{"took":238,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":44,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13620690","_score":24.646872,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I like to file a complaint against Equifax, Experian, Transunion, and XXXX XXXX for reporting these accounts on my credit profile I did not give permission to furnish my credit report with these negative items \" XXXX '' also they are violating US code 15 USC 1681a ( 2 ) Several class action lawsuits have been filed against XXXX, a major student loan servicer. These lawsuits allege various misconducts, including : XXXX. Miscalculation of XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX : XXXX lawsuit claims XXXX miscalculated XXXX payments for borrowers on income-based repayment plans, leading to higher payments than required. \nThis miscalculation reportedly impacted a borrower 's ability to qualify for a mortgage due to an inflated debt-to-income ratio. \nThe XXXX article mentions that the lawsuit aims to cover all consumers with addresses who were impacted by this miscalculation. \n\n\nXXXX. Breaching Servicing Agreements and Violating Laws : Another lawsuit, filed by, alleges that XXXX breached its servicing agreement with the federal government. \nThis lawsuit claims that student borrowers are intended XXXX beneficiaries of the agreement and were harmed by XXXX 's XXXX. \nIt also alleges that XXXX violated state and federal laws in its loan servicing practices. \n\n\nXXXX. Failure to Provide Adequate Notice Regarding XXXX Recertification : The XXXX  Attorney General XXXX XXXX reached a settlement with XXXX for {$1.00} XXXX due to allegations of failing to adequately communicate with borrowers about maintaining access to affordable payments. \nSpecifically, the investigation found that XXXX 's communications between XXXX and XXXX failed to comply with federal regulations regarding notice of IDR recertification deadlines. \n\n\nXXXX. Misleading Borrowers and Falsely Reporting to Credit Bureaus : A XXXX thread suggests that borrowers have experienced issues such as misapplied payments, inflated balances, and false reporting to credit bureaus. \n\n\nNote : It is important to note that class action lawsuits are ongoing legal proceedings, and the allegations have not been proven in court. not to mention the XXXX violation, and XXXX violating student education records, XXXX data, and personal information. XXXX has violated ferpa by accessing XXXX loan data. \n\nXXXX must update to positive info, or remove accounts immediately.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-20T15:44:52.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"604XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13620690","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-20T15:44:28.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Miscalculation</em> of <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> ( <em>XXXX</em> ) <em>XXXX</em> : <em>XXXX</em> <em>lawsuit</em> <em>claims</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>miscalculated</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>payments</em> for borrowers on income-based repayment plans, leading to higher <em>payments</em> than required. \nThis <em>miscalculation</em> reportedly impacted a borrower 's ability to qualify for a mortgage due to an inflated debt-to-income ratio. \nThe <em>XXXX</em> article mentions that the <em>lawsuit</em> aims to cover all consumers with addresses who were impacted by this <em>miscalculation</em>. \n\n\n<em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[24.646872,"13620690"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13620402","_score":24.627224,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I like to file a complaint against Equifax, Experian, Transunion, and XXXX XXXX for reporting these accounts on my credit profile I did not give permission to furnish my credit report with these negative items \" XXXX '' also they are violating US code 15 USC 1681a ( 2 ) Several class action lawsuits have been filed against XXXX, a major student loan servicer. These lawsuits allege various misconducts, including : XXXX. Miscalculation of XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX : XXXX lawsuit claims XXXX miscalculated XXXX payments for borrowers on income-based repayment plans, leading to higher payments than required. \nThis miscalculation reportedly impacted a borrower 's ability to qualify for a mortgage due to an inflated debt-to-income ratio. \nThe XXXX article mentions that the lawsuit aims to cover all consumers with addresses who were impacted by this miscalculation. \n\n\nXXXX. Breaching Servicing Agreements and Violating Laws : Another lawsuit, filed by, alleges that XXXX breached its servicing agreement with the federal government. \nThis lawsuit claims that student borrowers are intended XXXX beneficiaries of the agreement and were harmed by XXXX 's XXXX. \nIt also alleges that XXXX violated state and federal laws in its loan servicing practices. \n\n\nXXXX. Failure to Provide Adequate Notice Regarding XXXX Recertification : The XXXX  Attorney General XXXX XXXX reached a settlement with XXXX for {$1.00} XXXX due to allegations of failing to adequately communicate with borrowers about maintaining access to affordable payments. \nSpecifically, the investigation found that XXXX 's communications between XXXX and XXXX failed to comply with federal regulations regarding notice of IDR recertification deadlines. \n\n\nXXXX. Misleading Borrowers and Falsely Reporting to Credit Bureaus : A XXXX thread suggests that borrowers have experienced issues such as misapplied payments, inflated balances, and false reporting to credit bureaus. \n\n\nNote : It is important to note that class action lawsuits are ongoing legal proceedings, and the allegations have not been proven in court. not to mention the XXXX violation, and XXXX violating student education records, XXXX data, and personal information. XXXX has violated ferpa by accessing XXXX loan data. \n\nXXXX must update to positive info, or remove accounts immediately.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-20T15:44:54.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"604XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13620402","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-20T15:36:37.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Miscalculation</em> of <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> ( <em>XXXX</em> ) <em>XXXX</em> : <em>XXXX</em> <em>lawsuit</em> <em>claims</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>miscalculated</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>payments</em> for borrowers on income-based repayment plans, leading to higher <em>payments</em> than required. \nThis <em>miscalculation</em> reportedly impacted a borrower 's ability to qualify for a mortgage due to an inflated debt-to-income ratio. \nThe <em>XXXX</em> article mentions that the <em>lawsuit</em> aims to cover all consumers with addresses who were impacted by this <em>miscalculation</em>. \n\n\n<em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[24.627224,"13620402"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13622091","_score":24.4105,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I like to file a complaint against Equifax, Experian, and Transunion for reporting these accounts on my credit profile I did not give permission to furnish my credit report with these negative items \" Deptednelnet '' Several class action lawsuits have been filed against XXXX, a major student loan servicer. These lawsuits allege various misconducts, including : 1. Miscalculation of Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) Plans : One lawsuit claims XXXX miscalculated monthly payments for borrowers on income-based repayment plans, leading to higher payments than required.\n\nThis miscalculation reportedly impacted a borrower 's ability to qualify for a mortgage due to an inflated debt-to-income ratio. \nThe XXXX article mentions that the lawsuit aims to cover all consumers with West Virginia addresses who were impacted by this miscalculation. \n\n\nXXXX. Breaching Servicing Agreements and Violating Laws : Another lawsuit, filed by, alleges that XXXX breached its servicing agreement with the federal government. \nThis lawsuit claims that student borrowers are intended third-party beneficiaries of the agreement and were harmed by XXXX 's XXXX. \nIt also alleges that XXXX violated state and federal laws in its loan servicing practices. \n\n\nXXXX. Failure to Provide Adequate Notice Regarding IDR Recertification : The Massachusetts Attorney General 's Office reached a settlement with XXXX for {$1.00} XXXX due to allegations of failing to adequately communicate with borrowers about maintaining access to affordable payments. \nSpecifically, the investigation found that XXXX 's communications between XXXX and XXXX failed to comply with federal regulations regarding notice of IDR recertification deadlines.\n\n4. Misleading Borrowers and Falsely Reporting to Credit Bureaus : A XXXX thread suggests that borrowers have experienced issues such as misapplied payments, inflated balances, and false reporting to credit bureaus. \n\nThese accounts must be removed from my credit report, they're showing a payment history which is INVALID I never paid a student loan a day in my life which means this is inaccurately reporting.\n\nNote : It is important to note that class action lawsuits are ongoing legal proceedings, and the allegations have not been proven in court. not to mention the Ferpa violation, and XXXX violating student education records, Tax data, and personal information. XXXX has violated ferpa by accessing student loan data. \n\nPlease handle this investigation properly thank you for you attention and time. \n\nThank you, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-20T15:52:05.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"60827","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13622091","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-20T15:51:40.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Miscalculation</em> of Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) Plans : One <em>lawsuit</em> <em>claims</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>miscalculated</em> monthly <em>payments</em> for borrowers on income-based repayment plans, leading to higher <em>payments</em> than required.\n\nThis <em>miscalculation</em> reportedly impacted a borrower 's ability to qualify for a mortgage due to an inflated debt-to-income ratio. \nThe <em>XXXX</em> article mentions that the <em>lawsuit</em> aims to cover all consumers with West Virginia addresses who were impacted by this <em>miscalculation</em>. \n\n\n<em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[24.4105,"13622091"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13621564","_score":24.4105,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I like to file a complaint against Equifax, Experian, and Transunion for reporting these accounts on my credit profile I did not give permission to furnish my credit report with these negative items \" Deptednelnet '' Several class action lawsuits have been filed against XXXX, a major student loan servicer. These lawsuits allege various misconducts, including : 1. Miscalculation of Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) Plans : One lawsuit claims XXXX miscalculated monthly payments for borrowers on income-based repayment plans, leading to higher payments than required.\n\nThis miscalculation reportedly impacted a borrower 's ability to qualify for a mortgage due to an inflated debt-to-income ratio. \nThe XXXX article mentions that the lawsuit aims to cover all consumers with West Virginia addresses who were impacted by this miscalculation. \n\n\nXXXX. Breaching Servicing Agreements and Violating Laws : Another lawsuit, filed by, alleges that XXXX breached its servicing agreement with the federal government. \nThis lawsuit claims that student borrowers are intended third-party beneficiaries of the agreement and were harmed by XXXX 's XXXX. \nIt also alleges that XXXX violated state and federal laws in its loan servicing practices. \n\n\nXXXX. Failure to Provide Adequate Notice Regarding IDR Recertification : The Massachusetts Attorney General 's Office reached a settlement with XXXX for {$1.00} XXXX due to allegations of failing to adequately communicate with borrowers about maintaining access to affordable payments. \nSpecifically, the investigation found that XXXX 's communications between XXXX and XXXX failed to comply with federal regulations regarding notice of IDR recertification deadlines.\n\n4. Misleading Borrowers and Falsely Reporting to Credit Bureaus : A XXXX thread suggests that borrowers have experienced issues such as misapplied payments, inflated balances, and false reporting to credit bureaus. \n\nThese accounts must be removed from my credit report, they're showing a payment history which is INVALID I never paid a student loan a day in my life which means this is inaccurately reporting.\n\nNote : It is important to note that class action lawsuits are ongoing legal proceedings, and the allegations have not been proven in court. not to mention the Ferpa violation, and XXXX violating student education records, Tax data, and personal information. XXXX has violated ferpa by accessing student loan data. \n\nPlease handle this investigation properly thank you for you attention and time. \n\nThank you, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-20T15:52:08.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"60827","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13621564","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-20T15:46:22.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Miscalculation</em> of Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) Plans : One <em>lawsuit</em> <em>claims</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>miscalculated</em> monthly <em>payments</em> for borrowers on income-based repayment plans, leading to higher <em>payments</em> than required.\n\nThis <em>miscalculation</em> reportedly impacted a borrower 's ability to qualify for a mortgage due to an inflated debt-to-income ratio. \nThe <em>XXXX</em> article mentions that the <em>lawsuit</em> aims to cover all consumers with West Virginia addresses who were impacted by this <em>miscalculation</em>. \n\n\n<em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[24.4105,"13621564"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13622090","_score":24.343098,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I like to file a complaint against Equifax, Experian, and Transunion for reporting these accounts on my credit profile I did not give permission to furnish my credit report with these negative items \" Deptednelnet '' Several class action lawsuits have been filed against XXXX, a major student loan servicer. These lawsuits allege various misconducts, including : 1. Miscalculation of Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) Plans : One lawsuit claims XXXX miscalculated monthly payments for borrowers on income-based repayment plans, leading to higher payments than required.\n\nThis miscalculation reportedly impacted a borrower 's ability to qualify for a mortgage due to an inflated debt-to-income ratio. \nThe XXXX article mentions that the lawsuit aims to cover all consumers with West Virginia addresses who were impacted by this miscalculation. \n\n\nXXXX. Breaching Servicing Agreements and Violating Laws : Another lawsuit, filed by, alleges that XXXX breached its servicing agreement with the federal government. \nThis lawsuit claims that student borrowers are intended third-party beneficiaries of the agreement and were harmed by XXXX 's XXXX. \nIt also alleges that XXXX violated state and federal laws in its loan servicing practices. \n\n\nXXXX. Failure to Provide Adequate Notice Regarding IDR Recertification : The Massachusetts Attorney General 's Office reached a settlement with XXXX for {$1.00} XXXX due to allegations of failing to adequately communicate with borrowers about maintaining access to affordable payments. \nSpecifically, the investigation found that XXXX 's communications between XXXX and XXXX failed to comply with federal regulations regarding notice of IDR recertification deadlines.\n\n4. Misleading Borrowers and Falsely Reporting to Credit Bureaus : A XXXX thread suggests that borrowers have experienced issues such as misapplied payments, inflated balances, and false reporting to credit bureaus. \n\nThese accounts must be removed from my credit report, they're showing a payment history which is INVALID I never paid a student loan a day in my life which means this is inaccurately reporting.