{"took":145,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":124,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12741921","_score":30.57732,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"In my original complaint, Chime reaffirmed the following : On XX/XX/year>, we concluded the investigation and, based on the information available, determined that a partial error occurred. We sent email notifications informing you of the outcomes and that merchant B XXXX Services Mb issued a full merchant credit for the disputed transaction of {$29.00} on XX/XX/year>. For the remaining transactions of the dispute claim, we determined that no error occurred. On XX/XX/year>, you requested to reopen the investigation, and a new review was opened. The review only included the remaining XXXX ( XXXX ) disputed transactions deemed as no error found from the original dispute claim, totaling {$270.00}. As of our latest decision on XX/XX/year>, we concluded the investigation and, based on a review of your transaction history, device/login activity, account takeover indicators, and other risk-based factors, re-affirmed the determination that no error had occurred. \n\nDespite this acknowledgment, Chime has failed to provide any supporting documentation to substantiate its determination. Furthermore, they have not addressed the inadequate customer service I experienced when speaking with a XXXX regarding this matter. \n\nChime has now made representations to a regulatory body confirming that an error occurred with respect to XXXX of the disputed transactions, despite all transactions involving the same merchant, yet maintains that no error occurred for the remaining transactions. This position is inconsistent and raises concerns regarding the integrity of their investigation and decision-making process.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-31T20:50:02.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"610XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12741921","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2025-03-31T20:45:23.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In my original complaint, Chime reaffirmed the following : On XX/XX/year>, we <em>concluded</em> the <em>investigation</em> and, based on the information available, determined that a partial <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>. We sent email notifications informing you of the outcomes and that merchant B XXXX <em>Services</em> Mb issued a full merchant credit for the disputed transaction of {$29.00} on XX/XX/year>. For the remaining transactions of the dispute claim, we determined that no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>."]},"sort":[30.57732,"12741921"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6067391","_score":27.759262,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I filed a complaint against XXXX XXXX XXXX for {$290.00} and {$89.00} because they charged me for work not rendered. Of course, due to other issues I am having with NFCU surrounding overdrafts and overdraft fees, Non-sufficient funds and associated fees, Late or other fees and Bounced checks or returned payments - NFCU of course, sided with the merchant ; stating that 'no error occurred ' and reversed the credit applied to my debt card resulting in more fees. \n\nXXXX XXXX, Senior Investigator with the DMV 's Compliance Enforcement Division ( CED ) can confirm that Quality Auto Services charged me for services not rendered. XXXX XXXX visited XXXX XXXX XXXX and obtained copies of invoices : XXXX and XXXX and told me to take my vehicle back over to XXXX XXXX XXXX to have them put in Spark Plus and Ignition coils that were not put in there before. \n\nNFCU claims there was no error however the decision was implicit bias and retaliatory - NFCU did not carry out any investigation to come to that conclusion. If NFCU would have actually investigated the matter they would have concluded that I was charged for services not rendered. On XX/XX/2022, I was given invoice XXXX which showed XXXX XXXX XXXX fixing the misdemeanor error ; after the DMV investigated and concluded they charged me for services not rendered and needed to actually fix my vehicle.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-10-09T17:24:22.000Z","issue":"Problem caused by your funds being low","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"89166","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6067391","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2022-10-09T16:47:17.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Overdrafts and overdraft fees"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["On XX/XX/2022, I was given invoice XXXX which showed XXXX XXXX XXXX fixing the misdemeanor <em>error</em> ; after the DMV <em>investigated</em> and <em>concluded</em> they charged me for <em>services</em> not rendered and needed to actually fix my vehicle."]},"sort":[27.759262,"6067391"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7630913","_score":26.335041,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Account Number Ending In : XXXX Claim ID : XXXX Dispute Type : Debit - Non-Receipt of Goods or Services Date Error Reported : XXXX Claim Amount : {$120.00} Hello XXXX XXXX, This letter is to inform you that we have made a final determination regarding the claim referenced above. As part of our investigation, a review of our systems was performed in addition to information provided during the claim filing process. As applicable, we coordinate with other financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \n\nBased on our investigation, we have concluded no error occurred. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed. \n\nYou may request a copy of the documents we used in determining the final outcome of the investigation. If you have any additional questions or need further assistance, feel free to contact us at any time. \n\nThanks, Chime Disputes Team Account Number Ending In : XXXX Claim ID : XXXX Dispute Type : Debit - Non-Receipt of Goods or Services Date Error Reported : XXXX Claim Amount : {$13.00} Hello XXXX XXXX, This letter is to inform you we made a final determination regarding the claim referenced above. \n\nOur investigation concluded an error occurred. On XXXX, the merchant issued credit in the amount of {$13.00}. We consider this credit permanent, and we reversed any applicable fees. \n\nWe apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you, and thank you for being a valued Chime member. \n\nIf you have any additional questions or need further assistance, feel free to contact us at any time. \n\nSincerely, Chime XXXX XXXX XXXX amount {$410.00} date XXXX XXXX denied with any documents for their decision XXXX amount {$240.00} date XXXX XXXX denied with out documents of their decision","date_sent_to_company":"2023-09-30T08:49:09.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"936XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7630913","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2023-09-30T08:32:16.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As applicable, we coordinate with <em>other</em> financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \n\nBased on our <em>investigation</em>, we have <em>concluded</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed. \n\nYou may request a copy of the documents we used in determining the final outcome of the <em>investigation</em>. If you have any additional questions or need further assistance, feel free to contact us at any time."]},"sort":[26.335041,"7630913"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20326157","_score":26.332779,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Dispute Type : Debit - Non-Receipt of Goods or Services Date Error Reported : XXXX Claim Amount : {$690.00} Hello This letter is to inform you that we have made a final determination regarding the claim referenced above. As part of our investigation, a review of our systems was performed in addition to information provided during the claim filing process. As applicable, we coordinate with other financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \nBased on our investigation, we have concluded no error occurred. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed. \nYou may request a copy of the documents we used in determining the final outcome of the investigation. If you would like to request copies of the documents, or have further questions, please contact us at XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-17T09:29:34.000Z","issue":"Closing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"631XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20326157","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2026-03-17T09:23:14.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Funds not received from closed account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Based on our <em>investigation</em>, we have <em>concluded</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed. \nYou may request a copy of the documents we used in determining the final outcome of the <em>investigation</em>. If you would like to request copies of the documents, or have further questions, please contact us at XXXX."]},"sort":[26.332779,"20326157"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15625330","_score":24.087063,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I emailed the Chime executive office regarding my recent experience with a disputed transaction. While no fraud had occured. The seller, in this case XXXX sold me a product that was not as expected. I was unable to resolve with XXXX directly as I had voluntarily closed my account with them. And XXXX did not help any. So I resorted to dispute with Chime. Chime states they \" have their customers back '' in infomercials. Unfortunately they did not have my back in this dispute. I understand banks may not be able to resolve a consumer dispute in the customers favor always. \n\nChime... \n\nAccount Number Ending In : XXXX Claim ID : XXXX Dispute Type : Debit - Goods/Services Not As Described Date Error Reported : XXXX Claim Amount : {$19.00} Hello XXXX XXXX XXXX This letter is to inform you that we have made a final determination regarding the claim referenced above. As part of our investigation, a review of our systems was performed in addition to information provided during the claim filing process. As applicable, we coordinate with other financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \n\nBased on our investigation, we have concluded no error occurred. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-30T13:36:55.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"60074","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15625330","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2025-08-30T13:24:08.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem making or receiving payments"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As applicable, we coordinate with <em>other</em> financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \n\nBased on our <em>investigation</em>, we have <em>concluded</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed."]},"sort":[24.087063,"15625330"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8519033","_score":22.628462,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"On Sunday XX/XX/year>, I notified Chime Bank XXXX XXXX unauthorized transactions that occurred on my Chime Debit Card totaling {$3900.00}. Chime Bank falls under Banking services provided by XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX. or XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX FDIC. The Chime XXXX XXXX XXXX is issued by XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX pursuant to a license from XXXX XXXX XXXX and may be used everywhere XXXX XXXX XXXX are accepted. Please see back of your Card for its issuing bank. \n\nI found out that the transactions that occurred were made to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX a payment processor for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I notified the merchant to close the account and reported the unauthorized charges and sending all the requested information to the merchant. \n\nOn XX/XX/year> I received an email for Chime Bank stating : \" This letter is to inform you that we have made a final determination regarding the claim referenced above. As part of our investigation, a review of our systems was performed in addition to information provided during the claim filing process. As applicable, we coordinate with other financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \n\nBased on our investigation, we have concluded no error occurred. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed '' I have requested a copy of the documents that Chime Bank stated was used in determining the final outcome of the investigation.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-03-11T13:54:50.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"37363","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8519033","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2024-03-11T13:21:34.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As part of our <em>investigation</em>, a review of our systems was performed in addition to information provided during the claim filing process. As applicable, we coordinate with <em>other</em> financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \n\nBased on our <em>investigation</em>, we have <em>concluded</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>."]},"sort":[22.628462,"8519033"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4873938","_score":22.153492,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"To Whom It May Concern : 1. As Servicer of the above referenced Mortgage Loan, please treat this as a notice of error pursuant to the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, subject to the response time set out in Regulation X, 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 ( e ) ( 3 ) ( i ) ( B ).\n\n2. 1024.35 Borrower asserts an error relating to the servicing of a mortgage loan is a notice of error. 