmation of receipt. So when I went through my escrow transactions, one of the few things related to my mortgage that I still have unrestricted access to (see attachment 17), I was shocked and confused at how irregular my payments had been applied and whether or not they even had. I compared the escrow transactions to the loan statements I had and noticed that several payments were misapplied, not applied when received, or not applied at all. Several of my payments did not move forward my delinquency date, making it appear as though I am even further behind than I actually am. Monthly late fees and \"property preservation\" fees have accumulated regardless of whether or not I'd made a payment (see attachment 19). On several instances, Schools First refused payment until the payment was past due, which resulted in assessing frivolous late fees (see attachments 18 and 19). Some months my payments were even shown as being accepted but then \"refunded\", subsequently accruing more late fees. In reality those \"refunded\" payments were never actually reimbursed to my account. I went through and compared every bank statement from the past two years and noticed that there were several instances where I had received emails indicating to me that my payment had been accepted, in spite of whether or not that was even true. In XXXX XXXX for example, I received three separate emails from SchoolsFirst that thanked me for making three individual mortgage payments. Despite having not authorized all three of these payments, my bank account at the time indicated that my account had been debited for them. These payments are still shown on my loan statements and escrow transactions, yet not one of those payments were ever applied towards reducing the loan, and the withdrawals from my bank account are no longer reflected in the transaction history. Meanwhile, an XXXX XXXX mortgage statement indicated that a full periodic payment was fully applied to my negative escrow balance. Yet according to my bank statements, no such amount ever even left my bank account at that time! In fact my bank statements show several mortgage payments which resulted in an actual decrease of my total available account balance, but my loan statements do not accurately account for each of those payments. The money in my  \"Unapplied Funds\" account seems to appear out of nowhere and disappear just as quickly. I've recently found the most success in being allowed to make a payment by going into an actual branch, and I recently discovered that they would print my past statements for me at my request. Yet even when paying inside of an actual branch, my payments are still not accounted for appropriately nor are they applied upon receipt, and the transactions do not make any sense even to SchoolsFirst! The manager at the nearest SchoolsFirst branch can't explain any of this. I know because I have sat down with her and she has tried. In addition to this, I have also attempted to address the discrepancies with them in detail via telephone and email, and the issue continues to be either ignored or dismissed (See attachments 20 and 21). The most recent time I brought this up, I was told that Loss Mitigation had attempted to call me three times on one particular day (along with leaving a message for me). According to my cell phone records, this is simply not true. \n\nAs a result of this apparent book cooking, Ive made several attempts to request an itemized accounting of my loan and a full payment history beginning with the date of delinquency. In addition to the previously mentioned ignored Qualified Written Requests, I also attempted to contact the lawyer/trustee that had been assigned to my loan. Their phone number led to an automated recording which instructed me to contact them via email. I attempted to email and was charged XXXX for an emailed response of a payoff statement that was neither itemized, nor accurate, in spite of that being the specific point of my request (see attachments 22 and 23) However that statement stated \"For itemization please call XXXX. So I did this, and I was connected to an automated recording stating that Id reached XXXX XXXX XXXX, although I do not bank there nor hold a loan with that credit union. The man who answered claimed to be from \"Schools Credit Union\", claimed to have never heard of XXXX XXXX XXXX, and had no idea what I meant when I asked for a simple itemization. The man had the audacity to ask me if I was calling the correct number and ultimately stated that he would forward the request to the attorney assigned to my loan. I was then charged another XXXX to be sent another emailed statement that was again neither itemized nor accurate, and like the statement before, it said \"For itemization please call XXXX\" (See attachment 24). \n\nBy letter and by email I've submitted a Request To Know under the California Consumer Privacy Act, and in response they denied my inquiry for my own personal information and they stated that they were unwilling to complete my request. SchoolsFirst simply refuses to provide accurate and timely information regarding my loan or anything at all for that matter! Whether it's regarding my own personal information, or the total amount I owe, to who actually owns and/or services my loan, to when exactly (and if) my home has a sale date, or who to contact regarding any of this information. One payoff statement I received directed me to send payment to XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX (See attachment 25), so even who to pay is questionable! My purported monthly mortgage payment changes from one document to the next as well. The amount that they provided to the IRS on my 1098 was a different amount than the one shown on my loan statements. So they do not report accurate information to the IRS (in addition to the wrong mortgage payment on two 1098s, they also reported inaccurate amounts regarding what I have paid to them and what they have refunded to me). In XXXX  and XXXX  they reported that they had paid out money from my escrow in order to refund several of my periodic payments. While I did receive those checks, I did not cash them. However that money was still reported as being removed from my escrow account. I had asked to have those checks reissued and instead, according to my loan statements, it appears as though that money was applied towards my loan, (where it was sent by me in the first place several months prior). I can only assume that this is what happened since according to my loan statements- money was applied to my loan, and it was money that did not come from out of my bank account at the time. I was told however, that the checks \"were reissued\" to me. I never received a reissue of these checks. \n\nThey also do not report accurate information to any of the credit bureaus. Their incorrect reporting played a significant role in the status of my alleged past due balance and the debt to income ratio that SchoolsFirst used to justify their determination to deny my request for a loan modification. Specifically, their denial letter stated \"The consumer reporting agency contacted that provided information that influenced our decision in whole or in part was XXXX XXXX.\" So I requested the report from that agency and according to that report, my loan has had no payments made since XXXX  of XXXX, (see attachment 26) despite the fact that I have made more than 15 payments since then according to my escrow balance sheet (see attachment 17 highlights).\n\nShortly after receiving the denial letter, I had gotten into contact with  a \"Loss Mitigation Specialist\" from the Real Estate Servicing Department, after emailing and then calling their department in a desperate attempt to find anybody willing to help me. I attempted to explain everything that had led up to this point, and was initially hopeful and relieved to not have to continue communicating with SchoolsFirst's unhelpful call center. I was encouraged to submit an appeal to the denial, and to \"trust the process\". I did so, and on XXXX XXXX I learned I'd been approved for a repayment plan. Fortunately by now I'd had the wherewithal to know better than to rely on their mailed correspondence, and only through my own relentless calling was I able to retrieve this information in a timely manner. Left to SchoolsFirst's mailings, I received the letter with the details of this repayment plan on XXXX XXXX, two days after I was required to communicate my intent, and a full day after I was expected to have made a down payment of an amount that wasnt even possible for me to make.\n\nThe plan was scheduled to begin on XXXX XXXX and the first payment required was a down-payment of XXXX (see attachment 27), just shy of 17 months worth of payments. On top of this, the repayment plan indicated that my mortgage payment would nearly double for the next two years. While I have a sizable down payment saved because of the gaps in time where they refused to take my payments, XXXX  was an amount they knew I would not have even if I had completely cleared out every cent I had. SchoolsFirst knew precisely what I had and did not have, after I had been forced to send in multiple applications, Financial Forms, bank statements, paystubs, tax returns, w-2s, mortgage statements, hardship letters, letters of employment, and even my divorce decree. Not to mention I had also discussed all of this again with my contact in the Real Estate Department as she easily reviewed my accounts from her side seeing as how my lender is also my bank.\n\nEven if I could've somehow procured XXXX in that short amount of time (they couldn't even deliver their letter requesting the payment within the amount of time they were expecting me to furnish that amount!), they were asking me to completely drain everything I had in my checking and savings combined, and then hike up my total mortgage payment to nearly 60% of my take home pay- to repay an amount that was more than what I ever even owed to them! The \"total amount due\" in the repayment plan once again was not accurate, nor was it consistent with itself or any other document. It stated that the total past due amount was XXXX, yet when I did the math the total amount it had me paying back throughout the life of the repayment plan was XXXX. Why would I have to pay back a different number than the indicated \"total past due amount\"? If what I owe is actually XXXX, why wouldn't it just state that number instead? (see attachment 27) Meanwhile the loan statement for that month stated the total past due amount was XXXX  with a XXXX amount due, and the reinstatement document I received stated the total to reinstate was both XXXX and XXXX! (See attachment 28). \n\nThe repayment plan indicated that I had the option to either accept or refuse these terms by XXXX XXXX  (see attachment 29) or appeal one final time by XXXX XXXX (see attachment 30). I called and spoke with an agent to discuss and confirm my right to appeal (see attachment 31). Not one to be","date_sent_to_company":"2023-03-17T16:20:05.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"91786","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6711637","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2023-03-17T15:40:50.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["And of course when I initially applied for the loan, and when I opened a Home Equity Line of Credit on my home I was immediately notified through a Single Point of Contact via direct phone call and/or email- of exactly what was missing and exactly what they still needed, even going so far as to meet me in person to <em>retrieve</em> these <em>documents</em>."],"issue":["Trouble <em>during</em> payment process"]},"sort":[6.688807,"6711637"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10846627","_score":6.579461,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles It is with a XXXX XXXXXXXX that I share this experience, as integrity means everything to me. I had high expectations from a reputable dealership, I considered family when I purchased a vehicle from them on XX/XX/year>. The next day, I drove it from XXXX to XXXX. Later that afternoon, I noticed a large amount of oil had leaked onto the concrete where the car was parked. Knowing my parking space was clean before, I immediately documented the issue with photos and reached out to the dealerships general manager, sales manager, and salesperson on Monday.\n\nTo my surprise, the general manager admitted that he was aware of the oil leak. As someone familiar with carsmy father is a mechanicI know that oil is essential for an engines health, just like blood is to a body. When I asked why the issue wasnt resolved before selling it to me, especially given our supposed family bond, he replied that he didnt think it was worth fixing for the price. This response was deeply disappointing, and I was left to address a problem I hadnt created. \nAs if this wasnt bad enough, I also discovered roaches in the car, which intensified my frustration and XXXX. When I shared this with the general manager, he advised me to use foggers to solve the issue, as if it were a minor inconvenience. Given our historyhe had previously resolved a minor oil leak on a vehicle I purchased in XXXX was shocked by his dismissive attitude this time around. \nSince that day, Ive been back and forth with XXXX XXXX in XXXX, pleading with them to take the vehicle back and resolve the situation by providing an alternate truck. I even offered to return it, but circumstances beyond my control, including two hurricanes and financial constraints, prevented me from making the trip. Eventually, I found a local mechanic who examined the vehicle and concluded that the issue was too severe and should NEVER have been sold to me in the first place. \nOn XX/XX/year>, I took the vehicle to XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, where the team, including General XXXX XXXX, Service Advisor XXXX, and Service XXXX XXXX, went above and beyond to help. Despite not being responsible for this sale, they treated my situation with the urgency and respect I had hoped for from the original dealership. Lead Service Mechanic XXXX discovered the oil leak had not only damaged wires but also flooded the vehicles entire computer system, making the car unsafe to drive.\n\nThroughout this ordeal, I have repeatedly asked the original dealership to retrieve the car, acknowledging it as a lemon, but they have refused. I contacted my insurance company, ( XXXX XXXX ) made a claim, and notified my lender ( First Investors ) that I am unwilling to pay for a defective vehicle. I am exhausted from fighting this battle and simply want the situation rectified! \nDue to the delays in obtaining title documentation from XXXX XXXX, I am now on my SECOND temporary tag, which is about to expire, and I suspect the car wont pass Georgias emissions test. The oil has literally flooded the wires and the trucks computer system!! The check engine and oil light are constantly on!! This isnt a regular oil leak!! The XXXX general manager offered to split the costs with me to fix the vehicle, a solution I find unreasonable as the issue was pre-existing. When he said, Its just a car, XXXX, I felt utterly dismissed. This car is unsafe and infested, and I deserve better treatment. XXXX XXXX has CONSISTENTLY reached XXXX XXXX XXXX with no resolve to date. **Do not call me, answer the General Manager 's call!! \nXXXX XXXX XXXX of XXXX has shown me there are still people/businesses who uphold integrity in this industry. They have consistently prioritized my safety, even prohibiting me from driving the car due to its dangerous condition. I never wanted to make this situation public, but I can no longer tolerate being strung along by the dealership in XXXX, which has failed to make things right. This has impacted my financial stability, and all I seek is fairness. I have reached out to the automotive group that owns the XXXX dealership ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ), only to be told that the XXXX XXXX would be handling the situation. Nothing! Absolutely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Ive submitted this information briefly to journalists in both XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) via XXXX. \nMy goal is NOT to ruin anyones career ( as everyone needs to provide for their family ), but simply to have this situation resolved in a way that restores my faith in this business and in basic decency!! Someone had to inspect the car, sign off on the inspection of the car in order to ensure that it was SAFE and fit for sale!! I believe that had I not had to drive home to Georgia, the oil situation wouldve presented itself down the line, they werent banking on it happening as soon as fast as it happened!! XXXX XX/XX/XXXX!! The insurance adjuster has received the information as of XX/XX/year> and will investigate the truck!! The video is just a snippet!! \nI would like to Thank these groups, PUBLICLY for their support, advice & efforts during this challenging time : -The entire staff of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX*I have a total of 84 Photos, videos, emails, texts & documentation of my ENTIRE EXPERIENCE and all are readily available!!","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-20T21:19:36.000Z","issue":"Repossession","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10846627","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Stellantis Financial Services US Corp.","date_received":"2024-11-20T20:46:46.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Lender trying to repossess or disable the vehicle"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The insurance adjuster has received the information as of XX/XX/year> and will <em>investigate</em> the truck!! The video is just a snippet!!"]},"sort":[6.579461,"10846627"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13241180","_score":6.5059767,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally dispute the unverified bankruptcy information currently reported on my TransUnion, XXXX credit file. A detailed review indicates that this information originated from XXXX of XXXX sister companies in the financial risk sector formerly wholly owned by TransUnion XXXX XXXX and recently acquired by XXXX XXXX XXXX began operations in XX/XX/XXXX. There appears to be a perceptible cooperation and understanding between XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX as being owed to TransUnion, XXXX as a result TransUnion XXXX XXXX wholly owning the now unified brand. The sister companies are identified asXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  all which are identified as data brokers not unlike TransUnion, XXXX and are all operating under the jurisdiction of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.\n\nInadequate Verification Procedures and FCRA Violations As outlined by the E-Government Act of 2002, 28 U.S.C. 312 ( c ) ( 1 ), public access to bankruptcy records through Public Access to Court Electronic Records ( PACER ) is restricted to the last four digits of an individuals Social Security Number ( SSN ). Therefore, any attempt by data brokers to correlate bankruptcy records to a consumer using partial SSNs and other unverifiable identifiers is inherently flawed and fails to meet the FCRAs maximum possible accuracy standard under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ).\n\nData Broker Matching Errors and False Positive Risk Data brokers use proprietary algorithms and analytics to match individuals with public records, but these systems often produce false positives by matching records based solely on partial SSNs, names, and addresses. This flawed practice has resulted in the erroneous reporting of a bankruptcy record that does not belong to me.\n\nLack of Full SSN Matching : PACER and court records do not disclose full SSNs, making it impossible to conclusively verify the individual associated with the bankruptcy.\n\nViolation of FCRA Guidelines : Under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), credit reporting agencies are required to use reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy in credit reporting. Failure to verify complete consumer information before attributing public records constitutes a clear violation of the FCRA. \nRelevant Case Law : The precedent set by XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ), affirms that failure to verify public record information before associating it with a consumer XXXX constitute a breach of the FCRAs accuracy requirement.\n\nHowever, as noted, social security numbers ( SSNs ) are heavily redacted from public bankruptcy filings in compliance with the E-Government Act of 2002 ( 28 U.S.C. 312 ( c ) ( 1 ) ), which mandates that only the last four digits of an individuals SSN be displayed in public records. This raises a critical question about how data brokers manage to associate bankruptcy records with a consumers credit profile given this limitation.\n\nHow Data Brokers Verify Bankruptcy Cases Without Full SSNs : Partial SSN and Name Matching Data brokers use the last four digits of the plaintiff 's SSN along with the individuals full name and address to attempt a match.\n\nHowever, this approach is prone to errors, especially with common names, as matching only the last four digits and name increases the likelihood of false positives. \n\nAddress and Date of Birth Correlation Data brokers cross-reference the bankruptcy filing with publicly available information such as previous addresses, date of birth ( XXXX ), and other identifying details available in consumer profiles. \nEven though the full SSN is unavailable, combining partial SSN, XXXX, and address history increases the perceived probability of an accurate XXXX still not guaranteed. \n\nUse of Proprietary Matching Algorithms Many data brokers employ proprietary matching algorithms that attempt to correlate multiple data points to identify a consumer. \nThese algorithms weigh the similarity of names, addresses, DOBs, and other metadata to assign a confidence score to the match.\n\nHowever, these systems are not infallible and can introduce errors that lead to the reporting of bankruptcies on the wrong individuals credit report.\n\nPACER Court Record Cross-Referencing While PACER itself does not verify identities, data brokers retrieve court documents and then attempt to match case information with their internal databases.\n\nThe limitation is that PACER does not furnish the complete SSN or confirm the individuals identity beyond what is publicly available.\n\nThird-Party Verification Attempts Some data brokers utilize third-party sources to further validate the information, although these sources often rely on the same incomplete data, compounding the potential for errors.\n\nLegal Implications of Unverified Matches FCRA Violations : According to the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), data brokers and credit reporting agencies are required to ensure the maximum possible accuracy when reporting consumer information. Inaccurate matching based on incomplete identifiers violates this statutory mandate.\n\nFTC Guidelines : The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) has emphasized that partial or assumed knowledge can not be used to verify a consumers identity or bankruptcy status for credit reporting purposes.\n\nCase Law Supporting Inaccuracy ClaimXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) : Reinforced that credit reporting agencies and data brokers must use reliable procedures to prevent the inclusion of inaccurate information. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX ) : Highlighted that a failure to conduct reasonable investigations before attributing public records to a consumer XXXX constitute a violation of the FCRA. \n\nWhy This Matters Because data brokers do not have the full SSN or reliable means to conclusively verify a bankruptcys connection to a particular individual, any match based solely on partial SSN and name/address data can not meet the maximum possible accuracy standard under the FCRA. This weakness in verification opens the door to challenging the accuracy of any bankruptcy-related information reported on my credit profile. \n\nDemand for XXXXmediate Correction and Removal Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), I formally request the immediate removal of the inaccurately reported bankruptcy entry due to insufficient verification procedures. \nI also request that TransUnion, XXXX : XXXX. Provide documentation detailing the verification procedures implemented by TransUnion XXXX XXXX wholly owned subsidiaXXXX 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 XXXXXXXX, that is relied upon by TransUnion XXXX XXXX and other leading financial institutions, payments providers, and retailers worldwide for competitive studies, predictive analytics, models, and advisory services whom which correlated this bankruptcy record to me. \nXXXX. Identify the source of this erroneous information and provide all supporting documentation. \nXXXX. Remove the inaccurate bankruptcy entry and confirm the deletion in writing within 30 days as required by 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ).\n\nFailure to Comply and Legal Action Should TransUnion, LLC fail to correct this inaccurate reporting, I am prepared to file a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and explore legal remedies to enforce my rights under the FCRA. Continued failure to comply may result in civil liability under 15 U.S.C. 1681n for willful noncompliance and 15 U.S.C. 1681o for negligent noncompliance.I am writing to formally and unequivocally demand that Equifax provide a full and complete disclosure regarding the Method of Verification employed in response to the items I previously disputed on my credit report and which I am now re-disputing. You are hereby required to provide a detailed accounting of the procedures utilized to verify each disputed trade-line item, along with an explanation of how TransUnion, LLC ensured strict compliance with all applicable federal laws during the investigation process.\n\nSpecifically, I demand the following without exception : 1. A complete and itemized explanation of the verification methods used for each disputed entry.\n\n2. Copies of all documentation obtained and reviewed during your investigation process.\n\n3. Identification of all individuals, departments, and/or third parties involved in the verification.\n\n4. The specific dates on which each verification action was initiated and completed.\n\nAs you are fully aware, under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ), you are legally obligated to provide the results of any re-investigation to the consumer. Furthermore, under 15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ) ( 2 ), you are required to disclose the sources of information within my consumer file. Additionally, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ), I am entitled to a complete description of the procedures used to determine the accuracy and completeness of any disputed information.\n\nYou are hereby instructed to provide detailed documentation and explanations regarding your compliance with the following federal statutes and regulations : Fair Credit\nReporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., including but not limited to : 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ), 1681i ( a ) ( 4 ), 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ), 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ), 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ), 1681g ( a ), 1681s-2 ( b ) Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act ( FACTA ) amendments, including : 1681c-1, 1681c-2, 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 8 ) Consumer Financial Protection Act ( CFPA ), 12 U.S.C. 5531 et seq.\n\n12 C.F.R. Part 1022 ( Regulation V ) 16 C.F.R. Part 660 - Duties of Furnishers of Information Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), 15 U.S.C. 6801 et seq.\n\nEqual Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ), 15 U.S.C. 1691 et seq., and Regulation B, 12 C.F.R. Part 1002 Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 45 ( a ) In your response, you must address how TransUnion, LLC : 1. Conducts \" reasonable reinvestigations '' as mandated by 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ).\n\n2. Verifies information directly with original furnishers.\n\n3. Considers all relevant information submitted by consumers during disputes.\n\n4. Determines the accuracy and completeness of disputed entries.\n\n5. Implements compliance measures related to FCRA, FACTA, CFPA, and all corresponding regulations.\n\nAdditionally, as mandated by FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ), you are required to provide the results of your reinvestigation within 5 business days of its completion. Your failure to timely and fully comply with these statutory obligations will be considered a breach of federal law and may subject you to legal liability.\n\nI expect a comprehensive response to this demand within 30 days of your receipt of this letter, including a fully updated credit report reflecting the corrections, deletions, or modifications resulting from your investigation.\n\nPlease be advised that failure to provide the requested information and documentation in a complete, timely, and lawful manner will leave me no choice but to consider escalation of this matter through formal legal channels, including but not limited to complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), and potential civil action. \n\nATTACHED YOU WILL FIND MY PETITION READY TO BE FILED IN FEDERAL COURT AS A RESULT OF YOUR ACTIONS AND THOSE LISTED IN MY COMPLAINT.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-29T20:57:50.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"74066","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13241180","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-29T20:27:24.000Z","state":"OK","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Public record information inaccurate"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["PACER Court Record Cross-Referencing While PACER itself does not verify identities, data brokers <em>retrieve</em> court <em>documents</em> and then attempt to match case information with their internal databases.\n\nThe limitation is that PACER does not furnish the complete SSN or confirm the individuals identity beyond what is publicly available."]},"sort":[6.5059767,"13241180"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4622619","_score":5.9743896,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"To : XXXX XXXX XXXX ( CEO ) XXXX and XXXX XXXX To : BofA Cards Executives  XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX To : BofA Cards Counsel XXXX, TX XXXX To : BofA Senior Leadership ( not representatives ) BofA Senior Leadership, My Wife XXXX and I are pleading for your help but we feel no matter what we say, BofA is not believing anything that we have presented to this point which is quite confusing. We have had nothing but a good relationship with BofA for many years and have had nearly perfect credit with all of creditors for over 30 years. We are under attack from fraudsters on one side, creating threats to my family and myself, and BofA who has added to those threats by continued inaction or placing fraud back upon on myself and my family. We have never seen such lunacy before! These problems have now gone beyond stress and it has become dangerous! We have gotten to the point where the conversations I have had with XXXX XXXX  XXXX ( XXXX x XXXX ) in the BofA Regulatory Response team through the use of the CFPB. Unfortunately, other than our first conversation, XXXX has not called me back, even with several attempts to contact her. We are feeling threatened and BofA has just heightened that by no performing an investigation beyond looking at where emails and texts were made at the time of these incidents. We are laying out the following in detail so that the gravity of our concern and danger is completely understood! \n\n\n1. Prior to contacting the CFPB and BofA created standard fraud cases and we had sent dozens of faxes from a BofA office nearby our home to ensure all information was received. Each time we met with different branch personnel ; they called to get the correct fax number ( s ) for the BofA Fraud Team, confirmed them and faxed all documents collected by myself and my wife 30+ times. Since we were receiving information that your teams were not receiving them, even from the branch location over and over again, we filed a CFPB complaint, and wouldnt you know it, you got our initial documents from this regulator. What we also fear is that with the 30+ faxes we have sent to your teams our Personal Identification Information ( PII ) is floating around allover BofA and that creates another danger as well. Also, several of you people have been confirmed to be working from home and nothing is in place to ensure the safety of the PII we provided the 30+ times has been properly handled or locked from printing or other distribution throughout your company. \n\nNow for the facts : a. We personally have proven that my computer was stolen while on work assignment in XXXX Florida in XX/XX/XXXX, and this is where we believe this start of this can be tracked back to. \nb. Upon realizing my XXXX Laptop was stolen from my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, Florida, I contacted the Hotel Front Desk, speaking to management and reported it to them. At that point, the employee stated they would do two things. First, they stated that they would question each employee assigned to the floor my room was on, and second, they would contact the XXXX Police so that a Police report could be filed. \nc. At the end of that day, I was contacted by the manager, stating security had questioned each employee extensively and it was determined that none of them had removed my laptop from my room. The only thing they could think of is that someone broke into my room, having a key or manufacturing one to break in. This was a keycard so they are programmed at the front desk. \nd. I showed them I had both keys they had given me the day before, since I had moved to the new room due to what I believed to be an unsanitary condition in my former room. This had to do with the toilet that was not working properly and due to Covid 19 I was being extra precautious.\n\ne. The Manager on duty agreed, switching me to a different room right away. \nf. Soon after moving all of my items, including my clothing, laptop that was in my laptop bag I left the room to have dinner. Prior to leaving my room I took my wallet which had all cards, etc. enclosed g. The next morning, I had to take care of some business and went to get my laptop that I had placed in the closet. To my dismay, my computer bag was gone, along with my computer and a few personal effects. \nh. I immediately searched the room, and when my laptop was not found I contacted the front desk to advise my laptop had been removed my room. \ni. I also contacted XXXX and asked that they assist in securing my cloud account where I also had stored some of my family information. They assisted but this was now more than 24 hours later so they stated some of my items could have been compromised but they could offer me no proof of this. \nj. I spoke to the police, filed a police report ( BofA has this ), and waited to get home in XXXX to purchase a new XXXX Laptop. I then transferred my Cloud account to this new device and retrieved all of the information I had in my cloud account. I didnt notice anything was missing but over 2 months later, it was obvious that I had been hacked. \n2. Before what is mentioned in j above, on XX/XX/XXXX a charge for {$500.00} showed up on my BofA Card that I did not make. I called the hotel at that time wondering if it had possibly been compromised since this is the card, I used to pay my bill upon leaving a couple of days later. They could find no evidence of this and I reported the fraudulent item to BofA, along with the police report. BofA credited my account immediately and that was the last I heard of it. \n3. On XX/XX/XXXX I went out of country on business, not returning until XX/XX/XXXX. ( My Itineraries have been sent and received by BofA through the CFPB ) 4. On XX/XX/XXXX I sat down to pay my bills and began pulling up my credit card accounts first. The first place I went to was BofA, noticing some very strange activity on my XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. I then opened all other credit card accounts from other banks, noticing the same. So, of course I got extremely nervous, diving into the issues as the start of my own investigation on the XXXX and XXXX ( Saturday and Sunday ). Once I reviewed everything, I realized we were victims of fraud and contacted BofA and every other creditor right away to let them know. I was told by each creditor that I had 100 % fraud protection and to not worry since they were there to help. \n5. On XX/XX/XXXX I filed a second police report and this was due to fraud to both cover my family and to supply to creditors as needed. During this time, I continued to research this and noticing many payments had been made using specifically a BofA and XXXX XXXX bank accounts. I also let all creditors, including BofA know this. \n6. On XX/XX/XXXX I began making calls on the charges and tried to research the bank accounts as well. I also verified with both BofA and XXXX XXXX that nobody had opened, nor did I have any bank accounts with my name. Though this was relieving I also called three stores that appeared regularly on all of my card accounts ( XXXX, XXXX XXXX and XXXX ). Upon discussion with each and visiting both XXXX  and XXXX XXXX I was stunned to find out that the fraud surrounded GIFT CARDS. I called the gift card divisions of each and confirmed this, both XXXX  and XXXX XXXX had the Cards purchased IN PERSON but XXXX was purchased over the phone. \n7. I then realized I had to be victim of Identity Theft and this all had taken place while I was out of the country. Nevertheless, this freaked me out! I contacted the police again and filed another police report for Identity Theft for myself and my family! \n8. I then contacted the credit bureaus, freezing all of my familys credit and placing a statement on each that we were victims of Fraud and Identity Theft and to not open any credit without my express authorization and verification. \n\nNote : all of the above info and documentation has been supplied to BofA! \n\n\nThe following is where things got a lot worse! \n\n9. I was going to get our mail from our community mailbox ( we live in a master planned community ) and told my wife as much. She then said, Oh I forgot to tell you that our mailboxes were broken into