\n\nNote : It is important to note that class action lawsuits are ongoing legal proceedings, and the allegations have not been proven in court. not to mention the Ferpa violation, and XXXX violating student education records, Tax data, and personal information. XXXX has violated ferpa by accessing student loan data. \n\nPlease handle this investigation properly thank you for you attention and time. \n\nThank you, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-20T15:52:10.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"60827","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13622090","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-05-20T15:51:40.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Miscalculation</em> of Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) Plans : One <em>lawsuit</em> <em>claims</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>miscalculated</em> monthly <em>payments</em> for borrowers on income-based repayment plans, leading to higher <em>payments</em> than required.\n\nThis <em>miscalculation</em> reportedly impacted a borrower 's ability to qualify for a mortgage due to an inflated debt-to-income ratio. \nThe <em>XXXX</em> article mentions that the <em>lawsuit</em> aims to cover all consumers with West Virginia addresses who were impacted by this <em>miscalculation</em>. \n\n\n<em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[24.343098,"13622090"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13981114","_score":23.56786,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"I am enrolled in a federal XXXX plan ( such as XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, or XXXX ), which sets my monthly student loan payments as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has miscalculated my monthly payment amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \n\nThese concerns mirror the claims made in the class action lawsuit XXXX v. Nelnet Servicing , LLC ( XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), which alleges that Nelnet grossly miscalculated repayment amounts under income-driven plans, violating federal law and borrower protections.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-09T16:44:04.000Z","issue":"Issue with income share agreement","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"55025","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13981114","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Nelnet, Inc.","date_received":"2025-06-09T16:37:18.000Z","state":"MN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Billing or statement issues"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am enrolled in a federal <em>XXXX</em> plan ( such as <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em>, or <em>XXXX</em> ), which sets my monthly student loan <em>payments</em> as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has <em>miscalculated</em> my monthly <em>payment</em> amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \n\nThese concerns mirror the <em>claims</em> made in the class action <em>lawsuit</em> <em>XXXX</em> v. Nelnet Servicing , LLC ( <em>XXXX</em>. <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[23.56786,"13981114"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19138961","_score":20.420319,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against Nelnet Servicing , LLC for repeated, harmful servicing errors, misrepresentation of the amounts I allegedly owe, inaccurate credit reporting, failure to produce valid promissory notes for loans they claim I signed, and a breach of my personal data that has jeopardized my ability to verify that these debts are mine. \nXXXX. Misrepresentation and Miscalculation of Debt : Nelnet has reported inflated loan balances and payment amounts to the credit bureaus that do not reflect the terms of any valid promissory notes I have signed. I only have one executed promissory note, yet Nelnet is reporting over {$70000.00} in student loan debt tied to my identity. This misreporting includes 90-day late payments that have been inaccurately reported, damaging my credit. \nXXXX. Lawsuit Alleging Miscalculated Repayment Amounts : A class action lawsuit ( XXXX XXXX Nelnet Servicing , LLC, XXXX ) alleges that Nelnet grossly miscalculated monthly repayment amounts for borrowers and continued to report those inflated, inaccurate amounts to credit reporting agencies, even after disputes were submitted. According to the complaint, Nelnet reported a borrowers SAVE plan payment as over {$1900.00} per monthfar above what the repayment plan actually requiredleading to negative credit impacts and denial of a mortgage loan. The suit contends Nelnet failed to reasonably investigate disputes. \nXXXX. Inaccurate Credit Reporting : Nelnet has continued to furnish inaccurate and unverifiable debt data to Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion despite disputes. This likely violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) section 1681s-2 ( b ), which requires furnishers to accurately investigate and correct reporting errors. \nXXXX. Invalid or Missing Promissory Notes : Nelnet can not produce valid, signed promissory notes for the loans they claim I owe. Disbursements appear to have occurred without legally enforceable documentation, which would violate Title IV rules governing student loans and call into question the legitimacy of their claims. \nXXXX. Data Breach/ Identity Concerns : My personally identifiable information was accessed, used, or disclosed without my authorization, which suggests a failure to safeguard my data. Other borrowers have raised similar concerns about data security and potential identity theft related to Nelnets data practices. \nXXXX. Failure to Provide Documentation / Servicing Errors : Nelnet repeatedly fails to provide accurate billing statements, correct application of payments, or timely responses to disputes and requests for documentation. This has caused ongoing confusion, stress, and financial harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-30T19:11:56.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19138961","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Nelnet, Inc.","date_received":"2026-01-30T18:37:46.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Lawsuit</em> Alleging <em>Miscalculated</em> Repayment Amounts : A class action <em>lawsuit</em> ( <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> Nelnet Servicing , LLC, <em>XXXX</em> ) alleges that Nelnet grossly <em>miscalculated</em> monthly repayment amounts for borrowers and continued to report those inflated, inaccurate amounts to credit reporting agencies, even after disputes were submitted."]},"sort":[20.420319,"19138961"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2949324","_score":17.343555,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I'm writing about a over 30 years old fraudulent student loan. I was a minor when I attended XXXX XXXX XXXX. This was a corrupt beauty school along with over 36,000 students, my information and signature has been copied and pasted on documentations without my authorized consent. I do not have any signed contracts with any collection agencies or loan services. I've contacted XXXX loan servicing about this fraudulent claim by certified mail on XX/XX/2018. Also, reported by CFPB XXXX is facing 4 lawsuits alleging that it harmed student loan borrowers throughout the repayment process. XXXX miscalculated payments, steered struggling borrowers toward multiple forbearance instead of income-driven repayment plans, and provided unclear information, etc ... I've contacted ALL 3 credit bureaus, XXXX has completely removed this from my credit report. However, XXXX and Equifax has refused to remove this fraudulent account from my report. I've submitted them with a XXXX police report # XXXX and have contacted the FTC # XXXX as well.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-06-28T19:06:09.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"89147","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2949324","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2018-06-28T19:06:04.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Also, reported by CFPB <em>XXXX</em> is facing 4 <em>lawsuits</em> alleging that it harmed student loan borrowers throughout the repayment process. <em>XXXX</em> <em>miscalculated</em> <em>payments</em>, steered struggling borrowers toward multiple forbearance instead of income-driven repayment plans, and provided unclear information, etc ... I've contacted ALL 3 credit bureaus, <em>XXXX</em> has completely removed this from my credit report. However, <em>XXXX</em> and Equifax has refused to remove this fraudulent account from my report."]},"sort":[17.343555,"2949324"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2949323","_score":17.341566,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I'm writing about a over 30 years old fraudulent student loan. I was a minor when I attended XXXX XXXX XXXX. This was a corrupt XXXX  school along with over 36,000 students, my information and signature has been copied and pasted on documentations without my authorized consent. I do not have any signed contracts with any collection agencies or loan services. I've contacted XXXX loan servicing about this fraudulent claim by certified mail on XX/XX/2018. Also, reported by CFPB XXXX is facing 4 lawsuits alleging that it harmed student loan borrowers throughout the repayment process. XXXX miscalculated payments, steered struggling borrowers toward multiple forbearance instead of income-driven repayment plans, and provided unclear information, etc ... I've contacted ALL 3 credit bureaus, XXXX has completely removed this from my credit report. However, Experian and XXXX has refused to remove this fraudulent account from my report. I've submitted them with a XXXX police report # XXXX and have contacted the FTC # XXXX as well.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-06-28T19:06:09.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"89147","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2949323","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2018-06-28T19:06:04.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Also, reported by CFPB <em>XXXX</em> is facing 4 <em>lawsuits</em> alleging that it harmed student loan borrowers throughout the repayment process. <em>XXXX</em> <em>miscalculated</em> <em>payments</em>, steered struggling borrowers toward multiple forbearance instead of income-driven repayment plans, and provided unclear information, etc ... I've contacted ALL 3 credit bureaus, <em>XXXX</em> has completely removed this from my credit report. However, Experian and <em>XXXX</em> has refused to remove this fraudulent account from my report."]},"sort":[17.341566,"2949323"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2949239","_score":17.337896,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I'm writing about a over 30 years old fraudulent student loan. I was a minor when I attended XXXX XXXX XXXX. This was a corrupt XXXX school along with over 36,000 students, my information and signature has been copied and pasted on documentations without my authorized consent. I do not have any signed contracts with any collection agencies or loan services. I've contacted Navient loan servicing about this fraudulent claim by certified mail on XX/XX/2018. Also, reported by CFPB Navient is facing 4 lawsuits alleging that it harmed student loan borrowers throughout the repayment process. Navient miscalculated payments, steered struggling borrowers toward multiple forbearance instead of income-driven repayment plans, and provided unclear information, etc ... I've contacted ALL 3 credit bureaus, XXXX  has completely removed this from my credit report. However, XXXX  and XXXX has refused to remove this fraudulent account from my report. I've submitted them with a XXXX police report # XXXX and have contacted the FTC # XXXX as well.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-06-28T19:06:01.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"89147","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2949239","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","date_received":"2018-06-28T18:14:00.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Also, reported by CFPB Navient is facing 4 <em>lawsuits</em> alleging that it harmed student loan borrowers throughout the repayment process. Navient <em>miscalculated</em> <em>payments</em>, steered struggling borrowers toward multiple forbearance instead of income-driven repayment plans, and provided unclear information, etc ... I've contacted ALL 3 credit bureaus, <em>XXXX</em>  has completely removed this from my credit report. However, <em>XXXX</em>  and <em>XXXX</em> has refused to remove this fraudulent account from my report."]},"sort":[17.337896,"2949239"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13913757","_score":15.903024,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally dispute the accuracy of my monthly student loan repayment amounts calculated and administered by XXXX XXXX, XXXX under my Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) plan, as required by federal law.\n\nThis dispute is submitted pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., the Higher Education Act, and any applicable borrower protections outlined by the XXXX Department of Education. \n\nBASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan payments as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that XXXX has miscalculated my monthly payment amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \nThese concerns mirror the claims made in the class action lawsuit XXXX v. XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), which alleges that XXXX grossly miscalculated repayment amounts under income-driven plans, violating federal law and borrower protections.\n\nWHAT I AM REQUESTING In accordance with FCRA 1681i and 1681s-2, I am requesting the following : 1. A full recalculation of my monthly payment under the correct IDR formula, using my most recent adjusted gross income ( AGI ) and family size.\n\n2. An itemized explanation of how my current monthly amount was determined, including the formula, income data, and poverty guidelines used.\n\n3. A copy of my most recent recertification data, including IRS income retrieval records or tax documents you used.\n\n4. Confirmation that any overreported amounts have not been furnished inaccurately to consumer reporting agencies, or immediate correction if they have.\n\n5. A written update to reflect that this account is disputed by the consumer in all credit bureau reporting per XXXX XXXX compliance standards. \n\nRELEVANT LAWS & VIOLATIONS FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Requires maximum possible accuracy in credit reporting.\n\nFCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Requires furnishers to investigate disputes and correct inaccurate information.\n\nHigher Education Act & Department of Education IDR Guidance : Enforce specific rules around calculating borrower payments based on income and family size.\n\nCARES Act & IDR Flexibilities : If applicable, any misreporting during COVID-19 forbearance periods may also violate federal protections.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-05T22:50:39.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"625XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13913757","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-06-05T22:50:10.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["BASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan <em>payments</em> as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that <em>XXXX</em> has <em>miscalculated</em> my monthly <em>payment</em> amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \nThese concerns mirror the <em>claims</em> made in the class action <em>lawsuit</em> <em>XXXX</em> v. <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> ( <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[15.903024,"13913757"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13913222","_score":15.850879,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally dispute the accuracy of my monthly XXXX XXXX repayment amounts calculated and administered by Nelnet Servicing , LLC under my Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) plan, as required by federal law. \nThis dispute is submitted pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., the Higher Education Act, and any applicable borrower protections outlined by the U.S. Department of Education. \n\nBASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan payments as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has miscalculated my monthly payment amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \nThese concerns mirror the claims made in the class action lawsuit XXXX v. Nelnet Servicing , LLC ( XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), which alleges that Nelnet grossly miscalculated repayment amounts under income-driven plans, violating federal law and borrower protections.