{"took":187,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":48,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4790917","_score":26.802052,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Car was purchased in XX/XX/XXXX and was in an accident resulting in a total Loss in XX/XX/XXXX. This account was included in a LAWSUIT filed against the company in which the loan and any balance owed was to be deleted from my credit report due to a determination Santander used unfair predatory loan charges to low income and subprime credit customers. The settlement with Santander stated it will resolve allegations that the bank violated consumer protection laws by putting subprime borrowers into loans that carried a high probability of default. Instead of doing so and removing this account from my report, it is inaccurately STILL REPORTING, affecting my score and has recently been updated to state closed as of XX/XX/XXXX is is absolutely NOT TRUE. I would like this account removed immediately or there will be legal consequences.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-10-07T11:30:38.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"29229","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4790917","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.","date_received":"2021-10-07T11:12:23.000Z","state":"SC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Car was purchased in XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> and was in an accident resulting in a total Loss in XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>. This account was included in a <em>LAWSUIT</em> filed <em>against</em> the company in which the loan and any balance owed was to be deleted from my credit report due to a determination Santander used unfair predatory loan charges to low income and <em>subprime</em> credit customers."]},"sort":[26.802052,"4790917"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4057859","_score":25.697554,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"There is a {$550.00} million dollar lawsuit against XXXX by the attorney general that ordered them to forgive the auto loan debts of consumers due to their bad business practices and predatory lending during the time frame starting from XXXX to XXXX. I had a vehicle loan with them during that time frame and was definitely a victim of their subprime lending amongst other bad business practices, one being them not properly providing all loan parties proper documents. Attached is a link regarding the settlement via the Attorney general. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2021-01-09T08:11:33.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"78660","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4057859","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2021-01-09T03:03:43.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Attached is a link regarding the <em>settlement</em> via the Attorney general. <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> XXXXXXXX"]},"sort":[25.697554,"4057859"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3902542","_score":25.119587,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against XXXX XXXX XXXX and Jefferson Capital System violating my rights under the FRCA and  FDCPA. I purchase a XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX and was charged off on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. As a consumer according to the Attorney Generals Office claimed that XXXX XXXX XXXX subprime lending practices violated my consumer protection laws by exposing consumers to unnecessarily high levels of risk and knowingly place me into auto loans that had a high probability of default.\n\nI spoke to the Attorney General office and he told me to place a complaint with Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and FTC.  Against XXXX XXXX XXXX and Jefferson Capital System :  Account # XXXX or XXXX. If they dont delete these items from my credit report for the violations to forwarded it to them. So, they can file legal actions. \nThis month the FTC, State, and Federal Law Enforcement Partners Announce Nationwide Crackdown on Abusive Debt Collection. READ BELOW ; XXXX XXXX XXXX Subprime Auto Loan Dispute Resolved XX/XX/XXXX Settlement Includes Restitution for Consumers Contact : XXXX XXXX, Assistant Attorney General, XXXX Attorney General XXXX XXXX today announced a settlement with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX resolving complaints of unfair or deceptive practices relating to subprime auto loans. The settlement resolves the Attorney Generals claim that XXXX XXXX USAs subprime lending practices violated consumer protection laws by exposing consumers to unnecessarily high levels of risk and knowingly placing these consumers into auto loans that had a high probability of default. \nUnder the terms of the settlement, XXXX XXXX XXXX will provide relief to eligible consumers by : o paying {$75000.00} in restitution to certain subprime consumers who defaulted on loans between XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX ; o giving consumers with the lowest quality loans those who defaulted as of XX/XX/XXXX, and who have not yet had their cars repossessed the titles to their cars and waiving any balance on these consumers loans ; o waiving deficiency balances and attempting to buyback deficiency waivers the company no longer owns ; and, o engaging in credit repair for affected consumers. \nConsumers who are eligible for relief under the settlement please contacted the Attorney Generals Office. \nI as a consumer fall within the guidelines of this lawsuit was violated by this company. I am giving you guys a goodwill gesture because there practices have cause great harm to my credit. \nI am maintaining careful record of my communication for the purpose of filing this with Attorney Generals Office as I was told today. This complaint is in respond to Jefferson Capital System LLC attachment on XX/XX/XXXX. \nYou should also inform XXXX XXXX XXXX that there charge off be removed from credit report under there names this is under terms of relief for the consumer : engaging in credit repair for affected consumers.\n\nPlease remove these items with every CRA asap. Also send me a letter from both Jefferson Capital System and XXXX XXXX stating it will be removed.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-10-16T05:11:10.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"22191","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3902542","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CL Holdings LLC","date_received":"2020-10-16T04:47:08.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with personal statement of dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["READ BELOW ; <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>Subprime</em> Auto Loan Dispute Resolved XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> <em>Settlement</em> Includes Restitution for Consumers Contact : <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, Assistant Attorney General, <em>XXXX</em> Attorney General <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> today announced a <em>settlement</em> with <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> resolving complaints of unfair or deceptive practices relating to <em>subprime</em> auto loans."]},"sort":[25.119587,"3902542"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3902944","_score":24.867332,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against Santander Consumer USA and XXXX XXXX XXXX violating my rights under the FRCA and FDCPA. I purchase a XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX and was charged off on XXXX XXXX, XXXX. As a consumer according to the Attorney Generals Office claimed that Santander Consumer USAs subprime lending practices violated my consumer protection laws by exposing consumers to unnecessarily high levels of risk and knowingly place me into auto loans that had a high probability of default. \nI spoke to the Attorney General office and he told me to place a complaint with Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and FTC. Against Santander Consumer USA and XXXX XXXX XXXX : Account # XXXX or XXXX. If they dont delete these items from my credit report for the violations to forwarded it to them. So, they can file legal actions. \nThis month the FTC, State, and Federal Law Enforcement Partners Announce Nationwide Crackdown on Abusive Debt Collection. READ BELOW ; Santander Consumer USAs Subprime Auto Loan Dispute Resolved XX/XX/XXXX Settlement Includes Restitution for Consumers Contact : XXXX XXXX, Assistant Attorney General, XXXX Attorney General XXXX XXXX today announced a settlement with Santander Consumer USA , Inc. resolving complaints of unfair or deceptive practices relating to subprime auto loans. The settlement resolves the Attorney Generals claim that Santander Consumer USAs subprime lending practices violated consumer protection laws by exposing consumers to unnecessarily high levels of risk and knowingly placing these consumers into auto loans that had a high probability of default. \nUnder the terms of the settlement, Santander Consumer USA will provide relief to eligible consumers by : o paying {$75000.00} in restitution to certain subprime consumers who defaulted on loans between XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX ; o giving consumers with the lowest quality loans those who defaulted as of XX/XX/XXXX, and who have not yet had their cars repossessed the titles to their cars and waiving any balance on these consumers loans ; o waiving deficiency balances and attempting to buyback deficiency waivers the company no longer owns ; and, o engaging in credit repair for affected consumers. \nConsumers who are eligible for relief under the settlement please contacted the Attorney Generals Office. \nI as a consumer fall within the guidelines of this lawsuit was violated by this company. I am giving you guys a goodwill gesture because there practices have cause great harm to my credit. \nI am maintaining careful record of my communication for the purpose of filing this with Attorney Generals Office as I was told today. This complaint is in respond to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX attachment on XX/XX/XXXX. \nYou should also inform Santander Consumer USA that there charge off be removed from credit report under there names this is under terms of relief for the consumer : engaging in credit repair for affected consumers. \nPlease remove these items with every CRA asap. Also send me a letter from both XXXX XXXX XXXX and Santander USA stating it will be removed.