35 ( b ) ( 5 ) Imposition of a fee or charge that the servicer lacks a reasonable basis to impose upon the borrower.\n\n3. Error Resolution Notice under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35 and correcting the error or errors identified by the borrower and providing the borrower with a written notification of the correction, the effective date of the correction, and contact information, including a telephone number, for further assistance.\n\n4. ( ii ) Different or additional error. If during a reasonable investigation of a notice of error, a servicer concludes that errors occurred other than, or in addition to, the error or errors alleged by the borrower, the servicer shall correct all such additional errors and provide the borrower with a written notification that describes the errors the servicer identified, the action taken to correct the errors, the effective date of the correction, and contact information, including a telephone number, for further assistance. \n\n5. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) and XXXX XXXX illegal practices pose a detriment and these fees imposed were fraudulent in nature. This practice is unfair to us as borrowers and we are harmed by this illegal practices since the additional {$51.00}, XXXX was added to our original loan amount.. These practices are unfair, abusive, deceptive or predatory acts by the financial services company and its affiliatessuch as excessive fees, financial fraud or other illegal acts against me the consumer.\n\n6. I visited the property on two prior occasions and was provided incorrect codes to enter the property. I entered the property on a third occasion and took photograph ( see attachment ) of the entire house and all the damage within and throughout. It is evident that no work was performed for numerous years especially amounting to {$51000.00}. \n\n7. Select Portfolio Services incorrectly imposed preservation fees to my loan in the amount of approximately {$51.00}, XXXX from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. Photo documentation reflect the home has been in despair for awhile and deteriorated. XXXX and XXXX XXXX has added fees to the mortgage loan and no work or little work was performed.\n\n8. Payoff Errors : Select Portfolio Services provided an inaccurate mortgage payoff balance, since there was possible fraud by XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) and XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) and Safeguard properties collected over {$51.00}, XXXX of monies for work not performed. \n\n9. I am requesting Select Portfolio Services Inc certified me through the documents that an error has occurred and credit my account. As a borrow I should be protected from these unfair deceptive practices.\n\n10. A servicer is generally required to respond to a written request for information from a borrower regarding the mortgage loan Here, Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc has erred by adding {$51000.00} of unreasonable fees or fees for work not performed which should be immediately credited. Also I am requesting that XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX  ) and XXXX XXXX no longer maintain the property on record nor try to make necessary repairs at this date or future date to rectify the fraudulent activity of the fees added. The family will be responsible for any future repair or work performed and once this error is rectified plan to cure any default once the payoff amount has been corrected.\n\nThank you for taking the time to respond to this Notice of Error within 5 business days. \n\n\n***** PLEASE SEND ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO ***** :","date_sent_to_company":"2021-11-03T04:25:07.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4873938","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","date_received":"2021-11-03T04:12:40.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["If during a reasonable <em>investigation</em> of a notice of <em>error</em>, a <em>servicer</em> <em>concludes</em> that <em>errors</em> <em>occurred</em> <em>other</em> than, or in addition to, the <em>error</em> or <em>errors</em> alleged by the borrower, the <em>servicer</em> shall correct all such additional <em>errors</em> and provide the borrower with a written notification that describes the <em>errors</em> the <em>servicer</em> identified, the action taken to correct the <em>errors</em>, the effective date of the correction, and contact information, including a telephone number, for further assistance. \n\n5."],"company":["SELECT PORTFOLIO <em>SERVICING</em>, INC."]},"sort":[22.153492,"4873938"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17101408","_score":21.011442,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to dispute 2 fraudulent charges on my account in the amount totaling {$1000.00}. I am a victim of identity theft, and I did not make these charges. I request that you remove the fraudulent charges and any related finance charge and other charges from my account, send me an updated and accurate statement, and close the account.\n\nUpon receiving mobile notifications of 2 unfamiliar transactions, totaling {$1000.00} listed as chime and emails from chime about an account that I never initiated, I immediately contacted chime support to inform them that these charges were unauthorized and that someone else was using my personal information. They confirmed that there was an account open under my name. I told them that the account was fraudulently opened and To immediately close the account. I was unaware of any account under my name and have never used chime so I requested that a claim be opened to dispute these unauthorized charges.\n\nLater, key evidence emerged when someone emailed me, via XXXX to alert me that someone else was using my identity to pose as seller of a XXXX XXXX. Stranger asked seller for their ID. to confirm legitimacy of seller and rental. Seller gave him identical Image of my DL.My investigation confirmed that once my information was compromised it was easy for them to open a chime account using my stolen DL which allowed them to make transactions using linked payment methods. I've learned through complaints this is a common tactic used by scammers to easily move money through accounts due to limited guard rails in place on chime.Chime says charges are authorized. I have aggressively disputed transactions with several examples of key evidence get my dispute has been denied twice and they closed out my claim. I even wrote a very long letter including explaining a timeline of events, my investigation and rationale on why the evidence I provided shows strong signs of fraudulent activity. This is not only a case of fraudulent activity but also identity theft. But I know chime is notorious for this. I have placed a credit freeze with all three business bureaus. I also filed an identity report with the FTC but Im now {$1000.00} short and without it I wont be able to pay my rent next month.\n\n( Please see attachments for more complete, detailed explanations ).\n\nTimeline of Events : XX/XX/25 : Date of transactions. Lost wallet which contained my identification and all of my payment methods XX/XX/25 : Initial contact, Contacted Chime support via telephone and spoke with XXXX from Member Service Support, Filed Dispute # 1 with supporting documentation XX/XX/25 : Dispute # XXXX XXXX was denied. Received a determination stating no error occurred 1. Based on our investigation, we have concluded no error occurred. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed.\n\nYou may request a copy of the documents we used in determining the final outcome of the investigation. \nXXXX : Filed dispute # XXXX XXXX in which I included additional evidence. \nXX/XX/25 : Dispute # 2 was denied. Received a determination stating no error occurred 1. Based on our investigation, we have concluded no error occurred. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed.\n\nYou may request a copy of the documents we used in determining the final outcome of the investigation. \nXX/XX/25 : Notified Chime support that I plan on filing a rebuttal and they sent me a link to provide any supporting documentation for my rebuttal. \nXX/XX/25 : Submitted a formal rebuttal XXXX to chime w/ supporting documentation","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-07T17:17:56.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"200XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17101408","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2025-11-07T16:17:45.000Z","state":"DC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Lost wallet which contained my identification and all of my payment methods XX/XX/25 : Initial contact, Contacted Chime support via telephone and spoke with XXXX from Member <em>Service</em> Support, Filed Dispute # 1 with supporting documentation XX/XX/25 : Dispute # XXXX XXXX was denied. Received a determination stating no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em> 1. Based on our <em>investigation</em>, we have <em>concluded</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed."],"product":["Money transfer, virtual currency, or money <em>service</em>"]},"sort":[21.011442,"17101408"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11049889","_score":20.245596,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"I received my Direct deposit from my work XX/XX/year>, when I checked my account in the afternoon at XXXX while I'm at work, I was shocked when I saw {$500.00} was transferred to other person chime account!! I don't recognized the account and I did not transfer any money to anyone that day. So I called chime customer service right away and reported that there is unauthorized transaction in my checking account. Someone able to get into my account and transfer money. Asked me some questions and I answered. They said they will start to investigate to recover my money. After a week I got an email that says \" As part of our investigation, a review of our systems was performed in addition to information provided during the claim filing process. As applicable, we coordinate with other financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \n\nBased on our investigation, we have concluded no error occurred. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed. \nThen I called again the customer service and asked to reopen my dispute and I submitted some important information to help and prove that I did not made that transaction. I send them my work timesheet that I worked that day from XXXX to XXXX. A screenshot of my phone 's IP address, for them to compare if the transaction comes from my phone. Screenshots of all my previous money transfer. It my history, I always used the word \" loan '' when I transfer money to anyone. But this unauthorized transaction the word \" owes '' was used. I also sent screenshot of that person profile and it shows he is not in my contacts. I have no idea who the person is. \nToday I received email and it has exact words when I read the email. That their decision about this matter is there is no error. This is the reason why searched in the internet how will I get help to recover my hard earned money. I make basic wage and it's hard to make money and it will disappear just like that. Chime should do better investigation and add more security in their money transfer. A lot of customers will lose money just like that and they don't do proper investigation. Please help..","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-07T05:46:12.000Z","issue":"Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"89103","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11049889","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2024-12-07T04:56:02.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["They said they will start to <em>investigate</em> to recover my money. After a week I got an email that says \" As part of our <em>investigation</em>, a review of our systems was performed in addition to information provided during the claim filing process. As applicable, we coordinate with <em>other</em> financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \n\nBased on our <em>investigation</em>, we have <em>concluded</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>."],"product":["Money transfer, virtual currency, or money <em>service</em>"],"issue":["Unauthorized transactions or <em>other</em> transaction problem"]},"sort":[20.245596,"11049889"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20859625","_score":20.084557,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I dispute Wells Fargos XX/XX/XXXX response. The banks response is insufficient, conclusory, and does not resolve my complaint. I dispute both the denial of my claim and Wells Fargos refusal to refund the overdraft fees tied to the disputed activity. \n\nWells Fargo says it completed research, but its letter does not show a reasonable, documented investigation of the disputed transfers. Under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E, once a consumer gives timely notice of an alleged error, the financial institution must investigate the alleged error, determine whether an error occurred, and report the results to the consumer within the required time. If the institution can not complete the investigation within 10 business days, it may use provisional credit, but the investigation still must be concluded within the applicable regulatory period, and the consumer must have full use of the provisionally credited funds during the investigation. 15 U.S.C. 1693f ( a ), ( c ).\n\nWells Fargos response does not provide the factual basis necessary to justify denial. The letter says only that Wells Fargo did not identify evidence that the payment was made by an alternate method, could not locate charges on an alternate Wells Fargo account, and found the disputed transactions consistent with prior undisputed activity. Those are generalized conclusions, not a transaction-specific explanation showing what records were reviewed, what merchant or network data was obtained, what account evidence was compared, or how Wells Fargo determined that the disputed transactions were actually authorized by me. Regulation E requires a real investigation and a written explanation of findings if the bank concludes no error occurred. 