\n\nWHAT I AM REQUESTING In accordance with FCRA 1681i and 1681s-2, I am requesting the following : 1. A full recalculation of my monthly payment under the correct IDR formula, using my most recent adjusted gross income ( AGI ) and family size.\n\n2. An itemized explanation of how my current monthly amount was determined, including the formula, income data, and poverty guidelines used.\n\n3. A copy of my most recent recertification data, including IRS income retrieval records or tax documents you used.\n\n4. Confirmation that any overreported amounts have not been furnished inaccurately to consumer reporting agencies, or immediate correction if they have.\n\n5. A written update to reflect that this account is disputed by the consumer in all credit bureau reporting per XXXX XXXX compliance standards. \n\nRELEVANT LAWS & VIOLATIONS FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Requires maximum possible accuracy in credit reporting.\n\nFCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Requires furnishers to investigate disputes and correct inaccurate information.\n\nHigher Education Act & Department of Education IDR Guidance : Enforce specific rules around calculating borrower payments based on income and family size.\n\nCARES Act & IDR Flexibilities : If applicable, any misreporting during COVID-19 forbearance periods may also violate federal protections.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-05T22:50:36.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"625XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13913222","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Nelnet, Inc.","date_received":"2025-06-05T22:25:16.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["BASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan <em>payments</em> as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has <em>miscalculated</em> my monthly <em>payment</em> amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \nThese concerns mirror the <em>claims</em> made in the class action <em>lawsuit</em> <em>XXXX</em> v. Nelnet Servicing , LLC ( <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[15.850879,"13913222"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13913755","_score":15.843287,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally dispute the accuracy of my monthly XXXX XXXX repayment amounts calculated and administered by XXXX XXXX, XXXX under my Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) plan, as required by federal law.\n\nThis dispute is submitted pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., the Higher Education Act, and any applicable borrower protections outlined by the XXXX Department of Education. \n\nBASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan payments as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has miscalculated my monthly payment amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me.\n\nThese concerns mirror the claims made in the class action lawsuit XXXX v. XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), which alleges that XXXX grossly miscalculated repayment amounts under income-driven plans, violating federal law and borrower protections.\n\nWHAT I AM REQUESTING In accordance with FCRA 1681i and 1681s-2, I am requesting the following : 1. A full recalculation of my monthly payment under the correct IDR formula, using my most recent adjusted gross income ( AGI ) and family size.\n\n2. An itemized explanation of how my current monthly amount was determined, including the formula, income data, and poverty guidelines used.\n\n3. A copy of my most recent recertification data, including IRS income retrieval records or tax documents you used.\n\n4. Confirmation that any overreported amounts have not been furnished inaccurately to consumer reporting agencies, or immediate correction if they have.\n\n5. A written update to reflect that this account is disputed by the consumer in all credit bureau reporting per XXXX XXXX compliance standards. \n\nRELEVANT LAWS & VIOLATIONS FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Requires maximum possible accuracy in credit reporting.\n\nFCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Requires furnishers to investigate disputes and correct inaccurate information.\n\nHigher Education Act & Department of Education IDR Guidance : Enforce specific rules around calculating borrower payments based on income and family size.\n\nCARES Act & IDR Flexibilities : If applicable, any misreporting during COVID-19 forbearance periods may also violate federal protections.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-05T22:50:40.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"625XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13913755","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-05T22:50:10.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["BASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan <em>payments</em> as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has <em>miscalculated</em> my monthly <em>payment</em> amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me.\n\nThese concerns mirror the <em>claims</em> made in the class action <em>lawsuit</em> <em>XXXX</em> v. <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> ( <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[15.843287,"13913755"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13913756","_score":15.791819,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally dispute the accuracy of my monthly student loan repayment amounts calculated and administered by XXXX XXXX, XXXX under my Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) plan, as required by federal law.\n\nThis dispute is submitted pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., the Higher Education Act, and any applicable borrower protections outlined by the XXXX Department of Education. \nBASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan payments as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that XXXX has miscalculated my monthly payment amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \nThese concerns mirror the claims made in the class action lawsuit XXXX v. XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), which alleges that XXXX grossly miscalculated repayment amounts under income-driven plans, violating federal law and borrower protections.\n\nWHAT I AM REQUESTING In accordance with FCRA 1681i and 1681s-2, I am requesting the following : 1. A full recalculation of my monthly payment under the correct IDR formula, using my most recent adjusted gross income ( AGI ) and family size.\n\n2. An itemized explanation of how my current monthly amount was determined, including the formula, income data, and poverty guidelines used.\n\n3. A copy of my most recent recertification data, including IRS income retrieval records or tax documents you used.\n\n4. Confirmation that any overreported amounts have not been furnished inaccurately to consumer reporting agencies, or immediate correction if they have.\n\n5. A written update to reflect that this account is disputed by the consumer in all credit bureau reporting per XXXX XXXX compliance standards. \n\nRELEVANT LAWS & VIOLATIONS FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Requires maximum possible accuracy in credit reporting.\n\nFCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Requires furnishers to investigate disputes and correct inaccurate information.\n\nHigher Education Act & Department of Education IDR Guidance : Enforce specific rules around calculating borrower payments based on income and family size.\n\nCARES Act & IDR Flexibilities : If applicable, any misreporting during COVID-19 forbearance periods may also violate federal protections.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-05T22:50:36.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"625XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13913756","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-05T22:50:10.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["BASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan <em>payments</em> as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that <em>XXXX</em> has <em>miscalculated</em> my monthly <em>payment</em> amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \nThese concerns mirror the <em>claims</em> made in the class action <em>lawsuit</em> <em>XXXX</em> v. <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> ( <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[15.791819,"13913756"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20881387","_score":15.1850395,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : [ Insert Date ] To : Nelnet Servicing , LLC Attn : Disputes Department / Legal Compliance XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Subject : Formal Dispute of Inaccurate Monthly Repayment Calculations under Income-Driven Repayment Plan ( IDR ) Request for Validation & Correction To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to formally dispute the accuracy of my monthly student loan repayment amounts calculated and administered by Nelnet Servicing , LLC under my Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) plan, as required by federal law. \n\nThis dispute is submitted pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., the Higher Education Act, and any applicable borrower protections outlined by the U.S. Department of Education. \n\nBASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, or XXXX ), which sets my monthly student loan payments as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has miscalculated my monthly payment amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \n\nThese concerns mirror the claims made in the class action lawsuit XXXX XXXX Nelnet Servicing , LLC ( XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), which alleges that Nelnet grossly miscalculated repayment amounts under income-driven plans, violating federal law and borrower protections. \n\nWHAT I AM REQUESTING In accordance with FCRA 1681i and 1681s-2, I am requesting the following : A full recalculation of my monthly payment under the correct IDR formula, using my most recent adjusted gross income ( AGI ) and family size. \n\nAn itemized explanation of how my current monthly amount was determined, including the formula, income data, and poverty guidelines used. \n\nA copy of my most recent recertification data, including IRS income retrieval records or tax documents you used. \n\nConfirmation that any overreported amounts have not been furnished inaccurately to consumer reporting agencies, or immediate correction if they have. \n\nA written update to reflect that this account is disputed by the consumer in all credit bureau reporting per Metro 2 compliance standards.\n\nRELEVANT LAWS & VIOLATIONS FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Requires maximum possible accuracy in credit reporting.\n\nFCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Requires furnishers to investigate disputes and correct inaccurate information.\n\nHigher Education Act & Department of Education IDR Guidance : Enforce specific rules around calculating borrower payments based on income and family size.\n\nCARES Act & IDR Flexibilities : If applicable, any misreporting during XXXX forbearance periods may also violate federal protections.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-02T13:50:23.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"20136","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20881387","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Nelnet, Inc.","date_received":"2026-04-02T13:44:47.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Don't agree with the fees charged"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["BASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em>, or <em>XXXX</em> ), which sets my monthly student loan <em>payments</em> as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has <em>miscalculated</em> my monthly <em>payment</em> amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \n\nThese concerns mirror the <em>claims</em> made in the class action <em>lawsuit</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> Nelnet Servicing , LLC ( <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[15.1850395,"20881387"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13523787","_score":14.426208,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to formally dispute the accuracy of my monthly student loan repayment amounts calculated and administered by Nelnet Servicing , LLC under my Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) plan, as required by federal law.\n\nThis dispute is submitted pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., the Higher Education Act, and any applicable borrower protections outlined by the U.S. Department of Education. \n\nBASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan payments as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has miscalculated my monthly payment amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \n\nThese concerns mirror the claims made in the class action lawsuit XXXX v. Nelnet Servicing , LLC ( XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), which alleges that Nelnet grossly miscalculated repayment amounts under income-driven plans, violating federal law and borrower protections.\n\nWHAT I AM REQUESTING In accordance with FCRA 1681i and 1681s-2, I am requesting the following : A full recalculation of my monthly payment under the correct IDR formula, using my most recent adjusted gross income ( AGI ) and family size. \n\nAn itemized explanation of how my current monthly amount was determined, including the formula, income data, and poverty guidelines used. \n\nA copy of my most recent recertification data, including IRS income retrieval records or tax documents you used. \n\nConfirmation that any overreported amounts have not been furnished inaccurately to consumer reporting agencies, or immediate correction if they have. \n\nA written update to reflect that this account is disputed by the consumer in all credit bureau reporting per Metro 2 compliance standards.\n\nRELEVANT LAWS & VIOLATIONS FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Requires maximum possible accuracy in credit reporting.\n\nFCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Requires furnishers to investigate disputes and correct inaccurate information.\n\nHigher Education Act & Department of Education IDR Guidance : Enforce specific rules around calculating borrower payments based on income and family size. \nCARES Act & IDR Flexibilities : If applicable, any misreporting during COVID-19 forbearance periods may also violate federal protections. \n\nNEXT STEPS If Nelnet can not provide full documentation and validation of the amounts currently being charged, I request that : All affected repayment calculations be corrected retroactively. \nAll affected credit reporting be corrected or deleted. \nYou provide written notice within 30 days in compliance with the FCRA. \nFailure to respond or resolve this issue appropriately may result in a formal complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the Department of Educations XXXXederal Student Aid Ombudsman Group, and may trigger further legal action under FCRA 1681n and 1681o.\n\nThank you for your attention to this urgent matter. I look forward to your timely and thorough response. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-16T02:13:07.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"11772","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13523787","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Nelnet, Inc.","date_received":"2025-05-16T02:06:44.