{"took":194,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":273,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18943245","_score":25.97276,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I disputed XXXX unauthorized fraudulent transactions on my Discover credit card that occurred in XXXX XXXX. These were not made by me or anyone authorized to use my card. \nI promptly reported the fraud to Discover and provided evidence supporting that the charges were fraudulent ( including any relevant details like transaction dates, amounts, and merchant names if available, or descriptions of why they were unauthorized ). I requested a full investigation, including review of my evidence and contact with the merchant ( s ) for verification.\n\nHowever, Discover closed the investigation immediately without conducting any meaningful review. They admitted it was a mistake on their part and confirmed they did not investigate properly, they did not examine the evidence I submitted, did not contact the merchant ( s ), and did not follow standard fraud dispute procedures.\n\nAs a result, the fraudulent charges remain on my account, and I have not received any relief. This mishandling violates my rights under the Fair Credit Billing Act and Regulation Z, which require a reasonable investigation of billing errors, including unauthorized transactions. \nI have attached supporting documents, such as screenshots of communications with Discover where they admitted the error, transaction details, and any other evidence.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-23T02:27:27.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"93455","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18943245","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"DISCOVER BANK","date_received":"2026-01-23T02:17:48.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I requested a full <em>investigation</em>, <em>including</em> <em>review</em> of my evidence and <em>contact</em> with the <em>merchant</em> ( s ) for verification.\n\nHowever, Discover closed the <em>investigation</em> immediately without conducting any meaningful <em>review</em>. They admitted it was a mistake on their part and confirmed they did not <em>investigate</em> properly, they did not examine the evidence I submitted, did not <em>contact</em> the <em>merchant</em> ( s ), and did not follow standard fraud <em>dispute</em> procedures."]},"sort":[25.97276,"18943245"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19104247","_score":25.48317,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint concerns American Express and its failure to conduct lawful, consistent, and documented billing error investigations as required by Regulation Z, 12 CFR Section 1026.13.\n\nAmerican Express closed multiple disputes involving the same merchant, XXXX XXXX XXXX, using contradictory and inconsistent justifications, including inability to investigate, reliance on merchant policy, claims of incomplete dispute setup, and assertions that charges were valid.\n\nThe disputed transactions involve the same account, the same merchant, similar transaction amounts, and the same time period. Despite this, American Express issued different outcomes for identical transactions without identifying what evidence was reviewed or how determinations were reached.\n\nSeveral closures directed the consumer to contact the merchant directly or relied on internal merchant policies. These explanations do not satisfy Regulation Z, which requires a reasonable investigation and a written explanation of findings.\n\nThe merchant activity raises concerns regarding potentially prohibited or unlawful real money gaming transactions being billed under non gambling descriptors. American Express did not disclose whether merchant legality, licensing, or transaction classification was evaluated.\n\nClosing disputes involving potentially unlawful transactions without investigation undermines consumer protections and compliance safeguards.\n\nThe attached exhibits demonstrate a systemic dispute handling failure rather than isolated error.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-29T16:52:19.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"721XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19104247","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2026-01-29T16:48:28.000Z","state":"AR","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 <em>disputed</em> <em>transactions</em> involve the same account, the same <em>merchant</em>, similar transaction amounts, and the same time period. Despite this, American Express issued different outcomes for identical <em>transactions</em> without identifying what evidence was <em>reviewed</em> or how determinations were reached.\n\nSeveral closures directed the consumer to <em>contact</em> the <em>merchant</em> directly or relied on internal <em>merchant</em> policies."],"sub_issue":["Credit card company isn't resolving a <em>dispute</em> about a purchase on your statement"]},"sort":[25.48317,"19104247"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19626322","_score":25.349283,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"I recently filed XXXX disputes regarding transactions with XXXX. These disputes were submitted because I returned merchandise to the merchant successfully. The merchant acknowledged receipt of the returned items and confirmed that I would be issued a refund, however, I have not received any refunds to date. To support my claims, I provided documentation including the order confirmation email and email correspondence between the merchant and myself confirming the return and promised refund. Despite this evidence, Discover ruled in favor of the merchant. When I contacted customer service to question this decision, I was informed that all three disputes were still under review. This is concerning, as the disputed charges have already been reapplied to my account, even though the cases are supposedly still pending. When I asked that the provisional credits be reinstated while the investigation is ongoing, I was told not to worry and that the matter would be resolved. However, the charges remain on my account, and I am now accruing interest on transactions that are actively being disputed. This situation may also negatively impact my credit. Additionally, the customer service representatives were unable to provide a clear or consistent explanation as to why the charges were reapplied while the disputes are still under review AND while I provided proof of return confirmation from the merchant. I am requesting assistance in resolving this matter, including a review of the handling of my disputes and the reinstatement of the provisional credits while the investigation is ongoing.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-02-19T17:58:10.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"117XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19626322","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"DISCOVER BANK","date_received":"2026-02-19T17:53:23.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am requesting assistance in resolving this matter, <em>including</em> a <em>review</em> of the handling of my <em>disputes</em> and the reinstatement of the provisional credits while the <em>investigation</em> is ongoing."],"sub_issue":["Credit card company isn't resolving a <em>dispute</em> about a purchase on your statement"]},"sort":[25.349283,"19626322"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"22457231","_score":25.303986,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"I am reporting an issue with how USAA handled unauthorized credit card transactions. Two unauthorized transactions posted to my USAA credit card on the same day from two different XXXX merchants ( XXXX and XXXX  ). Approximately eight additional attempts were declined. I did not authorize any of these transactions.\n\nWhen I reported the unauthorized transactions, USAA opened them as merchant disputes instead of treating them as unauthorized use under Regulation Z. This resulted in the wrong investigation process being used.\n\nI submitted a written notice explaining that the transactions were unauthorized and uploaded documentation directly to the dispute section of my account. I also contacted USAA through chat to request that the new information be forwarded to the dispute department. USAA did not acknowledge or incorporate the written notice or documentation into the investigation, and the disputes continued to be processed under the merchant dispute workflow.\n\nBecause the transactions were misclassified from the beginning, USAA did not follow the required procedures for handling unauthorized credit card use, including the appropriate investigation process and review of the evidence I submitted.\n\nI am requesting that USAA review how the unauthorized transactions were handled and ensure that future reports of unauthorized use are processed under the correct Regulation Z procedures.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-05-22T02:21:53.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"33323","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"22457231","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2026-05-22T02:09:07.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["USAA did not acknowledge or incorporate the written notice or documentation into the <em>investigation</em>, and the <em>disputes</em> continued to be processed under the <em>merchant</em> <em>dispute</em> workflow.\n\nBecause the <em>transactions</em> were misclassified from the beginning, USAA did not follow the required procedures for handling unauthorized credit card use, <em>including</em> the appropriate <em>investigation</em> process and <em>review</em> of the evidence I submitted."]},"sort":[25.303986,"22457231"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20490156","_score":25.299843,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint regarding unauthorized transactions on my account with Chime. \n\nOn or about XX/XX/year>, my card information was used without my authorization to make multiple transactions across several online gambling and gaming platforms, including XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and other similar merchants. These transactions were not made by me, and I did not give permission to any individual to access or use my card.\n\nThere are two separate issues : 1. A set of unauthorized transactions totaling approximately {$150.00}, which I disputed with Chime. This dispute was denied within approximately three days without what appears to be a reasonable or thorough investigation.