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( c ), ( d ).\n\nThe CFPBs official commentary also makes clear that a financial institution must begin its investigation promptly upon receipt of an oral notice and may not delay until it receives written confirmation. It also states that if an error occurred, the institution must correct the error, including refunding any fees imposed by the institution, where applicable. 12 C.F.R. Part 1005, Official Interpretations to 1005.11 ( c ).\n\nI also dispute Wells Fargos apparent effort to rely on prior undisputed activity, receipt of benefit, or a broad transaction pattern instead of proving authorization of the disputed transfers. Under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E, consumer liability for unauthorized electronic fund transfers is limited by law, and the bank must comply with Regulation E before imposing liability on the consumer for an unauthorized EFT claim. 15 U.S.C. 1693g ( a ) ; 12 C.F.R. 1005.6 ( b ) ; Official Interpretations to 1005.11 ( b ). \nThe response is also deficient because it does not provide the documentation underlying Wells Fargos determination. If a financial institution determines that no error occurred, it must provide an explanation of its findings, include notice of the consumers right to request the documents relied upon, and, upon request, promptly provide reproductions of the documents it relied on. 15 U.S.C. 1693f ( d ) ; 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ). The CFPBs official commentary further states that the institution must provide copies in understandable form. \n\nI am therefore formally requesting that Wells Fargo produce all documents and data it relied upon in denying my claim and reversing the provisional credit, including but not limited to internal claim notes, transaction logs, account comparisons, merchant information, network records, screenshots, and any other material used to conclude that no error occurred. Regulation E expressly provides that those documents must be produced upon request. \n\nI also dispute Wells Fargos refusal to refund the overdraft fees listed in its own response. Wells Fargo identified XXXX overdraft fees of {$35.00} each, totaling {$420.00}. Those fees are : Account ending in XXXX : XXXX payment posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX Account ending in XXXX : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX XXXX * XXXX XXXX XXXX posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX NJ posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX  posted XX/XX/XXXX {$35.00} fee applied XX/XX/XXXX That is {$420.00} in overdraft fees identified by Wells Fargo . Wells Fargo also says one {$35.00} courtesy refund was issued on XX/XX/XXXX for the XX/XX/XXXX XXXX transaction, which means at least {$380.00} remains outstanding even under Wells Fargos own accounting. \n\nThese fees should not have been dismissed with a blanket statement about Wells Fargos posting practices. The bank still must explain, transaction by transaction and fee by fee, why each overdraft fee remains valid, especially where the fees were tied to disputed transactions and where Wells Fargo reversed provisional credit after denying the claim. The CFPBs official commentary states that if an error occurred, the institution must correct the error, including refunding fees imposed by the institution where applicable, and that upon debiting provisional credit, the institution may not impose fees for items it is required to honor under 1005.11.\n\nWells Fargos letter also states that it reversed the provisional credit of {$74.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. If Wells Fargo debited provisional credit after concluding no error occurred, Regulation E required a written explanation of findings and notice of my right to request the documents relied upon, and those documents must be provided promptly upon request. 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( d ) ( 1 ) - ( 2 ) ; 15 U.S.C. 1693f ( d ).\n\nWells Fargos handling of this matter also appears to raise UDAAP concerns under the Consumer Financial Protection Act. The CFPB may prevent a covered person from engaging in an unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice in connection with a consumer financial product or service, and it is unlawful for a covered person to engage in an unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice. 12 U.S.C. 5531 ( a ), 5536 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ). An act or practice is unfair where it causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers, the injury is not reasonably avoidable by consumers, and the injury is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or competition. 12 U.S.C. 5531 ( c ). Here, Wells Fargo reversed provisional credit, retained overdraft fees, and provided only a conclusory explanation rather than a transparent, evidence-based explanation of how it determined the disputed transactions were authorized. That caused concrete monetary harm to me in the form of unreimbursed fees and charges, and that harm was not reasonably avoidable once the bank controlled the investigation, the provisional credit decision, and the fee determinations. To the extent Wells Fargo failed to conduct a sufficient investigation, failed to provide a meaningful explanation, or retained fees without adequate support, that conduct appears to raise unfairness concerns under UDAAP.\n\nI am asking CFPB to require Wells Fargo to : 1. Reopen the investigation.\n\n2. Produce all documents and evidence relied upon in denying claim number XXXX and reversing the provisional credit. \n3. Provide a transaction-by-transaction explanation of how Wells Fargo concluded the disputed activity was authorized.\n\n4. Provide a fee-by-fee explanation of why each of the 12 overdraft fees remains valid. \n5. Refund all overdraft fees identified in the letter, totaling {$420.00}, or at minimum refund the outstanding {$380.00} Wells Fargo still appears to owe after the single {$35.00} courtesy refund it claims to have issued. \n6. Confirm whether Wells Fargo fully complied with the timing, investigation, provisional credit, written explanation, and document-production requirements of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E.\n\n7. Evaluate whether Wells Fargos conduct also constitutes an unfair act or practice under the Consumer Financial Protection Act/UDAAP provisions. \n\nMy position is straightforward : Wells Fargo has not shown a sufficient basis to deny my claim, has not provided the records it relied upon, and has not justified retaining the overdraft fees listed in its own response. I request that CFPB continue to pursue this matter and require a substantive response with supporting documentation.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-01T20:14:33.000Z","issue":"Problem caused by your funds being low","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"282XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20859625","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2026-04-01T20:09:33.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Overdrafts and overdraft fees"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Regulation E requires a real <em>investigation</em> and a written explanation of findings if the bank <em>concludes</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>. 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( c ), ( d ).\n\nThe CFPBs official commentary also makes clear that a financial institution must begin its <em>investigation</em> promptly upon receipt of an oral notice and may not delay until it receives written confirmation."]},"sort":[20.084557,"20859625"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18894270","_score":20.029222,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/year>, I sent a XXXX XXXX transfer of {$230.00} from my XXXX XXXX account ( ending XXXX ) for a service that was promised but never provided. I later determined the transaction appears to have been a scam ( services never delivered ; no refund ). I promptly disputed the transaction with XXXX XXXX and requested an investigation and supporting records. \n\nXXXX XXXX closed my dispute as \" no error occurred '' and refused to re-open it. XXXX XXXX  explanation is that ( 1 ) they attempted to request a \" good-faith return '' through XXXX to the receiving institution ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and the receiving institution declined ; ( 2 ) under \" XXXX rules, '' they can not compel a return ; ( 3 ) XXXX has XXXX no purchase protection '' and works like cash/wire once funds are sent ; and ( 4 ) XXXX XXXX  concluded the transfer was \" authorized '' and not due to an unauthorized transfer, system failure, or other \" error ''. \n\nXXXX XXXX position conflates recoverability with error-resolution compliance. Under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) and Regulation E, when a consumer reports a potential error, the institution must investigate, determine whether an error occurred, and report the results to the consumer within required timelines. \n\n1. XXXX XXXX described \" investigation '' is primarily a recovery attempt via XXXX. Whether the recipient bank will voluntarily return funds does not determine whether an \" error '' occurred under federal law. EFTA requires an investigation and a determination, not merely a clawback request.\n\n2. The banks conclusion that the transaction was \" authorized '' is conclusory and unsupported. Regulation E defines \" error '' to include an unauthorized electronic fund transfer. XXXX XXXX insists it reviewed evidence and determined the transfer was authorized, but it has not provided the factual basis that supports that conclusion ( e.g., authentication/authorization evidence ). Instead, XXXX XXXX relies on generalized XXXX disclaimers about \" no purchase protection '' which do not satisfy the banks federal statutory duties. \n\n3. XXXX XXXX failed to provide \" documents relied upon '' / meaningful explanation of findings. Regulation E requires a written explanation of findings when the institution determines no error occurred and, upon request, production of the documents the institution relied upon. Instead, XXXX XXXX sent me screenshots/status records indicating \" delivered/no return, '' but those records do not demonstrate authorization. When I requested records supporting the \" authorized '' determination, XXXX XXXX stated that \" system level data, internal security logs, or proprietary fraud monitoring outputs '' may not be disclosed. This is problematic because those are the categories of records that would ordinarily be relied upon to reach an \" authorized '' conclusion. If XXXX XXXX relied on those records, the bank should provide consumer-reportable versions or an adequate explanation of the evidence supporting its determination, rather than refusing disclosure while maintaining a conclusory denial. \n\n4. XXXX XXXX dispute handling appears to be an unfair process that effectively denies Regulation E protections by substituting \" XXXX works like cash '' messaging for the required investigation and substantiated findings. If XXXX XXXX markets or represents consumer protections for fraudulent transfers but then denies claims with conclusory statements and without providing the basis for an authorization determination, that XXXX implicate unfair/deceptive practices under the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nI requested that XXXX XXXX re-open the dispute and provide a Regulation E-compliant investigation and documentation, including : XXXX. Evidence supporting its \" authorized '' conclusion ( channel used, timestamps, session IDs, device identifiers, IP/geo indicators, XXXX challenges/results XXXX and any anomalous access/risk flags ) XXXX. Recipient token/enrollment history and the basis for \" token not restricted '' findings referenced by XXXX records XXXX XXXX XXXX case notes and the specific steps taken in the investigation beyond the XXXX return request XXXX. A substantive written explanation of findings consistent with Regulation XXXX First Tech refused to re-open and responded that the Regulation XXXX process is \" complete, '' relying largely on XXXX lack of purchase protection and stating some internal security documentation will not be disclosed. \n\nHarm to me : XXXX. Financial loss of {$230.00} XXXX. Significant time and administrative burden spent pursuing basic evidence and a legally compliant error-resolution process XXXX. Ongoing inability to validate the banks \" authorized '' conclusion due to lack of supporting evidence and refusal to provide consumer-reportable documentation","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-21T17:25:45.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"98072","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18894270","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"First Technology Federal Credit Union","date_received":"2026-01-21T17:13:03.000Z","state":"WA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["On XX/XX/year>, I sent a XXXX XXXX transfer of {$230.00} from my XXXX XXXX account ( ending XXXX ) for a <em>service</em> that was promised but never provided. I later determined the transaction appears to have been a scam ( <em>services</em> never delivered ; no refund ). I promptly disputed the transaction with XXXX XXXX and requested an <em>investigation</em> and supporting records. \n\nXXXX XXXX closed my dispute as \" no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em> '' and refused to re-open it."],"product":["Money transfer, virtual currency, or money <em>service</em>"]},"sort":[20.029222,"18894270"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5923695","_score":19.527475,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I have been a Chime member for over three years. I have had nothing but a positive experience until XX/XX/XXXX, when my account was hacked, and money was stolen from me. I had previously heard of other members experiencing fraud through Chime, but I refused to accept it. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a notification from Chime indicating that my app had been accessed from a new location, and a new device. Immediately following that notification, I received another one stating that a transfer in the amount of {$360.00} was made to XXXX. I tried logging into my app shortly after, in hopes of figuring out what had transpired, only to see that I had been completely logged out of my app, and the password was reset, preventing me from logging back in. After this unauthorized transaction and failure to log into the app, I contacted Chime by phone in hopes of having the matter resolved quickly. Instead, I was met with customer service agents who went through the motions of investigating my case. These agents submitted a dispute of the transaction, and in less than 24 hours provided an update indicating, Based on our investigation, we have concluded no error occurred. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed. Despite providing several screenshots of proof that I did not authorize any payments to any person, and proof that my account was accessed from a different location and device, Chime customer service failed to help me. In all of the years that I have used Chime, I had only used the Pay Friends feature, to make transfers between my fathers account and myself, therefore it is impossible that I would have made any transfers to other individuals. I am still arguing with them in hopes that they will return my funds.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-08-27T16:58:00.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"91324","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5923695","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2022-08-27T16:35:50.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem accessing account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Instead, I was met with customer <em>service</em> agents who went through the motions of <em>investigating</em> my case. These agents submitted a dispute of the transaction, and in less than 24 hours provided an update indicating, Based on our <em>investigation</em>, we have <em>concluded</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed."]},"sort":[19.527475,"5923695"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6419483","_score":19.509777,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I have unfortunately been a victim of identity theft and on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nXX/XX/XXXX My XXXX unemployment debit card which is issued by Central Trust Bank was compromised. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX I filed a dispute with XXXX cardholder services. I also filed a police report on XX/XX/XXXX and I've filed a report with the Federal Trade Commission on XX/XX/XXXX. I've submitted all of the above including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX the police report and the FTC report as evidence along with the transaction dispute form provided by cardholder services. \nI've yet to be credited for any of the transactions that took place with my account starting on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXXXXXX XXXX with an electronic ( ACH ) funds transfer from card to bank account {$5000.00} personal savings ACH withdrawal. A total {$13000.00} had been taken in total. \nXX/XX/XXXX I was informed by an account specialist with XXXX cardholder services my account has been pre-determined from here on that that no error will be found to have occured what information I send them i this dispute has been investigated multiple times I don't see how these people aren't investigating and working with the other financial institution to where the ACH transfers were sent to it has the names of the individuals and the accounts where they sent my money to right there in the bank statements. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I've asked for documents as to how they have concluded the investigation and all they send me is a bank statement.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-01-11T10:22:51.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"641XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6419483","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CENTRAL BANCOMPANY, INC","date_received":"2023-01-11T09:46:08.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XX/XX/XXXX I was informed by an account specialist with XXXX cardholder <em>services</em> my account has been pre-determined from here on that that no <em>error</em> will be found to have <em>occured</em> what information I send them i this dispute has been <em>investigated</em> multiple times I don't see how these people aren't <em>investigating</em> and working with the <em>other</em> financial institution to where the ACH transfers were sent to it has the names of the individuals and the accounts where they sent my money to right there in the bank"]},"sort":[19.509777,"6419483"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6956979","_score":19.456247,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint relates to a simple error committed by a merchant on XX/XX/XXXX in the amount of {$100.00}. On XX/XX/XXXX I entered an agreement with XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX as their debt collector. The agreement contained a preauthorized electronic fund transfer agreement, and allowed for varying amounts. On the XXXX of each month XXXX was allowed to debit from my account {$21.00}, on the XXXX of each XXXX {$53.00} ( plus the normal monthly amount ), and a {$25.00} for NSF fees. The agreement, EFTA, and XXXX  XXXX contain no authorization for XXXX to debit any amount, whether varying or otherwise, or in anyway relating to a failure to cancel any contract, on any date other than the XXXX of any particular month. Here, XXXX debited the monthly due, the yearly due, and the NSF fee ( a varying payment of {$100.00} ) on XX/XX/XXXX, rather than on XX/XX/XXXX ; constituting clear and convincing error. On XX/XX/XXXX I contacted Key Bank to dispute the transaction on the above grounds. Key immediately provisionally credited the amount in error, and began investigating. On or about XX/XX/XXXX Key finished its investigation, and planned to reverse the credit on XX/XX/XXXX, finding no error because, \" Cancellation of services was not completed prior to the billing of the disputed transaction. '' However, Key did not properly notify me of the results of its investigation and the date it had scheduled to debit the provisional credit ; I had not received the letter until XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX I called Key because the debit had seemed suspicious as it was not clearly labeled as a reversal. I requested an explanation of Key 's instigation and supporting documents. On XX/XX/XXXX, after having reviewed the explanation and the supporting documents I called Key to reassert the error ; this call lead to a showing of Key 's severe and systemic violation of the EFTA. After much back and forth the first employee ( XXXX ) informed me that there was a {$100.00} debit on XX/XX/XXXX ( the disputed transaction ) AND XX/XX/XXXX ( this debit did not appear on my periodic statement ). The XX/XX/XXXX debit was clearly what actually should have happened, a Preauthorized EFT in accordance with the agreement and EFTA ; rather than the XX/XX/XXXX which was clearly a merchant simply wanting to debit my account in a manner not agreed to in writing. XXXX had clearly realized this information was SUPPOSED to be hidden from me and claimed to have continuously keep \" Checking This ''. After further back and forth I asked to speak to a manager. The Manager claimed the XX/XX/XXXX payment was in fact a Preauthorized EFT, and admitted there was a debit on XX/XX/XXXX and claimed it should be on my periodic statement ; I informed her I had taken a screenshot of my account and the debit most certainly was not on the statement. I quoted to 15 USC 1693f ( e ) ( 2 ) and asked her if Key Bank gives the benefit of the doubt to consumers or to merchants, and she stated merchants. Flabbergasted, I quoted numerous other portions of the contract, EFTA, Reg E, and the documents Key provided and utilized in its initial investigation. After nearly a 2 hour phone call the manager finally agreed that the transaction constituted an error, and that she would REQUEST that the investigation be reopen. After the manager found that an error occurred, Key was clearly required to credit my account the amount in error within 1 day ; rather, a letter was sent to me stating Key \" received a request ... to reopen a previously denied claim ''. Now, 25 days after Key Bank found an error had in fact occurred, Key has yet to correct my account, whether provisionally or otherwise, or inform me that it has actually reopened and STARTED an investigation after my reassertion of error following review of the documents Key used to rely on to determine an error had not occurred. Key Bank 's violations of the EFTA/Reg E are clearly, at a minimum : failure to make an EFTA in a timely manner 15 USC 1693h ( a ) ( 1 ) ; failure to correct the error within one day after it determined an error occurred 15 USC 1693f ( b ) ; failure to provisionally recredit my account, make a good faith investigation, and did not have a reasonable basis for believing my account was not in error 15 USC 1693f ( e ) ( 1 ) ; knowingly and willfully concluding that my account was not in error when such conclusion could not reasonably have been drawn from the evidence available 15 USC 1693f ( e ) ( 2 ) ; an incorrect EFT from my account 15 USC 1693f ( f ) ( 2 ) ; the omission from a periodic statement of an EFT 15 USC 1693f ( f ) ( 3 ) ; my request for additional information 15 USC 1693f ( f ) ( 6 ) ; violations of Reg E 15 USC 1693f ( f ) ( 7 ) ; debiting a Preauthorized EFT on a different date than the one agreed to 12 CFR 1005.11 ( a ) ( vi ) ; failure to promptly investigate whether an error occurred, and complete its investigation in ten days due to its decision not to provisionally recredit my account 12 CFR 1005.11 ( c ) ; failure to notify me of the date the provisional credit would be debited prior to debiting it 12 CFR 1005.11 ( d ) ( 2 ). These violations may relate to its initial investigation or its ( non ) investigation following my reassertion after review of the documents used to rely on 12 CFR 1005.11 ( e ). The manager made clear that these violations are rooted in Key Bank policy and are standard practice at the institution.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-05-10T05:48:23.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"843XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6956979","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"KEYCORP","date_received":"2023-05-10T04:26:43.000Z","state":"UT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Now, 25 days after Key Bank found an <em>error</em> had in fact <em>occurred</em>, Key has yet to correct my account, whether provisionally or otherwise, or inform me that it has actually reopened and STARTED an <em>investigation</em> after my reassertion of <em>error</em> following review of the documents Key used to rely on to determine an <em>error</em> had not <em>occurred</em>."]},"sort":[19.456247,"6956979"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20104491","_score":19.339724,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint regarding unauthorized electronic transactions on my account with Truist Bank. \n\nUnknown individuals gained access to my bank account and made multiple unauthorized purchases at XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX I did not authorize these transactions, did not make these purchases, and did not receive any goods or services related to these charges. These fraudulent charges began on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nBecause I am an elderly customer and do not frequently review my account online, I unfortunately discovered these fraudulent transactions on XX/XX/XXXX. As soon as I became aware of the issue, I immediately notified the bank and reported the transactions as unauthorized. \n\nDespite reporting the fraud and requesting an investigation, the bank denied one of the claims and refused to reimburse the funds. The bank stated that they were notified of the incident too late. However, the bank reimbursed all of the other fraudulent charges, including one that occurred one day after the denied transaction ( XX/XX/XXXX ). This inconsistent decision suggests that the denied transaction was not properly investigated. \n\nThe statement containing the first unauthorized transaction is dated XX/XX/XXXX, and the fraud was reported on XX/XX/XXXX, which is within the XXXX reporting period required under Regulation E.\n\nI believe the bank failed to properly investigate these unauthorized transactions as required under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E. \n\nI formally request that the bank provide the documentation and evidence relied upon in denying my claim, including any records showing that these transactions were authorized, as required under Regulation E when a financial institution concludes that no error occurred.\n\nI am requesting that the bank : Conduct a proper investigation of the unauthorized transactions. \n\nProvide the documentation and evidence relied upon in denying my claim. \n\nReimburse the unauthorized charge in accordance with the consumer protections provided under federal law. \n\nThese transactions were not authorized by me, and I received no benefit from them. I am requesting assistance in resolving this matter and ensuring that my rights under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act are properly applied.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-09T20:22:11.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"236XX","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20104491","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2026-03-09T19:53:53.