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Don't agree with the fees charged"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["BASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan <em>payments</em> as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has <em>miscalculated</em> my monthly <em>payment</em> amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \n\nThese concerns mirror the <em>claims</em> made in the class action <em>lawsuit</em> <em>XXXX</em> v. Nelnet Servicing , LLC ( <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[14.426208,"13523787"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12028314","_score":13.453018,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"As of today's date, I have not heard from Wells Fargo regarding if I'm impacted by the CFPB settlement. From XXXX XXXX XXXX I attempted XXXX loan modifications and was declined/denial every time followed by XXXX foreclosure notifications.   foreclosure and bankruptcy financially have ruined my credit. I'm seeking recovery of all damages available under the law including compensatory and punitive damages as well as attorney fees and costs. HAMP required mortgage Wells Fargo the mortgage servicer to offer loan modifications to borrowers who met certain threshold requirements. These modifications would lower a borrowers mortgage payments to a manageable \nlevel (typically XXXX  percent of the borrowers monthly income) and allow the borrower to avoid foreclosure. Unfortunately, this did not happen. However, Wells Fargo, because of an alleged faulty calculation failed to offer a loan modification. Instead, Wells Fargo needlessly tried to foreclose on my Home. Wells Fargo has attempted to cast its conduct here as resulting from a faulty calculation. However, Wells Fargos problem goes much deeper than a single miscalculation. Wells Fargos conduct here reflects the same type of extreme and outrageous conduct that has embroiled Wells Fargo in a string of public scandals. This software determined customers eligibility for a \ngovernment-mandated mortgage modification during a time of extreme financial distress. Its importance to these customers lives cannot be overstated. Yet Wells Fargo not only failed to verify that its software was correctly calculating whether customers met threshold requirements for a mortgage modification, it also failed to regularly and properly audit the software for compliance with government requirements - allowing life-changing errors to remain uncorrected for years on end.\n\nWells Fargo Admits Loan Modification Error, Wrongfully Foreclosed on Homes\nA quarterly filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission in August XXXX revealed that Wells Fargo made an error in denying mortgage modifications to hundreds of borrowers. The securities filing says that Wells Fargo discovered a calculation error in its automated software for calculating whether a borrower should be offered more favorable loan terms instead of foreclosure. Wells Fargo says the error affected XXXX homes that were in the foreclosure process between XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX.\nIn XXXX XXXX Wells Fargo revised its estimate, announcing that the miscalculation affected XXXX homes that were going through foreclosure between XX/XX/XXXX, andXX/XX/XXXX.\nAs Wells Fargo explains, two federal government programs require Wells Fargo and other lenders to offer loan modifications to keep people in their homes when they are in default, rather than going through the expensive process of foreclosure. Wells Fargo did not comply with this law, it says, due to a software glitch that affected XXXX  mortgages that were in default. Ultimately, XXXX homes were foreclosed on, when a mortgage modification should have been offered, according to Wells Fargos disclosures.\nSenators Agree: Wells Fargo Computer Glitch Compensation Program Is Inadequate to Repair Damage from Wrongful Foreclosure\nWells Fargo says it has set aside XXXX million to remediate the wrongful disclosures caused by the software miscalculation. Split amongst the XXXX people, Wells Fargo says it wrongfully foreclosed on, which would amount to only about XXXX per person. But reportedly, the checks Wells Fargo is sending out are lower than that. Wells Fargo is telling people they can go to mediation if they want more money.\nSenator XXXX XXXX  said of Wells Fargos remediation plan: Setting aside a few thousand dollars for each of the people affected. Pathetic. According to Senator XXXX who sits on the Senate Banking Committee, Wells Fargos remediation plan does not offer nearly enough to compensate for the devastating ripple effect a foreclosure can have, including the stress and trauma of losing ones home, related health problems, and destroy[ing] peoples credit. Senator XXXX continued:\nIt is hard to imagine how Wells Fargos estimate of XXXX million for remediation would come close to remunerating impacted customers.\n\nList of Challenges and Issues Ive had with Wells Fargo over the last XXXX  years. Starting from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I entered a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  This loan was predatory. A predatory loan is a fraudulent and unfair, deceptive, or abusive loan that can trap borrowers in debt. Predatory lenders often target people who are in financial need. \nDue to the nature of the pick-a-payment loan, the monthly payment increased to an amount that I could not pay so I ended up filing for Bankruptcy in XXXX to remain in my home. In XXXX XXXX XXXX fell as a bank due to pick-a-payment loans and was acquired by XXXX In XXXX XXXX  was acquired by Wells Fargo as it also fell due to pick-a-payment loans. In XXXX XXXX XXXX my bankruptcy was discharged, and as such XXXX  issued a 1099c stating my debt had been canceled and that I was no longer responsible for the debt. However, my loan with XXXX was never reaffirmed nor was the lien released. However, the security deed was not updated to reflect any changes to my loan. \n\nIn XXXX I was given a loan modification by XXXX and issued another 1099c also cancellation of debt.  Also, in XXXX  I was given another modification by Wells Fargo but not issued a 1099c. In XXXX I was given another modification but this time I was but into a XXXXyear loan and Wells Fargo updated the security deed to reflect the new loan amount and to show Wells Fargo as the lien holder.    \n\nXXXX  Wells Fargo increased my mortgage to XXXXyear loan. They Modified my mortgages and told me if I dont agree with the XXXX-year term, I will most likely lose my home to foreclosure. \nAfter signing the XXXX-year loan modification I later found out Wells Fargo added a XXXX mortgage (stealth modification).\nAs the country tried to crawl out of the last recession, homeowners across America sought mortgage modifications to make their home loans more manageable. However, some homeowners say that Wells Fargo not only modified their loans without asking but that this lower rate added years  perhaps decades  to the terms of their mortgages. Wells Fargo has once again found itself in the middle of a growing scandal, as the bank faces accusations of making unauthorized changes to the mortgage loans held by customers who have entered bankruptcy.\nThis issue came to light after multiple homeowners sued the bank, claiming it had changed the terms of their mortgages without permission. While its unclear just how many of these modifications Wells Fargo has made, at least seven lawsuits, including one potential class-action complaint, have been filed against the bank.\nThe class-action lawsuit [PDF], filed in a federal court in North Carolina, accuses the bank of making at least three improper modifications to one couples mortgage beginning in XXXX. The couple filed for XXXX XXXX bankruptcy, which allows people to reorganize their finances while they work toward getting out of debt, in XXXX XXXX. According to the complaint, they were surprised to find in XXXX XXXX that Wells Fargo had filed a stealth modification to their mortgage even though their bankruptcy plan had been approved by the court.\nAny modifications to a bankruptcy plan must be approved by the court and those involved in the case. However, in this case, the couple claims they never agreed to allow Wells Fargo to change their loan terms. The filed modification, which was part of a loan modification trial process at Wells Fargo, lowered the couples monthly mortgage payments from XXXX XXXX XXXX.\nWhile paying a few hundred dollars less each month might be nice, buried deep in the terms of the modification was notice that the mortgage had been extended to XXXX years.\nUnder the couples XXXX XXXX plan, they were to pay their remaining XXXX  mortgage over 14 years, incurring about XXXX in interest charges. With Wells Fargos unauthorized extension, they would pay the remaining mortgage amount over an additional XXXX years, incurring not only the XXXX interest charges already planned, but an additional XXXX XXXX XXXX  depending on interest rates.\nTo make matters worse, the couple claims the Wells Fargo notice of modification implied that they would lose their home if they did not accept the modification.\nBy following the steps outlined below, you can begin to restore your mortgage account to good standing, the notice stated. If you fail to take the following steps and continue to miss or make late mortgage payments, you risk further damage to your credit and possibly foreclosure of your home.\nThe lawsuit claims that the couple should not have been in danger of foreclosure as they had not missed any payments before filing for bankruptcy and had made all planned payments that had come due.\nFollowing the filing of this modification, the couple claims that Wells Fargo filed similar changes with the court in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, neither of which were approved or requested by the couple.\nAccording to the lawsuit, Wells Fargo may have submitted the modification plans to enrich itself through incentive payments by the U.S. government.\nThe New York Times reports that some lenders take part in certain programs designed to encourage loan modifications for troubled borrowers. In these cases, the bank can receive up to XXXX from government programs for each loan it adjusts.\nAdditionally, the lawsuit claims that by modifying the loans for a longer term, Wells Fargo can collect millions of dollars in additional interest and servicing fees.\nAllegations found in the North Carolina class-action lawsuit have been detailed in several other complaints against Wells Fargo, the Times reports.\nIn one case, XXXX XXXX XXXX a Texas lawyer, tells the Times that he first thought Wells Fargo had made a simple clerical error when it came to a clients loan modification. But after looking into the issue he found a pattern of filing false documents with the federal court.\nThese modifications, he says, wreaked havoc on the customers finances and bankruptcy reorganization. XXXX tells the XXXX that one of his clients, who filed for bankruptcy in XXXX XXXX, received a letter in XXXX from the bank notifying them that they had been approved for a trial loan modification. While the couple didnt approve or request the changes, the bank submitted them to the court.\nIn this case, the payments were reduced from XXXX XXXX XXXX While the client had a plan in place to repay their loan in XXXX  years, the modification extended that time to 40 years, increasing interest charges by an extra XXXX\nA spokesperson for Wells Fargo tells the Times that the bank denies the claims made in the lawsuits, contending that both the borrowers and courts were notified of mortgage modifications properly. As for pushing through modifications without borrower approval, the rep says, We do not finalize a modification without receiving signed documents from the customer and, where required, approval from the bankruptcy court.\n\nXXXX  Wells Fargo Mortgage Servicing Violations\nSoftware Miscalculations: A glitch in the banks automated system incorrectly calculated that certain homeowners did not qualify for mortgage modifications, leading to wrongful foreclosures.\nLoan Modification Denial: Wrongfully denying eligible borrowers the opportunity to modify their mortgages, resulting in avoidable defaults and eventual foreclosures.\nFailure to Offer Modifications: Banks failed or delayed in offering loan modifications to homeowners who qualified under federal programs, leading to foreclosure even though the borrowers were entitled to more favorable modified loan terms.\nInaccurate Loan Reporting: Erroneously reporting some borrowers as being ineligible for mortgage relief, preventing them from accessing loss mitigation programs that could have saved their homes.\nImproper Fees and Interest Rate Miscalculations: Improperly charging fees and miscalculating interest rates on adjustable-rate mortgages have caused significant financial losses for homeowners.\nMisapplied Payments: Some homeowners reported that payments intended for mortgage modifications were misapplied, causing confusion and leading to wrongful foreclosure due to perceived defaults.\nFailure to Implement Federal Guidelines: Failing to follow federal mortgage relief guidelines that require loan modifications before initiating foreclosure proceedings.\n\nLoss of Mortgage Documentation: Errors in internal systems caused the loss of critical loan documents, which resulted in homeowners being wrongfully denied mortgage modifications.\n\nInadequate Communication: Poor communication practices from banks led to homeowners missing crucial modification deadlines, ultimately resulting in foreclosure even though they were eligible for assistance.\n\nNegligence in Monitoring Errors: Even after discovering errors that caused wrongful modification denials, banks failed to act promptly to rectify the issue, prolonging the harm to homeowners.\n\nFailing to honor your forbearance agreement.\nForeclosing earlier than allowed by recent federal protections put in place due to the COVID-19 pandemic.\nEngaging in practices that violate the 1968 Truth in Lending Act (TILA)\nFailing to comply with your loan modification agreement; and/or\nFailing to give you timely notices you are entitled to receive under federal and state law, such as a notice of default, or a pre-foreclosure breach notice.\n\n4-\tIve received two checks from Wells Fargo\nWhy is Wells Fargo Sending Settlement Checks Now?\nWhile the exact reason Wells Fargo is sending out these settlement checks remains unclear, the bank has likely uncovered a major servicing violation, like the issues outlined above. These violations may have occurred over several years before being discovered. Given the severity of these errorspotentially leading to homeowners losing their properties through foreclosureWells Fargo is likely issuing these checks as a preemptive effort to settle legal claims before they escalate into more costly lawsuits in the future.\nHow Big Are the Settlement Checks from Wells Fargo?\nBased on clients lawsuits, the settlement checks typically range from XXXX XXXX XXXX  with higher amounts indicating more serious violations. If you receive a very large, unsolicited settlement check in the mail, this could be a sign that your case is particularly strong, making it essential to consult with an attorney. \n\n5-\tIssues highlighting the challenges I have faced when seeking loan modifications with Wells Fargo. Wells Fargo loan modification problems include:\nDenial of Loan Modifications: Many borrowers report being denied loan modifications, often without clear reasons.\nDocument Submission Issues: Borrowers frequently have to send in the same document multiple times, leading to frustration.\nConfusion About the Process: Many homeowners feel uncertain about the status of their applications and the overall process.\nNegligence in Handling Applications: There have been claims that Wells Fargo acted negligently in denying modifications to eligible borrowers.\nWidespread Mismanagement: Reports indicate that Wells Fargo has made errors that resulted in the wrongful denial of loan modifications and other issues affecting mortgage customers.\n\n6-\tHarm Done by Wells Fargo Loan Modification Error, Wrongfully Foreclosure \na.\tSevere Emotional Distress XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\tWrongfully attempted Foreclosure XXXX times XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.\tHired 3rd party agencies to assist with modification and to stop or avoid foreclosure XXXX XXXX  Had to liquidate retirement accounts to avoid wrong foreclosures. This involved an additional 10% tax due to hardship early withdrawal of 401k XXXX XXXX  Borrowed money from family members XXXX XXXX\tEntitled to punitive damages XXXX   \n\nWells Fargo Unlawful Reporting  Pain & Suffering\nItem\tAmount\nMoney paid to reinstate loan XXXX over 9-year period \nMoney was paid to attorneys/agencies to help stop multiple foreclosure attempts over 9 years.