\n\n2. A second, much larger series of approximately XXXX unauthorized transactions made across these same merchants, which I have also disputed and is currently under review. \n\nI immediately took action upon discovering the unauthorized activity by reporting the transactions to Chime and initiating disputes. I have clearly stated that these charges are fraudulent and unauthorized. \n\nI am concerned that my initial dispute was denied without a proper or reasonable investigation. Given the number of transactions, the involvement of multiple online merchants, and the nature of the activity, this clearly indicates unauthorized access and potential fraud. \n\nI am requesting that Chime conduct a full and fair investigation of all disputed transactions, including contacting the merchants and reviewing any relevant transaction data, device access logs, or account activity. \n\nThese transactions have caused significant financial hardship, and I am seeking a full refund of all unauthorized charges. \n\nI respectfully request that Chime : - Reopen and properly investigate the previously denied dispute - Thoroughly investigate all unauthorized transactions across all listed merchants - Provide documentation of their investigation findings - Issue refunds for all confirmed unauthorized charges I did not authorize these transactions, did not benefit from them, and my account security was clearly compromised. \n\nI am also in the process of filing a police report regarding this unauthorized activity. \n\nThank you for your attention to this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-22T18:18:50.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Other banking product or service","zip_code":"03301","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20490156","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2026-03-22T18:07:00.000Z","state":"NH","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am requesting that Chime conduct a full and fair <em>investigation</em> of all <em>disputed</em> <em>transactions</em>, <em>including</em> <em>contacting</em> the <em>merchants</em> and <em>reviewing</em> any relevant transaction data, device access logs, or account activity. \n\nThese <em>transactions</em> have caused significant financial hardship, and I am seeking a full refund of all unauthorized charges."]},"sort":[25.299843,"20490156"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7265687","_score":24.640072,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I was charged over a month worth of transaction by this merchant. I contacted the bank and on the 14th day of the dispute was told they denied my dispute saying this We closely reviewed your case, including evidence provided by the merchant, and found that no error occurred. You have a right to request a copy of the documents relied upon in the investigation determination.We closely reviewed your case, including evidence provided by the merchant, and found that no error occurred. You have a right to request a copy of the documents relied upon in the investigation determination When I responded to the email and told them I was hospitalized at the time the transactions were made and sent them copies of my paperwork from the hospital they still denied my claim. I requested the documents used to make this decision I did not receive a reply. However the bank refunded two of the multiple transactions from the same merchant.Ive contacted the merchant several times since then and keep being told a manger will give me a call back and no one has returned my calls. I was told by customer service at the hotel that the rooms were booked under a last name similar to mine and the phone number nor the address listed on the reservations is mine. Yet no one has called me back to resolve this issue and the bank denied my claim simply because they can. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-07-17T11:54:43.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"08016","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7265687","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"FinCo Services Inc DBA Current","date_received":"2023-07-17T11:36:57.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I was charged over a month worth of transaction by this <em>merchant</em>. I <em>contacted</em> the bank and on the 14th day of the <em>dispute</em> was told they denied my <em>dispute</em> saying this We closely <em>reviewed</em> your case, <em>including</em> evidence provided by the <em>merchant</em>, and found that no error occurred. You have a right to request a copy of the documents relied upon in the <em>investigation</em> determination.We closely <em>reviewed</em> your case, <em>including</em> evidence provided by the <em>merchant</em>, and found that no error occurred."]},"sort":[24.640072,"7265687"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18548444","_score":24.58788,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I canceled my XXXX XXXXXXXX membership on XX/XX/year> and received written confirmation stating that no further billing would occur. This cancellation revoked any authorization for future charges. \n\nDespite this revocation, XXXX XXXXXXXX continued to debit my checking account after the cancellation date. These transactions were not authorized. \n\nThe disputed transactions consist of 26 monthly charges of {$35.00} each, totaling {$910.00}, all posted after XX/XX/year>. \n\nI disputed the charges with Bank of America as unauthorized post-cancellation transactions. The bank denied the disputes pursuant to its internal 90-day dispute timing policy, without requesting or reviewing my written proof that authorization had been revoked. \n\nThe bank stated that my prior business relationship with the merchant and failure to dispute within 90 days rendered me customer liable, effectively treating revoked authorization as continuing authorization. \n\nI was instructed by the bank to submit a written statement and supporting documentation by fax in order to reopen the disputed claims ; however, the claims were denied pursuant to the banks 90-day policy without any evidentiary review.\n\nThe banks rejection notice further directed me to call a phone number to obtain documentation explaining the basis for the denial. When I called, I was informed that no such documentation existed because the disputes had been denied solely on timing grounds.\n\nThe bank also failed to contact or obtain information from the merchant regarding the continued billing after cancellation, despite my dispute and the availability of written cancellation confirmation. \n\nI separately contacted XXXX  XXXX directly regarding the continued billing after cancellation, and the charges were not corrected. \n\nI requested escalation and review of my cancellation documentation. The bank declined to review the evidence and terminated a call when escalation was requested. \n\nThe banks actions are inconsistent with its obligation under its own dispute-handling and investigation policies to conduct a reasonable investigation, including review of available evidence and inquiry to the merchant, to determine whether valid authorization existed for disputed transactions. \n\nI am requesting regulatory review of the banks failure to investigate unauthorized transactions following revocation of authorization and correction of the denied disputes, including reimbursement of all charges assessed after XX/XX/year>.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-07T22:40:40.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"92646","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18548444","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2026-01-07T22:14:11.000Z","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":["I requested escalation and <em>review</em> of my cancellation documentation. The bank declined to <em>review</em> the evidence and terminated a call when escalation was requested. \n\nThe banks actions are inconsistent with its obligation under its own <em>dispute</em>-handling and <em>investigation</em> policies to conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em>, <em>including</em> <em>review</em> of available evidence and inquiry to the <em>merchant</em>, to determine whether valid authorization existed for <em>disputed</em> <em>transactions</em>."]},"sort":[24.58788,"18548444"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18087887","_score":23.529758,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Factual Statement of Unauthorized Charges and Improper Dispute Denial I am submitting this complaint regarding Chime Financial , Inc.s handling of unauthorized electronic fund transfers and its denial of my dispute in apparent violation of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) and Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. 1005.11. \n\nMultiple transactions were posted to my Chime account by a merchant identified as XXXX XXXX XXXX  / XXXX XXXX XXXX. These transactions were unauthorized. At no time was my debit card lost, stolen, or voluntarily shared, nor was my mobile device lost, stolen, or accessed by another individual. I did not provide consent for these transactions and did not receive the goods or services associated with the charges. \n\nUpon discovering the transactions, I promptly contacted the merchant. The merchant informed me that I was permitted to dispute the charges and stated that they were conducting a manual review. The merchant further acknowledged that this review remained unresolved for approximately XXXX months, and no refund or resolution was provided. \n\nDue to the merchants failure to resolve the matter, I exercised my right under Regulation E to dispute the transactions with Chime. Despite the nature of the claimunauthorized electronic fund transfersChime denied the dispute through what appears to have been an automated or expedited review, reportedly within a XXXX period. No meaningful investigation, evidence-based explanation, or documentation supporting the denial was provided to me. \n\nUnder 12 C.F.R. 1005.11, financial institutions are required to conduct a reasonable, good-faith investigation of alleged errors, particularly where unauthorized electronic fund transfers are claimed. A perfunctory or automated denial, without consideration of relevant facts or merchant admissions, raises serious concerns regarding compliance with Regulation Es error-resolution requirements. \n\nI am requesting that the CFPB review whether Chimes dispute handling practices in this matterincluding the speed of denial, lack of substantive explanation, and failure to consider material factsconstitute an unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice ( UDAAP ) and a failure to comply with federal consumer financial protection laws. \n\nI am seeking corrective action, including proper reconsideration of my dispute, restitution of the unauthorized funds, and assurance that Chimes dispute resolution procedures comply with Regulation E.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-16T21:08:33.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"95336","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18087887","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2025-12-16T20:49:12.