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I believe the bank failed to properly <em>investigate</em> these unauthorized transactions as required under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E. \n\nI formally request that the bank provide the documentation and evidence relied upon in denying my claim, including any records showing that these transactions were authorized, as required under Regulation E when a financial institution <em>concludes</em> that no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>."],"issue":["Problem with a lender or <em>other</em> company charging your account"]},"sort":[19.339724,"20104491"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20554390","_score":18.970757,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint Narrative I am submitting this complaint regarding Freedom Mortgages handling of my mortgage loan servicing, specifically its treatment of property tax payments for XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, the creation of an escrow account, the application of my payments, and its failure to properly respond to my written notices. \n\nThe underlying problem began when Freedom Mortgage disbursed property taxes to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX even though an active payment plan already existed with the taxing authority. Freedom Mortgage did not provide advance notice before making that tax disbursement. After doing so, Freedom Mortgage treated the account as though it could impose or maintain an escrow arrangement tied to that disbursement, even though that action was not authorized under the terms I understood to govern this loan relationship. Regulation X treats servicing errors involving the failure to properly handle taxes and other escrow-related charges as covered errors, and Regulation X also recognizes that whether an escrow account may be established depends in part on the loan documents and other applicable law. [ 1 ] [ 5 ] [ 7 ] After the tax disbursement, Freedom Mortgage began treating my loan as delinquent and/or handled my payments through suspense or other unapplied-payment methods instead of correctly applying payments to principal, interest, escrow, or other charges under the loan terms and applicable law. Mortgage servicers must credit payments as of the date of receipt and may not handle payment posting in a way that causes late charges, additional interest, or negative credit reporting when the payment was timely received. [ 1 ] [ 3 ] [ 5 ] I then sent written communications disputing these servicing errors and requesting information. My written notices identified me, identified the mortgage loan account, and described the errors and information requested. Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.35, a servicer must investigate and either correct the error or provide a written determination after a reasonable investigation. Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.36, a servicer must acknowledge a written information request within 5 business days and generally respond within 30 business days unless a valid extension applies. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] Freedom Mortgage did not provide a timely and adequate resolution. It failed to properly address my Notices of Error, failed to provide the requested information, and failed to explain its basis for disbursing the taxes, imposing escrow-related charges or treatment, placing funds into suspense, and reporting the loan as delinquent. Regulation X requires a servicer to conduct a reasonable investigation and provide a written response explaining either the correction made or the reasons it concluded no error occurred. For information requests, the servicer must either provide the requested information or state after a reasonable search why the information is not available. [ 2 ] [ 5 ] [ 6 ] The servicing errors caused financial and credit-related harm. Freedom Mortgages conduct created confusion about the amount actually due, interfered with my efforts to maintain the loan, and resulted in inaccurate delinquency treatment and/or reporting. Texas law also prohibits misrepresenting the character, extent, amount, or status of a consumer debt in collection activity. [ 9 ] I request that Freedom Mortgage : 1. Provide a complete written accounting of all payments received, all suspense-account activity, all escrow transactions, and the date and reason for each posting ; 2. Explain in writing why it disbursed XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX taxes despite the existing tax payment plan ; 3. Identify the contractual and legal basis it relied on to create, impose, or maintain any escrow requirement related to this issue ; 4. Correct any misapplied payments and remove any improper suspense balances ; 5. Correct any inaccurate delinquency status or negative credit reporting arising from these servicing errors ; 6. Reverse any fees, charges, or shortages that were caused by the improper tax disbursement or payment application ; 7. Provide all documents and servicing notes relied upon in responding to my prior written Notices of Error and Requests for Information ; and 8. Confirm in writing that the account has been corrected.\n\nThis complaint concerns mortgage servicing errors, not loan origination issues. The matters raised here involve payment application, tax disbursement, escrow handling, account status, and failures to respond to written servicing-error notices and information requests.\n\nReferences 1.\n\nCFPB Regulation X 1024.35 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulation X Current 2.\n\nCFPB Regulation X 1024.36 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulation X Current 3.\n\nCommentary to 1026.36 ( c ) ( 1 ) Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Official Interpretation Current 4. \nXXXX  Mortgage Servicing Rule Federal Register Final Rule XXXX 5.\n\nText of 12 CFR 1024.35 Federal Regulation e-CFR/Regulation text Current 6.\n\nText of 12 CFR 1024.36 Federal Regulation e-CFR/Regulation text Current 7.\n\nText of 12 CFR 1024.17 Federal Regulation e-CFR/Regulation text Current 8.\n\nText of 12 CFR 1026.36 Federal Regulation e-CFR/Regulation text Current 9.\n\nTexas Finance Code Chapter 392 Texas Legislature Statute Current","date_sent_to_company":"2026-03-24T19:57:55.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"77493","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20554390","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Freedom Mortgage Company","date_received":"2026-03-24T18:59:58.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It failed to properly address my Notices of <em>Error</em>, failed to provide the requested information, and failed to explain its basis for disbursing the taxes, imposing escrow-related charges or treatment, placing funds into suspense, and reporting the loan as delinquent. Regulation X requires a <em>servicer</em> to conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> and provide a written response explaining either the correction made or the reasons it <em>concluded</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>."]},"sort":[18.970757,"20554390"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5430311","_score":18.810867,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I would NOT rate this \" bank '' a single star if it were possible. The fact that Chime claims that its \" top priority is protecting [ their ] members that starts with keeping [ our ] information and money secure '' is already a false statement. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX PM, a total of {$300.00} were withdrawn from my checking account at a XX/XX/XXXX ATM machine in XXXX, CA. After receiving alerts on my phone about the transactions made, I immediately locked my debit card, called Chime customer service and was told to call back after the transactions had posted. Once they stopped pending, I called customer service again and filed for fraud, as I did not authorize the transactions. I had also requested a temporary credit as other banks do to assist their customers with fraud claims, however, they declined to do so. Chime responded to me via email on XX/XX/XXXX that after they \" made a final determination regarding [ my ] claim, '' Chime bank \" concluded no error occurred '' and \" no funds will be credited to [ my ] account and this claim is considered closed. '' As their member/customer, I was not happy with their decision and immediately called to reopen the claim. \n\nTo further help with the investigation, I emailed Chime on that same day ( XXXX ) at XXXX PM with attached photos of my location during the time the fraud incident occurred. Chime neglected to further investigate and stated the they \" stand by [ their ] initial decision '' ( XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX PM ). Chime emailed on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX AM stated they would be \" happy to send [ me ] the documentations used in [ their ] investigation, '' which I immediately requested and was told I would receive the documentations within XXXX business day. It is XX/XX/XXXX and Chime has neglected to send the documentations as requested and continue helping me as their member/customer. \n\nI now refuse to continue using Chime \" bank '' for any financial needs. I opened a new account with another financial institution and consulted an attorney for this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-04-10T04:20:13.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"90029","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5430311","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2022-04-10T03:58:28.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Chime responded to me via email on XX/XX/XXXX that after they \" made a final determination regarding [ my ] claim, '' Chime bank \" <em>concluded</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em> '' and \" no funds will be credited to [ my ] account and this claim is considered closed. '' As their member/customer, I was not happy with their decision and immediately called to reopen the claim."],"issue":["Problem with a lender or <em>other</em> company charging your account"]},"sort":[18.810867,"5430311"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12741554","_score":18.731627,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting my complaint once again because Cash App in not investigating complaints properly. On XX/XX/year> an unauthorized transaction was made on my Cash App account. The merchant was able to unlink my bank card and link their card information. They sent themselves {$320.00} from my bank account to theirs and then unlinked their card after successfully transferring funds. This is an issue I brought to Cash App and I have filed several complaints to no avail. They keep denying my claim and won't return my funds. Their conclusion was that no error occurred. I have made this complaint several times. They have concluded that no error occurred when it is obvious that someone else had placed their bank information on my account. If this was properly investigated the way it should be, it shouldn't keep coming up as no error. The card that received the funds from my account was not mine and I still don't understand why Cash App is not taking this seriously because it could be happening to others. My Cash App is $ shenaecrain. This is the account that has been affected and no resolution has been met. I now have a negative balance on my Cash App account. Cash App seems to be keep providing the same answer with no way of elevating my issue to a higher authority. Managers of Cash App can only be reached by email and they have provided robotic answers. They sent me an attached letter through CFPB with the same conclusions and responses that I have been given previously. I want this matter elevated and really investigated on a real level because it seems that the system has been hacked in some way. I'd like to also point out that I had possession of my phone and I've never given my account information to anyone. This is the main reason why I would really like this investigated because it seems like this is something that others could be victim of unknowingly. I am also willing to contact a lawyer as well as law enforcement if it would actually help get this situation rectified. \n\n\nJust to break the situation down XXXX more time : XX/XX/year> around XXXX I got a notification that I had been logged out of my Cash App. \nI try to go onto my Cash App just to find out that I had in fact been signed out and had to log back in. \nI check my account and I saw that several transactions failed around that time. I then saw that my bank card had been unlinked and a new bank card that wasn't mine had been linked onto my account. I then noticed that whoever was able to hack my account was able to successfully send themselves {$320.00}. I then tried to contact Cash App to dispute the transactions. I tried through the support chat and also over the phone once the customer service lines opened. Through every avenue I received the same response since XXXX. No real thorough investigation has been done. There should be a way to see who those funds actually went to.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-31T20:57:06.000Z","issue":"Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"95207","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12741554","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Block, Inc.","date_received":"2025-03-31T20:31:09.