while you were away and it appears the thieves were likely after checks and/or money in the mailbox. I went to the mailboxes anyhow and took pictures. I told her this was a major issue and was assured that the community had gone to the HOA and the police to report it. The next day I contacted our HOA, confirming the same! XXXX Pictures have been supplied to BofA ) 10. I was keeping a close eye on our credit at this time when all of a sudden, in XXXX, other charges started to appear and even more 3rd party payments were being made, and therefore bouncing. \n\n11. What myself and the police believe is that the fraudsters were looking to pay down/off our card to trick BofA to release more of my credit for the fraudsters to use. I tried to stop all of these but at first believed one could have been made by a new client I was working with. I later debunked this because the payments from that new client showed up in my XXXX XXXX XXXX account ending in XXXX ( I will discuss that issue in a bit because that account was compromised as well ). When I realized what was going on the payments had already been posted and even though I wanted them removed, BofAs Customer Service group who apparently handles payments, said they either needed to bounce or go through. I was appalled because I did not want someone else defrauded by these fraudsters by stealing their money. Then, as reviewing my accounts I found BofA had closed my accounts were to be frozen until the payments went through or bounced! Absolute insanity and the only way I found this all out is by attempting to use a card when my family went to dinner and the payment did not process on my credit card. \n12. I was beside myself because I am in the Anti-fraud and Anti-Money Laundering business as a well- trained investigator and knew this was causing a terrible mess that I was helpless to do anything about, even though I tried. I couldnt even use the uncharged balances since everything was frozen and BofA started to get very secretive. That scared me even more! \n13. Thats when one of the worst things happened. I made a call to BofA to provide more information and the person I spoke to read me some of the notes from the past couple of weeks or so. They stated that what I was saying was contradictory to what I had said earlier that day, days or weeks. I could not believe my ears and then I realized we were not only victims of Account Takeover but this was way worse! The fraudsters were taking this to a much more dangerous level and thats when I knew we were really under attack from some very bad people. Not only were they impersonating me at stores, online and over the phone with merchants, they were now doing the same with BofA as well! They had all of my info and all of my familys info as well! This became scary as heck and we were stuck in so many ways. \n14. First, I was told by the police and my mobile carrier that they believe I was the victim of having my phone spoofed. I am not going to explain this in detail as its well documented on the web, had been addressed and agreed to by the police and my mobile carrier ( XXXX Now XXXX ). \n15. It was also known by XXXX that I had called BofA. In addition, I asked the BofA Fraud representative to help me with checking to see if there was anyone else accessing my/our accounts. This is when they asked me to go to a profile page which I didnt know existed, and to the amazement of myself and my son there was an email and phone number in place that was not mine or anyone in my family. We determined, by a XXXX search, that the phone number was from Florida and we have no idea who owned that email address, since it was nobody in our family either. BofA you WERE sending texts to a spoofed phone ( mine ) or a changed number/email and I therefore did not receive any that XXXX noted on our most recent call. I have no doubt that BofA was also sending texts to this improper number and emails to this improper email account as well. BofA not only were you communicating with the ID Theft fraudster, but you also allowed complete account takeover. Why were you not looking out for our best interests when you knew full well that I had reported ID Theft and Account Takeover that led to fraud and bounced ACH payments? What are you doing BofA and what have you placed myself and my family in such a dangerous position? BofA increased the threat with these fraudsters and we know hold BofA accountable. On top of this, your fraud teams do not even appear to communicate with each other, yet the system we use as a consumer pulls up everything/// ( cards, bank accounts, etc. ) in ONE place! This is very, very odd! \n16. Now as of XX/XX/XXXX, my daughter was accosted by one of these fraudsters as she stepped out of her car. This was when a black or dark blue sedan pulled up to her and said Your Dad better back off on this credit card claim or someone will be getting hurt! He peeled off and confused/scared my daughter got back in her car and drove away, calling me as she did. So now BofA the fraudsters have made contact with my family and even though I have called in, asking for XXXX to discuss, she still has not returned my call. Once a fraudster makes contact with the victim this can and often does get very dangerous! BofA you are out of line ; you dont care and you are making this more dangerous by the hour for my family. I am not only disappointed, but I am also going to bring this to the local, national and international press. This will be very embarrassing since you have done nothing that you would and we will NOT pay for others fraudulent purchase. \n\nI want this to go all the way to the President and CEO of BofA who is at the top of this letter. The question comes down to, why would my wife and I do all of these highly malicious things, change our passwords on our accounts, change out emails, change our phone numbers, etc. when we have been such upstanding customers of the bank? To this day BofA is still blaming us for being victims of Identity theft that occurred potentially twice in a matter of a few months, having our online account taken over, fraudulence on our credit cards, and to top that payment ( ACH bounces ) fraud! So, 30+ years of particularly good credit goes down the tubes because of what? Because we were all defrauded and you BofA believe the fraudsters beyond your customers because you have recorded conversation of me calling the bank to authorize charges, etc.? This is absolutely out of hand now! This is what ID Theft and account takeover most often leads to and you are blaming me in particular? You, BofA you appear to be doing all in your power to destroy us and are unwilling to handle this appropriately, causing a great deal of increased danger for our family. \n\nIgnorance of a regulation is no excuse BofA and this was stated in the Dodd/Frank Act that was where the CFPB was born out of due to poor consumer protection that was rampant during the Financial Crisis! \n\na. FBCA Fair Credit Billing Act FCBA ( investopedia.com ) - easier to read b. FRCA - PDF c. Credit Card Act d. PCIDSS For example, per the FCBA we are NOT liable for any of this Fraud because 1. None of these charges were authorized by myself, my wife or my children ( BofA must prove or remove by regulation and US law )! BofA has not supplied any proof that they say they have information to us which is unsettling and dangerous. \n2. We never received any merchandise from any of these fraudulent purchases!\n\n3. BofA has not provided any proof that any of their accusations to us whatsoever. Per the FCBA, for instance, the customer is required to receive proof, not hearsay which is by law within our rights! I have proven I was not in the XXXX  store, as the store told me but they did not recognize me when I went to speat to XXXX  or XXXX XXXX ( I was in XXXX XXXXXXXX ). \n4. We as Consumers have 60 days from the time, we receive our credit card bill any charge with a card issuer. This was performed over and over again!\n\n5. The biggest takeaway here is that The FCBA protects consumers from unfair billing practices and none were never authorized by anyone in my family. BofA I was out of the Country for much of this and that has been proven by my itineraries ( these have been supplied to BofA over 30 times ).\n\n6. On top of that The Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) protects us as consumers from unfair practices regarding improper disclosure of our personal information. You fed the Fraudsters even more information about us by speaking to them without proper authorization. They used my STOLEN information to get to you BofA and they have Harmed myself and my family. This must stop this instant! \n7. Finally, BofA has 30 days to acknowledge receipt of a complaint. This do not take place you only did when we got the CFPB involved, yet we faxed all documents from your BofA offices over 30 times ). BofA then has two billing cycles to complete their investigation ; during that time the issuer is NOT ALLOWED to try to collect the payment, charge interest on it, or report it to credit bureaus as late ( not only did you not do this you reported right away that creditor closed accounts ) These limitations are to be applied to all disputed payments and other charges made during the same billing cycle, which can still accrue interest and be reported as late if not paid. In our case all of these charges are FRAUD, all of them are DISPUTED and NONE of them should have been reported to the credit reports during that set period of time. One thing I can tell you BofA, you reported these account closures right away ( AGAINST REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ) as has been reflected on our credit and we have credit monitoring proof to show this! \n\nIn Summary BofA, the FCBA protects consumers from unfair billing practices while the FCRA protects consumers from unfair practices regarding their personal information. You have violated both acts, have not provided us with proof of any wrongdoing and have shared our personal information with fraudsters that then mounted lies upon good information. You not only tainted the investigation, but you had also so many investigators involved that they all did not have the same information or were misinformed along the way as my case went from group to group. Finally, we are quite concerned that due to your poor investigative process overall, you have our personal information floating around your company and more than likely on an international scale which now exposes us to even more danger and fraud! We believe this is an inside job at this point which is profoundly serious! \n\nBofA, we ask this one more time. Please handle these issues safely, properly and with proper care with us only. You have not done this. We as a family have been threatened by fraudsters stealing our identities, account takeover and fraud. In fact, BofA has now increased this threat by enabling fraudsters to contact us! You, BofA have made this dangerous, have threatened my family even more by allowing fraud that should never have taken place and now you will not take any accountability, placing my family further at risk! I even asked for the address where local authorities could address the threats BofA has increased on my family in person and was denied! So BofA you are threatening us! Is BofA afraid to assist a client that is feeling threatened by fraudsters and now even more by yourselves? Thats dangerous and unethical, and I think it may even be against the law because when a threat is made it becomes enforceable by legal authorities. Thats how we feel BofA! You are and have been wrong BofA since this beginning, and we are now under worse attack because of it! \n\nThis entire madness needs to stop now and we need to have a proper and sane discussion to get through this! \n\n\nRegards, XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( direct )","date_sent_to_company":"2021-08-11T20:14:03.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"77095","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4622619","timely":"No","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2021-08-11T19:59:12.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["You not only tainted the <em>investigation</em>, but you had also so many <em>investigators</em> involved that they all did not have the same information or were misinformed <em>along</em> the way as my case went from group to group. Finally, we are quite concerned that due to your poor <em>investigative</em> process overall, you have our personal information floating around your company and more than likely on an international scale which now exposes us to even more danger and fraud!"]},"sort":[5.9743896,"4622619"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10891123","_score":5.1297045,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX US BANK XXXX XXXX : TRUSTEE XXXX XXXX : LAWYER TESTIMONY UNDER GOD. \nLeviticus 5:1 \" anyone who sins and is aware of it must testify before the lord and bring as his penalty a ram from the flock, one without defect or fault.\n\nFirst there is a bifurcation of the note and mortgage, debt collectors now have the account violation of FTC SEC IRS FINCEN XXXX SERVERAL OTHERS and violations of the FDCPA etc .... \n\n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX FROM THE XXXX XXXX XXXX a XXXX based company and representatives of said company settled upon a HELOC LOAN with XXXX XXXX XXXX. We assumed the company was acting in good faith but after further investigation of the mortgage we found that the companies involved acted in bad faith. Falsification of submitted documents, signatures, recordings in the courts, double bookkeeping entries, and the transfer of the asset. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, U.S. BANK XXXX XXXX XXXX ( not in its official capacity solely as trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX, are apart of this fraudulent transfer of the asset. We noticed a discrepancies once were we contacted by XXXX XXXX XXXX that claimed payments were missed ( default ) and that immediate payment was needed or they would accelerate to foreclosure proceedings. XX/XX/XXXX was the referenced date in which a payment was made and accepted by XXXX XXXX XXXX. The payment included the 3 months of payments plus interest. XXXX XXXX  had direct access to the account to retrieve funds do to the account made payable was set up through autopay at XXXX XXXX  located at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, Pa XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX claimed the same issue XXXX of XXXX in which payment was made again to XXXX XXXX XXXX and accepted. That is when we started to research the issue with payments and the account. We reached out to XXXX XXXX  to investigate the allegations made by XXXX XXXX XXXX that we were not making payments as scheduled from autopay out of the account held by XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX  informed us of the transaction history and found that XXXX XXXX DID INDEED receive payment electronically from the autopay set up on the account. There was no return funds from XXXX XXXX XXXX back to the account only payments sent. XXXX XXXX XXXX claimed that on the first of every month they would retrieve the payment, and then they would return the payment on the XXXX of every month. XXXX XXXX XXXX when asked claimed that they never received the payments and they returned what the did receive during that transaction. But after investigating the transaction with XXXX XXXX  we concluded that something was not right. XXXX XXXX  launched an investigation into the account which caused a domino affect into the hardships now faced by our family. With the account being on hold do to investigation it created economic hardships. Which affected our personal and business credit profiles, missed payments to other accounts and tons of pain and suffering. Which ended up with the account being closed. We experienced identity theft issues do to the negligence of XXXX XXXX XXXX and its agents and affiliates. XXXX XXXX XXXX then accelerated to foreclosure proceedings in which we were contacted by a lawyer based in XXXX. We were not properly served and did not receive any proper form of communication. From XXXX of XXXX Until XXXX of XXXX we tried to reach a conclusion with XXXX XXXX XXXX. We researched the transaction from the best of our knowledge with clean hands and honor. Due to the lack of information being shared by the companies, we could only gather as much information as publicly possible. XXXX XXXX US BANK XXXX XXXX. AND XXXX XXXX XXXX claimed that they did not have to disclose account information to the account holder because it was company policy. But in Pennsylvania the right to know law a adopted interpretation of the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, states we have right to full disclosure of any information. After several attempts and blatant refusal by the companies we pursued to gather what we could. Starting at the beginning, what is a mortgage? What type of mortgage do we have? What bank or banks are involved? etc.. We concluded with a few red flags starting with the settlement. Loan amount was for XXXX in which on the day of closing only about XXXX was deposited we asked why and was informed it went into the escrow account incase payments can not be made. So we looked into escrow accounts and according the IRS PUBLICATION 537 the buyers obligation is paid in full when the balance of purchase price is deposited into the escrow account. When the escrow account is established, you no longer rely on the buyer for the rest of the payment, but on the escrow arrangement. Which means they held another XXXX in the escrow account along with the funds deducted from the initial amount. Which led us further into what accounting means, double bookkeeping entry systems, and all that involved XXXX XXXX, and XXXX. We tracked the account all the way into a Fund held by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX being sold on the market. Which meant that our transaction was a secondary one and that we were never compensated and valuable consideration for the cashable item used by the bank to secure funding. We now know that the application was a cashable item and was pooled with other items and being serviced under one account. Which lead us into how the loan was structured and the identity of all parties. This information was not disclosed to us in anyway. We were unaware of the funds held in escrow by the title company the day of settlement. That they use false misleading business tactics like taking the escrow after the fact to mask what intentions they truly have. We found that banks can not lend there own money. We found that banks are borrowers of the FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM operating circular 9. We found that UCCC ( that all banks are intermediaries ). We found that banks invest on behalf of customers and investors. We are the customers, our taxpayer identification number was used in this transaction. Which means that this is a tax issue and according to IRS PUBLICATION 4681. In which the parties involved are falsifying documents submitting and not submitting tax forms using legalese to mislead cause economic harm etc. We have proof of the accounting from an independent audit, and almost positive that once full accounting is obtained we may also conclude all the violations this transaction. With further investigation we found that sharing account information with anyone outside the account holder is a violation major violation according to the FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION etc... We have tried to settle the matter but all the parties involved have provided a safe avenue to redemption of the mortgage. We have a right to equitable redemption. We are the Owners of the accounts all proceeds rights titles interest chattels rents debits credits debentures derivatives. As these company are using unjust enrichment errors of omission, piracy, identity theft, bank levy, false tax reporting 's securities reporting financial statements agreements etc. filed with SEC and local and state departments of revenue etc.. So we ask some questions for clarity to foreclosure. \nDefinitions and Resources : FORECLOSURE. To shut out, to bar, to destroy an equity of redemption. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. A termination of all rights of the mortgagor or his grantee in the property covered by the mortgage. XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX \nXXXX, XXXX. \nThe term is also loosely applied to any of the various methods, statutory or otherwise, known in different juris- dictions, of enforcing payment of the debt secured by a mortgage, by taking and selling the mortgaged estate. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX. \n\nUniform Commercial Code article 8 definitions : ( 1 ) \" Adverse claim '' means a claim that a claimant has a property interest in a financial asset and that it is a violation of the rights of the claimant for another person to hold, transfer, or deal with the financial asset.\n\n( 9 ) \" Financial asset, '' except as otherwise provided in Section 8-103, means : ( i ) a security ; ( ii ) an obligation of a person or a share, participation, or other interest in a person or in property or an enterprise of a person, which is, or is of a type, dealt in or traded on financial markets, or which is recognized in any area in which it is issued or dealt in as a medium for investment ; or ( as this applies because the Commercial Loan Agreement ) What is a mortgage? \nXXXX XXXX. XXXX  2 Definitions \" The literal meaning of the word \" mortgage '' is \" dead pledge '', 13 a mortuum vadium. 14 The term \" mortgage '' may be employed as meaning the debt secured by the mortgage ; 15 but in its true sense an ordinary mortgage is not a debt, 16 as the debt is the principle obligation, and the mortgage is generally regarded as merely an incident or accessory to the debt.17 A mortgage is an interest in land 18 created by a written instrument 19 providing security for the performance of a duty or payment of debt, 20 and is usually evidenced by a note. 21 ( do to the lack of signatures by the opposing party only our signatures to the contract are here ) Which makes the contract unenforceable and we sent commuications certified mail to the responsible parties with no response from all accept U.S. Bank XXXX XXXX that stated that XXXX XXXX is the party that needed to be addressed. They claimed they had no dealings with the transaction. Which was false, and according to the foreclosure case they were directly involved. \n\nThe term qualified mortgage means ( A ) any obligation ( including any participation or certificate of beneficial ownership therein ) which is principally secured by an interest in real property and which ( i ) is transferred to the REMIC on the startup day in exchange for regular or residual interests in the REMIC, ( ii ) is purchased by the REMIC within the 3-month period beginning on the startup day 26 USC 860 ( G ) ( A ) ( 3 ) What is a REMIC?\n\n26 USC 860D : For purposes of this title, the terms real estate mortgage investment conduit and REMIC mean any entity ( 1 ) to which an election to be treated as a REMIC applies for the taxable year and all prior taxable years, ( 4 ) as of the close of the 3rd month beginning after the startup day and at all times thereafter, substantially all of the assets of which consist of qualified mortgages and permitted investments, ( B ) Inadvertent terminations If ( i ) an entity ceases to be a REMIC, 26 USC 856 : A corporation, trust, or association shall not be considered a real estate investment trust for any taxable year unless ( 1 ) it files with its return for the taxable year an election to be a real estate investment trust or has made such election for a previous taxable year, and such election has not been terminated or revoked under subsection ( g ) ; What must the REMIC do to foreclose on your property?\n\n26 USC 856 ( e ) SPECIAL RULES FOR FORECLOSURE PROPERTY ( 1 ) FORECLOSURE PROPERTY DEFINED For purposes of this part, the term foreclosure property means any real property ( including interests in real property ), and any personal property incident to such real property, acquired by the real estate investment trust as the result of such trust having bid in such property at foreclosure, or having otherwise reduced such property to ownership or possession by agreement or process of law, after there was default ( or default was imminent ) on a lease of such property or on an indebtedness which such property secured. Such term does not include property acquired by the real estate investment trust as a result of indebtedness arising from the sale or other disposition of property of the trust described in section 1221 ( a ) ( 1 ) which was not originally acquired as foreclosure property.\n\n26 USC 856 ( 5 ) TAXPAYER MUST MAKE ELECTION Property shall be treated as foreclosure property for purposes of this part only if the real estate investment trust so elects ( in the manner provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary ) on or before the due date ( including any extensions of time ) for filing its return of tax under this chapter for the taxable year in which such trust acquires such property. A real estate investment trust may revoke any such election for a taxable year by filing the revocation ( in the manner provided by the Secretary ) on or before the due date ( including any extension of time ) for filing its return of tax under this chapter for the taxable year. If a trust revokes an election for any property, no election may be made by the trust under this paragraph with respect to the property for any subsequent taxable year. \nWhat regulation are they talking about? lets take a look! \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Keep in mind that the taxpayer here is the REMIC, meaning the trustee who presides over the REMIC must make these elections and do everything in his fiduciary power NOT TO COMPROMISE THE TAX STATUS OF THE REMIC! !!!\n\n26 USC 856 ( g ) TERMINATION OF ELECTION ( 1 ) FAILURE TO QUALIFY An election under subsection ( c ) ( 1 ) made by a corporation, trust, or association shall terminate if the corporation, trust, or association is not a real estate investment trust to which the provisions of this part apply for the taxable year with respect to which the election is made, or for any succeeding taxable year unless paragraph ( 5 ) applies. Such termination shall be effective for the taxable year for which the corporation, trust, or association is not a real estate investment trust to which the provisions of this part apply, and for all succeeding taxable years.\n\n( 2 ) REVOCATION An election under subsection ( c ) ( 1 ) made by a corporation, trust, or association may be revoked by it for any taxable year after the first taxable year for which the election is effective.\n\nA revocation under this paragraph shall be effective for the taxable year in which made and for all succeeding taxable years. Such revocation must be made on or before the 90th day after the first day of the first taxable year for which the revocation is to be effective. Such revocation shall be made in such manner as the Secretary shall prescribe by regulations.\n\n( 3 ) ELECTION AFTER TERMINATION OR REVOCATION Except as provided in paragraph ( 4 ), if a corporation, trust, or association has made an election under subsection ( c ) ( 1 ) and such election has been terminated or revoked under paragraph ( 1 ) or paragraph ( 2 ), such corporation, trust, or association ( and any successor corporation, trust, or association ) shall not be eligible to make an election under subsection ( c ) ( 1 ) for any taxable year prior to the fifth taxable year which begins after the first taxable year for which such termination or revocation is effective.\n\nThe servicer or attorney is liable for the tax, or whoever did not transfer it in time. Keep in mind that if the REMIC takes the defaulted note and transfers it after the 3 month deadline the whole REMIC loses it's tax status.\n\nHow does a REMIC acquire property?\n\nFormation and Initial Transfer of Assets : When a REMIC is initially formed, it acquires a pool of mortgages or mortgage-backed assets from a transferor, typically using a trust agreement. This transfer is often part of the REMICs creation, where the transferor places qualifying mortgages or mortgage-related assets into the REMIC structure .\n\nForm 1066, U.S. Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit ( REMIC ) Income Tax Return, is then used by the REMIC to report its income and tax elections but is not required to formally acquire the property.\n\nForeclosure and Election for Foreclosure Property : When the REMIC acquires property through foreclosure or similar means ( if a borrower defaults on a mortgage within the REMIC ), it can make an election to treat the property as foreclosure property. This is done on Form 1066 by attaching a statement to the form for the tax year in which the REMIC acquires the property.\n\nThis election classifies the foreclosed property as foreclosure property, which is important for favorable tax treatment, as it avoids having the income from the property treated as prohibited income for REMIC purposes.\n\nReporting Requirements : While Form 1066 is the primary reporting form, theres no form specifically required to acquire property into the REMIC. Instead, the acquisition is documented through legal agreements and records with the trust administrator, often filed in county records for foreclosures.\n\nSchedule Q ( Form 1066 ) is also used by the REMIC to report information to residual interest holders, including details about the income and property held by the REMIC.\n\nForm 1066 Statement : This statement is an attachment to Form 1066, U.S. Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit ( REMIC ) Income Tax Return.\n\nIt includes details about the property that the REMIC acquired through foreclosure and an explicit election under IRC 856 ( e ) to treat the property as foreclosure property.\n\nPurpose : This election allows the REMIC to classify the property as foreclosure property for tax purposes, meaning it can avoid taxes on income that would otherwise be considered non-qualifying income.\n\nForm 1099-A : Form 1099-A is issued by a lender when there is an acquisition or abandonment of secured property, typically by a financial institution to report the acquisition or abandonment of property to both the IRS and the borrower .\n\nPurpose : For the REMIC, Form 1099-A is relevant only if the REMIC must report the acquisition or abandonment of a secured property ( typically when the borrower defaults and the REMIC acquires the property ). The REMIC might use Form 1099-A to document the foreclosure for reporting purposes.\n\nKey Detail : Form 1099-A is sent to the IRS and the borrower, while the election statement attached to Form 1066 is only for the IRS to claim the foreclosure property status.\n\nand now the entire fund has been compromised .....\n\nFORM 56 AND FORM 56F were issued to the IRS on all the financial institutions involved and all other persons breach of this relationship lack of disclosure etc ....\n\nthe debt was discharged and accepted by the internal revenue service copies have been sent to the company and they have not returned those copies In order to transfer or assign a mortgage one must satisfy the mortgage meaning it was paid in exchange for the asset. I notice the fraudulent recording of the mortgage on public record as there were issues with chain of title and recording and by using affiliations and quid pro quo tactics these institutions are stealing properties all across the United States. We have requested an audit from the internal revenue service for the matter. \n\nthe company discharges its obligations with the US Treasury. All deposits notes bills bonds coupon etc ... .as per XXXX prospectus XXXX XXXX XXXX  is the registered agent to U.S. Bank XXXX XXXX and is now liable for damages we seek... \n\nthis is a tax issue, payment means to perform and these companies did not perform therefore we revoke there power of attorney over the transaction. We have a right to opt of the sharing of our information. These companies have a fiduciary duty to handle these accounts properly and these companies listed are repeat offenders of major violations and have been disciplined as such. Yet they continue to defraud the public interest the government the financial industry etc. The asset has been foreclosed on and sold and threats have been made to us. As we seek equitable relief and to restore our rights we have now begun alerting the property authorities. We pray for relief in the matter In god we trust. \n\nIssues : Lack and Failure of Consideration Failure to Comply with Notice Provisions Failure to Comply with Release Provisions Electing the fraud Remedy Non-justified threats of physical harm, criminal prosecution or financial ruin Waiver of Right Privilege Advantage or Benefit Non-waiver Provisions Unclean hands Doctrine Absence of impairment of security tender of payment etc...\n\nFollowing disciplinary actions as to the complaint being made. \nCFPB TAKES ACTION AGAINST XXXX XXXX  FOR ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE ACTIONS AND VIOLATING LAW ENFORCEMENT ORDER CEO XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX FOLLOWING THE INVESTIGATION FROM XXXX. \n\nU.S. BANK XXXX XXXX FINCEN PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS OF ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING LAWS. XX/XX/XXXX CASE LAW FOR XXXX V. US BANK SPECIAL PURPOSE ENTITIES are powerful financial tools. Can be either on and offshore and normally Off-balance sheet, bankruptcy remote, and illegitimate uses. They can be structures that lend themselves to money laundering, disguised as loans of revenue misstate earning through wash trades, concealment of losses embezzlement and accounting improprieties the asset was granted conveyed and transferred to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX by the OWNER of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as true owner of the asset. Poa filled with the internal revenue service The account has been pledged and assigned to the US Treasury per UCC 1 & 3 filed in the great state of NEW YORK. non UCC agricultural lien... \n\nWe are left at alerting the regulatory authorities for this breach of fiduciary duty and a host of other violations. CFPB, XXXX, SEC, FDIC, FTC, FBI, IRS, TREASURY, SSA, FINCEN, ATTORNEY GENERAL etc .... \n\nwe tried to upload supporting documents but they wont take","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-05T17:59:11.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","zip_code":"191XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10891123","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Fay Servicing, LLC","date_received":"2024-11-22T08:51:54.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Foreclosure"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX XXXX XXXX claimed that on the first of every month they would <em>retrieve</em> the payment, and then they would return the payment on the XXXX of every month. XXXX XXXX XXXX when asked claimed that they never received the payments and they returned what the did receive <em>during</em> that transaction. But after <em>investigating</em> the transaction with XXXX XXXX  we concluded that something was not right."]},"sort":[5.1297045,"10891123"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10852983","_score":5.1297045,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX : LXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. \nXXXX XXXX \" anyone who sins and is aware of it must testify before the lord and bring as his penalty a ram from the flock, one without defect or fault. \n\nFirst there is a bifurcation of the note and mortgage, debt collectors now have the account violation of FTC SEC IRS XXXX XXXX XXXX OTHERS and violations of the FDCPA etc .... \n\n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX FROM THE XXXX XXXX XXXX a XXXX based company and representatives of said company settled upon a XXXX XXXX with XXXX XXXX XXXX. We assumed the company was acting in good faith but after further investigation of the mortgage we found that the companies involved acted in bad faith. Falsification of submitted documents, signatures, recordings in the courts, double bookkeeping entries, and the transfer of the asset. XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( not in its official capacity solely as trustee for XXXX XXXX XXXX, are apart of this fraudulent transfer of the asset. We noticed a discrepancies once were we contacted by FAY SERVICING LLC that claimed payments were missed ( default ) and that immediate payment was needed or they would accelerate to foreclosure proceedings. XX/XX/XXXX was the referenced date in which a payment was made and accepted by FAY SERVICING LLC. The payment included the 3 months of payments plus interest. FAY SERVICING had direct access to the account to retrieve funds do to the account made payable was set up through autopay at XXXX XXXX  located at XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FAY SERVICING LLC claimed the same issue XXXX of XXXX in which payment was made again to FAY SERVICING LLC and accepted. That is when we started to research the issue with payments and the account. We reached out to XXXX Bank to investigate the allegations made by FAY SERVICING LLC that we were not making payments as scheduled from autopay out of the account held by XXXX BANK. XXXX BANK informed XXXX of the transaction history and found thaXXXX FAY SERVICING DID INDEED receive payment electronically from the autopay set up on the account. There was no return funds from FAY SERVICING LLC back to the account only payments sent. FAY SERVICING XXXX claimed that on the first of every month they would retrieve the payment, and then they would return the payment on the XXXX of every month. FAY SERVICING XXXX when asked claimed that they never received the payments and they returned what the did receive during that transaction. But after investigating the transaction with XXXX BANK we concluded that something was not right. XXXX BANK launched an investigation into the account which caused a domino affect into the hardships now faced by our family. With the account being on hold do to investigation it created economic hardships. Which affected our personal and business credit profiles, missed payments to other accounts and tons of pain and suffering. Which ended up with the account being closed. We experienced identity theft issues do to the negligence of FAY SERVICING XXXX and its agents and affiliates. FAY SERVICING XXXX then accelerated to foreclosure