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-10-16T05:11:17.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"22191","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3902944","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.","date_received":"2020-10-16T05:11:13.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with personal statement of dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["READ BELOW ; Santander Consumer USAs <em>Subprime</em> Auto Loan Dispute Resolved XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> <em>Settlement</em> Includes Restitution for Consumers Contact : <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, Assistant Attorney General, <em>XXXX</em> Attorney General <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> today announced a <em>settlement</em> with Santander Consumer USA , Inc. resolving complaints of unfair or deceptive practices relating to <em>subprime</em> auto loans."]},"sort":[24.867332,"3902944"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5897879","_score":24.556389,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX HMDA-LAR Public Disclosures show that XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), and XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) operated the XXXXDirect Toxic Subprime Mortgage Loan Origination Boiler-Room utilizing an illegal Two-Tier Mortgage Origination Scheme to Originate Toxic Mortgage Loans which were subsequently securitized into five subprime XXXX RMBS Certificates. Teams of XXXX  Lending Specialists operating the XXXX-Direct Toxic Mortgage Loan Origination Boiler-Room Explicitly-Targeting XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX Applicants ( and fraudulently utilized the Race Unavailable ( RNA ) Racial category ) ; and XXXX XXXXo XXXX  HMDA-LAR Public Disclosures show that 193,088 Toxic Mortgage Loans with an approximate valuation of $ XXXX were originated using the Two-Tier XXXX Toxic Mortgage Loan origination Scheme. However, this number of toxic Mortgage Loans may haven just the tip of the Iceberg because most of the loans originated by these so-called mortgage brokers were via non-HMDA institution subsidiary : XXXX, which from XXXX through XXXX was the 12th largest subprime lender in the Nation. These so-called XXXX Lending Specialists would initially submit Borrower Loan Applications to XXXX, and if they were denied, they would then submit the same loan application to XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ; and if it failed, they would then submit the same application to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX where it was a certainty to be approved. HMDA-LAR Public Disclosures show that 183,176 loans originated at XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and then sold to XXXX. \nAdditionally, hundreds of thousands of Toxic Mortgage Loans with an approximate valuation of hundreds of billions of dollars were originated by XXXX non-bank subsidiaries XXXX and its successor : XXXX, and all origination after XXXX were unreported to HMDA-LAR. Both XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX have pleaded guilty to \" Civil Violations '' related to the $ XXXX XXXX XXXX Lawsuit against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and the $ XXXX XXXX RMBS Trust Certificate Fraud, Lawsuit against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nBoth of these multi-Billion Dollar Lawsuits settlements included a total of $ XXXX for Consumer Relief Restitution that was to be given to Victims of these Trust Certificate frauds. \nThe Department of Justice ( DOJ ) Settlement stated that the \" Criminal Investigations '' related to both Frauds were Ongoing and that these \" Civil Lawsuit Settlement '' did not grant immunity to either of these Corporations, and Employees of these Corporations.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-08-19T19:19:38.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Other type of mortgage","zip_code":"85381","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5897879","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","date_received":"2022-08-19T18:19:24.000Z","state":"AZ","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Both <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, and XXXXXXXX <em>XXXX</em>  <em>XXXX</em> have pleaded guilty to \" Civil Violations '' related to the $ <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>Lawsuit</em> <em>against</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, and the $ <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> RMBS Trust Certificate Fraud, <em>Lawsuit</em> <em>against</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> \nBoth of these multi-Billion Dollar <em>Lawsuits</em> <em>settlements</em> included a total of $ <em>XXXX</em> for Consumer Relief Restitution that was to be given to Victims of these Trust Certificate frauds."]},"sort":[24.556389,"5897879"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5542348","_score":23.783583,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"I have been calling Navient to confirm that My Tuition Answer loans were part of the multi state settlement that stated that the loan would be cancelled under certain conditions. When I talked to multiple people they stated that I am not part of the cancellation. However this is untrue. \n\n1. My Loans were taken out from Sallie Mae between the time frame listed. I took out Sallie Mae Tuition loans between XXXX. \n\n2. My loans were subprime. My credit score was well below the XXXX threshold. Hence the cosigner that was assigned. \n\nIn the Multi State settlement it states that I fall under the cancellation for Category 3 Criteria. \n\n\" Any non traditional private educational loan with an outstanding balance and in past due status as of the debt relief forgiveness date '' after 2002. I defaulted on these loans. They were past due. Sallie Mae XXXX Navient had to take me to court and they wrote off 71 % of the balance, and then told me that they would be in default status. \n\nIn the court documents it states any non traditional loan that was made to a borrower with a FICO score below XXXX to attend a public or private university that was non profit. \n\nWhen I told them that I fall into this category they stated that they would not be forgiving my loans, because I do not fall into that category and they only are forgiving loans that are from Category 2 For Profit schools. \n\nThis is in the face of the court documents that show Appendix A : Private Loan Relief, for Category 1 - All Opportunity and Recourse Loans, and Category 3 Non Traditional with subprime credit scores. \n\nThere are 5 tuition answer Sallie Mae Loans that fall under the Category 3 - Non Traditional subprime credit category that should be cancelled under this agreement. \n\nFurthermore, One Customer Service Advocate or Representative told me that I may be part of another lawsuit under XXXX XXXX Navient, and that any payments I made after the bankruptcy may be refunded back. \n\nNot limiting to XXXX, Navient should remove the loans from my credit report, and cancel the debt. IF later XXXX vs Navient determines that money is owed, then also should they return any money back. \n\nI am asking that 1. Navient Immediately follow the XXXX guidelines and cancel these loans. \n2. If XXXX succeeds in XXXX vs Navient then they can repay the money owed at a later date. \n\nI understand that I am part of both lawsuits against Navient XXXX Sallie Mae. However, right now Navient needs to cancel immediately the loans under the first Multi State Settlement against Navient. Later they can determine the repayment owed under XXXX vs Navient.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-05-04T20:38:32.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"60647","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5542348","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","date_received":"2022-05-04T20:14:37.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Navient Immediately follow the <em>XXXX</em> guidelines and cancel these loans. \n2. If <em>XXXX</em> succeeds in <em>XXXX</em> vs Navient then they can repay the money owed at a later date. \n\nI understand that I am part of both <em>lawsuits</em> <em>against</em> Navient <em>XXXX</em> Sallie Mae. However, right now Navient needs to cancel immediately the loans under the first Multi State <em>Settlement</em> <em>against</em> Navient. Later they can determine the repayment owed under <em>XXXX</em> vs Navient."]},"sort":[23.783583,"5542348"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8530219","_score":23.101255,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"We have finished paying for our vehicle. We have paid over {$62000.00} for a {$36000.00} vehicle that was originally finance on XX/XX/XXXX. When our maturity date came on XX/XX/XXXX ; we were waiting for our XXXX XXXX. But was told that we owe another {$24000.00} ; for some kind of fictitous fees, Exeter stated. We told them that was against the law. We told Exeter that we have already paid for our vehicle and then some. \n\nWe have contacted Exeter with no kind of resolution. We have contacted our XXXX office in XXXX ; they were no help ; We contacted our XXXX office this year in XXXX and they did nothing to check or XXXX Exeter. I did contact the XXXX office in Massachusetts and XXXX Delaware and explained my situation ; but because we live in Louisiana we have to go through our state XXXX XXXX and have them call. But our XXXX XXXX in Louisiana don't do anything for their consumers. \nI guess because we are XXXX people. We get Discriminated against alot. We need help. We consulted XXXX XXXX but they all said the Attorney General office suppose to help us. All we want is our XXXX XXXX. \n\n\nExeter XXXX company was sued for the same thing they are doing to us. \n\nA lawsuit was filed against Exeter in XXXX of XXXX. In this lawsuit the plaintiff claimed that Exeter violated the Federal Trade Commission Act having to do with Fair Debt Collection Practices. XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX {$5.00} XXXX for Consumers, State in Subprime Auto-loan Settlement Settlement to Provide Relief