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I did not provide consent for these <em>transactions</em> and did not receive the goods or services associated with the charges. \n\nUpon discovering the <em>transactions</em>, I promptly <em>contacted</em> the <em>merchant</em>. The <em>merchant</em> informed me that I was permitted to <em>dispute</em> the charges and stated that they were conducting a manual <em>review</em>. The <em>merchant</em> further acknowledged that this <em>review</em> remained unresolved for approximately XXXX months, and no refund or resolution was provided."]},"sort":[23.529758,"18087887"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17272354","_score":23.39044,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Statement Regarding Unauthorized Charges and Improper Claim Denial Navy Federal Credit Union I am submitting this statement regarding multiple unauthorized debit card charges that were made on my Navy Federal Credit Union account, totaling over {$1100.00}. As soon as I discovered the fraudulent activity, I immediately reported the charges to Navy Federal, canceled my compromised card, and contacted the merchant involved. \n\nDespite following proper procedures, Navy Federal denied my claim instantly, without conducting a proper investigation or reviewing the evidence. After this denial, I contacted the merchant directly. The merchant conducted their own compliance review and investigation and confirmed in writing that the transactions were the result of unauthorized activity and fraud. Their email states clearly that the charges were not made by me and that Navy Federal should issue the appropriate reversals and reimbursements.\n\nUpon receiving this confirmation from the merchant, I contacted Navy Federal again and requested that my claim be reopened. I provided the bank with a copy of the merchants findings. Instead of addressing the evidence, Navy Federal representatives were extremely rude and dismissive. To date, they have still refused to return the funds or properly investigate the matter.\n\nMy account has now been drained of over {$1100.00} due to fraudulent activity that I did not authorize, and Navy Federal has failed to follow the appropriate dispute and investigation procedures required under federal regulations, including Regulation E of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. I am requesting an immediate reopening of my dispute, a full investigation, and reimbursement for all unauthorized charges as required by law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-15T18:00:49.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"954XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17272354","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2025-11-15T17:48:56.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As soon as I discovered the fraudulent activity, I immediately reported the charges to Navy Federal, canceled my compromised card, and <em>contacted</em> the <em>merchant</em> involved. \n\nDespite following proper procedures, Navy Federal denied my claim instantly, without conducting a proper <em>investigation</em> or <em>reviewing</em> the evidence. After this denial, I <em>contacted</em> the <em>merchant</em> directly."]},"sort":[23.39044,"17272354"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21237817","_score":23.357958,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint regarding SoFis handling of disputed transactions totaling approximately {$8400.00} involving the merchant XXXX. \n\nI believe SoFi failed to conduct a reasonable and complete investigation as required under federal consumer protection standards, and improperly denied my claims without addressing the core issue : the merchant refused to provide services and withheld my funds. \n\nXXXX and Key Facts : In XX/XX/year>, multiple transactions totaling approximately {$8400.00} were processed by XXXX. \nShortly thereafter, my account with the merchant was terminated, and I was explicitly informed that I would not be permitted to withdraw or access my remaining balance. \nThe merchant instructed me to contact my financial institution to recover the funds, effectively acknowledging that I would not receive the services or access to funds I paid for. \n\nI promptly filed disputes with SoFi and provided supporting documentation, including communications from the merchant confirming account termination and refusal to release funds. \n\nDeficiencies in SoFis Investigation : SoFi denied my claims with a generic conclusion that no error occurred, without addressing the central issue that the merchant failed to provide services and withheld funds. \nThe investigation appears to have been limited to whether the transactions were authorized, rather than evaluating whether the transactions were valid in light of the merchants conduct. \nSoFi did not provide the underlying evidence, merchant response, or documentation relied upon in making its determination. \nI was not given a meaningful opportunity to respond to or rebut the findings before the claims were closed. \n\nXXXX XXXX : This matter involves more than authorization. The merchant : Terminated my account Refused to provide services Retained funds without allowing withdrawal This constitutes a failure to deliver the agreed-upon service and raises serious concerns regarding merchant conduct. These factors should have been considered in the dispute process. \n\nImpact : The denial of these claims has resulted in a substantial financial loss of approximately {$8400.00}. This has caused significant financial hardship and distress, particularly given that I have been left without recourse despite acting promptly and providing documentation. \n\nRequested Resolution : I am requesting that SoFi : XXXX. Reopen and reinvestigate all disputed transactions totaling approximately {$8400.00} XXXX. Conduct a full review that considers the merchants refusal to provide services and release funds XXXX. Provide all documentation and evidence relied upon in denying my claims, including any merchant responses XXXX. Issue appropriate refunds or credits for transactions where services were not provided I am also requesting confirmation that SoFi is complying with its obligations to conduct reasonable investigations and provide transparent determinations in consumer disputes. \n\nGiven the amount involved and the circumstances, I request prompt attention and resolution of this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-14T20:08:41.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"07410","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21237817","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.","date_received":"2026-04-14T19:53:19.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Reopen and reinvestigate all <em>disputed</em> <em>transactions</em> totaling approximately {$8400.00} XXXX. Conduct a full <em>review</em> that considers the <em>merchants</em> refusal to provide services and release funds XXXX. Provide all documentation and evidence relied upon in denying my claims, <em>including</em> any <em>merchant</em> responses XXXX."]},"sort":[23.357958,"21237817"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21683415","_score":23.210548,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"On or around XX/XX/year>, I noticed multiple disputed transactions connected to XXXX XXXX and XXXX that I did not recognize or that did not match what I intended to authorize. The total disputed activity is approximately {$2400.00}. \n\nI contacted Wells Fargo and opened a card claim, Claim # XXXX. I also reported a lost XXXX XXXX during the same timeframe and submitted documentation showing the device was reported lost. In addition, I contacted XXXX regarding the disputed XXXX transactions. XXXX responded that they were unable to match the transactions to my account based on the information provided. \n\nI submitted supporting documentation to Wells Fargo, including the XXXX response and the XXXX documentation. I am concerned that Wells Fargo may deny the claim without fully reviewing the merchants response, device security issue, transaction timestamps, authorization records, and account access information. \n\nI am requesting that Wells Fargo conduct a complete and fair investigation before making a final determination. Specifically, I am asking Wells Fargo to review whether the XXXX XXXX and XXXX transactions were properly authorized, whether the merchant could verify the transactions as belonging to my account, whether there were any duplicate or irregular transactions, and whether the documented lost device may have contributed to unauthorized activity.\n\nI have attempted to resolve this directly with Wells Fargo by opening a claim and submitting documentation, but I am escalating this complaint because the disputed amount is significant and I need assurance that all evidence is reviewed carefully before a decision is made since they have denied all my past claims through the years being a customer.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-28T21:11:32.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"90807","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21683415","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2026-04-28T21:05:33.000Z","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":["On or around XX/XX/year>, I noticed multiple <em>disputed</em> <em>transactions</em> connected to XXXX XXXX and XXXX that I did not recognize or that did not match what I intended to authorize. The total <em>disputed</em> activity is approximately {$2400.00}. \n\nI <em>contacted</em> Wells Fargo and opened a card claim, Claim # XXXX. I also reported a lost XXXX XXXX during the same timeframe and submitted documentation showing the device was reported lost. In addition, I <em>contacted</em> XXXX regarding the <em>disputed</em> XXXX <em>transactions</em>."]