proceedings in which we were contacted by a lawyer based in XXXX. We were not properly served and did not receive any proper form of communication. From XXXX of XXXX Until XXXX of XXXX we tried to reach a conclusion with FAY SERVICING XXXX. We researched the transaction from the best of our knowledge with clean hands and honor. Due to the lack of information being shared by the companies, we could only gather as much information as publicly possible. FAY SERVICING XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX claimed that they did not have to disclose account information to the account holder because it was company policy. But in Pennsylvania the right to know law a adopted interpretation of the FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, states we have right to full disclosure of any information. After several attempts and blatant refusal by the companies we pursued to gather what we could. Starting at the beginning, what is a mortgage? What type of mortgage do we have? What bank or banks are involved? etc.. We concluded with a few red flags starting with the settlement. Loan amount was for XXXX in which on the day of closing only about XXXX was deposited we asked why and was informed it went into the escrow account incase payments can not be made. So we looked into escrow accounts and according the IRS XXXX XXXX the buyers obligation is paid in full when the balance of purchase price is deposited into the escrow account. When the escrow account is established, you no longer rely on the buyer for the rest of the payment, but on the escrow arrangement. Which means they held another XXXX in the escrow account along with the funds deducted from the initial amount. Which led us further into what accounting means, double bookkeeping entry systems, and all that involved XXXX XXXX, and XXXX. We tracked the account all the way into a Fund held by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX being sold on the market. Which meant that our transaction was a secondary one and that we were never compensated and valuable consideration for the cashable item used by the bank to secure funding. We now know that the application was a cashable item and was pooled with other items and being serviced under XXXX account. Which lead us into how the loan was structured and the identity of all parties. This information was not disclosed to us in anyway. We were unaware of the funds held in escrow by the title company the day of settlement. That they use false misleading business tactics like taking the escrow after the fact to mask what intentions they truly have. We found that banks can not lend there own money. We found that banks are borrowers of the FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM operating circular XXXX. We found that XXXX ( that all banks are XXXX ). We found that banks invest on behalf of customers and investors. We are the customers, our taxpayer identification number was used in this transaction. Which means that this is a tax issue and according to IRS XXXX XXXX. In which the parties involved are falsifying documents submitting and not submitting tax forms using legalese to mislead cause economic harm etc. We have proof of the accounting from an independent audit, and almost positive that once full accounting is obtained we may also conclude all the violations this transaction. With further investigation we found that sharing account information with anyone outside the account holder is a violation major violation according to the FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION etc... We have tried to settle the matter but all the parties involved have provided a safe avenue to redemption of the mortgage. We have a right to equitable redemption. We are the Owners of the accounts all proceeds rights titles interest chattels rents debits credits debentures derivatives. As these company are using unjust enrichment errors of omission, piracy, identity theft, bank XXXX, false tax reporting 's securities reporting financial statements agreements etc. filed with SEC and local and state departments of revenue etc.. So we ask some questions for clarity to foreclosure. \nDefinitions and Resources : FORECLOSURE. To shut out, to bar, to destroy an equity of redemption. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX Okl. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. A termination of all rights of the mortgagor or his grantee in the property covered by the mortgage. XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX \nXXXX, XXXX. \nThe term is also loosely applied to any of the various methods, statutory or otherwise, known in different juris- dictions, of enforcing payment of the debt secured by a mortgage, by taking and selling the mortgaged estate. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX Mortgage XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX So. XXXX, XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX article XXXX definitions : ( XXXX ) \" Adverse claim '' means a claim that a claimant has a property interest in a financial asset and that it is a violation of the rights of the claimant for another person to hold, transfer, or deal with the financial asset. \n( XXXX ) \" Financial asset, '' except as otherwise provided in Section XXXX, means : ( i ) a security ; ( ii ) an obligation of a person or a share, participation, or other interest in a person or in property or an enterprise of a person, which is, or is of a type, dealt in or traded on financial markets, or which is recognized in any area in which it is issued or dealt in as a medium for investment ; or ( as this applies because the XXXX XXXX XXXX ) What is a mortgage? \nXXXX XXXX. Mortgages XXXX Definitions \" The literal meaning of the word \" mortgage '' is \" dead pledge '', XXXX a mortuum vadium. XXXX The term \" mortgage '' XXXX be employed as meaning the debt secured by the mortgage ; XXXX but in its true sense an ordinary mortgage is not a debt, XXXX as the debt is the principle obligation, and the mortgage is generally regarded as merely an incident or accessory to the XXXX A mortgage is an interest in land XXXX created by a written instrument XXXX providing security for the performance of a duty or payment of debt, XXXX and is usually evidenced by a note. XXXX ( do to the lack of signatures by the opposing party only our signatures to the contract are here ) Which makes the contract unenforceable and we sent communications certified mail to the responsible parties with no response from all accept XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX that stated that Fay Servicing is the party that needed to be addressed. They claimed they had no dealings with the transaction. Which was false, and according to the foreclosure case they were directly involved. \n\nThe term qualified mortgage means ( A ) any obligation ( including any participation or certificate of beneficial ownership therein ) which is principally secured by an interest in real property and which ( i ) is transferred to the XXXX on the startup day in exchange for regular or residual interests in the XXXX, ( ii ) is purchased by the XXXX within the XXXX period beginning on the startup day XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX G ) ( A ) ( XXXX ) What is a XXXX? \nXXXX XXXX XXXX : For purposes of this title, the terms real estate mortgage investment conduit and XXXX mean any entity ( XXXX ) to which an election to be treated as a XXXX applies for the taxable year and all prior taxable years, ( XXXX ) as of the close of the XXXX month beginning after the startup day and at all times thereafter, substantially all of the assets of which consist of qualified mortgages and permitted investments, ( B ) Inadvertent terminations If ( i ) an entity ceases to be a XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX : A corporation, trust, or XXXX shall not be considered a real estate investment trust for any taxable year unless ( XXXX ) it files with its return for the taxable year an election to be a real estate investment trust or has made such election for a previous taxable year, and such election has not been terminated or revoked under subsection ( g ) ; What must the XXXX do to foreclose on your property? \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) SPECIAL RULES FOR FORECLOSURE PROPERTY ( XXXX ) FORECLOSURE PROPERTY DEFINED For purposes of this part, the term foreclosure property means any real property ( including interests in real property ), and any personal property incident to such real property, acquired by the real estate investment trust as the result of such trust having bid in such property at foreclosure, or having otherwise reduced such property to ownership or possession by agreement or process of law, after there was default ( or default was imminent ) on a lease of such property or on an indebtedness which such property secured. Such term does not include property acquired by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as a result of indebtedness arising from the sale or other disposition of property of the trust described in section XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) which was not originally acquired as foreclosure property. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) TAXPAYER MUST MAKE ELECTION Property shall be treated as foreclosure property for purposes of this part only if the real estate investment trust so elects ( in the manner provided in regulations prescribed by the Secretary ) on or before the due date ( including any extensions of time ) for filing its return of tax under this chapter for the taxable year in which such trust acquires such property. A real estate investment trust XXXX revoke any such election for a taxable year by filing the revocation ( in the manner provided by the XXXX ) on or before the due date ( including any extension of time ) for filing its return of tax under this chapter for the taxable year. If a trust revokes an election for any property, no election XXXX be made by the trust under this paragraph with respect to the property for any subsequent taxable year. \nWhat regulation are they talking about? lets take a look! \nhttps : XXXX Keep in mind that the taxpayer here is the XXXX, meaning the trustee who presides over the XXXX must XXXX these elections and do everything in his fiduciary power NOT TO COMPROMISE THE TAX STATUS OF THE XXXX! XXXX!! \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( g ) TERMINATION OF ELECTION ( XXXX ) FAILURE TO QUALIFY An election under subsection ( c ) ( XXXX ) made by a corporation, trust, or XXXX shall terminate if the corporation, trust, or association is not a real estate investment trust to which the provisions of this part apply for the taxable year with respect to which the election is made, or for any succeeding taxable year unless paragraph ( XXXX ) applies. Such termination shall be effective for the taxable year for which the corporation, trust, or association is not a real estate investment trust to which the provisions of this part apply, and for all succeeding taxable years. \n( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX election under subsection ( c ) ( XXXX ) made by a corporation, trust, or association XXXX be revoked by it for any taxable year after the first taxable year for which the election is effective. \nA revocation under this paragraph shall be effective for the taxable year in which made and for all succeeding taxable years. Such revocation must be made on or before the XXXX day after the first day of the first taxable year for which the revocation is to be effective. Such revocation shall be made in such manner as the XXXX shall prescribe by regulations. \n( XXXX ) ELECTION AFTER TERMINATION OR REVOCATION Except as provided in paragraph ( XXXX ), if a corporation, trust, or association has made an election under subsection ( c ) ( XXXX ) and such election has been terminated or revoked under paragraph ( XXXX ) or paragraph ( XXXX ), such corporation, trust, or association ( and any successor corporation, trust, or association ) shall not be eligible to make an election under subsection ( c ) ( XXXX ) for any taxable year prior to the fifth taxable year which begins after the first taxable year for which such termination or revocation is effective. \nThe servicer or attorney is liable for the tax, or whoever did not transfer it in time. Keep in mind that if the XXXX takes the defaulted note and transfers it after the 3 month deadline the whole XXXX loses it's tax status. \nHow does a XXXX acquire property? \nFormation and Initial Transfer of Assets : When a XXXX is initially formed, it acquires a pool of mortgages or mortgage-backed assets from a transferor, typically using a trust agreement. This transfer is often part of the XXXX  creation, where the transferor places qualifying mortgages or mortgage-related assets into the XXXX structure XXXX \nForm XXXX, XXXX Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit ( XXXX ) Income Tax Return, is then used by the XXXX to report its income and tax elections but is not required to formally acquire the property. \nForeclosure and XXXX for Foreclosure XXXX : When the XXXX acquires property through foreclosure or similar means ( if a borrower defaults on a mortgage within the XXXX ), it can make an election to treat the property as foreclosure property. This is done on Form XXXX by attaching a statement to the form for the tax year in which the XXXX acquires the property. \nThis election classifies the foreclosed property as foreclosure property, which is important for favorable tax treatment, as it avoids having the income from the property treated as prohibited income for XXXX purposes. \nReporting Requirements : While Form XXXX is the primary reporting form, theres no form specifically required to acquire property into the XXXX. Instead, the acquisition is documented through legal agreements and records with the trust XXXX, often filed in county records for foreclosures. \nSchedule Q ( Form XXXX ) is also used by the XXXX to report information to residual interest holders, including details about the income and property held by the XXXX. \n\nForm XXXX Statement : This statement is an attachment to Form XXXX, XXXX Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit ( XXXX ) Income Tax Return. \nIt includes details about the property that the XXXX acquired through foreclosure and an explicit election under IRC XXXX ( XXXX ) to treat the property as foreclosure property. \nPurpose : This election allows the XXXX to classify the property as foreclosure property for tax purposes, meaning it can avoid taxes on income that would otherwise be considered non-qualifying income. \nForm XXXX : Form XXXX is issued by a lender when there is an acquisition or abandonment of secured property, typically by a financial institution to report the acquisition or abandonment of property to both the IRS and the borrower XXXX \nPurpose : For the XXXX, Form XXXX is relevant only if the XXXX must report the acquisition or abandonment of a secured property ( typically when the borrower defaults and the XXXX acquires XXXX property ). The XXXX might use Form XXXX to document the foreclosure for reporting purposes. \nKey Detail : Form XXXX is sent to the IRS and the borrower, while the election statement attached to Form XXXX is only for the IRS to XXXX the foreclosure property status. \nand now the entire fund has been compromised ..... \nFORM XXXX AND FORM XXXX were issued to the IRS on all the financial institutions involved and all other persons breach of this relationship lack of disclosure etc .... \n\nIn order to transfer or assign a mortgage one must satisfy the mortgage meaning it was paid in exchange for the asset. I notice the fraudulent recording of the mortgage on public record as there were issues with chain of title and recording and by using affiliations and quid pro quo tactics these institutions are stealing properties all across the United States. We have requested an audit from the internal revenue service for the matter. \n\nthe company discharges its obligations with the XXXX Treasury. All deposits notes bills bonds coupon etc ... .as per XXXX prospectus XXXX XXXX company is the registered agent to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX and is now liable for damages we seek... \n\nthis is a tax issue, payment means to perform and these companies did not perform therefore we revoke there power of attorney over the transaction. We have a right to opt of the sharing of our information. These companies have a fiduciary duty to handle these accounts properly and these companies listed are repeat offenders of major violations and have been disciplined as such. Yet they continue to defraud the public interest the government the financial industry etc. The asset has been foreclosed on and sold and threats have been made to us. As we seek equitable relief and to restore our rights we have now begun alerting the property authorities. We pray for relief in the matter In XXXX we trust. \n\nIssues : Lack and Failure of Consideration Failure to Comply with Notice Provisions Failure to Comply with Release Provisions Electing the fraud Remedy Non-justified threats of physical harm, criminal prosecution or financial ruin XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or Benefit Non-waiver Provisions Unclean hands Doctrine Absence of impairment of security tender of payment etc... \n\nFollowing disciplinary actions as to the complaint being made. \nCFPB TAKES ACTION AGAINST FAY SERVICING FOR ILLEGAL FORECLOSURE ACTIONS AND VIOLATING LAW ENFORCEMENT ORDER XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX FOLLOWING THE INVESTIGATION FROM XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS OF ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING LAWS. XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX SPECIAL PURPOSE ENTITIES are powerful financial tools. Can be either on and offshore and normally Off-balance sheet, bankruptcy remote, and illegitimate uses. They can be structures that lend themselves to money laundering, disguised as loans of revenue misstate earning through wash trades, concealment of losses embezzlement and accounting improprieties the asset was granted conveyed and transferred to XXXX XXXX XXXX REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST by the OWNER of FROM THE MUSCLE INVESTMENTS as true owner of the asset. Poa filled with the internal revenue service The account has been pledged and assigned to the XXXX Treasury per XXXX XXXX & XXXX filed in the great state of XXXX XXXX. non XXXX agricultural XXXX... \n\nWe are left at alerting the regulatory authorities for this breach of fiduciary duty and a host of other violations. CFPB, XXXX, SEC, FDIC, FTC, FBI, IRS, TREASURY, XXXX, XXXX, ATTORNEY GENERAL etc .... \n\nwe tried to upload supporting documents but they wont take","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-20T17:59:22.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","zip_code":"191XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10852983","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Fay Servicing, LLC","date_received":"2024-11-20T17:45:46.