to Hundreds of Massachusetts Borrowers XXXX XXXX XXXX Attorney General and DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ATTORNEY GENERAL XXXX XXXX Attorney General XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX chief lawyer and law enforcement XXXX of the XXXX of Massachusetts. \nThis companys loans put car buyers in economic danger, Attorney General XXXX XXXX Massachusetts said. Todays settlement with Exeter provides XXXX XXXX XXXX in relief and repairs damaged credit. Our office will continue to investigate the subprime lenders, financiers, and securitizers, and protect consumers. \n\nExeter facilitated the origination of Massachusetts auto loans that the company knew or should have known were unfair and in violation of the state Consumer Protection Law. Courts have held that lending is unlawful under the statute if lenders do not have a basis for believing that borrowers will be able to repay their loans in normal course. Exeter also allegedly mishandled servicing and collecting activities in violation of the Attorney Generals debt collection regulations. \n\nCar loans to consumers with poor credit, known as subprime auto loans, are often made through contracts signed at the car dealership, but the loans are funded by non-dealer financial institutions, like Exeter. As part of the funding process, these financial institutions securitize the loans, funding them by selling investment notes. \nExeter Finance LLC, will pay more than {$5.00} XXXX for its role in allegedly financing unfair, subprime auto loans for car buyers. \n\nExeter also allegedly mishandled servicing and collecting activities in violation of the Attorney Generals debt collection regulations.\n\nCar loans to consumers with poor credit, known as subprime auto loans, are often made through contracts signed at the car dealership, but the loans are funded by non-dealer financial institutions, like Exeter ****All we want is our VEHICLE TITLE for our XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n****We will continue to file Complaints all the way to the White House/President/ on the news until we get our Vehicle Title. enough is enough ; this is so stressful. \nMy XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  and my XXXX continues to act up. This is really bothering my health. We are so sick of the way we have been treated. No one is helping us the Even car dealerships are saying we have been violated ; there's no way that should happen... We have paid twice for one vehicle.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-03-15T14:52:01.000Z","issue":"Problems at the end of the loan or lease","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"707XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8530219","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Exeter Finance, LLC.","date_received":"2024-03-12T18:50:50.000Z","state":"LA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Unable to receive car title or other problem after the loan is paid off"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["We consulted <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> but they all said the Attorney General office suppose to help us. All we want is our <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>. \n\n\nExeter <em>XXXX</em> company was sued for the same thing they are doing to us. \n\nA <em>lawsuit</em> was filed <em>against</em> Exeter in <em>XXXX</em> of <em>XXXX</em>. In this <em>lawsuit</em> the plaintiff claimed that Exeter violated the Federal Trade Commission Act having to do with Fair Debt Collection Practices."]},"sort":[23.101255,"8530219"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3953594","_score":22.185253,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I have reached out to this company via certified letters onXX/XX/XXXX in which they failed to respond asking them to validate this debt. Then pursuant to the recent lawsuit against Santander, I was advised that Santander will be required to cease debt collection on my report due to litigation where Santander was ordered by the courts to pay {$65.00} XXXX to the 34 participating states for restitution for subprime consumers who defaulted on loans between XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XXXX XXXX, XXXX and The settlement also includes significant consumer relief by way of loan forgiveness. My state of NC was one of those participating states under attorney general XXXX XXXX and my loan was also deemed eligible to receive complete forgiveness and relief from this debt. This debt is no longer owed, however upon multiple disputes, Santander continues to verify and validate this debt. This is a direct violation of my consumer rights and this account needs to be deleted from all of my credit reports immediately.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-11-13T22:35:35.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Auto debt","zip_code":"28278","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3953594","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.","date_received":"2020-11-13T21:51:08.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Then pursuant to the recent <em>lawsuit</em> <em>against</em> Santander, I was advised that Santander will be required to cease debt collection on my report due to litigation where Santander was ordered by the courts to pay {$65.00} <em>XXXX</em> to the 34 participating states for restitution for <em>subprime</em> consumers who defaulted on loans between <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> and <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> and The <em>settlement</em> also includes significant consumer relief by way of loan forgiveness."]},"sort":[22.185253,"3953594"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11956504","_score":21.783203,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to file a complaint regarding Credit Acceptance Corporation. My account was sent to collections due to a car accident in XXXX that resulted in the vehicle being totaled. In XXXX, I contacted Credit Acceptance Corporation to negotiate a settlement for the debt, but was not given any opportunity to discuss or adjust the loan amount or the interest rate. This has caused significant financial distress. \n\n\nI am also aware of the joint lawsuit filed against Credit Acceptance Corporation in XX/XX/XXXX, which highlights alleges that Credit Acceptance Corporation engaged in deceptive and abusive practices, such as hiding loan costs, misrepresenting terms, and pushing unaffordable loans on subprime borrowers. It also accuses CAC of violating state usury laws and engaging in securities fraud by packaging these loans into investments. This adds to my concerns about the fairness and transparency in handling such cases. \n\nI am seeking your assistance in resolving this matter. Thank you for your attention to this issue. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-05T12:19:48.000Z","issue":"Managing the loan or lease","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"20707","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11956504","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-02-05T12:00:23.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem with the interest rate"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am also aware of the joint <em>lawsuit</em> filed <em>against</em> Credit Acceptance Corporation in XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, which highlights alleges that Credit Acceptance Corporation engaged in deceptive and abusive practices, such as hiding loan costs, misrepresenting terms, and pushing unaffordable loans on <em>subprime</em> borrowers. It also accuses CAC of violating state usury laws and engaging in securities fraud by packaging these loans into investments."]},"sort":[21.783203,"11956504"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4203648","_score":21.24376,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"On or about XX/XX/XXXX, a class action lawsuit settlement was announced by XXXX state attorneys general after a multistate investigation found Santander was engaging in subprime lending practices. Santander Consumer USA provided me with a car loan on or about { XX/XX/XXXX }. This car loan agreement contained unreasonable terms and was a product of unethical and dishonest business practices by Santander. \n\nGiven these facts, I request that Santander : I. remove late-payment and repossession information from my credit report. \nII. forgive my repossession deficiency. \nIII. notify debt buyer/collection Agency to cease debt collection activity against me ; and IV. notify debt buyer to return any monies collected from me. \n\nOther states have already ordered restitution from Santander to their affected constituents. I will give you 30 days from the date of this letter to provide the requested remedy or I will use all remedies available to me under the law to ensure that I am made whole. \n\nThank you for your anticipated voluntary cooperation in this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-03-11T06:36:37.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Auto debt","zip_code":"33025","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4203648","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.","date_received":"2021-03-11T06:28:27.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["On or about XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, a class action <em>lawsuit</em> <em>settlement</em> was announced by <em>XXXX</em> state attorneys general after a multistate investigation found Santander was engaging in <em>subprime</em> lending practices. Santander Consumer USA provided me with a car loan on or about { XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> }. This car loan agreement contained unreasonable terms and was a product of unethical and dishonest business practices by Santander."]