},"sort":[23.210548,"21683415"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18675335","_score":23.10069,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"I reported unauthorized credit card transactions and disputed them as fraud. I provided a written statement from the merchant confirming that the transactions were processed in error, were not authorized by me, that no goods or services were provided, and that the merchant does not contest the dispute and supports reversal through a bank-initiated chargeback. The letter identifies the merchant and includes the exact transaction dates and amounts. \n\nDespite this evidence, the issuer denied the fraud dispute. I contacted the issuer multiple times requesting review and escalation. During these contacts, an agent identified as XXXX repeatedly denied the claim, refused to reopen or escalate the dispute, and advised that no further review would occur unless additional evidence was provided, despite the existing merchant confirmation. I was advised that supervisors and other agents would maintain the same position and that escalation would not be permitted. \n\nThe issuer asserted that the fraud claim was reported as the card not lost or stolen. This is incorrect. At the time of reporting, I subsequently clarified and corrected that the card was lost. Despite this correction, the issuer failed to update the claim record and continued to rely on the inaccurate initial notation when denying the fraud dispute. \n\nThe issuer also stated that the merchant letter was insufficient because it did not include a phone number and suggested the letter implied the merchant should issue a refund. This rationale does not address the substance of the evidence. There is no requirement that a merchant confirmation include a phone number, and the letter explicitly supports issuer-initiated reversal rather than a direct refund. \n\nSecurity Operations asserted exclusive authority over the review, refused escalation, and declined to reconsider the dispute despite the merchants written confirmation and despite the correction that the card was lost. As a result, the fraud claim was denied without a reasonable investigation, based on inaccurate claim information and procedural technicalities rather than the facts. \n\nI am requesting regulatory review of the issuers handling of this dispute, including reliance on incorrect claim details that I corrected, refusal to update records, refusal to escalate, and denial of the fraud claim despite material evidence. \n\nNote my current phone number is different that the number on file with CPFB. My number is ( XXXX ) XXXX. In addition the card this is pertaining to to is a chase freedom unlimited ending in XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-13T08:33:07.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"91355","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18675335","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2026-01-13T08:01:47.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Despite this evidence, the issuer denied the fraud <em>dispute</em>. I <em>contacted</em> the issuer multiple times requesting <em>review</em> and escalation. During these <em>contacts</em>, an agent identified as XXXX repeatedly denied the claim, refused to reopen or escalate the <em>dispute</em>, and advised that no further <em>review</em> would occur unless additional evidence was provided, despite the existing <em>merchant</em> confirmation."]},"sort":[23.10069,"18675335"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18394714","_score":23.048346,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint regarding Capital Ones handling of my debit card dispute. \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, two transactions were processed on my debit card for XXXX purchases in the amounts of {$8300.00} and {$8400.00}. \n\nThe merchandise was returned to Costco, and the merchant confirmed receipt of both returns and issued refunds. I have documentation including refund confirmation emails from Costco, XXXX  return tracking numbers showing delivery to Costco, and screenshots from my Costco account showing both orders marked as returned and refunded. \n\nI disputed the transactions with Capital One and provided all requested documentation. Despite this, Capital One denied the dispute stating that the transactions were valid, without addressing or acknowledging the merchants confirmation that refunds were issued. \n\nI contacted Capital One again and the claim was reopened, and I resubmitted the documentation via fax. However, the dispute was denied again without a proper explanation or consideration of the refund and return evidence. \n\nI believe Capital One failed to properly investigate this debit card dispute and did not conduct a reasonable review of the documentation provided. \n\nI am requesting a full review of my dispute, proper consideration of the refund evidence, and correction of my account to reflect the issued refunds.The disputed transactions are associated with Capital One claim number XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-31T17:51:07.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"11201","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18394714","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-12-31T17:33:21.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Money was taken from your account on the wrong day or for the wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I <em>contacted</em> Capital One again and the claim was reopened, and I resubmitted the documentation via fax. However, the <em>dispute</em> was denied again without a proper explanation or consideration of the refund and return evidence. \n\nI believe Capital One failed to properly <em>investigate</em> this debit card <em>dispute</em> and did not conduct a reasonable <em>review</em> of the documentation provided."]},"sort":[23.048346,"18394714"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21066624","_score":22.89734,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Chase refused to process a valid debit card dispute under XXXX network rules. \n\nI am filing a complaint against Chase Bank regarding their refusal to properly process a valid debit card dispute involving services not rendered. \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, I made multiple debit card payments totaling {$1600.00} to a merchant listed as XXXX for an apartment reservation made through XXXX. Although I authorized these transactions, the listing was fraudulent. I never received any check-in instructions, and the host became completely unresponsive. \n\nI made repeated attempts to contact the host and XXXX including messages and emails. A XXXX representative indicated they would follow up, but I never received any resolution or assistance. As a result, I paid for a reservation that was never provided. \n\nI promptly contacted Chase and attempted to dispute the charges. However, the claim was incorrectly categorized as an unauthorized transaction. This led to a denial because the transactions were technically authorized. \n\nI have since clarified to Chase that this is not a fraud claim, but rather a services not rendered dispute involving a scam merchant. Despite this clarification, Chase has refused to reopen or reclassify the claim and has declined to process the dispute under the appropriate XXXX chargeback rules. \n\nChase is failing to properly evaluate and process a valid dispute under XXXX network protections for debit card transactions. The issue is not authorization, but the merchants failure to provide the paid service and their complete lack of response. \n\nI am requesting that Chase : 1. Reopen this case and correctly classify it as a services not rendered dispute 2. Submit the dispute through XXXX under the appropriate merchant dispute category 3. Conduct a proper investigation based on the facts provided 4. Refund the full amount of {$1600.00} if the claim is validated I have documentation supporting my claim, including proof of payment, records of attempted communication with the merchant and XXXX, and evidence that no service was ever delivered. \n\nChases refusal to process this dispute based solely on an initial misclassification is unreasonable and has resulted in significant financial loss. \n\nI request that this matter be reviewed and resolved promptly.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-08T20:51:30.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"90006","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21066624","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2026-04-08T20:37:48.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I made repeated attempts to <em>contact</em> the host and XXXX <em>including</em> messages and emails. A XXXX representative indicated they would follow up, but I never received any resolution or assistance. As a result, I paid for a reservation that was never provided. \n\nI promptly <em>contacted</em> Chase and attempted to <em>dispute</em> the charges. However, the claim was incorrectly categorized as an unauthorized transaction. This led to a denial because the <em>transactions</em> were technically authorized."]},"sort":[22.89734,"21066624"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10920743","_score":22.707188,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, I purchased XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX from a merchant in XXXX separate transactions totaling {$15000.00}. These devices were marketed as capable of mining specific XXXX, including XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. However, after the devices were received, they were found to be incapable of mining the advertised cryptocurrencies. \n\nI contacted the merchant to resolve this issue, but my attempts were unsuccessful. Communication through their official XXXX channel resulted in my account being blocked, and emails to their support team were either ignored or provided unhelpful responses. \n\nIn early XXXX, I initiated disputes with Goldman Sachs regarding these transactions, presenting extensive evidence, including : Product brochures and screenshots showing the false advertising. \nNegative reviews corroborating the merchant 's misrepresentation. \nStatements of the devices failing to perform as advertised. \nGoldman Sachs denied the disputes without conducting a thorough investigation, stating that the merchants terms and conditions were met despite clear evidence to the contrary. They also failed to request evidence from the merchant or provide provisional credits during the dispute process. \n\nI reopened the disputes on XX/XX/XXXX, under dispute numbers XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX, but they were quickly denied again on XX/XX/XXXX, citing the same inadequate reasoning. After a year of attempts to resolve this issue, I remain without resolution, and the company has failed to address the substantial evidence supporting my claims. \n\nI am now seeking assistance from CFPB to hold the company accountable for the mishandling of this case and to receive reimbursement for the financial loss incurred due to the misrepresented merchandise.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-25T10:44:24.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"630XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10920743","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA","date_received":"2024-11-25T10:34:49.