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Foreclosure"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["FAY SERVICING XXXX claimed that on the first of every month they would <em>retrieve</em> the payment, and then they would return the payment on the XXXX of every month. FAY SERVICING XXXX when asked claimed that they never received the payments and they returned what the did receive <em>during</em> that transaction. But after <em>investigating</em> the transaction with XXXX BANK we concluded that something was not right."]},"sort":[5.1297045,"10852983"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2977738","_score":5.1162634,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"My name is XXXX XXXX and I am sending this message on behalf of my mother, XXXX XXXX XXXX. My mother is XXXX years old and lives with me due to health issues. My mother has XXXX XXXX which has impaired her XXXX XXXX to the point that she has not been able to drive for the past year. My mom has recently been a victim of identity theft and credit card fraud which included unauthorized purchases on her XXXX  credit card that is issued and administered by Wells Fargo. I made contact on XX/XX/XXXX to report the fraud and as of today have yet to receive an appropriate resolution. Since Wells Fargo has yet to provide me with any documentation such as an affidavit of fraud and forgery, I feel it is necessary for me to document the occurrences I have experienced over the last month regarding this issue.\n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX received a call from XXXX XXXX regarding an attempted charge on her XXXX XXXX card. She informed them that she was at home and was not attempting to make any purchases. At that time the representative notified her that they would cancel her card and deny the transaction. At this time we confirmed that all of her credit cards were in her possession.\n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX received a credit card in the mail for a store by the name of XXXX. She immediately showed me the card and stated that she did not even know what store this was. I called the number on the back of the card to report that this card was opened and was not my mother. They informed me that they were closing the card and would send me an affidavit to sign and return stating that this card was not authorized to be opened by her. They also informed us that this card was opened at a store in XXXX and used on the same day for purchases in the amount of {$480.00}.\n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX received a credit card in the mail for a store by name of XXXX. Once again she immediately showed me the card and stated that she had not been to an XXXX store and did not open a card. I called the number on the back of the card to report that this card was opened and was not my mother. They inform due that they were closing the card and would send me an affidavit to sign and return stating that this card was not authorized to be opened by her. They also informed us that the card was opened at a store in XXXX  and was used on the same day for purchases in the amount of $ {$490.00}.\n\nAlso on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX received a credit card statement from XXXX XXXX. This is an active card that she has had for years and has not used it in a very long time. The statement had charges in the amount of $ {$1200.00} ( {$850.00} at a mall in XXXX and {$440.00} at a mall in XXXX   County ).\n\nBased on the events above, we came to the conclusion that we possibly had a bigger problem on our hands. At this time a call was placed to XXXX to place a freeze on her credit so that no other new cards could be opened in her name. The confirmation number is XXXX. They sent notification to the other two credit bureaus. I received notification via mail from XXXX and XXXX acknowledging the freeze. After completing this step, we retrieved XXXX XXXX credit report from XXXX to ensure no other accounts had been opened. Once we determined that there was not any other new accounts, I began to review all of her other accounts online to determine if there was any other unauthorized activity on her other active credit card accounts. Upon that review we identified that a few other accounts had fraud on them : XXXX- {$450.00} on XX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX- {$1100.00} in XXXX  & {$1900.00} in XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. An attempted transaction on the XX/XX/XXXX in XXXX  which the purchase that prompted the call to my mom on that day to inquire if she was attempting to make the charge.\n\nXXXX : XX/XX/XXXX- {$690.00}, {$330.00}, {$120.00}, {$880.00} @ XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX- {$960.00} and {$420.00} @ XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX- {$1000.00}, {$300.00} @ XXXX XXXX XXXX   XX/XX/XXXX- {$780.00} @ XXXX XXXX All of the above Merchants were contacted on XX/XX/XXXX. Everyone with the exception of XXXX/Wells Fargo, provided me with a case number followed up by an affidavit of fraud and forgery to complete and return. Along with notifying the impacted merchants, we also took the liberty to contact all other credit card companies that XXXX XXXX had accounts with. We informed them of her current situation and each one of them recommended that her existing card be closed and new one be issued just to be cautious. They also recommended that we go online and set up any alerts that we possibly could in their online system to receive notification of any future purchases. On cards where that was the option, we set alert limits at {$150.00} to be sent via text and email.\n\nIn regards to the initial claim filed with XXXX/Wells Fargo, I have been less that satisfied with how this has been handled. After my initial call, I received no affidavit of forgery or request for additional information. The first contact we have had with XXXX  after our verbal claim on XX/XX/XXXX was a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX which stated the following- Our investigation shows that the activity was verified at time of the transaction. Any temporary credit you may have received will be reversed and the amount will be reapplied to your balance. On XX/XX/XXXX, I placed a call to XXXX and spoke with someone by the name of XXXX. In speaking with him he stated that the charge in the amount of {$490.00} on XX/XX/XXXX was proven to be valid and that is why the claim was declined. I informed him that we were not disputing the charge @ XXXX in XXXX  on that date or for that amount as that was a valid charge. It was the other nine charges ( listed above ) that were in dispute. I explained that I was very specific with this information when filing the claim on XX/XX/XXXX. He informed me that the claim was filed wrong and the he would have to submit it for reconsideration. He asked if I had filed a police report and I informed him that I had not. Being that this had never happened to us before, we were not sure of what steps needed to be taken completely. He told me at that time that it might help my claim if I was to file a police report. I agreed and stated that I would take that step as soon as we hung up the phone. I expressed to him at that time that I was very disappointed that we were back at square one due to the first agent filing the claim incorrectly. I also asked him why had I not received an affidavit of fraud or forgery as I did with the other impacted merchants. He never answered the question and explained that he was submitting the claim and someone would in contact. On XX/XX/XXXX, I called to inquire about the status of the claim. Initially I spoke with an agent by the name of XXXX. Somehow were disconnected so I called back and spoke with an agent by the name of XXXX. In speaking with him he stated that he would resubmit the claim and I should hear back within 7-10 days. I questioned if XXXX and done so upon speaking with him on XX/XX/XXXX, why would he need to do the same thing? This made me question whether XXXX had completed what he promised he would do when we spoke. At this time I had filed a police report so I provided XXXX  with that number. After my interaction with XXXX, I hung up but did not feel good about the conversation or how it appeared that XXXX  did not do what he promised. XXXX did not ask for the officers number or the police station that I filed the claim. I called back and spoke with an agent by the name of XXXX. I asked to speak with a manager in which she stated that there was not one on site. I asked if she was in a call center in which she replied yes. I stated that I found it hard to believe that there was not one on site. She changed her statement saying that one was not available. I explained why I needed to speak with one in which she recommended that I contact the Executive Offices. She provided me with that information and we ended our interaction. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a call from XXXX  with the Executive Offices. I explained the situation to her and after speaking with XXXX XXXX to confirm that I am handling this on her behalf, she listed to complaint further. Once again, I expressed concern that no affidavit of forgery was sent to us allowing us the chance to formally dispute the charges. She did not speak to why this was the case but once again assured that this would be reviewed and that I would hear something within 10 days. For the first time since reporting this issue on XX/XX/XXXX, I received a tracking number # XXXX. XXXX  informed me that the research analyst assigned to this case would be XXXX XXXX. She provided me with her number and her ext in the event that I had any questions/concerns. Most recently, I received a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX stating the following, The fraud department has advised us that your claim has been denied. However, you may have this decision reconsidered. On XX/XX/XXXX, I made contact with XXXX  and she informed me that the case was actually being researched by XXXX XXXX but that she was out of the office. XXXX then took the time to review the file and informed me that she was going to open a new case ( ID XXXX ). She asked me to email and to fax over any statement of supporting information that would support my claim and request for reconsideration. I expressed my frustrations with her and ONCE again questioned why I had not received an affidavit of fraud or forgery to sign. Just like the other agents I have spoken with, she did not address that concern but instead apologized for my experience and assured me that she would try to help. During this conversation she informed me that due to a new case number being assigned, they would need to have my mothers permission to speak to them on her behalf regarding this issue ( regardless of the fact that this had been obtained multiple times since XX/XX/XXXX ) and by the Executive Offices on XX/XX/XXXX. She explained that this was policy and I expressed that I felt this was another attempt of XXXX/Wells Fargo to prolong the investigation and to complicate matter for my mother to find resolution. XXXX XXXX was out of town on XX/XX/XXXX when I spoke with XXXX  and I informed her that she would return on XX/XX/XXXX and we would make the call as soon as she returned. This called was placed and a message was left for XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX XXXX. I would also like to note that when speaking with XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, I stated that my payment was due on XX/XX/XXXX. I asked if I need to make the minimum payment and I was told no since the account was under review. Due to this, no payment was made. I received my statement for this month and it shows a past due balance due to no payment last month. I will be making the minimum payments this week as I acknowledge the charge of {$490.00} conducted on XX/XX/XXXX @ XXXX  was my mothers. I do request that the late fee be refunded and that it not reflected as late on her credit due to misinformation.\n\nAs you can see from the narrative above, a lot of time has been spent regarding this issue ( especially with XXXX/Wells Fargo ). Other merchants/credit cards companies have been very communicative and diligent in the handling of this issue. XXXX  had already concluded their investigation and have sent a letter stating that the matter is closed and resolved. Attached to this email are the following : 1 ) Letters from XXXX   and XXXX showing that contact was made to place a freeze on XXXX XXXX credit.\n\n2 ) Letter from XXXX XXXX regarding the XXXX account that was opened as part of identify fraud. This letter shows that the investigation is closed and there is NO liability.\n\n3 ) Video still image from XXXX  police showing the individual who opened the account at XXXX  in XXXX XXXX name.\n\n4 ) Copy of XXXX XXXX Drivers license.\n\n5 ) Copy of Police report filed with the XXXX PD. It was filed on XX/XX/XXXX with Officer XXXX @ XXXX. Police report number is XXXX. When speaking with Officer XXXX, he stated that he would forward my case to the other precincts on my behalf. Soon after, I did receive a call from XXXX PD- Officer XXXX XXXX . His phone number is XXXX and the case number is XXXX.\n\nAs I have stated multiple times, XXXX XXXX is willing to visit any XXXX  or Wells Fargo location to identify herself and to sign any affidavit necessary to resolve this matter. If she is familiar with who the individual is after reviewing pictures/video, she is more than willing to provide information and to prosecute. This claim has been denied twice ( once due to the first claim being filed incorrectly ) and is now under review for a third time under a new case number. I am asking that any documentation that can be obtained via video or otherwise, be used along with the information that I have provided to clear this case. If this case is to be declined a third time I am requesting the following : Contact number to the highest representative in the Executive Office.\n\nDetails of any efforts made along with and specific information obtained from the transaction to reach an unfavorable conclusion ( including any footage obtained from store ).\n\nDocumentation on what is protocol within your organization once someone reports fraud ( what is required of the customer and how is this communicated ).\n\nAttorney name and address to forward any legal correspondence to.\n\nName and contact of individual at Wells and XXXX  to forward all media inquires to.\n\nI appreciate your assistance in helping to resolve this issue as quickly as possible. If there are any additional questions or request for documentation- please feel free to contact XXXX XXXX at XXXX or myself at XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-07-31T22:25:26.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"Store credit card","zip_code":"75075","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2977738","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2018-07-31T22:10:21.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am asking that any documentation that can be obtained via video or otherwise, be used <em>along</em> with the information that I have provided to clear this case. If this case is to be declined a third time I am requesting the following : Contact number to the highest representative in the Executive Office.\n\nDetails of any efforts made <em>along</em> with and specific information obtained from the transaction to reach an unfavorable conclusion ( including any footage obtained from store )."]},"sort":[5.1162634,"2977738"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6555564","_score":4.8288403,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Consumer XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Georgia XXXX XXXX only XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX WELLS FARGO Bank - XXXX XXXX Attn : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Georgia Re : Identity Theft concerns at WELLS FARGO BANK and the settlement agreement with U.S. Dept of Justice to pay customers for internal fee overcharges In America , free trade is intended to benefit the economy, businesses, as well as individual consumers with fair and honest transactions. Anti-Trust Laws are federal legislation intended to inhibit activities of large, well-funded, and highly networked American business enterprises from taking an overly aggressive and/or unfair advantage because of their size and networked organization within the business environment and financial markets. Entities such as banks and large corporations typically fall in this category. \n\nIn unison, these malicious and clandestine behaviors are continuous, collaborated, networked and intentional acts of discriminatory practices, cultural bias/prejudice, and other XXXX behaviors of XXXX AMERICAN business and public officials ( and their associates ) to financially harass, harm, and inhibit XXXX AMERICAN real property, land, and business-ownership. \n\n***SPECIAL NOTE*** As the Personal Representative of the XXXX XXXX XXXX, I, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX focused on securing access and all property rights to marshal my father 's estate assets for probate especially his real property situated at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Georgia XXXX XXXX which is my personal residential home and my primary business location. I have never surrendered my equity, my access, or my rights to this property or any of my fathers asset properties. ***This Special Note is repeated for emphasis. *** On XX/XX/XXXX, Consumer Reporter XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, detailed in her report that Wells Fargo customers were victimized with illegal practices that cheated customers on car loans, mortgages, and banking accounts by WELLS FARGO. According to Consumer Financial Protections Bureau ( CFPB ), a U.S. government agency, more than XXXX XXXX Wells Fargo accounts were subjected to these internal illegal practices. \n\nBusiness Reporter XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, published on XX/XX/XXXX, that court documents indicated that Wells Fargo defrauded customers between XXXX and XXXX. As I listened closely to news reports about my bank, I was amazed at the information. These reports fed my spirit as they explained so much. The negative Customer Service issues I experienced in recent years and on Thursday, XX/XX/XXXX, must be documented to hold Wells Fargo accountable to the court settlements so that I can be compensated for the losses I have suffered. \n\nThis message details how my relevant concerns from Thursday, XX/XX/XXXX, are consistent with the crimes Wells Fargo XXXX committed and was found guilty of as prosecuted by the U.S. Department of Justice ( US-DOJ ) with input from the CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU XXXX CFPB ). In XXXX settlement, Wells Fargo is currently under court order to repay its customers {$3.00} XXXXillion for overcharged fees and other losses. In a different settlement, Wells Fargo has been ordered to pay {$37.00} million in fines for overcharging some customers. The U.S. Dept of Justice believes Wells Fargo created a work environment and culture where defrauding or otherwise taking advantage of customers became normal business practice. \n\nCurrently, I have XXXX accounts open and active at Wells Fargo that I will continue to use. I am not closing my accounts so that I can continue to pay my bills, and I can remain engaged in the accountability process of the U.S. Dept of Justice with input from the CFPB. \n\nAlso, to protect my rights and my positive credit status, and