},"sort":[21.24376,"4203648"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2804283","_score":19.766724,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"After multiple unsuccessful attempts of filing complaints against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and its business-partner, Select Portfolio Servicing , Inc., XXXX XXXX  asked the OCC to assume Jurisdiction of all complaint filed by CFPB, because the alleged Predatory Lending, Mortgage Fraud, and Racial Discrimination/Racial Profiling \" crimes '' occurred betweenXX/XX/XXXXand XX/XX/XXXX ; and during this period, the OCC was the Supervisory Agency for all XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) affiliates. During this period, dozens of serious Regulation C/HMDA violations also were committed by the XXXX affiliate, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( aka XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ) ; and the OCC was the HMDA Supervisory Agency that was responsibilities for monitoring annual HMDA Loan Application Register ( LAR ) submissions. These submissions required the signature of an Officer of the Bank, certifying that the annual submission was valid and error-free, and that all other information contained in the LAR was for the Respondent ( Bank ) submitting the annual disclosure. During the period between XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX affiliate : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX., was the principal operator of a subprime lending boiler room known as the XXXX XXXX XXXX  Center located in XXXX XXXX, PA. This center originated created more than five hundred thousands applications, and originated more than one hundred and fifty-two subprime home mortgage loans, even though it had no HUD certification to originate subprime home mortgage loans. The XXXX XXXX  Specialists employees at the XXXX XXXX XXXX   Center betweenXX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ; specifically targeted XXXX XXXX and other economically-disadvantaged consumer residing in twenty urban MSAs/MDs, and between the period of XXXX andXX/XX/XXXX, originated more than one hundred and ninety-five thousand subprime and Alt-A conventional home mortgage loans, and only six ( 6 ) FHA/VA/FSA-RHS home mortgage loans. Many, ( if not most ) of the home \" Toxic Mortgage '' loans originated at this center betweenXX/XX/XXXXand XX/XX/XXXX were subsequently securitized into RBMS Certificates by a XXXX affiliate.\n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX thirty-three days before the XX/XX/XXXX, \" landmark '' DOJ settlement of the XXXX XXXX  Lawsuit was announced, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  who was then the owner and servicer of these \" Toxic Mortgage '' loans, outsourced ( \" jettisoned '' ) hundreds of these \" Toxic Mortgages '' to Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. ; and the \" XXXX XXXX XXXX '' made all of these \" Toxic Mortgage '' loans ineligible for a share of the XXXX dollar Consumer Relief Provision of this settlement. It is clear that the \" XXXX XXXX XXXX  '' was the brain-child of XXXX XXXX, but there is strong evidence, that SPS, may have unknowingly been a conspirator to this \" Toxic Mortgage '' jettison maneuver.\n\nThe OCC attempted to refer the SPS portion of the \" XXXX XXXX XXXX '' conspiracy to CFPB but CFPB inadvertently filed Complaint Number XXXX   to XXXX XXXX instead of SPS ( See attachment entitled Description and Timeline. ) This complaint is being submitted because CFPB submitted the OCC Case Number XXXX XXXX to XXXX XXXX rather than SPS. ( Also, for additional background see CFPB Complaint XXXX which was closed without arbitration by SPS. )","date_sent_to_company":"2018-02-05T18:48:14.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Other type of mortgage","zip_code":"85381","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2804283","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","date_received":"2018-02-05T16:32:16.000Z","state":"AZ","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["On XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> thirty-three days before the XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, \" landmark '' DOJ <em>settlement</em> of the <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>  <em>Lawsuit</em> was announced, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>  who was then the owner and servicer of these \" Toxic Mortgage '' loans, outsourced ( \" jettisoned '' ) hundreds of these \" Toxic Mortgages '' to Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. ; and the \" <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> '' made all of these \" Toxic Mortgage '' loans ineligible for a share of the <em>XXXX</em> dollar Consumer Relief Provision of this <em>settlement</em>."]},"sort":[19.766724,"2804283"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3959977","_score":19.354504,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Santander USA Consumer is still up to there deceitful tactics in trying to harm me financially.I am filing this complaint against Santander Consumer violating my rights under the FRCA and FDCPA. The third party XXXX XXXX XXXX did delete it from my credit report but Santander Consumer is still reporting it on my credit report account # XXXX. I have been in contact with FTC they told to reach out one more time to see if they would delete this item from my credit .I purchase a XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX and was charged off on XXXX XXXX, XXXX There are multitude of violations that they are harming me as consumer by reporting : 1 ) They are reporting to the credit bureaus inaccurate history which causing financial harm and defamation : US Court of Appeals , Ninth Circuit , No.00-15946, Nelson vs. Chase Manhattan . Extent of damages incurred by the wronged party will be deemed by the courts. 2 ) They failed to report to the credit bureaus that it is being disputed. Protection under the FCRA Section 623 fine of {$1000.00}. 3 ) The credit bureaus refused to correct information after I proved proof of inaccuracy, willfully injuring. Protection under the FCRA Section 623 CUSHMAN v TRANS UNION CORPORATION US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Court Case 115 F.3d 220.4 ) Santander Consumer are \" Reaging '' my account by reporting the date of last activity instead of the date of 1st delinquency. Consumer Protection afforded by FCRA Section 605 ( c ) fine of {$1000.00}. They also are not showing on my credit the charge-off amount and the 7 year reporting is not listed. As a consumer according to the Attorney Generals Office claimed that Santander Consumer USAs subprime lending practices violated my consumer protection laws by exposing consumers to unnecessarily high levels of risk and knowingly place me into auto loans that had a high probability of default. I spoke to the Attorney General office and he told me to place a complaint with Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and FTC. So, as I stated XXXX XXXX XXXX who brought the loan from Santander Consumer did deleted from my report. They could have kept on there for 7 year but they knew they were inviolations.So, I am asking one more time yes I have been told by the Assistant Attorney General I am going get paid because of Santander Consumer actions against me. I don't want the money I just want them to do right and have this item removed from my credit report. If they dont delete these items from my credit report for the violations to forwarded it to the Assistant Attorney General office that is over sending the money to the consumers that were validated. So, they can file legal actions. This month the FTC, State, and Federal Law Enforcement Partners Announce Nationwide Crackdown on Abusive Debt Collection. READ BELOW ; Santander Consumer XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Dispute Resolved XX/XX/XXXX Settlement Includes Restitution for Consumers Contact : XXXX XXXX, Assistant Attorney General, XXXX Attorney General XXXX XXXX today announced a settlement with Santander Consumer USA , Inc. resolving complaints of unfair or deceptive practices relating to subprime auto loans. The settlement resolves the Attorney Generals claim that Santander Consumer USAs subprime lending practices violated consumer protection laws by exposing consumers to unnecessarily high levels of risk and knowingly placing these consumers into auto loans that had a high probability of default. Under the terms of the settlement, Santander Consumer USA will provide relief to eligible consumers by : o paying {$75000.00} in restitution to certain subprime consumers who defaulted on loans between XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX ; o giving consumers with the lowest quality loans those who defaulted as of XX/XX/XXXX, and who have not yet had their cars repossessed the titles to their cars and waiving any balance on these consumers loans ; o waiving deficiency balances and attempting to buyback deficiency waivers the company no longer owns ; and, o engaging in credit repair for affected consumers. Consumers who are eligible for relief under the settlement please contacted the Attorney Generals Office. I as a consumer fall within the guidelines of this lawsuit was violated by this company. I am giving you guys a goodwill gesture because there practices have cause great harm to my credit. I am maintaining careful record of my communication for the purpose of filing this with Attorney Generals Office as I was told today. This complaint in respond to the letter I received from Santander Consumer USA on XX/XX/XXXX.. The Assistant Attorney General Office said that Santander Consumer USA that there charge off be removed from credit report under there name. This is under terms of relief for the consumer : engaging in credit repair for affected consumers. Please remove this item with every CRA asap.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-11-17T21:43:07.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Auto debt","zip_code":"22191","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3959977","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.","date_received":"2020-11-17T21:03:55.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["READ BELOW ; Santander Consumer <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> Dispute Resolved XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> <em>Settlement</em> Includes Restitution for Consumers Contact : <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, Assistant Attorney General, <em>XXXX</em> Attorney General <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> today announced a <em>settlement</em> with Santander Consumer USA , Inc. resolving complaints of unfair or deceptive practices relating to <em>subprime</em> auto loans."]