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Their conclusion was that no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>. I have made this complaint several times. They have <em>concluded</em> that no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em> when it is obvious that someone else had placed their bank information on my account. If this was properly <em>investigated</em> the way it should be, it shouldn't keep coming up as no <em>error</em>. The card that received the funds from my account was not mine and I still don't understand why Cash App is not taking this seriously because it could be happening to <em>others</em>."],"product":["Money transfer, virtual currency, or money <em>service</em>"],"issue":["Unauthorized transactions or <em>other</em> transaction problem"]},"sort":[18.731627,"12741554"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7220661","_score":18.680418,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX {$150.00} XXXX XXXX {$500.00} XXXX XXXX {$70.00} XXXX XXXX {$750.00} XXXX XXXX {$1000.00} XXXX XXXX {$750.00} XXXX XXXX {$500.00} XXXX XXXX {$500.00} XXXX XXXX {$2000.00} On XX/XX/XXXX I called Chime Member Services and informed them I had been a victim of fraud. I explained I saw the transactions credited from my account and upon noticing them ( payment from phone number to phone number ) I changed my banking password and disabled international transactions on my banking app. \n\nThese amounts were made with fraudulent intent via phone-to-phone transfers that were deducted directly from my checking and were instantly approved as they were all checking transactions. This does not mean I authorized or approved such transactions. Not to mention my checking account was the only account compromised. Not my savings. \n\nI filed a claims report with Chime The report states : \" While the dispute is not eligible for provisional credit issued by Chime , Chime will investigate dispute types that fall under Regulation E ''. \n\n\" The dispute process can take until XX/XX/XXXX. '' \" Check the status of the dispute anytime on Chime. '' On XX/XX/XXXX Chime Member Services informed me that my claim had been denied as \" no error had occurred. '' Chime did not provide documentation or proof of an investigation that concluded the final outcome of this investigation under Regulation E guidelines. \n\nRegulation E outlines electronic funds transfers ( EFT ) under section 1005.6. \nas electronic fund transfer from a consumer 's account initiated by a person other than the consumer without actual authority to initiate the transfer and from which the consumer receives no benefit. \n\nNote : This scam has compromised my funds not only with Chime but other electronic vendors like XXXX XXXX and XXXX by the same person who uses various aliases and phone numbers to seek unauthorized electronic payments.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-07-07T17:04:14.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"199XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7220661","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2023-07-07T15:22:24.000Z","state":"DE","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["\" The dispute process can take until XX/XX/XXXX. '' \" Check the status of the dispute anytime on Chime. '' On XX/XX/XXXX Chime Member <em>Services</em> informed me that my claim had been denied as \" no <em>error</em> had <em>occurred</em>. '' Chime did not provide documentation or proof of an <em>investigation</em> that <em>concluded</em> the final outcome of this <em>investigation</em> under Regulation E guidelines. \n\nRegulation E outlines electronic funds transfers ( EFT ) under section 1005.6."],"product":["Money transfer, virtual currency, or money <em>service</em>"]},"sort":[18.680418,"7220661"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8563900","_score":17.957674,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Around XXXX, XXXX I opened a dispute with Bank Credit.Ai in regard several payment came out of my account without my authorization. Acct # : XXXX Transaction Description : : ACH debits by XXXX XXXX Date Error Reported : XX/XX/XXXX Claim Amount : {$320.00} Date Transaction Posted XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nCred.ai treated this dispute as an error being reported when in fact was an unauthorized used of my Card and/or Bank account XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX they denied the claim based on the statement \" We have completed our investigation, and we have determined that no error occurred. As a result, we have closed your dispute claim. '' That same day I requested all documentation involving the decision to close this claim against me. It took them until XX/XX/XXXX to send the requested documents. Just ONE. This document will be attached as well. Document refers to someones notation for the account \" assuming '' the transaction are correct and no investigation was performed, at ALL. Someone decided to close the claim stating she/he believe this transactions are correct because I did not reported them when they wanted me to report them and missed, I don't know how many opportunities, of phone calls. A direct violation of of Bank practice and state and federal law. \n\nAs stated before, It was brought to my attention theres no documents available for me to review other than internal hearsay notations and someones assumption after looking to my account phone calls history that has nothing to do with the fraudulent charges. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I emailed them back to reopen the case and start an investigation. 4 months later still haven't heard from this Bank and case still closed without remediation and returned of disputed ( fraudulent ) funds back to my account. \n\nI stopped direct deposit to this account right away. I will not be using this account in daily basis as I did before. I will be submitting complaints to all State and Federal organization about this Bank. Now, let 's go over their responses they used to deny my claim. \n\nFirst assumption to deny my claim. I made several phone calls after 1st transaction in dispute had been posted on my account. When I call Customer Service is about an specific topic and/or issue can not and does not constitute sufficient evidence I should've been aware of any other transaction aside from what I was calling for, therefore, investigation team, can not use this statement to conclude I could've or should've seen the payment at that time. \n\nAssumption number two to deny my claim, they're repaeating themselves about phone calls I had made to customer service and not seeing the transaction and reporting it. That's exactly what happened, I did not see this payments coming through. \n\nAssumption number three, The transactions I was calling for was, in fact, different from the payment is being disputed. For the 3rd time, again, they repeated themselves.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-03-17T06:08:40.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"90029","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8563900","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CRED Technologies dba cred.ai","date_received":"2024-03-17T06:05:51.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Banking errors"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["When I call Customer <em>Service</em> is about an specific topic and/or issue can not and does not constitute sufficient evidence I should've been aware of any <em>other</em> transaction aside from what I was calling for, therefore, <em>investigation</em> team, can not use this statement to <em>conclude</em> I could've or should've seen the payment at that time. \n\nAssumption number two to deny my claim, they're repaeating themselves about phone calls I had made to customer <em>service</em> and not seeing the transaction and reporting it."],"sub_issue":["Banking <em>errors</em>"]},"sort":[17.957674,"8563900"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2473977","_score":17.675385,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"In   XXXX   XXXX   I searched the Navy Federal Credit Union website for my account 's tax statements for  XXXX  and previous years. At that time, it was visible that only the latest (   XXXX   ) was made available through that medium. So, I started checking as far back as the website would allow for months ending in  XXXX , to compare. I came upon a check amount that had been withdrawn in   XXXX   XXXX   that I did not recognize. I phoned th e NFCU to inquire about said check. The customer service person sent a check copy to my email. That check bears my account nu mber, but the other numbers on the bottom of the check do not coincide with the check #, nor is it my name, nor signature on said check. I called the customer service line on several occasions regarding the unrecognized check, questioning how that check was able to clear the bank with wrong information. I spoke to a supervisor on several occasions by the name of   XXXX   ( spelling? ) who concurred the check did not seem right with the information on the check, but it had been a mobile deposit from another location and an investigation would be opened, with an investigator contacting me for further details which never happene d. She did send me a pre-completed form for me to return to NFCU. Today, I received a letter from NFCU that it is my responsibility due \" After a thorough investigation, we   concluded that no error occurred based on account activity. You are responsible for the full amount of the claim, {$500.00}. You have the right to request information concerning the investigation and how we arrived at this conclusion. '' I phoned the toll free number on the letter and all the cs person in their security dept. could tell me was that from available notes, it was due to being past the 60 days from statement, but could not tell me if it had actually been investigated. Now, that does not seem correct to this consumer due there is still no real explanation as to how the withdrawal even went through the account with such discrepancy on the check, regardless of time, once it was discovered. It seems, indeed, an error that it was paid with no further ado. The mobile banking information is in the copy of the check copied to me, the copy tells the name/address of the individual who relates to the check and the name of who it was paid out to, none of it which is my information, not even my location. I am in  XXXX  ; the party on the check notes a  XXXX  address. Again, it is not clear in my mind how that check was able to be cleared, except to opine that attention was not paid to the specifics of the check. The amount of the check was for {$500.00} paid out of my checking account with NFCU. I was given your agency name for who handles credit union matters when the security dept. customer service person was prompted for the info. by me today. I am reaching out to your agency in hopes that you can assist me with this matter. Thank you very much for your consideration.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-05-03T17:24:17.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"46322","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2473977","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2017-05-01T22:56:24.000Z","state":"IN","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Banking errors"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":[") who concurred the check did not seem right with the information on the check, but it had been a mobile deposit from another location and an <em>investigation</em> would be opened, with an <em>investigator</em> contacting me for further details which never happene d. She did send me a pre-completed form for me to return to NFCU. Today, I received a letter from NFCU that it is my responsibility due \" After a thorough <em>investigation</em>, we   <em>concluded</em> that no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em> based on account activity."],"sub_issue":["Banking <em>errors</em>"]},"sort":[17.675385,"2473977"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18025271","_score":17.561186,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint regarding XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX systemic failure to comply with the Fair Credit Billing Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 ) in its handling of multiple credit card billing disputes involving transactions within the last 120 days. \n\nThese disputes arose during a period in which multiple widely reported data breaches affecting financial institutions, telecommunications providers, and online service platforms materially increased the risk of unauthorized account activity. This context required heightened scrutiny and careful investigation, not summary denial. \n\nI timely disputed multiple charges after determining that the underlying services associated with these transactions were not properly delivered, usable, or accessible. These transactions involved third-party payment processors and custodial wallet services, which require fact-specific, human review, particularly where data security concerns and account compromise risk exist. \n\nInstead of conducting individualized, good-faith investigations as required by federal law, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX boilerplate, conclusory determinations, including statements such as you accepted the amount charged and not enough documentation, without identifying what evidence was reviewed, what documentation was required, or how disputes involving custodial or intermediary services were evaluated. \n\nAt least XXXX dispute was closed as XXXX by XXXX despite no intent to withdraw and without any substantive investigation. Other disputes were declined in rapid succession using identical language, demonstrating a pattern of procedural denial rather than a reasonable investigation, contrary to 15 U.S.C. 1666 ( a ) ( 3 ). \n\nDue to the seriousness of these matters, and in light of the elevated risk environment created by recent data breaches, I took the additional step of filing a police report. XXXX XXXX never requested a copy of this report, never advised that it was required, and never incorporated it into any dispute review prior to declining the claims. The disputes were denied first and only afterward treated as final, effectively preventing the submission of additional documentation. \n\nThis sequence reflects a pre-determined dispute outcome rather than a lawful investigative process and is inconsistent with the Fair Credit Billing Acts requirement that a creditor conduct a reasonable investigation before concluding that no billing error occurred. \n\nFurther, XXXX XXXX handling of these disputes created a chilling effect that discouraged and inhibited me from submitting the remaining disputes within the applicable XXXX billing error window. After repeated premature closures, lack of guidance, and reliance on automated responses, I reasonably believed further submissions would be futile. This conduct interfered with my ability to fully exercise federally protected dispute rights. \n\nI am attaching a transaction summary reflecting the affected charges to demonstrate the scope of disputes impacted by XXXX XXXX dispute-handling practices. \n\nGiven the known data breach environment, the complexity of third-party payment XXXX, and the existence of a police report, I expressly request that this matter receive a manual, substantive investigation by qualified personnel. XXXX verification systems, including e-OSCAR-style processing, are inadequate in these circumstances and do not satisfy the statutory standard of a reasonable investigation. \n\nXXXX XXXX actions appear to constitute procedural non-compliance, not mere disagreement over outcomes, and raise serious concerns regarding whether consumers are being deterred from exercising rights guaranteed under federal law","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-14T07:26:38.