\tApprox. XXXX XXXX XXXX  \nLiquidation of multiple 401k\tLost saving/retirement funds = approx. XXXX XXXX XXXX \nTime spent for management of this issue  XXXX  hrs/year\tApprox XXXX  IRS confiscation of all tax refunds since XXXX\tApprox. XXXX XXXX  per year for XXXX years) \nIRS enforced maximum withholdings  single filer status\t\nApprox. XXXX XXXX  per year.) \nIRS\tXXXX  IRS debt XXXX\nMedical conditions due to stress:\nDuring the past 9 years, we have been under hardship and undue stress leading to the following medical conditions: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  \nAmount - XXXX\nMortgage paid over 9 years totaling over $300,000\nDamaged Credit  I have filed XXXX XXXXtime to stop foreclosure since XXXX which now prevents me from getting a loan.\nUnable to get loans\nXXXX  \nThere have been several lawsuits filed against Wells Fargo ranging from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX which have been very similar situations to my situation. Therefore, Im seeking XXXX XXXX XXXX  \nAbove is a list of activities and damage that have severely impacted me and my family due to Predatory lending, reporting 1099c by Wells Fargo, formerly known as XXXX.  Wrongful foreclosure attempts, Loan Modification Errors, ETC. These problems have negatively impacted our quality of daily life (i.e., no vacations, no dinners out, no shopping, etc.) and damaged our credit. This psychological trauma/mental health, stressful event needs to end. After XXXX  years of being on this mortgage, it is still unclear if my mortgage is valid. XXXX XXXX and Now Wells Fargo have all failed me as a borrower. I was given a predatory loan that is a fraudulent, unfair deceptive, or abusive loan that can trap borrowers in debt. After several government bailouts to these mortgage companies, Im trapped in debt that appears no way out but foreclosure. \n\nWhat is Wrongful Foreclosure Action\nA wrongful foreclosure is when a lending institution forecloses on a property without any proper legal basis.  This can be through mistakes, negligence or intentional misconduct.  However, it goes, borrowers should always exercise due diligence making sure they dont fall prey to such practices.  \nWhen Your Rights Are Violated\nLending institutions stand to profit by foreclosing on a property.  It may be done by mistake or by unfair means for financial gain.  Whether accidental or deliberate, wrongful foreclosures have huge ramifications for homeowners.  Families can lose their homes, and their credit is so badly impacted by foreclosure that getting a new mortgage is next to impossible, to say nothing of how bad credit can impact other areas of life.  Wrongful foreclosures also cause undue stress on a family, especially if they must completely rearrange their lives (new neighborhoods/cities/schools / etc.).  Many homeowners may decide to pursue legal action against lenders, to reclaim some semblance of their former lives.\nWrongful Foreclosure Cases\nThere are several high-profile cases to illustrate what happens when wrongful foreclosures happen.  One of the most well-known cases involves Wells Fargo.  In 2019, Washington DCs Eastern U.S. District Court ruled that Wells Fargo wrongfully took back hundreds of homes.  It wasnt deliberate on Wells Fargos part, but a textbook example of a technical glitch in software that caused hundreds of borrowers not to get the loan modifications they qualified for.  As part of the judiciary relief, Wells Fargo gave each borrower more than $10,000.  Victims also had further recourse under a class action settlement with the bank.\nIn another case, a lending institution told a couple they couldnt get a loan modification without getting behind on payments.  They defaulted on their loan and filed for bankruptcy on the advice of the lender.  They lost their home anyway because the lender continued with foreclosure proceedings, even with a bankruptcy stay in place.  The couple eventually were awarded more than $45 million in actual and punitive wrongful foreclosure damages and court costs.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-28T09:47:50.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"30331","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12028314","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2025-02-12T22:11:23.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"An existing modification, forbearance plan, short sale, or other loss mitigation relief"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["If you fail to take the following steps and continue to miss or make late mortgage <em>payments</em>, you risk further damage to your credit and possibly foreclosure of your home.\nThe <em>lawsuit</em> <em>claims</em> that the couple should not have been in danger of foreclosure as they had not missed any <em>payments</em> before filing for bankruptcy and had made all planned <em>payments</em> that had come due."]},"sort":[13.453018,"12028314"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13584629","_score":13.018734,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, OR, XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/year>XXXX  To : Nelnet Servicing , LLC Attn : Disputes Department / Legal Compliance XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Subject : Formal Dispute of Inaccurate Monthly Repayment Calculations under Income-Driven Repayment Plan ( IDR ) Request for Validation & Correction To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to formally dispute the accuracy of my monthly student loan repayment amounts calculated and administered by Nelnet Servicing , LLC under my Income-Driven Repayment ( IDR ) plan, as required by federal law. \nThis dispute is submitted pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., the Higher Education Act, and any applicable borrower protections outlined by the U.S. Department of Education.\n\nBASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan payments as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has miscalculated my monthly payment amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \nThese concerns mirror the claims made in the class action lawsuit Stevens v. Nelnet Servicing , LLC ( XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), which alleges that Nelnet grossly miscalculated repayment amounts under income-driven plans, violating federal law and borrower protections. \n\nWHAT I AM REQUESTING In accordance with FCRA 1681i and 1681s-2, I am requesting the following : A full recalculation of my monthly payment under the correct IDR formula, using my most recent adjusted gross income ( AGI ) and family size. \nAn itemized explanation of how my current monthly amount was determined, including the formula, income data, and poverty guidelines used. \nA copy of my most recent recertification data, including IRS income retrieval records or tax documents you used. \nConfirmation that any overreported amounts have not been furnished inaccurately to consumer reporting agencies, or immediate correction if they have. \nA written update to reflect that this account is disputed by the consumer in all credit bureau reporting per Metro 2 compliance standards.\n\nRELEVANT LAWS & VIOLATIONS FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Requires maximum possible accuracy in credit reporting. \nFCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Requires furnishers to investigate disputes and correct inaccurate information.\n\nHigher Education Act & Department of Education IDR Guidance : Enforce specific rules around calculating borrower payments based on income and family size.\n\nCARES Act & IDR Flexibilities : If applicable, any misreporting during COVID-19 forbearance periods may also violate federal protections.\n\nENCLOSURES I have enclosed the following : Copy of most recent billing statement from Nelnet Copy of tax return / proof of income Screenshot or copy of my current repayment plan details Copy of credit report ( if misreporting is suspected ) NEXT STEPS If Nelnet can not provide full documentation and validation of the amounts currently being charged, I request that : All affected repayment calculations be corrected retroactively.\n\nAll affected credit reporting be corrected or deleted. \nYou provide written notice within 30 days in compliance with the FCRA. \nFailure to respond or resolve this issue appropriately may result in a formal complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the Department of Educations Federal Student Aid Ombudsman Group, and may trigger further legal action under FCRA 1681n and 1681o.\n\nThank you for your attention to this urgent matter. I look forward to your timely and thorough response. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-19T20:26:46.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"97203","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13584629","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Nelnet, Inc.","date_received":"2025-05-19T19:32:34.000Z","state":"OR","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["BASIS FOR DISPUTE I am enrolled in a federal IDR plan ( such as SAVE, REPAYE, PAYE, or IBR ), which sets my monthly student loan <em>payments</em> as a percentage of my discretionary income. However, I have reason to believe that Nelnet has <em>miscalculated</em> my monthly <em>payment</em> amount, resulting in amounts that exceed the limits set by federal guidelines, and placing an undue financial burden on me. \nThese concerns mirror the <em>claims</em> made in the class action <em>lawsuit</em> Stevens v. Nelnet Servicing , LLC ( <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[13.018734,"13584629"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18587301","_score":12.265319,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this formal complaint against the XXXX Department of Education and their loan servicers ( XXXX, Debt Management & Collections System Loans, XXXX Loans and any other affiliate student loan servicers ) for serious and ongoing misconduct involving my federal student loan account. I am claiming abuse, negligence in reporting and crediting payments, denial of access to payment history and statements, loan fraud, unauthorized servicer changes without notice or consent, wrongful default reporting, and violations of data protection laws ( XXXX ) by the US Department of Education. \n\nThe actions outlined below constitute unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices, inadequate servicing, and possible loan contract fraud. \n\nXXXX. Failure to XXXX XXXX and Report Payments I have been systematically denied access to my payment history, and payments I made have not been properly credited or reported. This constitutes unfair or deceptive servicing in violation of : XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( CFPB XXXX Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ), XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( FCRA XXXX XXXX XXXX ), XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( FDCPA False or Unfair XXXX XXXX Practices ). \n\nThe CFPB has identified widespread servicing failures where student loan servicers failed to provide required protections to borrowers and mishandled accounts, resulting in harm. \n\nXXXX. Unauthorized Servicer Transfers Without Notice My loan was transferred from XXXX servicer to another ( including XXXX, Debt Management & Collections System Loans & ECMC-CA loans ) without prior written or verbal consent. This failure to provide notice violated federal servicing standards and deprived me of the ability to monitor my loan and payments. \n\nSuch servicer mismanagement has been highlighted in litigation and regulatory scrutiny, including the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( AFT ) v. XXXX case, which alleges servicers failed to send billing statements, miscalculated obligations, and mismanaged repayment options. \n\nXXXX. Invalid Promissory Note Contractual Fraud The promissory note associated with my loan does not contain my wet-ink signature or a signature from the Department of Education XXXX A contract, including a loan, generally requires signatures from all parties to be enforceable under common contract law principles. A purported loan without a valid signed agreement XXXX constitute loan contract fraud, misrepresentation, and unlawful debt collection. \n\nXXXX. Failure to Disclose Assignment/ XXXX XXXX of the XXXX I demand disclosure of the price for which my loan was purchased or assigned. If this transfer occurred for less than the balance claimed ( or without valid documentation ), the debt as enforced should be void under debt-validation and standing doctrines ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ). \n\nXXXX. Improper Change to IDR Repayment Terms In XX/XX/year>, the Department of Education agreed to place my account in an Income Driven Repayment ( XXXX ) plan with $ XXXX monthly payments, which I paid via XXXX. Later, without notice or consent, my payment was increased to {$260.00} per month, which is improper, deceptive, and disruptive. The agreed upon {$5.00} per month automatic payment stopped, without notifying me. This caused the account to go into default Changes to repayment plans without borrower notification, especially in ways that trigger defaults, are exactly the type of servicing failures alleged in the US Department of Education and XXXX lawsuit filed by AFT and others, where practices like improper billing and misinformation about repayment plans are central claims. \n\nXXXX. Wrongful Default and Credit Damage Because of these servicing errors, including unreported payments and lack of communication changes to my repayment schedule, my loan was wrongfully reported as in default. This has harmed my credit and caused financial injury, which XXXX violate : XXXX U.S.C. XXXX ( FCRA Duty to Report XXXX XXXX ), XXXX laws against defamation and unfair reporting. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX There are multiple ongoing lawsuits demonstrating widespread abuses by US Department of Education and XXXX servicers, including XXXX : AFT v. XXXX, No. XXXX ( D.D.C. ), alleging failure to send billing statements, incorrect payment calculations, and mismanagement of repayment programs. \n\nXXXX v. XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX. ), alleging XXXX failed to implement discharges ordered by XXXX, failed to issue refunds, and continued reporting debts inaccurately. \n\nRegulators have also penalized XXXX for not sending timely billing statements to millions of borrowers, which caused widespread delinquency. \n\nXXXX. Data Breach, XXXX, and Title IV Violations My personal and financial data was compromised due to a data breach involving the student loan servicing infrastructure, violating XXXX ( Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act ) and Title XXXX data protections. Data breaches affecting federal student loan records implicate federal privacy obligations and expose borrowers to identity theft and financial harm. \n\nXXXX. Demand for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on the above, I demand immediate cancellation of all student loan debt associated with my account. This cancellation should include removal of all adverse credit reporting and correction of public records reflecting the alleged debt and default.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-09T02:29:27.