},"sort":[19.354504,"3959977"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11867516","_score":19.200645,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am writing to formally file a complaint against XXXX ( formerly Navient ) regarding predatory lending practices and illegal student loan servicing that have placed me under severe financial hardship. Despite my efforts to resolve my situationincluding attempts to have my interest rate permanently reduced and my loan discharged under the legal settlements involving these entitiesI have received no relief. My private student loan has ballooned from an initial {$30000.00} to over {$100000.00}, and my monthly payments of nearly {$1600.00} are unaffordable, especially when combined with my other student loans. \n\nBackground : Loan Origination : I took out a {$30000.00} private student loan from Sallie Mae to attend XXXX University, a for-profit institution known for predatory enrollment tactics. \nLoan Transfer : This loan was later transferred to Navient, and is now managed by XXXX. \nCurrent Status : Despite making consistent payments, my balance has increased exponentially due to excessive interest rates, compounding fees, and predatory servicing practices. \n\nPredatory Practices by XXXX University : XXXX University has been the subject of multiple lawsuits and investigations due to its deceptive recruitment and financial practices, particularly targeting XXXX and female students : Reverse Redlining : XXXX deliberately marketed its doctoral programs to minority students while misrepresenting tuition costs and program durations. Students, including myself, were unknowingly pushed into extended enrollment periods, driving up loan balances. \nClass-Action Lawsuits : XXXX University settled a lawsuit alleging that the school purposefully delayed students dissertation and capstone projects to force continued tuition payments. ( Source ) Illegal and Unethical Practices by Navient/XX/XX/XXXX Navient, now operating as XXXX, has a documented history of predatory lending, deceptive servicing, and unlawful collection practices : Predatory Lending : Navient knowingly issued subprime private student loans to borrowers at for-profit institutions like XXXX, despite knowing these students were unlikely to repay. \nLegal Settlements : Navient reached a {$1.00} XXXX settlement with 39 state attorneys general due to fraudulent lending and loan servicing practices. The agreement included {$1.00} XXXX in loan cancellations and {$95.00} XXXX in restitution for borrowers harmed by these tactics. ( Source ) CFPB Lawsuit : The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau sued Navient for systematically failing borrowers by : Steering them into costly forbearance plans instead of income-driven repayment options. \nMisapplying payments to increase interest and fees. \nProviding false information about loan forgiveness eligibility. ( Source ) My Attempts to Seek Resolution : Despite multiple attempts, I have been denied relief in the following ways : 1. Request for Loan Discharge Under the Navient Lawsuit Settlement : I applied to have my loan discharged as part of the {$1.00} XXXX settlement, but I was not granted relief, despite being directly impacted. \n2. Request for Permanent Interest Rate Reduction : I have contacted XXXX and formally requested a reduction in my exorbitant interest rate, but they have refused to adjust my loan terms permanently. \n3. Attempts to Verify Loan Ownership : I have requested documentation proving that XXXX legally owns my loan, but I have received no response or proof of legitimate ownershipa key issue in previous lawsuits against National Collegiate Student Loan Trusts ( NCSLTs ), where courts ruled that these entities could not collect on loans they could not prove ownership of. \n\nPersonal Impact : My loan has ballooned from {$30000.00} to over {$100000.00}, a direct result of deceptive lending and servicing practices. \nMy monthly payments of nearly {$1600.00} are financially crippling. \nDespite making regular payments, my principal has barely decreased, proving that XXXX is engaging in unethical interest and fee accumulation tactics. \nThe stress of this predatory debt has severely impacted my financial well-being and overall quality of life. \n\nRequested Action from CFPB : Given the overwhelming evidence of predatory and illegal practices by XXXX University, Navient, and now XXXX, I respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau take the following actions : 1. Investigate the legality of my loans origination and servicing transfers to determine if XXXX has the legal right to collect on my debt. \n2. Determine whether my loan qualifies for discharge under existing Navient/Mohela lawsuits and settlements due to predatory and deceptive practices. \n3. Mandate that XXXX immediately cease all collection activities while my case is under review. \n4. Permanently reduce my student loan interest rate and provide meaningful loan balance reductions. \n5. Hold XXXX accountable for its predatory practices, just as Navient and NCSLTs were penalized in prior legal actions. \n\nConclusion : The documented history of lawsuits, settlements, and federal enforcement actions against XXXX University, Navient, and XXXX makes it clear that my student loan debt was the result of fraudulent and predatory lending. I urge the CFPB to investigate and take immediate action to provide relief, not just for me, but for all affected borrowers. \n\nI appreciate your time and attention to this matter, and I look forward to your response.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-01T02:23:18.000Z","issue":"Struggling to repay your loan","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"11003","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11867516","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","date_received":"2025-02-01T01:43:39.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Can't get other flexible options for repaying your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Class-Action <em>Lawsuits</em> : <em>XXXX</em> University settled a <em>lawsuit</em> alleging that the school purposefully delayed students dissertation and capstone projects to force continued tuition payments. ( Source ) Illegal and Unethical Practices by Navient/XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> Navient, now operating as <em>XXXX</em>, has a documented history of predatory lending, deceptive servicing, and unlawful collection practices : Predatory Lending : Navient knowingly issued <em>subprime</em> private student loans to borrowers at for-profit institutions"]},"sort":[19.200645,"11867516"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"1960292","_score":18.443108,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX Despite $ XXXX settlement, Wells Fargo still facing DOJ probe into mortgage operations LENDINGSERVICING Despite $ XXXX settlement, Wells Fargo still facing DOJ probe into mortgage operations Discloses ongoing federal and state investigations XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX KEYWORDS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DOJ FALSE CLAIMS ACT FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION FHA WELLS FARGO WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE WELLS FARGO MORTGAGE Wells Fargo Despite recently agreeing to a {$1.00} XXXX settlement with the federal government to resolve claims related to its Federal Housing Administration lending program from XXXX, Wells Fargo is still facing investigations into its \" mortgage related practices '' from the Department of Justice XXXX as well as other federal and state agencies, the megabank disclosed this week. \n\nAccording to a XXXX report, Wells Fargo stated in is XXXX filing with the XXXX that the bank is currently under investigation by a number of agencies over the mortgage operations of both Wells Fargo and its \" predecessor institutions. '' The news of the ongoing investigations come less than a month after Wells Fargo agreed to the more than {$1.00} XXXX settlement with the DOJ, the XXXX for the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the XXXX XXXX for the XXXX and the XXXX \n\nThat settlement stemmed from a lawsuit that was originally filed in XXXX XXXX, in which the DOJ sought damages and civil penalties under the False Claims Act. \n\nIn its XXXX, Wells Fargo noted that the {$1.00} XXXX settlement with the feds is not yet finalized. \n\n\" Although Wells Fargo and the Federal Government have reached an agreement in principle to resolve these matters, there can be no assurance that Wells Fargo and the Federal Government will agree on the final documentation of the settlement, '' Wells Fargo said in its XXXX. \n\nAnd, it appears that settlement did n't get Wells Fargo out of the crosshairs of the DOJ and other agencies. \n\n\" Wells Fargo, for itself and for predecessor institutions, has responded, and continues to respond, to requests from these agencies seeking information regarding the origination, underwriting and securitization of residential mortgages, including sub-prime mortgages, '' the bank stated. \n\nWells Fargo also stated that it has established a potential liability for its \" contingent litigation losses, '' based ona \" range of potential losses for each matter that is both probable and estimable. '' Wells Fargo stated that the \" high end of the range of reasonably possible potential litigation losses in excess of the company 's liability for probable and estimable losses was approximately {$1.00} XXXX, '' as of XXXX XXXX, XXXX. \n\n\" For these matters and others where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible but not probable, there may be a range of possible losses in excess of the established liability that can not be estimated, '' Wells Fargo added. \n\n\" Based on information currently available, advice of counsel, available insurance coverage and established reserves, Wells Fargo believes that the eventual outcome of the actions against Wells Fargo and/or its subsidiaries, including the matters described above, will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on Wells Fargo 's consolidated financial position, '' Wells Fargo stated. \" However, in the event of unexpected future developments, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of those matters, if unfavorable, may be material to Wells Fargo 's results of operations for any particular period. '' REPRINTS AddThis Sharing Buttons Related Articles Wells Fargo fined {$81.00} XXXX for violating federal bankruptcy rules Wells Fargo, DOJ losing \" optimism '' for lawsuit settlement Wells Fargo officially r","date_sent_to_company":"2016-06-08T21:50:38.000Z","issue":"Loan modification,collection,foreclosure","sub_product":"Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)","zip_code":"33414","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"1960292","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2016-06-08T21:50:38.