to inhibit any new/other potential harms due to inappropriate use of my PII by Wells Fargo staff , an Identity Theft complaint has been filed with the Federal Trade Commission XXXX FTC ) along with subsequent complaints filed with the CFPB and XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to be bound together with other previously filed complaints to be considered XXXX document. The activities described herein are as they occurred on XX/XX/XXXX, in the WELLS FARGO location on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Georgia and is the triggering event for this complaint. This message is written to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX attention. \n\n***SPECIAL NOTE*** As the Personal Representative of the XXXX XXXX XXXX, I, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX focused on securing access and all property rights to marshal my father 's estate assets for probate especially his real property situated at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Georgia XXXX XXXX which is my personal residential home and my primary business location. I have never surrendered my equity, my access, or my rights to this or any of my fathers assets properties. ***This Special Note is repeated for emphasis. *** XXXX XXXX, since you are the Branch Manager of the WELLS FARGO on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Georgia XXXX I regularly bank, this message is sent to your attention for follow-up and intervention where necessary. Due to the actions your staff put upon me and my accounts on Thursday, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, please be advised that an Identity Theft complaint was file on Monday, XX/XX/XXXX, with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) that names Wells Fargo staff in your branch as violators who used my Personally Identifiable Information ( PII ) without my permission. I am a customer of Wells Fargo for many years and the quality of service has declined significantly. I have had to file numerous account and fee-related complaints. I have submitted numerous requests for investigation of concerns for potential fraud in recent years. The settlement with the U.S. Dept of Justice explains it all. Details in this letter fine tune my points. \n\nMy Wells Fargo banking accounts have been affected with overdraft fees even as the funds were available, or the check had been paid. Even though my no fee accounts met the criteria for no monthly fee to be assessed, a monthly fee suddenly started to be taken, and is still being taken out of my accounts. A couple of my accounts were closed by the bank for lack of use or no reason at all during the Pandemic. Previous vendors were given access to my accounts to allow payments for charges I did not authorize. Even after I notified the vendor and the bank that ANY pre-authorized access was no longer granted, Wells Fargo still allowed vendors to be paid for charges I did not authorize. Sometimes the funds were put back into my account immediately, then months later taken out again. During XXXX, over {$300.00} was taken from my XXXX account without any prior notice to me. These transactions happened all the time. \n\nConsistent with previously filed Identity Theft, Civil Rights, and mail fraud/ mail mismanagement complaints I filed against local public official and the U.S. postal service employees, Wells Fargo staff repeatedly started to fail to list my residential and mailing address correctly as I requested. At that time, I was unaware these actions were malicious and deliberate. In collusion with others seeking to steal my identity as the legitimate possessor/occupant of my fathers property, Wells Fargo staff tried to change my identity to be associated with my residential address since XXXX. This distraction started a few years ago, shortly after my fathers death and after several years of quality service where my address was no issue. Banks are furnishers of information that would impact the address on a credit history. \n\nThis simple task seemed to stump them until recently I shared that the address issues only existed within a specific region for Wells Fargo in Georgia. Everywhere else no problems. The tall man at the main Customer Service desk at the entrance of your branch was the person who cleaned up my address for accurate delivery of my mail as I needed to re-order and finally receive a XXXX  Debit Card. Submitting my address correctly worked. \n\nApparently, my fiduciary efforts to protect my fathers estate assets led to the discovery of clandestine diversionary tactics by XXXX  AMERICAN bad actors in government, in banking, and in the U.S. postal service to reveal a corporately applied agenda to facilitate illegitimate and illegal state, judicial, or financial takeovers of XXXX XXXX real property, land, businesses, and other financial assets such as with the XXXX XXXX XXXX that I administer. As the natural daughter and Personal Representative of XXXX XXXX XXXX, these actions become relevant to this Identity Theft claim against Wells Fargo. What your staff did was guided by XXXX AMERICAN supervisors with focus on the bigger picture of Civil Rights violations UPON people of XXXX at the hands of people of XXXX. \n\nBut for the guidance of XXXX AMERICAN executives, these violations of law inside the Wells Fargo Bank would not be possible. In unison, such practices are discriminatory to harm a specific class of AMERICAN CITIZENS as they violate U.S. Anti-Trust laws and are hereby submitted to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for review, oversight, and referral for additional investigation and legal intervention. \n\nXXXX example that I personally experienced : On XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I spoke with Wells Fargo XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in the same office where XXXX XXXX and I XXXX. XXXX XXXX, a XXXX AMERICAN, interjected herself in my Customer Service visit and openly lied to me several times regarding my accounts. Her efforts were an attempt to trick me into paying Wells Fargo over {$400.00} that I did not owe just to replace a compromised account. Her focus was to harm my access to open other accounts within Wells Fargo and at other banksunless I paid the {$400.00}. Though it was a struggle for me, before I left that day my discussion, my documents, and my attention to details resolved most of that extortion agendabut not all. I saved those notes too. \n\nYour Branch Operations XXXX, XXXX XXXX, is aware of my other Identity Theft concerns as a Civil Rights matter. XX/XX/XXXX, I came into the branch to order a new debit card. On that visit to the XXXX XXXX XXXX branch, XXXX XXXX and I had a long and detailed conversation in a branch office regarding excessive overreach of CAUCASIAN AMERICAN public officials and how their behaviors have impacted my personal and business outcomes as I serve to protect my fathers estate. The detailed document of the complaint I submitted XX/XX/XXXX, to the Dept of Justice care of both Georgia XXXX is published on my XXXX XXXX  website ( XXXX : XXXX ). XXXX received my website information ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) with an invitation to visit my educational platform, and to read for background on the youth group initiative. She asked me to adjust the age range to include her son. XXXX shared her personal email and phone number with me for that purpose. I still have those notes as well. \n\nXXXX XXXX, despite the judgments and fines recently announced against WELLS FARGO, this message details my experience on Thursday, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, in the XXXX branch ( XXXX XXXX ) on XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX branch that you manage. After seeing the news reports and based upon my experiences, I would not be surprised to find that most of the Wells Fargo customers affected in the U.S. DOJ/CFPB settlement are disproportionality XXXX AMERICAN. Your staff continued the abuse previously adjudicated in a federal court as if no ruling had ever been issued as I came into the bank to cash a Wells Fargo check written to me. With all the previously noted issues and several debit cards that were delayed or not delivered by the U.S. Postal Service, I did not want to process the check through my account. I was told I had to use my account to get a Cashiers check and I had to pay a fee ( $ XXXX Cashiers check ). \n\nPer the settlement that WELLS FARGO made with the U.S. Dept of Justice and the CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU ( CFPB ), this message is sent to notify Wells Fargo of my expectation of a settlement refund for all my financial losses due to excessive fees, inappropriate overdrafts, and other overreach incidents regarding all financial products and services-current and inactive. Also known as a CHARGEBACK, a settlement refund amount due to me accumulated over a period of years. I have filed numerous inhouse complaints with Wells Fargo. I expect nothing less than the full value not only for the actual financial losses, but I want compensation for the excessive time energy and money it took to remain solvent and stable in an illegitimate storm of deliberate confusion intended to steal my fathers real property estate asset. \n\nSince I had been in that branch and conducted business several times in the past, I thought I had built a cordial, faith-based rapport with XXXX ( Teller ) and XXXX Tookes XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX ). To keep from repeating myself across others in line and to increase privacy, I write a detailed note for bank tellers to read my banking needs for the day. This is my usual practice. \n\nA few minutes into my transactions they both ( XXXX and XXXX ) began to gaslight me with accusations of contentious and uncooperative behavior after they asked to hold my Drivers License in their hands, and when I said no. Even though I held it for them to view, both immediately became aggressive even trying to bully me to let them hold my it in their hand. XXXX even turned her face away to deny my banking needs with service refusal. Based upon my past encounters at other branches, this request was not standard procedure. When I present my bank issued debit or ATM card, my bank card verifies me. During and since the XXXX Pandemic, I prefer to hold my documents. At times, I could tell that they were communicating with someone over my shoulder-behind me, but I have no idea of who it was. My business was in front of me, so I was watching them. Im sure your bank has cameras if that information becomes an issue. \n\nTo get through the transaction, I inserted my bank card into the kiosk per usual procedure. I eventually gave my Driver License over to them because they threatened to not provide any banking service. As my banking transaction was being processed, I asked for my license back. XXXX XXXX was discourteous and contentious as she abruptly returned my id. When I was asked to confirm my transaction as correct and complete, initially it was not according to my request. My name was listed incorrectly. XXXX corrected that issue. \n\nThen suddenly, the printer went into reboot mode just as my documents were called for print, but it had just printed a check for another customers request. Ironically, XXXX happen to be standing near that printer. Both, XXXX and XXXX XXXX, repeatedly assured me that my documents ( Cashiers Checks associated with my account ) are valid when I questioned the printers sudden breakdown. \n\nNext, I noticed XXXX and XXXX XXXX set about completing another form on XXXX terminal without telling me what was happening. My drivers license was again requested to complete something they both said was required but gave me no clear details. I hesitantly returned it to them. I was asked to confirm the address on my Drivers License as it was held up possibly for someone behind me to see. It appeared that my license was being held up for someone behind me to see more than for me to see it. The Drivers License was not actually pointed in my direction. \n\nAnother damming indicator of PII abuse was their production and use of my Social Security number. XXXX of them wrote my SSN on the back of my note. I think it was the XXXX XXXX XXXX handwriting. Not only did I NOT GIVE my SSN to them ( in the Teller line ), neither of them asked for it from me. That information was obviously retrieved from my stored bank account profile by the XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nShe wrote my SSN on the back of my original transaction request note. Again, I did not provide nor authorize the use of my Social Security number on a form that I had no knowledge of. She returned my note by laying it face up on top of the teller counter with my SSN showing. Im sure the bank security cameras will verify my statements. I still have the note I wrote with my SSN in their handwriting on the back. They said the form was regarding my transactions, but they did not give me any specific details. \n\nI usually keep the back of my license covered to protect my identity so when I saw them open the back, I asked that the cover be closed. Their banking tasks did not require access to the back of my Drivers License. Both gruffed and complained as they accepted my direction. As I waited for my documents and my transaction receipts to be given to me, I felt uncomfortably vulnerable. They were already trying to gaslight my actions to be difficult, so I said very little. I felt violated as I watched my Personally Identifiable Information ( PII ) was being used for a purpose that I was not being informed of as if I had knowledge when I did not. Before exiting the teller counter, I slowly counted and recounted all my documents and checked my transactions to give time for them to share what/why my PII, especially my Social Security number was used for. They said nothing. \n\nThe XXXX XXXX, XXXX, actions of Wells Fargo personnel noted in this complaint are consistent with my previous Civil Rights complaints to include XXXX XXXX. Pandemic-related Fraud and other fraud-related overreach by XXXX  AMERICAN public officials, and USPS delivery fails. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX I filed a Civil Rights complaint into the U.S. Dept of JusticeXXXX XXXX XXXX against XXXX local elected officials of XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Georgia who refused to do their jobs and, thereby, exposed me and my father, XXXX XXXX, to multiple incidents of colluded harassment for the illegal encroachment of his real property assets. As I serve to probate my fathers estate, my complaint was submitted individually and through the offices of XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. That XXXXpage document is posted on my website ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) as My Story for full cultural disclosure. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX filed an I.D . Theft/Fraud complaint against Georgia XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ( FTC Report XXXX XXXX ). \n\nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX filed an I.D . XXXX complaint against the U.S. Post Office XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA ( FTC Report XXXX XXXX ). All subsequent and future complaints are to be bound together as XXXX Civil Rights matter ( id # XXXX ) documented by XXXX XXXX XXXX of the XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nMonday, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, I filed an Identity Theft complaint against Wells Fargo-XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXXbranch personnel specifically ( FTC Report # XXXX XXXX .. To protect my rights, the FTC requires follow-up letters be sent to notify furnishers of information to stop collection proceedings against me. In the case with Wells Fargo, to stop the harassment of my financial access -internal and external-, and to give my Wells Fargo bank accounts responsible oversight to prevent future unauthorized losses especially as directed by the settlement agreement with the U.S. Dept of Justice in association with the CFPB. This Wells Fargo Identity Theft Letter includes a copy of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureaus Notice to Furnishers of Information is attached.\n\nAltogether, the tactics of public officers and their relevant agencies exposes a corporately applied agenda to facilitate the illegitimate and illegal state, judicial, or financial, takeover of XXXX AMERICAN-owned real property, land, businesses, and other financial assets such as the assets of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX As I fulfill my responsibilities as Personal Representative, not only are these practices discriminatory they violate U.S. Anti-Trust laws to harm a specific group of Americans as a practice of discrimination. The outcome inhibits the growth of XXXX AMERICAN wealth and stable prosperity like a XXXX century version of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX but quieter, clandestine, insidious with technological advancements. \n\nAs part of my XXXX XXXX teachings, I am aware of other XXXX AMERICAN property/ land and business-owners who are similarly affected. Upon encouragement, they are filing their own Civil Rights complaints with the Justice Department to establish that the pattern of discriminatory practice, cultural bias/prejudices, and other XXXX behaviors exist in an Anti-Trust fashion. \n\nMy federal complaint summary and primary impact statement is as follows : Discovery of clandestine diversionary tactics by CAUCASIAN AMERICANS in govt, banking, and the U.S. postal service reveal a corporately applied agenda to facilitate illegitimate and illegal state, judicial, and/or financial takeovers of XXXX AMERICAN-owned real property, land, businesses assets. In unison, such practices are discriminatory to harm a specific class of AMERICAN CITIZENS and violate U.S. Anti-Trust laws. This XX/XX/XXXX, complaint against Wells Fargo ( FTC Report # XXXX ) is consistent with the Civil Rights complaints from XXXX XXXX XXXX, M.Ed. on XX/XX/XXXX, submitted to US-DOJ against XXXX XXXX  AMERICAN public officials care of XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I.D . XXXX complaint against Georgia Dept XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ( FTC Report XXXX XXXX ) ; I.D . XXXX complaint against the XXXX Post XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA ( FTC Report # XXXX XXXX. All documents submitted to the U.S. Dept. of Justice are to be bound together and tagged with US-DOJ Reference id XXXX as if they are XXXX document of evidence. Thank you. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. \n\nIn closing XXXX XXXX, would you please transmit this message and the attachments to upline WELLS FARGO Corporate Fraud Oversight staff, and/or whomever remits payments to bank customers impacted by the U.S.-DOJ/CFPB court ordered settlements/claims so that my restitution check, or chargeback be process and delivered to me? A PDF copy of this message is attached to emailed messages. \n\nSincere regards, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX GA XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Georgia XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX-under separate covers : XXXX. XXXX XXXX and XXXX. XXXX XXXX, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau % Senator XXXX XXXX U.S. Dept of Justice-XXXX XXXX XXXX Federal Trade Commission XXXX FTC ) ( FTC Report XXXX XXXX, re : Wells Fargo XXXX XXXX, GA ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Reference id # XXXX )","date_sent_to_company":"2023-02-14T14:48:22.