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In early XXXX, I initiated <em>disputes</em> with Goldman Sachs regarding these <em>transactions</em>, presenting extensive evidence, <em>including</em> : Product brochures and screenshots showing the false advertising. \nNegative <em>reviews</em> corroborating the <em>merchant</em> 's misrepresentation. \nStatements of the devices failing to perform as advertised. \nGoldman Sachs denied the <em>disputes</em> without conducting a thorough <em>investigation</em>, stating that the <em>merchants</em> terms and conditions were met despite clear evidence to the contrary."],"sub_issue":["Credit card company isn't resolving a <em>dispute</em> about a purchase on your statement"]},"sort":[22.707188,"10920743"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11499118","_score":22.50406,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX unauthorized transactions {$610.00} and XXXX, totaling {$920.00}, were withdrawn from my account and transferred to XXXX XXXX. The funds were then used to purchase XXXX, which I was unaware of until I reviewed my transaction log on XX/XX/XXXX. Upon discovering the charges, I immediately contacted my bank to dispute the transactions, and they initiated an investigation. After approximately 10 days, I reached out to Discover 's Fraud Department and was informed that the case had already been closed. The reason given was that the merchant provided proof supporting the accuracy of the transaction, which I believe is incorrect. I informed the representative that I had additional evidence to support my claim, including documentation of unauthorized withdrawals from my account into XXXX XXXX and XXXX purchases. However, the representative declined to consider this evidence and decided to close the case. \n\nI believe my dispute was not thoroughly investigated, as no one from the fraud department reached out to me to verify the accuracy of my statement or to review the additional evidence I could provide. I respectfully request that my case be reopened, thoroughly investigated, and that a refund be issued to my account. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX unauthorized transactions, totaling {$930.00}, were withdrawn from my account and transferred to XXXX XXXX. The funds were then used to purchase XXXX, which I was unaware of until I reviewed my transaction log on XX/XX/XXXX. Upon discovering the charges, I immediately contacted my bank to dispute the transactions, and they initiated an investigation. After approximately 10 days, I reached out to Discover 's Fraud Department and was informed that the case had already been closed. The reason given was that the merchant provided proof supporting the accuracy of the transaction, which I believe is incorrect. I informed the representative that I had additional evidence to support my claim, including documentation of unauthorized withdrawals from my account into XXXX XXXX and XXXX purchases. However, the representative declined to consider this evidence and decided to close the case. \n\nI believe my dispute was not thoroughly investigated, as no one from the fraud department reached out to me to verify the accuracy of my statement or to review the additional evidence I could provide. I respectfully request that my case be reopened, thoroughly investigated, and that a refund be issued to my account. \n\n\nP.S. I have screenshots of withdrawals from my XXXX accounts on XX/XX/XXXX that were made without my authorization and were used to transfer XXXX  to multiple users.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-13T22:22:06.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"85388","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11499118","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"DISCOVER BANK","date_received":"2025-01-13T22:05:12.000Z","state":"AZ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX unauthorized <em>transactions</em> {$610.00} and XXXX, totaling {$920.00}, were withdrawn from my account and transferred to XXXX XXXX. The funds were then used to purchase XXXX, which I was unaware of until I <em>reviewed</em> my transaction log on XX/XX/XXXX. Upon discovering the charges, I immediately <em>contacted</em> my bank to <em>dispute</em> the <em>transactions</em>, and they initiated an <em>investigation</em>."]},"sort":[22.50406,"11499118"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21767721","_score":22.27085,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting a complaint regarding two unauthorized transactions on my checking account in the amounts of approximately {$1900.00} and {$2000.00} associated with a merchant listed as XXXX XXXX. \n\nI was initially contacted by Navy Federal Credit Union and informed that these transactions appeared potentially fraudulent. During that call, I immediately confirmed that I did not authorize the transactions, did not recognize the merchant, and had no relationship with the company associated with the charges.\n\nDespite reporting the transactions as fraud immediatly, the payments were still processed. I timely filed a fraud claim and fully cooperated with the investigation and appeal process.\n\nThe credit union later denied my claim, stating only that its information contradicts my claim of unauthorized activity. However, the company has repeatedly refused to provide any actual evidence or documentation showing that I authorized the transactions. Specifically, I requested documentation supporting their determination, including transaction authorization records, merchant verification, authentication methods, IP/device information, or other evidence relied upon during the investigation. These requests were denied. The company later stated that most of its investigation process was conducted electronically and that physical documentation relating to the fraud claim was minimal. Despite this, the company continues to deny my claim\nwithout explaining what information allegedly supports authorization.\n\nIn response to the companys request for additional information, I conducted independent research regarding the merchant associated with the charges. I searched the California Secretary of State database for XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX CA and found no registered business entity under that name nor location. I provided this documentation to the credit union as additional support for my fraud claim.\n\nTo date : * I maintain that these transactions were unauthorized.\n\n* I do not recognize or have any relationship with the merchant.\n\n* The company has failed to provide evidence demonstrating authorization.\n\n* My fraud claim and appeal were denied despite my repeated requests for supporting documentation.\n\nI am requesting that the CFPB review whether the investigation conducted by the credit union complied with applicable consumer protection requirements, including obligations under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E regarding unauthorized electronic fund transfers and reasonable investigations of disputed transactions.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-30T21:46:48.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"95136","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21767721","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2026-04-30T21:26:23.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am requesting that the CFPB <em>review</em> whether the <em>investigation</em> conducted by the credit union complied with applicable consumer protection requirements, <em>including</em> obligations under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E regarding unauthorized electronic fund transfers and reasonable <em>investigations</em> of <em>disputed</em> <em>transactions</em>."]},"sort":[22.27085,"21767721"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18999129","_score":22.235386,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint because Comenity Capital Bank has refused to properly investigate or file disputes for a series of unauthorized transactions posted to my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account from a merchant called XXXX XXXX. \n\nDespite multiple contacts and escalations, I followed every instruction provided by Comenity : I reviewed all available statements and compiled a full itemized list of disputed transactions. \nI submitted supporting documentation through their Secure Message Center, including screenshots and a written dispute letter. \nI explained that the merchant refused to provide itemized receipts or transaction details when contacted directly. \nI included the exact dates and amounts of each transaction, as well as my attempts to resolve the issue with the merchant. \n\n\nComenity acknowledged receipt of my documentation and escalated my inquiry to a Senior Account Specialist. However, they have since failed to initiate formal disputes or provide any resolution. Instead, they redirected me to call their Account Protection team, despite already having all required information in writing.\n\nThis delay and refusal to act violates my rights under the Fair Credit Billing Act. I am requesting that the CFPB require Comenity Capital Bank to : 1. Accept and process my dispute for each unauthorized XXXX XXXX transaction. \nXXXX. Provide a written explanation of their investigation and findings. \nXXXX. Remove any improperly posted charges and associated fees from my account. \n\n\nI am attaching my dispute letter, itemized transaction list, and screenshots submitted to Comenity for reference.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-26T07:23:25.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"39440","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18999129","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.","date_received":"2026-01-26T07:16:03.000Z","state":"MS","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am filing this complaint because Comenity Capital Bank has refused to properly <em>investigate</em> or file <em>disputes</em> for a series of unauthorized <em>transactions</em> posted to my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account from a <em>merchant</em> called XXXX XXXX. \n\nDespite multiple <em>contacts</em> and escalations, I followed every instruction provided by Comenity : I <em>reviewed</em> all available statements and compiled a full itemized list of <em>disputed</em> <em>transactions</em>."],"sub_issue":["Credit card company isn't resolving a <em>dispute</em> about a purchase on your statement"]},"sort":[22.235386,"18999129"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18941949","_score":22.083078,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint regarding SoFi Bank, N.A.s failure to follow basic consumer protections required under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E, and its retaliatory closure of my account during an active dispute and prior CFPB complaint. This complaint also concerns SoFis improper reliance on and deference to offshore and opaque merchants, including XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, whose practices made merchant-level resolution impossible. \n\nOn or about XX/XX/XXXX, I notified SoFi of unauthorized electronic fund transfers totaling approximately {$2500.00}. These transactions were associated with mobile and web-based gaming applications operated by XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), including applications marketed as XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX Although the transactions arose from the same application ecosystem, they were processed under rapidly changing merchant identifiers, including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and related variants. \n\nThe merchant identifiers changed from one transaction to the next within short time