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["According to a <em>XXXX</em> report, Wells Fargo stated in is <em>XXXX</em> filing with the <em>XXXX</em> that the bank is currently under investigation by a number of agencies over the mortgage operations of both Wells Fargo and its \" predecessor institutions. '' The news of the ongoing investigations come less than a month after Wells Fargo agreed to the more than {$1.00} <em>XXXX</em> <em>settlement</em> with the DOJ, the <em>XXXX</em> for the <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, the <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> for the <em>XXXX</em> and the <em>XXXX</em> \n\nThat <em>settlement</em> stemmed from a <em>lawsuit</em> that"]},"sort":[18.443108,"1960292"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8892413","_score":18.107574,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"In XXXX at the age of XXXX and only XXXX months after XXXX  high school, I applied to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX, MA to become a XXXX XXXX. Unbeknownst to me at the time, this was a predatory school and since then, has been countlessly found guilty of defrauding its students as evidenced by a sweep of all Federal loans being forgiven to students who attended the schools associated with XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI only received XXXX federal loan for the amount of {$3500.00} in which the balance was ultimately forgiven on XX/XX/XXXX due to the verdict of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX case which the court declared that all individuals who borrowed federal student loans to pay the cost of attendance for any of the XXXX persons named in the Massachusetts Attorney Generals exhibit have the right to borrower defense relief under XXXX C.F.R. XXXX ( c ) ( XXXX ) ( XXXX ) and not related to Then-Attorney General XXXX XXXX lawsuit against XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nUnfortunately for me, I had XXXX other loans that were privately owned by Navient, the XXXX XXXX loan and the XXXX XXXX loan, both of which were subprime private loans. Despite the $ XXXX settlement on XX/XX/XXXX against Navient , I did not qualify for that forgiveness either as I was never late for at least seven continuous monthly billing cycles. \n\nFor context, I originally borrowed a total of {$17000.00} which was disbursed in XXXX. From XXXX, I paid Navient a total of {$29000.00} and accrued {$29000.00} in interest. After my interest rate kept fluctuating and went up to 13 % on one loan and 14 % on another in XXXX, I decided to refinance the remaining balance of my loans for {$18000.00} the remaining balance on a {$17000.00} loan from 15 years ago. \n\nSummary : o Initially borrowed : {$17000.00} o Total payments received from XXXX = {$29000.00} o Total balance refinanced in XXXX = {$18000.00} o Out of pocket payment = {$47000.00} ( payments received + refinanced balance ) o {$29000.00} more than what was initially borrowed ALL interest. \n\nI have been negatively affected by this because I not only attended a predatory school but also received subprime loans that were designed to never allow me out of debt and despite governments efforts to forgive these loans, I never qualified for its forgiveness. These private loans deserve the same forgiveness as the federal loans because even after 17 years of repayment, I am still suffering from the grips of these harmful tactics by XXXX XXXX and Navient.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-05-01T03:49:44.000Z","issue":"Getting a loan","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"06042","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8892413","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","date_received":"2024-05-01T02:58:56.000Z","state":"CT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"High pressure sales tactics or recruiting"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> ( c ) ( <em>XXXX</em> ) ( <em>XXXX</em> ) and not related to Then-Attorney General <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>lawsuit</em> <em>against</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> \n\nUnfortunately for me, I had <em>XXXX</em> other loans that were privately owned by Navient, the <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> loan and the <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> loan, both of which were <em>subprime</em> private loans. Despite the $ <em>XXXX</em> <em>settlement</em> on XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> <em>against</em> Navient , I did not qualify for that forgiveness either as I was never late for at least seven continuous monthly billing cycles."]},"sort":[18.107574,"8892413"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4033261","_score":17.679735,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"This company never responded to a Letter of Demand in regards to a Class Action Settlement against Santander Consumer USA Inc. They are trying to repossess my car during a pandemic and when they have agreed to forgive consumers loans and present them with the title for giving us predatory subprime auto loans. I have filed complaints with multiple agencies and they have not responded to me. When they finally did respond in my last complaint they outright lied that they never received my letter of demand and it has been over 2 months since I sent that. There response is that they can not tell me my \" internal customer number '' which is how they determined my interest rate that is insurmountable for an ordinary person with ordinary wages. They never verified my income and gave me an outlandish interest rate that has put me in default 3 different times over the last 2 years I have been in the loan. This class action lawsuit that they settled out of court for {$550.00} XXXX was suppose to remedy this ridiculous and predatory loan. They were expecting me to default because the amount has left me unable to eat, pay rent, or other necessities. On top of this they have negatively reported on my credit many times this year ( during a worldwide pandemic ). I am 99 % certain I am eligible for the settlement remedy which includes forgiving the remainder of my loan, relinquishing the title to the car, and removal of negative credit ratings from the company as they have done multiple times in one month ( I will add documents for proof of my claims ). Thats the difference between me and this company, I have the burden of proof that they have taken advantage of me as a consumer and they need to do what is right as I am intending to sue them for damages if they repossess this car that is not theirs anymore according to the settlement agreement. I don't believe that you all closed my case without them presenting any proof of their claims whereas I have provided proof and my comprehensive explanation. They are a scam company that takes advantage of consumers and then wants to take away their cars whenever they can't pay because they created an impossible interest rate and ridiculous terms.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-12-27T23:53:50.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay your loan","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"32303","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4033261","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.","date_received":"2020-12-27T22:19:40.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Lender trying to repossess or disable the vehicle"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This company never responded to a Letter of Demand in regards to a Class Action <em>Settlement</em> <em>against</em> Santander Consumer USA Inc. They are trying to repossess my car during a pandemic and when they have agreed to forgive consumers loans and present them with the title for giving us predatory <em>subprime</em> auto loans. I have filed complaints with multiple agencies and they have not responded to me."]},"sort":[17.679735,"4033261"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12848839","_score":16.766647,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"I should be apart of the settlement class. My loans began eligibility for payment XX/XX/XXXX. I was unable to make a payment because even though I completed all of my course work I was not eligible to become and XXXX XXXX because I was still on probation. The school knew this and told me I would be eligible for my license anyway. I incurred an additional amount of debt that was beyond my ability to afford without a XXXX XXXX My loans qualify for private loan debt relief will primarily go to borrowers who took out private subprime student loans ( made to borrowers with low credit scores ) through Navients predecessor, Sallie Mae, XXXX XXXX, and then had more than seven consecutive months of delinquent payments prior to XX/XX/XXXX. My first ( 1 ) missed payment was XX/XX/XXXX, then I incurred repayment fees for each signature loan that was issued that were above my cost of attendance and paid directly to me in a check. The excessive repayment fees amounts for the 4 loans were {$180.00}, {$220.00}, {$330.00}, and {$400.00} which were then capitalized to my loan on the same day. The second ( 2 ) consecutive month I was unable to pay the loan was XX/XX/XXXX in which i incurred late fees for each loan, the third ( 3 ) month was XX/XX/XXXX which I incurred late fees, the fourth ( 4 ) month was XX/XX/XXXX and I incurred late fees. The fifth ( 5 ) month was XX/XX/XXXX and I incurred late fees, the sixth ( 6 ) month was XX/XX/XXXX and I incurred late fees, the seventh ( 7 ) consecutive month in non payment was XX/XX/XXXX and then my loans were put in some auto forbearance as to not default the loan since Sallie Mae was moving its servicing to Navient and wanted to inflate the package of loans. I was then again unable to pay the next months until I filed for bankruptcy case number XXXX in the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. During