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"85326","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18587301","timely":"No","company_response":"Untimely response","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Servicer under contract with Federal Student Aid","date_received":"2026-01-09T00:13:31.000Z","state":"AZ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Trouble with how payments are being handled"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This caused the account to go into default Changes to repayment plans without borrower notification, especially in ways that trigger defaults, are exactly the type of servicing failures alleged in the US Department of Education and <em>XXXX</em> <em>lawsuit</em> filed by AFT and others, where practices like improper billing and misinformation about repayment plans are central <em>claims</em>. \n\n<em>XXXX</em>."],"sub_issue":["Trouble with how <em>payments</em> are being handled"]},"sort":[12.265319,"18587301"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3234742","_score":12.153231,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Please be advised of the submission of the attached police report for the pending criminal charges against XXXX XXXX XXXX for the XXXX XXXX card theft on the above account along with two other accounts. This account was reported to your office as fraud in XX/XX/2019 as was improperly cited as a civil matter after Mr. XXXX attempted unsuccessfully to negotiate the repayment of these cards on both his behalf and the affected cards behalf as well for full restitution and to avoid criminal prosecution. These attempts were unsuccessful after Ms. XXXX missed every promised repayment date and as such, the case has been referred to the DAs office for criminal charges. As directed by the Chase Executive Office,  this claim is being resubmitted to you with the police report attached for processing of this claim as fraudulent. \nNo further payments will be made on this account by Mr. XXXX as this account has been properly documented and reported as fraudulent to your company. Any attempts to collect this debt or require Mr. XXXX to make payments with threat of lawsuits, negative credit impacts, or garnishments or liens will be met with civil action. This complaint and accompanying police report are also being submitted to the North Carolina Attorney Generals Office and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau due to the failure to thoroughly investigate this claim as fraud and writing the account off as civil citing the victim allowed the perpetrator access to his cards because they lived together. This statement was NEVER made by Mr. XXXX and is a falsehood created by the Chase fraud department to prevent alleviating Mr. XXXX burden placed upon him by the fraudulent charges on this account. Mr. XXXX has never made any statement that Ms. XXXX was allowed to use his cards, nor has he told you as much. This narrative was created by your own department and explained to Mr. XXXX by telephone that our system had no option to notate your account, so we had to put in there you provide access to your cards. This notation must also be removed as it is both incorrect and was NEVER stated by Mr. XXXX. This creates confusion and inaccurate information by anyone new who looks at this account and falsely assumes Mr. XXXX allowed Ms. XXXX access to his cards. This is not true as Mr. XXXX has stated in his complaint, Ms. XXXX took these cards from his wallet and dresser drawers without his knowledge or permission as well as recorded all his account numbers, security codes, expiration dates, and personal information in a notebook and used these without his permission. This notation on his account is false and must be removed immediately. \n\n\nLastly, no Statute, Federally or at the NC State level, allows for the commission of a crime to be civil for XXXX card theft simply because the victim and the criminal live in the same home. This would negate any purpose of authorized users, credit reports, or even the requirement to sign for authorization on purchases if anyone in the same household could use another persons credit card without their permission. It would also make the zero fraud liability your company advertises completely useless as you would simply claim anyone who used anothers card without their knowledge is civil, as you are trying to do to Mr. XXXX, simply because they resided in the home. \nYour argument is now that any family member, friend, roommate, or overnight guest could then illegally take the card holders credit card and use it without fear of any financial or legal consequences. Obviously, this is NOT the case and your company is well aware that no such law or statute exists, yet, you are attempting to use this as your justification for denial of Mr. XXXX fraud claim. I strongly recommend you take this fraud claim seriously at stop the ridiculous claim that this fraud is his responsibility to payback when you have all of the necessary evidence to support this claim as fraud. Simply stating to Mr. XXXX Our company is a financial institution and does not want to take this as a financial loss is NOT Mr. XXXX responsibility. Your company promotes a zero-fraud liability and must adhere to those promises once documentation has been provided that Mr. XXXX is NOT responsible for these charges. \nYour company is now in possession of Mr. XXXX statement of who the perpetrator is, her contact information, a copy of all fraudulent charges, and lastly a police report showing the charges for XXXX XXXX Transaction Card Fraud being filed by Officer XXXX XXXX of the XXXX Police Department on XX/XX/2019 after Mr. XXXX was unsuccessful in recovering these stolen funds himself on behalf of your company through negotiations with Ms. XXXX. Mr. XXXX has shown good faith in his actions and responsibility in his attempts to resolve this matter on his own prior to submitting this case to your company for fraud. \nIt has also been your own companys admission to mistakenly calculating the initial refund to Mr. XXXX account and then informing him this money was his to use on the card at his leisure because it was his refunded charges, even submitting a request to have a paper check cut in the amount of {$2500.00} sent by mail for his remaining refund so that he could cash the remaining refund out all at once without having to use the card to access the refunded money, then abruptly claiming this account is NOT fraud and instead civil and demanding all money to be returned after giving him access to these funds. This miscalculation on the refundable amount is not the fault of Mr. XXXX as your company and your company alone calculated the refund amount and then gave Mr. XXXX the access to these funds. The burden of your error is entirely upon your company and Mr. XXXX owes no further payments to your company. While Mr. XXXX is not demanding the excess money from the miscalculation, it is his stance that failure of an international banking institution to accurately provide the right refunded amount on his account is not his responsibility. It is the responsibility of Chase to ensure their employees are able to calculate simple mathematical equations and then properly apply those calculations to consumer accounts. With millions of transactions completed every day, a typical consumer such as Mr. XXXX should feel confident in the accuracy of the calculations and refunds provided since Chase has the more experienced and educated personnel on staff who do this exclusively on a daily basis. To attempt to require Mr. XXXX be held liable for your companies mistake in applying a refunded amount above what you intended is simply asinine and is a cost of doing business on behalf of your company. This should serve as a learning lesson to make sure that your company checks for accuracy before sending money to customers and then informing them they may spend this refund as it is theirs to do as they please. Mr. XXXX is not responsible for double checking your math, nor did he have the knowledge or the ability to do so as your company is attempting to argue. Should a client make a similar mistake and overpay on their intended minimum payment to Chase, I have no doubt that Chase would simply say It is not our responsibility to ensure the accuracy of how much money you pay us, so why would you expect something different from your customer, or in this case? I expect a full review of this account and all disputed charges submitted as fraudulent to be removed as promised.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-05-07T17:27:18.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"27530","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3234742","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2019-05-07T17:12:01.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As directed by the Chase Executive Office,  this <em>claim</em> is being resubmitted to you with the police report attached for processing of this <em>claim</em> as fraudulent. \nNo further <em>payments</em> will be made on this account by Mr. <em>XXXX</em> as this account has been properly documented and reported as fraudulent to your company. Any attempts to collect this debt or require Mr. <em>XXXX</em> to make <em>payments</em> with threat of <em>lawsuits</em>, negative credit impacts, or garnishments or liens will be met with civil action."]},"sort":[12.153231,"3234742"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11915741","_score":9.873945,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"1. Experian Violation : Failure to conduct a reasonable investigation of disputed accounts.\n\nLaw Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Date of Violation : Ongoing, dispute submitted multiple times, most recently in 2025. \n\nDescription : XXXX failed to conduct a reinvestigation of disputes and improperly reinserted inaccurate information without notifying the consumer. \n\nViolation : Mishandling of consumer data, leading to identity theft risks.\n\nLaw Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681b, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : Failure to safeguard consumer data, increasing exposure to fraud following multiple data breaches in XXXX, including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Data breaches .\n\nViolation : Sham investigation of credit disputes and failure to correct errors.\n\nLaw Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Date of Violation : Ongoing XXXX Description : XXXX did not thoroughly investigate disputes and instead automatically sided with furnishers without validating information, a violation identified in a CFPB lawsuit against XXXX. \n\n\n\n-- - XXXX. Equifax Violation : Reinserted previously deleted negative information without consumer notification. \n\nLaw Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : Equifax allowed XXXX errors to reappear without informing the consumer, damaging credit scores unlawfully. \n\nViolation : Failed to investigate consumer disputes, leaving inaccurate information on file. \n\nLaw Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) Date of Violation : Ongoing since XXXX Description : CFPB fined Equifax {$15.00} XXXX for failing to investigate consumer disputes properly and ignoring supporting documentation provided by consumers. \n\nViolation : Sharing incorrect credit scores with lenders. \n\nLaw Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : Coding errors within Equifaxs system led to the miscalculation of credit scores for thousands of consumers, negatively impacting lending decisions. \n\n\n\n-- - XXXX. TransUnion Violation : Failed to properly investigate disputed accounts. \n\nXXXX Violated : XXXX U.S.C. XXXX ( a ) Date of Violation : Ongoing since XXXX Description : XXXX ignored consumer dispute filings and continued reporting inaccurate information without verification. \n\nViolation : XXXX deleted collection accounts without notice. \n\nXXXX Violated : XXXX U.S.C. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : After a successful dispute, XXXX unlawfully XXXX previously removed collection accounts without informing the consumer. \n\nViolation : Mishandling consumer financial data, contributing to fraud risks. \n\nXXXX Violated : XXXX U.S.C. XXXX, GLBA Date of Violation : XXXX Description : Following the National Public XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX implement stronger security measures, exposing consumer credit files to potential fraud. \n\n\n\n-- - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Falsely reporting a fully paid-off auto loan as delinquent ( 180 days past due ). \n\nXXXX Violated : XXXX U.S.C. XXXX ( a ), UCC XXXX XXXX Tender of Payment ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : Credit Acceptance refuses to acknowledge securities tendered as payment and falsely claims the consumer owes a balance, causing severe credit damage. \n\nViolation : XXXX fraud by refusing to process XXXX as proof of payment. \n\nXXXX Violated : XXXX XXXX, Banking XXXX of XXXX Date of Violation : XXXX Description XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXailed to XXXX XXXX tender, violating UCC regulations on debt XXXX. \n\n\n\n-- - XXXX. XXXX XXXX Violation : Fraudulent debt collection and failure to acknowledge securities-based payment. \n\nXXXX Violated : XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX Date of Violation : XXXX Description : XXXX continued XXXX efforts despite receiving lawful securities as tender, violating consumer rights under UCC tender XXXX payment laws. \n\n\n\n-- - XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX : Illegally maintaining an invalid debt and damaging the consumers credit profile. \n\nXXXX Violated : XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( a ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX refused XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and continued reporting false delinquency data to credit bureaus.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-03T14:34:08.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"44146","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11915741","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-02-03T14:33:39.000Z","state":"OH","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> ( a ), UCC <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> Tender of <em>Payment</em> ) Date of Violation : <em>XXXX</em> Description : Credit Acceptance refuses to acknowledge securities tendered as <em>payment</em> and falsely <em>claims</em> the consumer owes a balance, causing severe credit damage. \n\nViolation : <em>XXXX</em> fraud by refusing to process <em>XXXX</em> as proof of <em>payment</em>. \n\n<em>XXXX</em> Violated : <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, Banking <em>XXXX</em> of <em>XXXX</em> Date of Violation : <em>XXXX</em> Description <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> XXXXailed to <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> tender, violating UCC regulations on debt <em>XXXX</em>. \n\n\n\n-- - <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[9.873945,"11915741"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4353350","_score":9.472182,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"United Wholesale Mortgage ( UWM ) has been using false claims, miscalculations, fake accounting, lies and no customer support or response to complaints in order to not pay over taxes XXXX escrow and overcharge us over XXXX in order to create a situation where we can not keep up with our mortgage payments so they can foreclose on our house. \n\nUWM has miscalculated our escrow payments and are charging us {$1100.00} in excess every month. This has caused us to go into overdraft for 3 months in a row, accumulating numerous overdraft fees. \n\nWe have spent 6 months continuously working to prevent UWM from bankrupting us, including the following actions : 1. WE HAVE DEMANDED AN OFF-CYCLE ESCROW AUDIT FROM UWM. We notified them of their error for on XX/XX/XXXX. UWM did nothing. We notified UWM via email again on XX/XX/XXXX. They said they would have an answer within 6 weeks. They never answered. We contacted the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX and THEY CONFIRMED UWM 's TAX ESTIMATE WAS WRONG, but UWM again did nothing to correct the error, \" because you didn't request an off-cycle escrow audit '' their agent said. \n\nOur accounting of UWM 's ESCROW calculation, which were verified by their staff over the phone, has been emailed to them multiple times ( dates included above ) and are outlined as follows : A. As confirmed by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, we will owe approximately {$23000.00} in property taxes for the XXXX billing cycle, which can be confirmed this by looking at the XXXX XXXX Property Tax Web Site, XXXX XXXX XXXX. By adding the supplemental bill for XXXX to the secured bill for XXXX, you will get the anticipated secured tax bill for the XXXX cycle. Because the property was sold to us in XXXX, the bill was issued in two parts that year, as a secured and a supplemental bill. In the future, there will be no supplemental bill, only the secured bill ( which will be for the total I noted ). \n\nB. We will owe approximately {$2100.00} in homeowner 's insurance. Combining this with the property taxes yields a total escrow account need of {$25000.00} for the XXXX billing cycle. Dividing this amount by 12 results in {$2100.00} per month that needs to be collected as escrow.\n\nC. UWM is charging us {$3200.00} per month in escrow. That is {$1100.00} more per month than they should be charging us. Even accounting for possible increases in the tax rate, they are still charging us over a {$1000.00} more per month than they should be.\n\n2. WE HAVE DEMANDED THAT UWM REIMBURSE US OUR ESCROW ACCOUNT FOR THE {$220.00} IN LATE FEES THEY AGREED TO PAY IN WRITING.