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"23229","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18025271","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2025-12-14T06:25:03.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This sequence reflects a pre-determined dispute outcome rather than a lawful <em>investigative</em> process and is inconsistent with the Fair Credit Billing Acts requirement that a creditor conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> before <em>concluding</em> that no billing <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>. \n\nFurther, XXXX XXXX handling of these disputes created a chilling effect that discouraged and inhibited me from submitting the remaining disputes within the applicable XXXX billing <em>error</em> window."]},"sort":[17.561186,"18025271"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17803068","_score":17.520554,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Complaint Against USAA Federal Savings Bank Improper Denial of Fraud Claim Under Regulation E ( XXXX Scam ) Financial company : USAA Federal Savings Bank Type of product : Checking account / XXXX ( P2P transfer ) Account ending : XXXX Dispute/Claim ID : XXXX -- - What happened On XX/XX/year>, I was the victim of a bank-impersonation scam involving a fraudulent XXXX transfer of {$1000.00} from my USAA checking account. \n\nI received a call from someone who claimed to be from USAAs fraud department. They stated there was suspicious activity on my account and that I needed to follow their instructions to secure my funds. Relying on their representation that they were USAA, I followed their directions. As a result, a XXXX transfer of {$1000.00} was sent from my account to XXXX XXXX ( a recipient controlled by the scammer ). \n\nI did not receive any goods, services, or benefit from this transaction. This was not a legitimate purchase or payment I intended to make to a merchant or known party. It was the result of deception and impersonation of my bank. \n\nI reported the fraud to USAA on XX/XX/year>. USAA opened a dispute and initially issued a temporary/provisional credit for the {$1000.00}. \n\nOn or about XX/XX/year>, USAA sent me a letter stating that they had completed their investigation and were denying my claim. As part of that denial, the provisional credit of {$1000.00} was actually withdrawn twice, resulting in a total negative impact of {$2000.00} instead of just the original {$1000.00} fraudulent transfer. In other words, not only did USAA refuse to permanently restore the original {$1000.00}, but their handling of the provisional credit created an additional {$1000.00} debit to my account. \n\nThis has left me in a worse financial position than before I reported the fraud. \n\n\n-- - What the bank said In a written letter, USAA stated ( paraphrased and quoted ) : They had completed their investigation and determined that no error occurred. \n\nFunds were sent as requested. \n\nThey referenced XXXX Terms of Service and said that the sender is responsible for resolving disputes with the recipient, including for goods or services. \n\nThey stated that the external bank declined to return the funds. \n\nThey concluded the investigation and stated that no further action would be taken and that the temporary credit would be debited from my account. \n\n\nUSAA is treating this as if I voluntarily paid someone for goods/services and am now unhappy, instead of acknowledging it as fraud and a bank-impersonation scam. In addition, USAAs own handling of the provisional credit has effectively resulted in a double withdrawal. \n\n\n-- - Why I believe this violates Regulation E and CFPB guidance This situation is an unauthorized electronic fund transfer ( EFT ) under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ) and Regulation E ( 12 C.F.R. 1005 ).\n\nRegulation E, 12 C.F.R. 1005.2 ( m ) defines an unauthorized electronic fund transfer as a transfer from a consumers account initiated by a person other than the consumer without actual authority and from which the consumer receives no benefit.\n\nIn this case, a third party impersonated my bank, deceived me, and caused the transfer. I received no benefit, and the scammer had no actual authority.\n\nThe CFPBs own guidance/FAQs on electronic fund transfers and P2P payments explain that : A credit-push P2P transfer ( such as a XXXX payment ) is considered an EFT even if initiated by a third party that fraudulently obtained access to a consumers account, and that such a transfer is an unauthorized EFT when done without the consumers actual authority and without benefit to the consumer.\n\nDespite this, USAA denied my claim by : 1. Treating the transaction as if it were a legitimate, authorized payment sent as requested ; 2. Citing XXXX  Terms of Service and saying the sender is responsible and must resolve it with the recipient ; 3. Ignoring the fact that this was a bank-impersonation scam, not a dispute over goods or services ; 4. Failing to correct what appears to be an internal error that caused the provisional credit to be withdrawn twice, resulting in a total of {$2000.00} in debits tied to a {$1000.00} fraudulent transaction. \n\n\n\nXXXX terms of service can not override federal protections under Regulation E. USAAs position appears contrary to EFTA and CFPB interpretations regarding unauthorized EFTs and bank-impersonation scams, and its handling of the provisional credit appears to be an additional error.\n\nAdditionally, under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( b ) ( d ), USAA is required to : Conduct a reasonable investigation of an alleged error ; Determine whether an error occurred ; Provide a provisional credit if they can not complete the investigation within 10 business days ; Correct any bank errors and provide written explanation and, if requested, the documentation used in making its determination.\n\nUSAAs letter is generic and relies on XXXX network response and terms of service, rather than a proper Regulation XXXX analysis of an unauthorized transfer caused by fraud and impersonation, and it does not address the double debit of the provisional credit. \n\n\n-- - What I am asking the CFPB to do I am requesting that the CFPB : 1. Review USAAs handling of my claim under Regulation E/EFTA and CFPB guidance on P2P fraud and bank impersonation scams ; 2. Require USAA to properly treat this as an unauthorized electronic fund transfer, not a goods/services dispute or no error ; 3. Require USAA to refund the original {$1000.00} that was taken from my account as a result of this scam, 4. Require USAA to correct the additional {$1000.00} debit that occurred when the provisional credit was withdrawn twice, so that I am not penalized beyond the original fraudulent amount ; 5. Reverse any related fees or negative consequences applied to my account due to these debits ; 6. Ensure USAA provides me with the documentation and evidence they relied on in denying the claim ( call logs, internal notes, any risk analysis, communications with the receiving bank, etc. ) ; 7. Review whether USAAs general policies and practices concerning XXXX and impersonation scams comply with Regulation E and CFPB guidance.\n\nThis scam has caused me significant financial and emotional stress. I relied on my bank to protect me and to follow federal law, and instead I feel I have been victimized twiceonce by the scammer and then again by the banks refusal to recognize this as fraud and by the double withdrawal of the provisional credit.\n\nThank you for your time and assistance. \n\nName : XXXX XXXX Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, TX XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-21T22:33:51.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Domestic (US) money transfer","zip_code":"786XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17803068","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2025-11-21T22:02:13.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, under 12 C.F.R. 1005.11 ( b ) ( d ), USAA is required to : Conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> of an alleged <em>error</em> ; Determine whether an <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em> ; Provide a provisional credit if they can not complete the <em>investigation</em> within 10 business days ; Correct any bank <em>errors</em> and provide written explanation and, if requested, the documentation used in making its determination."],"product":["Money transfer, virtual currency, or money <em>service</em>"],"company":["UNITED <em>SERVICES</em> AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION"]},"sort":[17.520554,"17803068"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2351186","_score":16.866882,"_source":{"product":"Prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Executive Summary On Friday XX/XX/XXXX I, XXXX, purchased a {$500.00} VISA Debit Gift Card from XXXX located at XXXX GA XXXX at XXXX EST from the main customer service kiosk. The associated VISA Debit Gift Card account number ( PAN ) is XXXX EXP XX/XX/XXXX CCV XXXX with proxy ID XXXX issued by XXXX under contract with Black Hawk Networks. \n\nOn Friday XX/XX/XXXX I attempted to use the {$500.00} VISA Debit Gift Card referenced above to make a point of sale purchase at XXXX, GA XXXX at approximately XXXX EST, and experienced a card authorization decline at point of sale utilizing card ending in XXXX. \n\nUpon contacting XXXX shortly after experiencing the card authorization decline, at telephone number XXXX, I learned the following facts and reported the card as compromised due to suspected fraud Shortly upon activation of the card at XX/XX/XXXX XXXX EST, the card was registered to a \" XXXX '' in zip code \" XXXX '' via channels unknown, but most likely via XXXX. No IP address information was available when asked. \n\nIt is my understanding and belief that the person registering the VISA Debit Gift Card likely at one time obtained or had an co-conspiring associate gain physical access to the instrument with details of the following data parameters required to register the card. It is my professional judgement an employee of XXXX likely may have been involved in the compromise of the instrument. \n\nFraud case regarding the {$500.00} VISA Debit Gift Card ending in XXXX was filed with card issuing bank, XXXX, at telephone number XXXX with case number XXXX. \n\nVarious individual transactions we performed between {$1.00} and {$490.00} with an aggregate total less than {$500.00} during the XXXX hour on XX/XX/XXXX at the following merchants. These transactions were unauthorized by me, the legitimate card holder. \n\nDispute case was opened with XXXX on Friday XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nCopies of XXXX Police Department report were forwarded to XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nDocumentation and evidence to support claim, including proof of XXXX bank statement screen shot showing I was the legitimate purchaser of the pre-paid debit card, was provided by electronic mail to XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI was reimbursed for the fraudulent use of this card by XXXX directly on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter from Blackhawk Networks indicating the investigation had been concluded and that \" after further review of the cardholder 's dispute claim we have found no error has occurred. As such, your case is considered resolved and closed ''. This statement is in direct contravention of the consumer protections enumerated in Federal Reserve Board Reg E governing the use of credit / debit / pre-paid card instruments. While I have been made whole by XXXX, a separate and distinct entity from Blackhawk Networks, I find Blackhawk Network 's arbitrary and capricious closing of my dispute case and finding of \" no error has occurred '' to be factually incorrect. I am bringing this matter to the attention of the US Consumer Financial Protection bureau as I am concerned other legitimate consumers may be adversely affected by Blackhawk Network 's arbitrary and capacious closing of REG E dispute claims with findings of \" no error has occurred '' in direct contravention to sworn statements, facts, police reports, etc.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-02-23T22:12:56.000Z","issue":"Unauthorized transactions/trans. issues","sub_product":"General purpose card","zip_code":"303XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2351186","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Blackhawk Network Holdings Inc.","date_received":"2017-02-18T23:54:07.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["On XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter from Blackhawk Networks indicating the <em>investigation</em> had been <em>concluded</em> and that \" after further review of the cardholder 's dispute claim we have found no <em>error</em> has <em>occurred</em>. As such, your case is considered resolved and closed ''. This statement is in direct contravention of the consumer protections enumerated in Federal Reserve Board Reg E governing the use of credit / debit / pre-paid card instruments."]