intervals, not over days or billing cycles. By XX/XX/XXXX, additional unauthorized debits following the same pattern brought the total disputed amount to approximately {$6000.00}. The transactions shared identical application source, timing, and authorization status, but rotated merchant descriptors in a manner that rendered merchant-name-based stop payments ineffective by design. \n\nBoth XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX publish terms that disclaim real-money gambling, describe in-application currency as non-redeemable or entertainment-only, and reserve unilateral authority to suspend or terminate accounts. In practice, however, the applications use visual, functional, and promotional mechanisms that induce repeated spending. When I attempted to inquire about the charges, my accounts were locked or restricted, and no meaningful merchant contact information was available. As a result, it was impossible to complete the contact the merchant first step that SoFi relied upon. \n\nDespite timely notice of this fraud pattern and the impossibility of merchant resolution, SoFi failed to take the most basic steps required once unauthorized activity is reported. Specifically, SoFi permitted additional unauthorized debits to post after notice, failed to freeze or meaningfully restrict the account, relied on stop-payment measures that could not function given the rotating merchant identifiers, and deferred responsibility to offshore merchants that lacked meaningful or verifiable contact information. \n\nSoFi refunded only the smallest disputed charges while refusing reimbursement of larger, identically situated transactions, despite identical timing, merchant behavior, and authorization circumstances. No written explanation of the investigation or the basis for selective reimbursement was provided, as required under Regulation E.\n\nAfter I filed a prior complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, SoFi closed my account while the dispute was still active. This account served as my primary banking account. As a direct result of the closure, a holiday payroll deposit of approximately {$4900.00} was withdrawn or rendered inaccessible, and I lost access to transaction records necessary to fully quantify my damages. The timing and circumstances of the closure raise serious concerns about retaliation for protected consumer activity and the chilling of lawful regulatory reporting. \n\nI am requesting CFPB review of SoFis failure to comply with Regulation E after notice of unauthorized transfers, its handling of disputes involving XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, its reliance on unreachable offshore merchants, selective reimbursement practices without documented investigative findings, and its closure of my account following protected CFPB activity. \n\nI respectfully request CFPB assistance to ensure compliance with federal consumer protection laws, to address retaliatory conduct, and to prevent further harm. \n\nI am requesting CFPB review of SoFis failure to comply with Regulation E after notice of unauthorized transfers, its handling of disputes involving rapidly rotating merchant identifiers, selective reimbursement practices without documented investigative findings, reliance on unreachable offshore merchants, and account closure following protected CFPB activity. \n\nI respectfully request CFPB assistance to ensure compliance with federal consumer protection laws, to address retaliatory conduct, and to prevent further harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-23T01:15:32.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"711XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18941949","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.","date_received":"2026-01-23T00:51:37.000Z","state":"LA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Can't stop withdrawals from your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am requesting CFPB <em>review</em> of SoFis failure to comply with Regulation E after notice of unauthorized transfers, its handling of <em>disputes</em> involving rapidly rotating <em>merchant</em> identifiers, selective reimbursement practices without documented <em>investigative</em> findings, reliance on unreachable offshore <em>merchants</em>, and account closure following protected CFPB activity."]},"sort":[22.083078,"18941949"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18116090","_score":21.859812,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/year>, a total of XXXX unauthorized debit card transactions were made on my checking account, totaling {$570.00}. I did not make or authorize any of these transactions. I immediately contacted my bank to dispute the charges and requested a full investigation. I also asked the bank to provide documentation supporting their decision, including transaction details, merchant information, and any proof of authorization. \nThe bank denied my claim, stating that it did not have the requested information or any evidence showing that I authorized the transactions. They also did not explain the denial. I requested further clarification and documentation, but the bank did not provide any. The only action they took was to replace my debit card and reset my online banking username and password. \nBefore I even received the replacement card, an additional XXXX unauthorized transactions occurred on XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, XXXX, totaling {$810.00}, this time from XXXX. I contacted the bank again and disputed these transactions, but my claim was denied a second time. \nI am requesting the CFPBs assistance in reviewing the banks handling of both disputes, as these transactions were clearly unauthorized and the bank did not provide documentation, a proper investigation, or any valid reason for denying my claims.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-03T03:48:02.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"77077","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18116090","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2025-12-03T03:16:17.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/year>, a total of XXXX unauthorized debit card <em>transactions</em> were made on my checking account, totaling {$570.00}. I did not make or authorize any of these <em>transactions</em>. I immediately <em>contacted</em> my bank to <em>dispute</em> the charges and requested a full <em>investigation</em>. I also asked the bank to provide documentation supporting their decision, <em>including</em> transaction details, <em>merchant</em> information, and any proof of authorization."]},"sort":[21.859812,"18116090"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21934495","_score":21.787888,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Truist Credit Card Disputes Department, I am writing regarding claim number XXXX, which has now been denied again. I am extremely disappointed and frustrated by XXXX handling of this matter. \n\nThis dispute involves a business credit card transaction for services not rendered. The merchant, XXXX XXXX XXXX, accepted payment for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that was to be completed over several months, with delivery expected in XXXX XXXX. Because of that agreed timeline, it would have been impossible for me to know within 60 days of the original XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX transactions that the services would not be delivered. \n\nDespite this, Truist has continued to deny my claim solely based on the date the dispute was filed, while refusing to fully investigate the actual issue : the merchant failed to provide the contracted services.\n\nNo reasonable review appears to have been made regarding : Whether the merchant delivered any completed work Whether proof of services exists Whether the merchant is reachable My documentation shows repeated attempts to resolve this directly The contractual timeline showed that delivery was expected months later This is especially disheartening because another banking institution reviewed similar transactions with this same merchant, conducted a proper investigation, and ruled in my favor after determining I was not provided the services purchased.\n\nInstead, Truist has chosen to ignore the facts and rely only on the XXXX filing date, leaving me financially harmed while the merchant keeps my funds. I now feel I have been wronged not only by the merchant but also by the institution I trusted to protect its business cardholders. \n\nAs a loyal Truist customer, I expected far better treatment and a fair review process. This experience has severely damaged my confidence in Truists commitment to its clients.\n\nBecause this matter has not been handled properly, I will now be pursuing all available remedies, including filing formal complaints against Truist with thXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the Federal Trade Commission, and any other appropriate regulatory agencies. I am also exploring all legal options available to recover my losses.\n\nI am requesting one final escalation of claim XXXX to a supervisor or XXXX review team for a complete investigation based on the facts of this case, not solely the transaction date. \n\nPlease contact me immediately regarding next steps. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX Sincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-05-06T15:27:17.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"30066","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21934495","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2026-05-06T15:20:20.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["No reasonable <em>review</em> appears to have been made regarding : Whether the <em>merchant</em> delivered any completed work Whether proof of services exists Whether the <em>merchant</em> is reachable My documentation shows repeated attempts to resolve this directly The contractual timeline showed that delivery was expected months later This is especially disheartening because another banking institution <em>reviewed</em> similar <em>transactions</em> with this same <em>merchant</em>, conducted a proper <em>investigation</em>, and ruled in my favor after determining"],"sub_issue":["Credit card company isn't resolving a <em>dispute</em> about a purchase on your statement"]},"sort":[21.787888,"21934495"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18812642","_score":21.7217,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"While I was outside the United States, my credit card was used for a series of unauthorized transactions totaling over {$20000.00}. \n\nThe charges occurred across multiple merchants and different U.S. locations, over a period of time, clearly inconsistent with my location and normal spending patterns. Despite the size and pattern of these transactions, I did not receive any fraud alerts, phone calls, emails, or app notifications from the bank. \n\nBecause my account was set up with automatic payments, the fraudulent charges were paid automatically and were not immediately visible to me. Upon returning and discovering the issue, I contacted the bank as soon as possible to report the unauthorized transactions. \n\nThe bank refused reimbursement and denied my dispute. Importantly, the bank also denied transactions that were within XXXX days of my notice, without providing a clear explanation, investigation details, or documentation of how those timely disputes were reviewed. \n\nI requested information regarding the banks fraud investigation process and the rationale for denying the disputed transactions, including those within the XXXXday window, but the bank did not provide this information. \n\nI believe the bank failed both in reasonable fraud monitoring and in properly investigating and resolving my dispute in accordance with consumer protection requirements.