\n\nWe had to file a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) regarding UWM 's refusal over XXXX in taxes in XXXX despite our repeated requests. Finally, they did pay the bill, one of them LATE. This incurred a {$220.00} penalty. UWM ASSURED US IN A LETTER SENT BY MAIL ( INCLUDED ) THAT UWM WOULD PAY THIS PENALTY, but instead UWM took it out of OUR escrow funds. I have attached the letter UWM sent to the CFPB, in which UWM assured us they would be paid the fine. We have attached the bill showing UWM charged us the money from our escrow account. DESPITE REPEATED CALLS, UWM HAS NEVER REIMBURSED US THIS LATE FEE, WHICH THEY TOLD THE CFPB THEY WOULD REIMBURSE TO US. UWM has never even replied to this complaint or acknowledged it in any way. UWM lied to us and to the CFPB.\n\nIn the letter to the CFPB, UWM even said they would send us a {$25.00} Visa gift card because of all we had to go through to get them to pay the tax bill as is their obligation under the escrow agreement. They never sent us anything. I refer to the attached letter that UWM send to CFPB regarding our case ( included in attachments, in which UWM made that commitment.\n\nWe have begun applying for a refinancing of our loan in order to get away from UWM 's depredatory banking practices ( today XX/XX/XXXX ). XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, we sent them another email letter of complaint ( included in attachments ) and we spent several hours on the phone, which was cut off after a lengthy explanation was given for our complaint ( which has happened at least once every phone call we have ever made to them ). We had to repeat the lengthy wait times and complicated explanation again to another UWM staff member. After over an hour ( much of it lengthy hold times ) we were told nothing could be done ( which is also the statement we are given over the phone every time we've called ( phoning records available ). After much aggressive insistences by us to speak with a higher up and resistance/refusal by UWM ( also a consistent and chronic experience during phone engagements with UWM ), they agreed to have a manager call us back XX/XX/XXXX the next day. Nobody ever called, which again is typical of their fake customer service*. \n\n[ [ [ [ *On a previous occasions we did receive a call back from managers, but we ourselves were not available to speak at the time and the number that they left us to call them back was not their direct line, but the general phone line that we always have to call and the only one they ever provide, that involves dropped calls, lengthy wait times and unhelpful ; disempowered staff. Again we called the number and repeated our attempts to explain the escrow issue with the same routine of lengthy wait times, laborious phone tress and aggressive debates with unknowledgeable, disempowered UWM staff. Again after hours of frustrating, redundant efforts we were told a manger would call us back. This time we were available to speak with the manager when he called. He was distracted, ignorant, unable to understand the problem, and ultimately unhelpful except to redirect us to another completely different apartment by email that was not listed anywhere. We emailed the department, and we received no response. The process we went through to follow up on their lack of response would take paragraphs and we had to gather much documentation from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that UWM already had ] ] ] ] *.\n\nIt is clear that UWM is practicing a well documented practice of intentional theft and cover up through miscalculation, false accounting, obfuscation and fake customer service. They wear their customers down by burdening them with having to figure out and document how they are being driven into bankruptcy by UWM 's maneuverings to not fulfill their financial obligations to pay taxes, and illegally increase their customers ' mortgage payment so high that they can not pay them and then foreclose on their house. Not until we involved the CFPB has UWM ever taken any action to resolve or admit to their malfeasance ( which they call \" an inadvertent oversight '' ), and even then they took that opportunity to unjustifiably raise our mortgage payments through the same malpractices they used before to avoid paying over XXXX in taxes ( the complaint to the CFPB regarding this issue on file under this same login with CFPB ). Through false accounting, wrongful increases in mortgage payments, cover up and providing no way to speak with someone who could resolve their overcharges and underpayments, UWM is intentionally creating situations where they can foreclose on our house.\n\nUWM should be audited, sued, its directorship fired, and restructured. We will certainly pursue class action lawsuits and seek to support others who are being similarly driven to foreclosure due to UWM 's criminal endeavors. \n\nIn summary : We have been calling and emailing UWM multiple times a week since XX/XX/XXXX, but all of our communication with UWM ( including multiple phone calls and emails ) have been ignored, laborious, frustrated, cyclical and otherwise thwarted. Concerns addressed in emails have never been responded too and employees who answer the phone, drop calls, enact lengthy wait times ( while confirming that we are correct that UWM is in error ), then insist they can be of no help and redirect us cyclically through unhelpful managers and email addresses that never respond. \n\nThis is the second time in 6 months that we have had to file a complaint with the CFPB against UWM. The first time it was because of their refusal to pay XXXX in property taxes due their claim that we lacked adequate funds in our escrow account, a claim which was demonstrably false. We only got them to pay those taxes ( late ) by involving the CFPB and they docked our escrow account to pay their late fee even though they made a commitment in writing ( included ) that \" any penalties associated with late payment of this ( tax ) bill will be covered by UWM and not billed to your escrow account ''. Now they have falsely recalculated our escrow payments and they are overcharging us unsustainably. If they had succeeded in their previous attempt to not pay our taxes ( making us pay them instead ) then they would have bankrupted us and foreclosed on our home. If they succeed this time in overcharging us for escrow they will also achieve the same end. My wife ( XXXX XXXX, the loan mortgage account holder ) has become suicidal in the last weeks of these proceedings. \n\nUWM is overwhelming our resources with their bureaucratic obfuscations, continued nonresponsiveness, overcharges and failure to pay property taxes on time and correctly. We have spent over 200 hours figuring out and documenting their false accounting of our escrow, mortgage accounts and property taxes. We are in our third month of overdraft due to their over charges and my wife ( whose salary pays the mortgage while I care for our two special needs autistic children ) has become suicidal and unable to cope with them directly.\n\nOnly after involving the CFPB has UWM ever addressed our concerns directly and then they continued to create situations where they over charge us while they retain our excess escrow funds and refuse to pay taxes they are obligated in writing to pay.\n\nWe are asking the CFPB to : 1. Compel UWM to immediately correct their mortgage and escrow calculations and stop overcharging us. \n\n2. Compel UWM to immediately refund the amounts theyve been overcharging us since XXXX. \n\n3. Compel UWM to pay all federal and state property tax late fees and our overdraft fees accrued due to their errors.\n\n4. Compel UWM to pay the cost of refinancing our mortgage with another company, an endeavor we have undertaken as a means of protecting us from UWMs depredation. \n\nThank you very much for your consideration.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-05-05T18:56:08.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"94941","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4353350","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"United Shore Financial Services, LLC","date_received":"2021-05-05T17:16:54.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["United Wholesale Mortgage ( UWM ) has been using false <em>claims</em>, <em>miscalculations</em>, fake accounting, lies and no customer support or response to complaints in order to not pay over taxes <em>XXXX</em> escrow and overcharge us over <em>XXXX</em> in order to create a situation where we can not keep up with our mortgage <em>payments</em> so they can foreclose on our house. \n\nUWM has <em>miscalculated</em> our escrow <em>payments</em> and are charging us {$1100.00} in excess every month."],"issue":["Trouble during <em>payment</em> process"]},"sort":[9.472182,"4353350"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11903164","_score":9.258007,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX. Experian Violation : Failure to conduct a reasonable investigation of disputed accounts. \n\nXXXX Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Date of Violation : Ongoing, dispute submitted multiple times, most recently in XXXX. \n\nDescription : XXXX failed to conduct a reinvestigation of disputes and improperly reinserted inaccurate information without notifying the consumer. \n\nViolation : Mishandling of consumer data, leading to identity theft risks. \n\nXXXX Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681b, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : Failure to safeguard consumer data, increasing exposure to fraud following multiple data breaches in XXXX, including AT & T and National Public XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nViolation : Sham investigation of credit disputes and failure to correct errors. \n\nXXXX Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Date of Violation : Ongoing XXXX Description : XXXX did not thoroughly investigate disputes and instead automatically sided with furnishers without validating information, a violation identified in a CFPB lawsuit against XXXX. \n\n\n\n-- - XXXX. XXXX Violation : Reinserted previously deleted negative information without consumer notification. \n\nXXXX Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : XXXX allowed XXXX errors to reappear without informing the consumer, damaging credit scores unlawfully. \n\nViolation : Failed to investigate consumer disputes, leaving inaccurate information on file. \n\nXXXX Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) Date of Violation : Ongoing since XXXX Description : CFPB fined XXXX {$15.00} XXXX for failing to investigate consumer disputes properly and ignoring supporting documentation provided by consumers. \n\nViolation : Sharing incorrect credit scores with lenders. \n\nXXXX Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : Coding errors within XXXX system led to the miscalculation of credit scores for thousands of consumers, negatively impacting lending decisions. \n\n\n\n-- - XXXX. TransUnion Violation : Failed to properly investigate disputed accounts. \n\nXXXX Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Date of Violation : Ongoing since XXXX Description : TransUnion ignored consumer dispute filings and continued reporting inaccurate information without verification. \n\nViolation : XXXX deleted collection accounts without notice. \n\nXXXX Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : After a successful dispute, TransUnion unlawfully XXXX previously removed collection accounts without informing the consumer. \n\nViolation : Mishandling consumer financial data, contributing to fraud risks. \n\nXXXX Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681b, GLBA Date of Violation : XXXX Description : Following the National Public XXXX XXXX XXXX TransUnion XXXX XXXX implement stronger security measures, exposing consumer credit files to potential fraud. \n\n\n\n-- - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Falsely reporting a fully paid-off auto loan as delinquent ( 180 days past due ). \n\nXXXX Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ), UCC 3-603 ( Tender of Payment ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : Credit Acceptance refuses to acknowledge securities tendered as payment and falsely claims the consumer owes a balance, causing severe credit damage. \n\nViolation : XXXX fraud by refusing to process XXXX as proof of payment. \n\nXXXX Violated : XXXX XXXX, Banking XXXX of XXXX Date of Violation : XXXX Description : Credit Acceptance failed to XXXX XXXX tender, violating UCC regulations on debt XXXX. \n\n\n\n-- - XXXX. XXXX XXXX Violation : Fraudulent debt collection and failure to acknowledge securities-based payment. \n\nXXXX Violated : XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX Date of Violation : XXXX Description : XXXX continued XXXX efforts despite receiving lawful securities as tender, violating consumer rights under UCC tender XXXX payment laws. \n\n\n\n-- - XXXX. XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX : Illegally maintaining an invalid debt and damaging the consumers credit profile. \n\nXXXX Violated : XXXX XXXX, 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) Date of Violation : XXXX Description : XXXX Bank XXXX refused XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and continued reporting false delinquency data to credit bureaus.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-03T14:34:05.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"44146","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11903164","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-02-03T14:33:39.000Z","state":"OH","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> Violated : 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ), UCC 3-603 ( Tender of <em>Payment</em> ) Date of Violation : <em>XXXX</em> Description : Credit Acceptance refuses to acknowledge securities tendered as <em>payment</em> and falsely <em>claims</em> the consumer owes a balance, causing severe credit damage. \n\nViolation : <em>XXXX</em> fraud by refusing to process <em>XXXX</em> as proof of <em>payment</em>."]},"sort":[9.258007,"11903164"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11686724","_score":9.246421,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Experian Disputes Department, I am writing to formally dispute inaccuracies on my credit report. I am aware of the recent findings by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), which highlight that Experian has engaged in improper practices when handling consumer disputes. Specifically, the CFPB has alleged the following : Failure to Properly Investigate Disputes : Conducting sham investigations that fail to address consumer concerns adequately, including using faulty intake procedures and failing to notify consumers about investigation results properly. \n\nReinsertion of Inaccurate Information : Allowing deleted inaccuracies to be reinserted on credit reports due to a lack of proper matching tools and safeguards. \n\nViolation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : Failing to adhere to federal requirements regarding dispute resolution and accuracy in consumer reports. \n\nAs per these allegations, I am concerned that the inaccuracies on my report may have resulted from such practices. The disputed information includes : XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX >Sold ; was Charged-off< Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date Closed : XX/XX/XXXX Remarks : Charged-off and sold. \n\nEstimated Removal Date : XXXX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX : Status : >Account XXXX Days Past Due Date< Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Remarks : Credit line suspended due to delinquent payments. \n\nBalance : {$790.00} as of the last update ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nPayment History : Reached XXXX  days past due in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Auto Loan ) : Status : Current but with late payments. \n\nLate Payment : XXXX  Days Late in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nBalance : {$26000.00}. \n\nIn addition to this, I am referencing the XXXX lawsuit against Experian dated XX/XX/XXXX, which outlines their failure to conduct proper investigations and prevent reinsertion of previously deleted inaccuracies ( referenced in the attached CFPB report titled CFPB Sues Experian for Sham Investigations of Credit Report Errors ). This report highlights significant issues in XXXX handling of disputes and provides additional grounds for my concern regarding the accuracy of my credit report. \n\nI am providing documentation to support my claim, including : Account statements. \n\nCorrespondence with creditors. \n\nCFPB Report on Experian practices. \n\nI demand that you thoroughly investigate this dispute in compliance