},"sort":[16.866882,"2351186"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10040975","_score":16.73725,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/year> I used the Chime pay anyone feature to send XXXX to my brother. \n\n\n( Way to pay! \nHi XXXX, you just sent {$60.00} for \" Repay '' to XXXX XXXX ) According to the way it's to work, he should have received a text to his phone number which is correct, supposedly providing a link for him to transfer the amount directly to his debit card : ( Did you know you can pay people who dont have a Chime account? Heres how it works : They get a text message or email with a link that brings them to a secure web page.\n\nNext, they use any US debit card to claim their money instantly, and securely. \nTheir money arrives instantly and fee-free. No app signup or download needed from them at all. ) He advised that he never received a text. I contacted Chime to open a dispute. \n\n( Account Number Ending In : XXXX Claim ID : XXXX Dispute Type : Pay Friends - Transfer to Incorrect Recipient Date Error Reported : XXXX Claim Amount : {$60.00} ) My brother and I eventually determined XXXX instead was sent to an account no longer belonging to him, whereas had he received a text based on Chime 's own description of the service there would be no issue. \n\nI provided additional details to Chime which would have immediately cleared the dispute but received in return : ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, This letter is to inform you that we have made a final determination regarding the claim referenced above. As part of our investigation, a review of our systems was performed in addition to information provided during the claim filing process. As applicable, we coordinate with other financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \n\nBased on our investigation, we have concluded no error occurred. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed. \nYou may request a copy of the documents we used in determining the final outcome of the investigation. If you have any additional questions or need further assistance, feel free to contact us at any time.\n\nThanks, Chime Disputes Team ) In addition, I requested documents mentioned above and still have yet to receive as of the date of this complaint : ( I want see the documents described also any proof that recipient was sent a text requiring him to transfer the money from the text himself ) I have heard nothing and am still out XXXX. \n\nI am not interested in a cookie-cutter response from Chime associates, I just want them to do the right thing. And by not doing so, they are justifying misleading information. That XXXX is somewhere other than where it is supposed to be. It needs to be returned to me. I sincerely hope this has to go no further for what some deem a relatively small amount of money. However, small amounts like this multiplied by hundreds of customers becomes very profitable. I do like Chime but this I can not accept.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-09-06T18:20:02.000Z","issue":"Other transaction problem","sub_product":"Domestic (US) money transfer","zip_code":"554XX","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10040975","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2024-09-06T17:29:03.000Z","state":"MN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As part of our <em>investigation</em>, a review of our systems was performed in addition to information provided during the claim filing process. As applicable, we coordinate with <em>other</em> financial institutions, merchants, and networks as part of the claim review. \n\nBased on our <em>investigation</em>, we have <em>concluded</em> no <em>error</em> <em>occurred</em>. Therefore, no funds will be credited to your account and this claim is considered closed."],"product":["Money transfer, virtual currency, or money <em>service</em>"],"issue":["<em>Other</em> transaction problem"]},"sort":[16.73725,"10040975"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":124,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":124}]}},"product":{"doc_count":124,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":45,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":42},{"key":"Other banking product or service","doc_count":2},{"key":"Savings account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":17,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mobile or digital wallet","doc_count":9},{"key":"Domestic (US) money transfer","doc_count":5},{"key":"Virtual currency","doc_count":2},{"key":"International money transfer","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":13,"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":12}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":11,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":9},{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":11,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":6},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":3},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":10,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":10}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":7,"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":5},{"key":"General-purpose prepaid card","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Prepaid card","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Government benefit card","doc_count":2},{"key":"General purpose card","doc_count":1},{"key":"General-purpose prepaid card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Bank account or service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other bank product/service","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":"Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Installment loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":124,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":26,"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":11},{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":4},{"key":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed","doc_count":4},{"key":"Banking errors","doc_count":3},{"key":"Problem making or receiving payments","doc_count":3},{"key":"Problem accessing account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","doc_count":13,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Transaction was not authorized","doc_count":13}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":13,"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":8},{"key":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card","doc_count":5}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":11,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":7}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":7,"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":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":2},{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":6,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance","doc_count":1},{"key":"Payment process","doc_count":1},{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","doc_count":5,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer","doc_count":4},{"key":"Charged for a purchase or transfer you did not make with the card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing an account","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":2},{"key":"Funds not received from closed account","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Unauthorized transactions or other transaction problem","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief","doc_count":1},{"key":"Foreclosure","doc_count":1},{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing your account","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Can't close your account","doc_count":1},{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Billing dispute for services","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"False statements or representation","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempted to collect wrong amount","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":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Other transaction problem","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problem caused by your funds being low","doc_count":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":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Application denials","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Billing disputes","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","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":"Making/receiving payments, sending money","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Other features, terms, or problems","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Privacy issues","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem when making payments","doc_count":1,"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":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","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":"Unauthorized withdrawals or charges","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":124,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":123},{"key":"No","doc_count":1}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":124,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":104},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":11},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":9}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":124,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":124}]}},"company":{"doc_count":124,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Chime Financial Inc","doc_count":19},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":8},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":6},{"key":"Block, Inc.","doc_count":5},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":5},{"key":"UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION","doc_count":5},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":4},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":4},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":4},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":3},{"key":"KEYCORP","doc_count":3},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":2},{"key":"CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Comerica","doc_count":2},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":2},{"key":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA","doc_count":2},{"key":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","doc_count":2},{"key":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY","doc_count":2},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":2},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"Aldridge Pite, LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORPORATION, THE","doc_count":1},{"key":"BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE","doc_count":1},{"key":"BBVA FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Blackhawk Network Holdings Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"CARD Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"CENTRAL BANCOMPANY, INC","doc_count":1},{"key":"CMG Financial Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"CRED Technologies dba cred.ai","doc_count":1},{"key":"Credit Systems International, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"DEBT 0, INC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Dave Operating, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Early Warning Services, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"FIRST CITIZENS BANCSHARES, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"First Technology Federal Credit Union","doc_count":1},{"key":"Freedom Mortgage Company","doc_count":1},{"key":"GMFS, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"HOME BANCSHARES, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"HW Holding, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"Io, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"LendingPoint Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"MIDFIRST BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"Netspend Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"PNC Bank N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"PROSPERITY BANCSHARES, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"ROBINHOOD MARKETS INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rent Recovery Solutions","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rowland Avenue Management, Inc. A/KA Columbia Debt Recovery, LLC d/b/a Genesis","doc_count":1},{"key":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":1},{"key":"U.S. BANCORP","doc_count":1},{"key":"UMB FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":124,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TX","doc_count":18},{"key":"CA","doc_count":10},{"key":"FL","doc_count":10},{"key":"IL","doc_count":7},{"key":"NC","doc_count":6},{"key":"PA","doc_count":6},{"key":"GA","doc_count":5},{"key":"MD","doc_count":5},{"key":"MO","doc_count":5},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":5},{"key":"NV","doc_count":5},{"key":"IN","doc_count":4},{"key":"WA","doc_count":4},{"key":"CO","doc_count":3},{"key":"KS","doc_count":3},{"key":"NY","doc_count":3},{"key":"OR","doc_count":3},{"key":"TN","doc_count":3},{"key":"HI","doc_count":2},{"key":"KY","doc_count":2},{"key":"MI","doc_count":2},{"key":"OK","doc_count":2},{"key":"VA","doc_count":2},{"key":"DC","doc_count":1},{"key":"DE","doc_count":1},{"key":"IA","doc_count":1},{"key":"LA","doc_count":1},{"key":"MN","doc_count":1},{"key":"OH","doc_count":1},{"key":"SC","doc_count":1},{"key":"UT","doc_count":1},{"key":"WI","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":124,"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":36},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":9},{"key":"Company believes complaint is the result of an isolated error","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":124,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":19},{"key":"Older American","doc_count":9},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[16.735481,"10040975"],"3":[13.529821,"13912145"],"4":[11.190902,"11649892"],"5":[7.247328,"2919353"]}}}