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-18T06:21:05.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"60632","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18812642","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2026-01-18T06:02:12.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Upon returning and discovering the issue, I <em>contacted</em> the bank as soon as possible to report the unauthorized <em>transactions</em>. \n\nThe bank refused reimbursement and denied my <em>dispute</em>. Importantly, the bank also denied <em>transactions</em> that were within XXXX days of my notice, without providing a clear explanation, <em>investigation</em> details, or documentation of how those timely <em>disputes</em> were <em>reviewed</em>."],"sub_issue":["Credit card company isn't resolving a <em>dispute</em> about a purchase on your statement"]},"sort":[21.7217,"18812642"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10105342","_score":21.706827,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Chime gave two unauthorized transactions andmonies without checking with me to XXXX! When I reported fraud they both denied me my right for the money to be returned even after a police report was sent and or mailed to both companies! XXXX theft of my monies. \n\n\n\nChime Account Number Ending In : XXXX Claim ID : XXXX Dispute Type : Debit-Unauthorized Transaction Date Error Reported : XXXX Document Request Date : XXXX Claim Amount : {$1200.00} Hi XXXX, XXXX to this email are the document ( XXXX ) used in your dispute investigation. Your investigation included a review of the following transactions : Chime TXN ID Date Amount Merchant XXXX. XXXX XXXX {$10.00} *******forever XXXX. XXXX XXXX {$1200.00} XXXX XXXX When we received your dispute, we gathered evidence pertaining to your dispute claim and made our decision based on this evidence. This included information that we had available to us at the time, such as device and/or location information, and additional information/evidence that you or the merchant provided us, if any. \n\nThe documents we included in this email may include : Documentation provided by you, including but not limited to receipts, emails/ conversations with the merchant, confirmation emails, answers to support questions, and call logs uploaded through the document portal or emailed to the Chime Dispute Support team. \n\nAny information provided by the merchant. During the investigation of your claim, we may have filed for a chargeback with the merchant. A chargeback is a request made by Chime to the merchant to have the disputed funds returned to you. XXXX can reject chargebacks and provide their own evidence that a transaction is legitimate. If evidence was provided, it will be attached to this email. If no merchant evidence is attached, none was provided to us during the investigations. You can learn more about the chargeback process here. \n\n\nIf you have any additional questions or need further assistance, feel free to contact us anytime. \n\nWarm regards, Chime Dispute XXXX This ticket includes a secure attachment. Use this link to access.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-09-19T15:14:31.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"53221","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10105342","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2024-09-12T23:36:36.000Z","state":"WI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Chime Account Number Ending In : XXXX Claim ID : XXXX <em>Dispute</em> Type : Debit-Unauthorized Transaction Date Error Reported : XXXX Document Request Date : XXXX Claim Amount : {$1200.00} Hi XXXX, XXXX to this email are the document ( XXXX ) used in your <em>dispute</em> <em>investigation</em>. Your <em>investigation</em> included a <em>review</em> of the following <em>transactions</em> : Chime TXN ID Date Amount <em>Merchant</em> XXXX. XXXX XXXX {$10.00} *******forever XXXX."]},"sort":[21.706827,"10105342"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"22082322","_score":21.56115,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting a formal complaint regarding the handling of a recent debit card dispute on my account.\n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I visited XXXX XXXX XXXX with a friend and initially attempted to start a tab. After learning the restaurant intended to keep my card during the tab process, I requested to be cashed out instead. My portion of the bill was approximately {$43.00}.\n\nLater that evening, I noticed two pending charges on my account one for {$43.00} and another for {$46.00}. I initially assumed one of the pending transactions would fall off and that it was there because of the initial start a tab idea. However, after the transactions posted, I noticed I had effectively been charged approximately {$90.00} total.\n\nI contacted the restaurant and attempted to speak with management regarding the issue. During the dispute process with the bank, First Horizon, I explained that I did not receive a final receipt from the merchant, but that I had contextual evidence supporting my claim, including a video taken at the restaurant where the transaction amount was discussed. Despite this, the dispute was denied primarily due to lack of a receipt.\n\nAfterward, the restaurant manager acknowledged issues with their XXXX XXXX, described it as janky, and refunded the full amount directly to me via XXXX XXXX. \n\nAt this point, my concern is no longer strictly about reimbursement, since the merchant resolved that portion. My concern is the quality and thoroughness of the dispute investigation conducted by First Horizon. Given the circumstances and the merchants later acknowledgment of XXXX processing issues, I do not feel the matter received an adequate review.\n\nAs both a customer and employee of the bank, this experience has significantly impacted my confidence in the institutions dispute resolution process and customer advocacy standards.\n\nI would appreciate a formal review of how this claim was handled, including whether appropriate investigative procedures were followed before the denial decision was made.\n\nThank you for your time and attention to this matter. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-05-11T18:02:33.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"723XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"22082322","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"FIRST HORIZON BANK","date_received":"2026-05-11T17:51:54.000Z","state":"AR","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["At this point, my concern is no longer strictly about reimbursement, since the <em>merchant</em> resolved that portion. My concern is the quality and thoroughness of the <em>dispute</em> <em>investigation</em> conducted by First Horizon. Given the circumstances and the <em>merchants</em> later acknowledgment of XXXX processing issues, I do not feel the matter received an adequate <em>review</em>."]},"sort":[21.56115,"22082322"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21314161","_score":21.494429,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing a complaint regarding how Wells Fargo handled a fraud claim on my debit card. \nIn XX/XX/year>, my debit card was compromised and used for unauthorized purchases totaling approximately {$380.00} through XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. I reported the fraud to Wells Fargo immediately, and my debit card was canceled and replaced. I also filed a police report and provided all requested documentation, including my bank statements and phone records, to XXXX and the police report number to Wells Fargo. \nWells Fargo issued a provisional credit while they investigated the claim. \nSeparately, XXXX conducted their own investigation and later confirmed to me in writing ( via email ) that the transactions were determined to be unauthorized and that a refund would be issued to my original payment method. \nHowever, I never received this refund. \nRecently, Wells Fargo reversed the provisional credit, stating that the transactions were authorized based on information provided by the merchant ( Zip ). This directly contradicts the written communication I received from XXXX confirming that a refund would be issued due to unauthorized activity. \nI contacted Wells Fargo to dispute the reversal and informed them that I have documentation showing the merchant agreed to refund the charges. I was told that my claim was closed and that I could not appeal or reopen the case. \nAt this point : The merchant has stated a refund would be issued but has not provided it Wells Fargo has removed the provisional credit and is relying on information that appears inconsistent with the merchants written communication I am left responsible for fraudulent charges despite providing all requested documentation I am requesting that Wells Fargo reopen and properly investigate this claim, including reviewing the documentation I have from the merchant confirming the refund, and provide a resolution consistent with applicable consumer protection regulations.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-16T19:19:52.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"55014","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21314161","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2026-04-16T18:03:49.000Z","state":"MN","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Recently, Wells Fargo reversed the provisional credit, stating that the <em>transactions</em> were authorized based on information provided by the <em>merchant</em> ( Zip ). This directly contradicts the written communication I received from XXXX confirming that a refund would be issued due to unauthorized activity. \nI <em>contacted</em> Wells Fargo to <em>dispute</em> the reversal and informed them that I have documentation showing the <em>merchant</em> agreed to refund the charges."]