with the FCRA, provide me with a written statement of the investigation results, and immediately correct any inaccuracies. Please ensure that any errors previously corrected are not reinserted into my credit report. Additionally, I request that you provide verification of the above accounts, as I believe you will be unable to verify the accuracy of the information listed. \n\nFailure to address this matter promptly and accurately may result in additional action, as these practices significantly affect my financial standing, including access to credit, employment, and housing. \n\nThank you for your attention to this matter. \n\nDear XXXX XXXX Department, I am writing to dispute inaccuracies on my credit report and express my concern regarding improper practices in your dispute resolution process, as highlighted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). According to the CFPB 's recent findings, XXXX has engaged in the following : Inadequate Investigations of Consumer Disputes : Failing to review supporting documentation provided by consumers and relying excessively on responses from furnishers, even when such responses were illogical or contradicted existing evidence. \n\nReinsertion of Deleted Inaccuracies : Allowing previously removed errors to reappear on consumer reports and failing to block inaccurate data related to identity theft. \n\nSharing Inaccurate Credit Scores and Data : Errors in internal systems that caused miscalculations and sharing of inaccurate credit scores with lenders. \n\nViolation of the FCRA : Failing to ensure maximum accuracy in consumer reports and not complying with federal law regarding dispute investigations. \n\nThe errors I am disputing include : XXXX  ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX >Sold ; was Charged-off< Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date Closed : XX/XX/XXXX Remarks : Charged-off and sold. \n\nEstimated Removal Date : XXXX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX : Status : >Account XXXX  Days Past Due Date< Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Remarks : Credit line suspended due to delinquent payments. \n\nBalance : {$790.00} as of the last update ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nPayment History : Reached XXXX  days past due in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Auto Loan ) : Status : Current but with late payments. \n\nLate Payment : XXXX  Days Late in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nBalance : {$26000.00}. \n\nIn addition to this, I am referencing the XXXX enforcement action against XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX, which required XXXX to pay a {$15.00} XXXX civil penalty for its failure to conduct proper investigations and prevent reinsertion of deleted errors ( referenced in the attached CFPB report titled CFPB XXXX XXXX to Pay {$15.00} XXXX for Improper Investigations of Credit Reporting Errors ). This report further confirms my concerns about XXXX mishandling of consumer disputes. \n\nI am enclosing evidence to substantiate my claim, including : Account statements. \n\nCorrespondence with creditors. \n\nCFPB Report on XXXX practices. \n\nI request that you investigate this matter thoroughly, in compliance with the FCRA, and provide me with a detailed written report of your findings. Additionally, I ask that you take corrective action to ensure my credit report reflects accurate information and prevent any future reinsertions of previously corrected errors. Furthermore, I demand verification of the above accounts, as I believe you can not validate their accuracy. \n\nPlease be advised that failure to handle this matter appropriately could lead to further action, as the mishandling of disputes has serious repercussions on my financial opportunities and overall well-being. \n\nThank you for addressing this matter promptly.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-23T04:42:34.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"386XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11686724","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-01-23T04:42:33.000Z","state":"MS","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> ( Auto Loan ) : Status : Current but with late <em>payments</em>. \n\nLate <em>Payment</em> : <em>XXXX</em>  Days Late in XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>. \n\nBalance : {$26000.00}. \n\nIn addition to this, I am referencing the <em>XXXX</em> <em>lawsuit</em> against Experian dated XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, which outlines their failure to conduct proper investigations and prevent reinsertion of previously deleted inaccuracies ( referenced in the attached CFPB report titled CFPB Sues Experian for Sham Investigations of Credit Report Errors )."]},"sort":[9.246421,"11686724"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11721002","_score":9.233098,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear XXXX Disputes Department, I am writing to formally dispute inaccuracies on my credit report. I am aware of the recent findings by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), which highlight that XXXX has engaged in improper practices when handling consumer disputes. Specifically, the CFPB has alleged the following : Failure to Properly Investigate Disputes : Conducting sham investigations that fail to address consumer concerns adequately, including using faulty intake procedures and failing to notify consumers about investigation results properly. \n\nReinsertion of Inaccurate Information : Allowing deleted inaccuracies to be reinserted on credit reports due to a lack of proper matching tools and safeguards. \n\nViolation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : Failing to adhere to federal requirements regarding dispute resolution and accuracy in consumer reports. \n\nAs per these allegations, I am concerned that the inaccuracies on my report may have resulted from such practices. The disputed information includes : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Digital Credit Card XXXX : Status : >Sold ; was Charged-off< Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date Closed : XX/XX/XXXX Remarks : Charged-off and sold. \n\nEstimated Removal Date : XXXX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX : Status : >Account 30 Days Past Due Date< Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Remarks : Credit line suspended due to delinquent payments. \n\nBalance : {$790.00} as of the last update ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nPayment History : Reached 90 days past due in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Auto Loan ) : Status : Current but with late payments. \n\nLate Payment : 30 Days Late in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nBalance : {$26000.00}. \n\nIn addition to this, I am referencing the XXXX lawsuit against XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX, which outlines their failure to conduct proper investigations and prevent reinsertion of previously deleted inaccuracies ( referenced in the attached CFPB report titled CFPB Sues XXXX for Sham  Investigations of Credit Report Errors ). This report highlights significant issues in XXXX handling of disputes and provides additional grounds for my concern regarding the accuracy of my credit report. \n\nI am providing documentation to support my claim, including : Account statements. \n\nCorrespondence with creditors. \n\nCFPB Report on XXXX practices. \n\nI demand that you thoroughly investigate this dispute in compliance with the FCRA, provide me with a written statement of the investigation results, and immediately correct any inaccuracies. Please ensure that any errors previously corrected are not reinserted into my credit report. Additionally, I request that you provide verification of the above accounts, as I believe you will be unable to verify the accuracy of the information listed. \n\nFailure to address this matter promptly and accurately may result in additional action, as these practices significantly affect my financial standing, including access to credit, employment, and housing.\n\nThank you for your attention to this matter.\n\nDear Equifax Disputes Department, I am writing to dispute inaccuracies on my credit report and express my concern regarding improper practices in your dispute resolution process, as highlighted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). According to the CFPB 's recent findings, Equifax has engaged in the following : Inadequate Investigations of Consumer Disputes : Failing to review supporting documentation provided by consumers and relying excessively on responses from furnishers, even when such responses were illogical or contradicted existing evidence. \n\nReinsertion of Deleted Inaccuracies : Allowing previously removed errors to reappear on consumer reports and failing to block inaccurate data related to identity theft. \n\nSharing Inaccurate Credit Scores and Data : Errors in internal systems that caused miscalculations and sharing of inaccurate credit scores with lenders. \n\nViolation of the FCRA : Failing to ensure maximum accuracy in consumer reports and not complying with federal law regarding dispute investigations. \n\nThe errors I am disputing include : XXXX ( XXXX Digital Credit Card XXXX XXXX Status XXXX >Sold ; was Charged-off< Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date Closed : XX/XX/XXXX Remarks : Charged-off and sold. \n\nEstimated Removal Date : XXXX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX : Status : >Account 30 Days Past Due Date< Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Remarks : Credit line suspended due to delinquent payments. \n\nBalance : {$790.00} as of the last update ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nPayment History : Reached 90 days past due in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Auto Loan ) : Status : Current but with late payments. \n\nLate Payment : 30 Days Late in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nBalance : {$26000.00}. \n\nIn addition to this, I am referencing the CFPBs enforcement action against Equifax dated XX/XX/XXXX, which required Equifax to pay a {$15.00} XXXX civil penalty for its failure to conduct proper investigations and prevent reinsertion of deleted errors ( referenced in the attached CFPB report titled CFPB Orders Equifax to Pay {$15.00} XXXX for Improper Investigations of Credit Reporting Errors ). This report further confirms my concerns about Equifaxs mishandling of consumer disputes. \n\nI am enclosing evidence to substantiate my claim, including : Account statements. \n\nCorrespondence with creditors. \n\nCFPB Report on Equifax practices. \n\nI request that you investigate this matter thoroughly, in compliance with the FCRA, and provide me with a detailed written report of your findings. Additionally, I ask that you take corrective action to ensure my credit report reflects accurate information and prevent any future reinsertions of previously corrected errors. Furthermore, I demand verification of the above accounts, as I believe you can not validate their accuracy. \n\nPlease be advised that failure to handle this matter appropriately could lead to further action, as the mishandling of disputes has serious repercussions on my financial opportunities and overall well-being. \n\nThank you for addressing this matter promptly.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-23T04:42:25.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"386XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11721002","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-23T04:39:21.000Z","state":"MS","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> ( Auto Loan ) : Status : Current but with late <em>payments</em>. \n\nLate <em>Payment</em> : 30 Days Late in XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>. \n\nBalance : {$26000.00}. \n\nIn addition to this, I am referencing the <em>XXXX</em> <em>lawsuit</em> against <em>XXXX</em> dated XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, which outlines their failure to conduct proper investigations and prevent reinsertion of previously deleted inaccuracies ( referenced in the attached CFPB report titled CFPB Sues <em>XXXX</em> for Sham  Investigations of Credit Report Errors )."]},"sort":[9.233098,"11721002"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":44,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":44}]}},"product":{"doc_count":44,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":16,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":14},{"key":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","doc_count":1},{"key":"Other type of mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":13,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":13}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":8,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Federal student loan servicing","doc_count":7},{"key":"Private student loan","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":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Lease","doc_count":1},{"key":"Loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":44,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":12,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan","doc_count":10}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":9,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":6},{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","doc_count":6,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Received bad information about your loan","doc_count":3},{"key":"Don't agree with the fees charged","doc_count":2},{"key":"Trouble with how payments are being handled","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":5,"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":5}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":4,"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":"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":"Issue with income share agreement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Billing or statement issues","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing the loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Billing problem","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problems at the end of the loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Termination fees or other problem when ending the lease early","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to repay your loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with forgiveness, cancellation, or discharge","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Sued you without properly notifying you of lawsuit","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":44,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":43},{"key":"No","doc_count":1}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":44,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":33},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":10},{"key":"Untimely response","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":44,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":44}]}},"company":{"doc_count":44,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc.","doc_count":10},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":6},{"key":"Nelnet, Inc.","doc_count":6},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":4},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":4},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":2},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"MOHELA","doc_count":1},{"key":"Mercedes Benz Financial Services","doc_count":1},{"key":"SANTANDER HOLDINGS USA, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Servicer under contract with Federal Student Aid","doc_count":1},{"key":"United Shore Financial Services, LLC","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":44,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"GA","doc_count":11},{"key":"IL","doc_count":9},{"key":"NV","doc_count":4},{"key":"OH","doc_count":3},{"key":"CA","doc_count":2},{"key":"IN","doc_count":2},{"key":"MS","doc_count":2},{"key":"NY","doc_count":2},{"key":"OR","doc_count":2},{"key":"AZ","doc_count":1},{"key":"MD","doc_count":1},{"key":"MN","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NH","doc_count":1},{"key":"TX","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":44,"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":12}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":44,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":2}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[9.233098,"11721002"]}}}