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Other banking product or service","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6555564","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2023-02-10T22:12:51.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Banking errors"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Also, to protect my rights and my positive credit status, and to inhibit any new/other potential harms due to inappropriate use of my PII by Wells Fargo staff , an Identity Theft complaint has been filed with the Federal Trade Commission XXXX FTC ) <em>along</em> with subsequent complaints filed with the CFPB and XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to be bound together with other previously filed complaints to be considered XXXX <em>document</em>."]},"sort":[4.8288403,"6555564"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3147072","_score":4.781143,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Good Morning : To whom it may concern : I am requesting that this Claim be reopened and that XXXX should be reviewed with accuracy and diligence. I have not been given the chance to argue the validity of this claim because we just received our letter from B of A this week. By that time B of A already closed this claim. That is a great in justice considering how long you had the case open, never the less I have evidence that I could have presented to B of A to prove my innocence. I can not get the necessary information to fully defend myself from B of A or XXXX IE all information on all items that I am claiming fraud for and old account information from XXXX which showed the items being ordered what I have ordered, profile information to include the email of the perpetrator and fraudulent information that was entered by the perpetrator before my account was re-established on XX/XX/XXXX because XXXX has taken this information off my account and it is no longer viewable. I am requesting that B of A demand this information from XXXX based on disclosing necessary information based on the freedom of information act. \nThe first thing I want to talk about is where I was during the time these purchases were made. It would be impossible for me to have made any type of order from the XXXX to the XXXX of XXXX because I was on a long range fishing trip out of XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX from XXXX AM on XX/XX/XXXX to XXXX AM on the XXXX as noted by page XXXX of the enclosed documents to include the Manifest, the Receipt for the trip, and an email from XXXX XXXX stating there was no internet service where the boat went which was over XXXX miles due West from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I have also enclosed a leave request to go on vacation to fish out of XXXX XXXX and it is digitally signed by my boss XXXX XXXX. If you have any more questions about this please contact XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX or my boss at XXXX. As noted on XXXX number XXXX the order was placed on XX/XX/XXXXXX/XX/2018. This also means that I would have not been there for pick up on the delivery date of XX/XX/2018. I have also never used overnight shipping or accelerated ( Express ) shipping. I have also never ordered multiple items in this qty. I have also never placed such a large order in $ amount that was done on this order that is part of the profile of this order. Does not fit me and it was not me. Also, the emails sent to work address never allowed me to address these items being ordered. The perpetrator ordered the items on the XXXX and received the items on the XXXX where he picked them up at my address either off the front porch or off of the truck. The delivery trucks in my neighborhood have been delivering items to people just standing outside in front of house without checking ids or where they live from time to time also. I came back from the fishing trip on the XXXX of XXXX a Sunday and returned to work on the XXXX of XXXX By this time it was too late for me to address these issues. I would have not been looking for these items either since I did know they were ordered because I was on a fishing trip. \nThe second thing I would like to address is the fact that XXXX knows my account was compromised. Monday on the XXXX when I got back to work from my fishing trip and looked at the unauthorized purchases on my bank account, I called XXXX. I also tried to log in on XXXX at which time I could not because the perpetrator changed the password and other items ( such as my email to his email because I saw it after I got to log in with the aid of XXXX ) in my profile. I told XXXX about this so they should know that my account was compromised. XXXX then verified who I was and then helped me to restore my account. I have 5 emails from XXXX showing the perpetrator trying to get into my account before he ordered the merchandise and I was on the fishing trip. After the 5th time of password resets the perpetrator starting ordering the merchandise. I would have addressed the password resets with temporary passwords if I was at work on the XXXX but I was on the fishing trip and the emails were sent to my work email. I am enclosing these emails pages 6-10 of the enclosed documents. Page 6 shows the perpetrator trying log in and having problems at XXXX am on the XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX, therefore ; a password reset was sent to my email at work at which time I was on the fishing trip. It also mentions in page 6 that the perpetrator answered the security questions wrong and was denied. But it mentioned that the perpetrator should call for assistance. Page 7 shows the perpetrator trying to attempt to register his device on my account. He was also having problems doing this at XXXX am on the XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX which still places me on the fishing trip. XXXX provided a temp password to my email account which the perpetrator did not get because it was sent to my work email and I was on the fishing trip. Page 8 shows again the perpetrator having problems registering a device at XXXX XXXX on the XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX this is the same scenario as found on page 7. I was on the fishing trip. Page 9 is similar also done at XXXX am on the XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX. I was on the fishing trip. Page 10 also is the same as page 8 done at XXXX am on the XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX. I was on the fishing trip. \nPage 11 will show the perpetrator attempting to order a gift card for XXXX dollars. This was not allowed by XXXX, never the less an attempt was made by the same perpetrator at XXXX pm on the XXXX of XXXX once again I was on the fishing trip. This order also shows an email I do not recognize of XXXX. XXXX recognize this email never used it. Who is this? \nPage 12 will show the perpetrator trying to order a XXXX $ gift card. I was never charged this but I just wanted to bring up the phone number on this order of XXXX XXXX be worth investigating. I have not tried to call this number either because I do not want to tip this person off! Why was this sent to this phone number who is this? Never the less, it was ordered under my account because I got the email for it. It was done on the XXXX of XXXX PM which at this time I had reset my account and re-established with XXXX I dont get this one who is this? \nNow, I want to discuss the receipt of the items on which a confirmation email was sent to my email which I was not aware of because I was on the fishing trip and did not see these emails until I got back to work on the XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX on my work email. The perpetrator used my account and had them delivered to my address and either got them off of the XXXX or off of my front porch. I dont know but I dont have these items and never ordered them! Plus my wife was at her Mother in Laws from the morning until the evening of the XXXX of XXXX when the items got delivered because she wanted to spend time with her mother I will submit a statement from her mother and boyfriend stating she was at their house when the items got delivered. She would have stayed at home if we knew that these items where coming in, but we had no way of knowing that because somebody else ordered these items not me not my wife and emails were sent to my work email that were delivered to my work email while I was out fishing! Page 13 XXXX camera arriving the XXXX. Do not have the tracking number because B of A only sent me the tracking number and details for the XXXX DVD player. Dont have this item and never ordered it. It would help if I had complete information on all of the items tracking number and when they were bought this information has not been made available to me which should be disclosed to me by rights of the freedom of information act. How can I prove my case on incomplete data /information provided to me to me by B of A!!!! I am not going to discuss all of items they are all similar to page 13, however I can discuss order number XXXX XXXX Audio DVD Player for {$100.00} ( Pages 14-17 ) because this is the only item out of 9 items I get to respond to because B of A only sent me information on this item. First of all the order date was XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX. I was fishing. Second, item delivered on XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX. I was fishing and my wife was staying with her mother in law from the morning until the evening I will provide a letter from my mother in law and her boyfriend stating that she was there. Third, XXXX XXXX, as stated earlier the perpetrator was trying to register devices as noted on page 6-10 so is it out of the question to assume that in the long run he got to register his device and order the merchandise with his device and also change the password and email in my profile. I also checked my router IP with check my I.P. on the internet that is connected to my router and what came up was XXXX. XXXX, therefore ; I would challenge XXXX on the possibility that this IP belongs to a different device/router than mine because I have emails that shows the perpetrator trying to register devices under my account. Next, XXXX knows when I got back on the XXXX that my account was compromised, I could not even log in and there was information changed in my profile like an email that I did not even recognize. XXXX has deleted all the information from the ordering of this merchandise from my account and I can not talk to the fraud department at XXXX. I demand once again that B of A request all old information pertaining to this merchandise and my account as it was before I could check it and re-establish my account on the XXXX of XX/XX/2018 from XXXX. The only thing they can tell me to do is to put in a claim with my bank ( B of A ) once again this is a violation of the freedom of information act. Since these unauthorized charges occurred on my account, XXXX reestablished my account with me with a different password on the XXXX of XXXX XXXX. Next, I noticed on the last page of the documentation that it says that the Carrier ( XXXX ) was notified to pick up package? Was this somebody telling XXXX to pick up the package so it could be delivered? Finally, on the provided documentation last page it says item delivered on XXXX XXXX at XXXX PM. My wife was at her Mother in Laws which once again I will provide a statement for that, and I was fishing. My wife would have been at home if she was expecting a package for sure we do not let items lay on our patio if we know they are coming in but we had no way of knowing these items were coming in. So what were the times of the other items that were delivered on XXXX XXXX XXXX I have not been provided information on that so I can not make a statement on the other items!!! \nThe next item ( Page 18 ) I would like to discuss is the location of my wife on the XXXX of XXXX, XXXX. This document shows that my wife was with her mother in law at address XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CA XXXX. She was there from early morning XXXX till the evening time at which time she returned home and noticed no packages on the porch. I was out fishing at this time. If we know a package is coming to our house we will make an effort to stay home until the package arrives. We did not make arrangements for these packages because we did not order them or know they were being delivered! \nThe next item will show that I filed an identity theft report with the Federal Trade Commission. Please note for your records. Pages 19-20. \nThe next item page 21 will show that the perpetrator tried to attempt to buy the XXXX XXXX DVD player and got declined at XXXX am on the XXXX of XX/XX/2018, he later then was successful on ordering this item on the XXXX I dont know what time because XXXX has withheld this information along which all the other information that is pertinent to this case. \nThe next item page 22. This is the first day that I noticed fraud on my B of A account from XXXX. This letter is very generic because on this day my account was re-established because my password did not work to get into my account. This is the first day I contacted XXXX about the fraud. After I got into my account I noticed other information on my profile had been changed IE email address and some other things. In accordance with the freedom of information act I am requesting this information from XXXX. I want the account information as shown right before I reestablished my account on the the XXXX of XXXX, XXXX. This information is important and necessary to show the items that were changed in my profile during that time. I told XXXX about the information that had been change but I am no longer able to retrieve this information being withheld by XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-02-08T21:32:49.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"93536","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3147072","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2019-02-08T20:23:41.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This information is important and necessary to show the items that were changed in my profile <em>during</em> that time. I told XXXX about the information that had been change but I am no longer able to <em>retrieve</em> this information being withheld by XXXX."]},"sort":[4.781143,"3147072"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":31,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":31}]}},"product":{"doc_count":31,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":8,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":7},{"key":"Other banking product or service","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Auto debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":1},{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","doc_count":2},{"key":"Conventional fixed mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Domestic (US) money transfer","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid 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":1},{"key":"Store credit card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Lease","doc_count":1},{"key":"Loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":31,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":5,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Banking errors","doc_count":1},{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":1},{"key":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed","doc_count":1},{"key":"Problem accessing account","doc_count":1},{"key":"Problem using a debit or ATM card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":4,"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":3},{"key":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":2},{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":3,"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":3}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Repossession","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account reinstatement or redemption after repossession","doc_count":1},{"key":"Lender trying to repossess or disable the vehicle","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":"Foreclosure","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Closing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Funds not received from closed account","doc_count":1}]}},{"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":"Public record information inaccurate","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Loan servicing, payments, escrow account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"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":"Other transaction problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problem caused by your funds being low","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Overdrafts and overdraft fees","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":"Investigation took more than 30 days","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":"Transaction was not authorized","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Seized or attempted to seize your property","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":31,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":30},{"key":"No","doc_count":1}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":31,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":22},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":6},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":3}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":31,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":31}]}},"company":{"doc_count":31,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":5},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":4},{"key":"ALLY FINANCIAL INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Fay Servicing, LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":2},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"Aldridge PIte Haan, LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Chime Financial Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Stellantis Financial Services US Corp.","doc_count":1},{"key":"TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"U.S. BANCORP","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":31,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":7},{"key":"GA","doc_count":3},{"key":"KY","doc_count":3},{"key":"PA","doc_count":3},{"key":"TX","doc_count":3},{"key":"FL","doc_count":2},{"key":"MI","doc_count":2},{"key":"AK","doc_count":1},{"key":"MO","doc_count":1},{"key":"NV","doc_count":1},{"key":"NY","doc_count":1},{"key":"OK","doc_count":1},{"key":"PR","doc_count":1},{"key":"TN","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":31,"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":17},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":2}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":31,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":4},{"key":"Servicemember","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":{"2":[4.781143,"3147072"]}}}