},"sort":[21.494429,"21314161"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":273,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":273}]}},"product":{"doc_count":273,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":124,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":111},{"key":"Other banking product or service","doc_count":11},{"key":"Savings account","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":89,"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":83},{"key":"Store credit card","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":16,"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":15},{"key":"General-purpose prepaid card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":14,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mobile or digital wallet","doc_count":6},{"key":"Domestic (US) money transfer","doc_count":3},{"key":"Virtual currency","doc_count":2},{"key":"Check cashing service","doc_count":1},{"key":"Foreign currency exchange","doc_count":1},{"key":"International money transfer","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":12,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":12}]}},{"key":"Prepaid card","doc_count":10,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose prepaid card","doc_count":5},{"key":"Government benefit card","doc_count":3},{"key":"General purpose card","doc_count":1},{"key":"Payroll card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":2},{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Installment loan","doc_count":1},{"key":"Other advances of future income","doc_count":1},{"key":"Payday loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt or credit management","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt settlement","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":273,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":93,"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":70},{"key":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card","doc_count":22},{"key":"Overcharged for something you did purchase with the card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":62,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem using a debit or ATM card","doc_count":44},{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":10},{"key":"Banking errors","doc_count":4},{"key":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","doc_count":56,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Transaction was not authorized","doc_count":44},{"key":"Money was taken from your account on the wrong day or for the wrong amount","doc_count":7},{"key":"Can't stop withdrawals from your account","doc_count":5}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":4},{"key":"Problem with personal statement of dispute","doc_count":1},{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":1},{"key":"Was not notified of investigation status or results","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Charged for a purchase or transfer you did not make with the card","doc_count":4},{"key":"Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Other features, terms, or problems","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other problem","doc_count":3},{"key":"Problem with customer service","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 was result of identity theft","doc_count":2},{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing an account","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Arbitration","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Closing your account","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize","doc_count":1},{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem caused by your funds being low","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Overdrafts and overdraft fees","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Unexpected or other fees","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Charged upfront or unexpected fees","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Fees or interest","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with fees","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Getting the loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Incorrect exchange rate","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Issues with repayment","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Managing the loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Billing problem","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing, opening, or closing your mobile wallet account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Opening an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Confusing or missing disclosures","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 getting a card or closing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trouble closing card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with fraud alerts or security freezes","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Trouble using your card","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Can't use card to make purchases","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Unauthorized transactions/trans. issues","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Wrong amount charged or received","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":273,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":271},{"key":"No","doc_count":2}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":273,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":229},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":33},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":11}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":273,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":273}]}},"company":{"doc_count":273,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":27},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":22},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":20},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":19},{"key":"Chime Financial Inc","doc_count":18},{"key":"SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.","doc_count":13},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":12},{"key":"Block, Inc.","doc_count":11},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":10},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":9},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":8},{"key":"GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA","doc_count":8},{"key":"U.S. BANCORP","doc_count":8},{"key":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","doc_count":6},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":5},{"key":"UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION","doc_count":5},{"key":"BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE","doc_count":4},{"key":"CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.","doc_count":4},{"key":"Affirm Holdings, Inc","doc_count":3},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":3},{"key":"FIFTH THIRD FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":3},{"key":"PNC Bank N.A.","doc_count":3},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":3},{"key":"TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY","doc_count":3},{"key":"Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"COMMERCE BANK","doc_count":2},{"key":"FinCo Services Inc DBA Current","doc_count":2},{"key":"Incomm Holdings Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"KEYCORP","doc_count":2},{"key":"Netspend Corporation","doc_count":2},{"key":"OneMain Finance Corporation","doc_count":2},{"key":"ROBINHOOD MARKETS INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Winklevoss Exchange LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"ADP Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"ALLY FINANCIAL INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"American Credit Acceptance, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Atlantic Union Bankshares, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"BB&T CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"BOEING EMPLOYEES' CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Blackhawk Network Holdings Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Coinbase, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Comerica","doc_count":1},{"key":"Credit Control, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Dave Operating, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"E*TRADE BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FIRST HORIZON BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"FISERV FINXACT CORE","doc_count":1},{"key":"Foris DAX, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, THE","doc_count":1},{"key":"Klarna AB","doc_count":1},{"key":"M&T BANK CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"OFG BANCORP","doc_count":1},{"key":"OPTUM BANK, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Relay Financial (US), Corp.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ria Envia, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"SIMMONS FIRST NATIONAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Tilt Finance, Inc.","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":273,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":45},{"key":"TX","doc_count":28},{"key":"FL","doc_count":23},{"key":"GA","doc_count":18},{"key":"NY","doc_count":16},{"key":"VA","doc_count":13},{"key":"NC","doc_count":10},{"key":"IL","doc_count":9},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":9},{"key":"MI","doc_count":8},{"key":"AR","doc_count":7},{"key":"CO","doc_count":7},{"key":"MD","doc_count":7},{"key":"MO","doc_count":6},{"key":"MA","doc_count":5},{"key":"NV","doc_count":5},{"key":"CT","doc_count":4},{"key":"OH","doc_count":4},{"key":"OK","doc_count":4},{"key":"PA","doc_count":4},{"key":"WI","doc_count":4},{"key":"AZ","doc_count":3},{"key":"IN","doc_count":3},{"key":"KS","doc_count":3},{"key":"LA","doc_count":3},{"key":"TN","doc_count":3},{"key":"WA","doc_count":3},{"key":"AL","doc_count":2},{"key":"KY","doc_count":2},{"key":"MS","doc_count":2},{"key":"DC","doc_count":1},{"key":"IA","doc_count":1},{"key":"MN","doc_count":1},{"key":"ND","doc_count":1},{"key":"NE","doc_count":1},{"key":"NH","doc_count":1},{"key":"NM","doc_count":1},{"key":"PR","doc_count":1},{"key":"SC","doc_count":1},{"key":"SD","doc_count":1},{"key":"WV","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":273,"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":96},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":11}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":273,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":22},{"key":"Older American","doc_count":5},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":2}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-15T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-15T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16469162,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[21.494429,"21314161"],"3":[20.061264,"10182547"],"4":[18.626703,"18443797"],"5":[17.795305,"12686946"],"6":[16.515373,"21613790"],"7":[15.2035675,"22187762"],"8":[14.259506,"20519271"]}}}