this time I was heavily harassed and made to believe my loans were not dischargeable so on XX/XX/XXXX I filed an Adversary hearing XXXX XXXX in the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX against Sallie Mae LoanServicer but it was later dismissed without entry or judgement. My XXXX  XXXX bankruptcy case was Discharged on XX/XX/XXXX. \nThese loans should have never been subject to adversary proceedings because the Signature Loans and Tuition Answer loans were deemed by the court to be unsecured debt as they were above the cost of attendance and were issued directly to me and should be treated as any other unsecured debt. I have attached a class action settlement that outlines my eligibility for discharge of my Signature Student Loans and Tuition Answer student loans. The Signature student loan was a subprime loan with interest rates of 13-17 % as well as the Tuition Answer loans at 12-14 % by Sallie Mae and my credit score was less than XXXX at the time and so was my mother who co-signed. Sallie Mae took advantage of me and the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that was aware that I wouldnt be able to obtain a nursing license upon graduation because I was on Federal house arrest. I have shown you that I was in non-payment for more than 7 consecutive months. The qualifications for private loans and the XXXX settlement are The private loan debt relief will primarily go to borrowers who took out private subprime student loans ( made to borrowers with low credit scores ) through Navients predecessor, Sallie Mae, betweenXXXX XXXX, and then had more than seven consecutive months of delinquent payments prior to XX/XX/XXXX I and my cosigner XXXX XXXX have clearly met this criteria and we should be awarded relief for my predatory private student loans. I have attached a copy of my payment history to show the consecutive missed payments. The non profit school I went to was XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and I have attached finding by the courts of their severe predatory behavior. My credit score was XXXX when I originated the loans and my mother who co-signed was XXXX. I have also attached a class action lawsuit that I hold class status and qualify as I filed bankruptcy and these loans should have been discharged in the proceeding. I pray that I have been able to provide adequate documentation of my qualifications regarding the Navient AGI settlement and the class action settlement. \nAccording to the AIG settlement I fall into Category 3 Criteria : Non-traditional Any non-traditional private education loan with an outstanding balance and in Past Due Status as of the Debt Relief Forgiveness Date disbursed by XXXX XXXX lenders, subsidiaries, predecessors, successors, and/or affiliates after XXXX. \nNon-traditional as used herein means a private education loan disbursed ( 1 ) to a borrower with a FICO score below XXXX at origination to attend a private for-profit educational institution; or ( 2 ) to a borrower with a FICO score below 640 at origination to attend a public or a private not-for-profit educational institution.\n\nAlthough they say I did not qualify because I went to a not for profit school you can see in the order from the court that I do qualify due to the low credit score when loan was originated. \n\nI would appreciate my loans cancelled and a refund please.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-06T13:39:35.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"068XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12848839","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","date_received":"2025-04-06T13:30:09.000Z","state":"CT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Need information about your loan balance or loan terms"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The qualifications for private loans and the <em>XXXX</em> <em>settlement</em> are The private loan debt relief will primarily go to borrowers who took out private <em>subprime</em> student loans ( made to borrowers with low credit scores ) through Navients predecessor, Sallie Mae, between<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, and then had more than seven consecutive months of delinquent payments prior to XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> I and my cosigner <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> have clearly met this criteria and we should be awarded relief for my predatory private student loans."]},"sort":[16.766647,"12848839"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"1634138","_score":15.21528,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Multiple attempts have been denied by XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) my previous loan servicer ; prior to the loan transfer to a company known as Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing ( SMS ), located at XXXX, SC XXXX. The reason behind these requests to XXXX and SMS, are primarily because of the originator of our mortgage loan was closed down due to fraudulent lending practices 2 years after origination of our mortgage. I have desperately tried to force XXXX and Shellpoint to provide me with a full response to a Qualified Written Request ( QWR ) on several occasions. These failures are direct violations to H.R.4173 - Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ( 111th Congress ( XXXX ) Both XXXX and SMS have failed to and refused to provide me with specific, mortgage assignments, sale affidavits, allonge ( s ) to the Note, all deed of trust transfers updating and county recordings. My requests for proof of ownership and custodial servicing rights have all been ignored. I 'm being led to believe that my loan was originated with XXXX. ( XXXX ), then allegedly transferred or sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), then sold or transferred to XXXX d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing ( SMS ) without acknowledgment of possession or ownership of documents requested pursuant to 12 U.S.C. Section 2605 ( e ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and Reg. X Section 3500.21 ( e ) ( 1 ). Furthermore, it is my claim that XXXX as well SMS has continued to perpetrate the original fraud that our family endured under the illegal lending business practices of XXXX. Our mortgage loan was originated on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, by a company known as XXXX ( XXXX ) This company was founded in XXXX and in XXXX, XXXX, went out of business. The company was founded in XXXX and was based at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX. In XXXX XXXX, at the time offered subprime lending and mortgage financing services in California. Unbeknownst to my family, over a five year span XXXX, wrote {$3.00} XXXX in mortgages, lending money fast and often on onerous terms, to people with shaky credit. XXXX would line their pockets with exorbitant fees and they boosted by high costs and interest rates, high even by subprime market industry standards. XXXX, after-tax profits averaged 29 percent of revenue. In XXXX, XXXX, had its biggest year, profit topped {$37.00} XXXX. As a result XXXX would lose their homes. We later discovered that XXXX, lending licensing was revoked on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, by The Department of Corporations of California reference OAH CASE NO. : ( XXXX # XXXX ). ORDER SUMMARILY REVOKING CALIFORNIA FINANCE LENDERS LAW LICENSE OF XXXX. There are multiple pending lawsuits against XXXX, for altering HUD-1 Settlement Statements which is a Federal crime as well as padding or stretching appraisal reports in order to increase lending amounts to exceed actual property values, at the time of closing. Increases which ultimately forced XXXX, to falsifying income documents in addition to not providing my family with truth in lending disclosures and amortization schedules. All of which are violations to RESPA and the Fair Debt Collection Act ( FDCPA ). For these reasons it is unjust and illegal for SMS to enforce foreclosure action on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, against my original deed of trust, prior to providing proof of my mortgage debt. I implore your office to open and immediate inquiry into these predatory actions and violations to consumer protection laws being ignored as well as potential securitization fraud. I 'm prepared to file a civil litigation suit if necessary in order to resolve this matter once and for all.","date_sent_to_company":"2015-11-02T12:41:21.000Z","issue":"Loan servicing, payments, escrow account","sub_product":"Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)","zip_code":"94124","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"1634138","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","date_received":"2015-10-31T00:54:24.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["There are multiple pending <em>lawsuits</em> <em>against</em> <em>XXXX</em>, for altering HUD-1 <em>Settlement</em> Statements which is a Federal crime as well as padding or stretching appraisal reports in order to increase lending amounts to exceed actual property values, at the time of closing. Increases which ultimately forced <em>XXXX</em>, to falsifying income documents in addition to not providing my family with truth in lending disclosures and amortization schedules."]},"sort":[15.21528,"1634138"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12956858","_score":14.527901,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Experian XXXX : Legal Department/Disputes XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX **RE : URGENT DEMAND FOR DELETION OF INACCURATE CREDIT INQUIRIESXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  [ Insert your Experian File Number here ] ** **NOTICE OF INTENT TO PURSUE LEGAL ACTION FOR MULTIPLE FCRA VIOLATIONS** To Whom It May Concern : I am writing to formally dispute multiple unauthorized credit inquiries appearing on my Experian credit report. These inquiries violate several federal consumer protection laws and industry guidelines, and I demand their immediate removal. \n\nI have identified a pattern of multiple credit inquiries that were made within minutes of each other on the same dates, primarily on XX/XX/XXXX, from companies including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX This pattern constitutes multiple violations of federal law and industry standards. \n\n**SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS : ** **1. Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ) Violations : ** - The pattern of multiple applications to similar high-cost lenders suggests discriminatory lending practices through improper \" steering '' to subprime products - Regulation B ( 12 CFR 1002 ) prohibits discriminatory credit practices which this pattern suggests **2. Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) Violations : ** - The rapid succession of applications indicates failure to provide proper disclosure of loan terms before applications were processed - Pattern suggests violations of disclosure requirements under Regulation Z ( 12 CFR 1026 ) **3. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and FACT Act ( FACTA ) Violations : ** - Multiple inquiries within minutes violate Section 604 permissible purpose requirements- Failure to consolidate related inquiries violates accuracy provisions under Section 607 - Reporting of multiple inquiries for the same purpose violates Section 605 ( c ) ( 3 ) **4. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) Metro 2 Compliance Violations : ** - Failure to properly code inquiry types according to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - Non-compliance with Metro 2 Format \" de-duplication '' standards for reporting similar inquiries - Violation of industry standards requiring similar inquiries within 14-45 day windows to be reported as single inquiries I hereby demand that Experian and its third-party vendors : 1. Conduct a thorough investigation of these disputed items XXXX. Remove ALL unauthorized credit inquiries listed in my report dated [ date on report ] 3. Provide documentation of the permissible purpose for each inquiry if you refuse to remove them 4. Update my credit report immediately and provide me with a corrected copy 5. Notify all recipients of my credit report within the last six months of these corrections **NOTICE OF RELEVANT LEGAL PRECEDENTS : ** I bring to your attention the following relevant legal precedents that establish Experian 's liability for the violations described above : 1. In XXXX, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) sued Experian for conducting \" sham investigations '' of credit report errors and failing to properly address consumer disputes, resulting in inaccurate information remaining on credit reports. The CFPB declared that \" when consumers disputed errors on their credit reports, Experian conducted sham investigations rather than properly reviewing the disputes as required by federal law. '' 2. In a XXXX class action lawsuit against Experian, multiple consumers alleged that Experian purposely delayed investigating alleged inaccuracies in credit reports due to an internal policy labeling mailed-in claims as \" suspicious, '' in direct violation of the FCRA. \n\nXXXX. In XXXX, Experian paid {XXXX XXXX to settle a class-action lawsuit that claimed the company failed to properly investigate customer disputes about inaccurate credit reports, similar to my situation. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX established that consumers do not need to prove actual damages to recover statutory damages for willful violations of the FCRA. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  was ordered to pay XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  for failing to fix inaccuracies on her credit report after she disputed them. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX settlement was approved against the three major credit bureaus, including Experian, for violations of the FCRA by \" recklessly failing to follow reasonable procedures to ensure accurate reporting '' - which was noted as the second-largest settlement ever in an FCRA lawsuit. \n\nXXXX. The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) has previously imposed a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX against Experian for FCRA violations. \n\n8. In another significant case, Experian agreed to pay XXXX XXXX  to settle a class action lawsuit ( XXXX v. Experian ) for allegedly disclosing consumers ' credit checks to a debt collector in violation of the FCRA. The lawsuit alleged that Experian failed to confirm that the debt collector was using the credit reports for a permissible purpose. \n\n9. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) fined Experian XXXX XXXX for deceiving consumers about the use of credit scores, falsely representing that the credit scores it marketed and provided to consumers were the same scores lenders use to make credit decisions. \n\n10. Experian 's history of misusing consumer credit information and conducting inadequate investigations of disputes demonstrates a pattern of willful violations of the FCRA that courts have consistently penalized with significant monetary damages.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-12T08:36:34.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"713XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12956858","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-04-12T08:36:10.000Z","state":"LA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>settlement</em> was approved <em>against</em> the three major credit bureaus, including Experian, for violations of the FCRA by \" recklessly failing to follow reasonable procedures to ensure accurate reporting '' - which was noted as the second-largest <em>settlement</em> ever in an FCRA <em>lawsuit</em>. \n\n<em>XXXX</em>. The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) has previously imposed a <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>against</em> Experian for FCRA violations. \n\n8."]},"sort":[14.527901,"12956858"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12956232","_score":14.527901,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Experian XXXX : Legal Department/Disputes XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX **RE : URGENT DEMAND FOR DELETION OF INACCURATE CREDIT INQUIRIESXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  [ Insert your Experian File Number here ] ** **NOTICE OF INTENT TO PURSUE LEGAL ACTION FOR MULTIPLE FCRA VIOLATIONS** To Whom It May Concern : I am writing to formally dispute multiple unauthorized credit inquiries appearing on my Experian credit report. These inquiries violate several federal consumer protection laws and industry guidelines, and I demand their immediate removal. \n\nI have identified a pattern of multiple credit inquiries that were made within minutes of each other on the same dates, primarily on XX/XX/XXXX, from companies including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX This pattern constitutes multiple violations of federal law and industry standards. \n\n**SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS : ** **1. Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ) Violations : ** - The pattern of multiple applications to similar high-cost lenders suggests discriminatory lending practices through improper \" steering '' to subprime products - Regulation B ( 12 CFR 1002 ) prohibits discriminatory credit practices which this pattern suggests **2. Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) Violations : ** - The rapid succession of applications indicates failure to provide proper disclosure of loan terms before applications were processed - Pattern suggests violations of disclosure requirements under Regulation Z ( 12 CFR 1026 ) **3. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and FACT Act ( FACTA ) Violations : ** - Multiple inquiries within minutes violate Section 604 permissible purpose requirements- Failure to consolidate related inquiries violates accuracy provisions under Section 607 - Reporting of multiple inquiries for the same purpose violates Section 605 ( c ) ( 3 ) **4. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) Metro 2 Compliance Violations : ** - Failure to properly code inquiry types according to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - Non-compliance with Metro 2 Format \" de-duplication '' standards for reporting similar inquiries - Violation of industry standards requiring similar inquiries within 14-45 day windows to be reported as single inquiries I hereby demand that Experian and its third-party vendors : 1. Conduct a thorough investigation of these disputed items XXXX. Remove ALL unauthorized credit inquiries listed in my report dated [ date on report ] 3. Provide documentation of the permissible purpose for each inquiry if you refuse to remove them 4. Update my credit report immediately and provide me with a corrected copy 5. Notify all recipients of my credit report within the last six months of these corrections **NOTICE OF RELEVANT LEGAL PRECEDENTS : ** I bring to your attention the following relevant legal precedents that establish Experian 's liability for the violations described above : 1. In XXXX, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) sued Experian for conducting \" sham investigations '' of credit report errors and failing to properly address consumer disputes, resulting in inaccurate information remaining on credit reports. The CFPB declared that \" when consumers disputed errors on their credit reports, Experian conducted sham investigations rather than properly reviewing the disputes as required by federal law. '' 2. In a XXXX class action lawsuit against Experian, multiple consumers alleged that Experian purposely delayed investigating alleged inaccuracies in credit reports due to an internal policy labeling mailed-in claims as \" suspicious, '' in direct violation of the FCRA. \n\nXXXX. In XXXX, Experian paid {XXXX XXXX to settle a class-action lawsuit that claimed the company failed to properly investigate customer disputes about inaccurate credit reports, similar to my situation. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX established that consumers do not need to prove actual damages to recover statutory damages for willful violations of the FCRA. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  was ordered to pay XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  for failing to fix inaccuracies on her credit report after she disputed them. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX settlement was approved against the three major credit bureaus, including Experian, for violations of the FCRA by \" recklessly failing to follow reasonable procedures to ensure accurate reporting '' - which was noted as the second-largest settlement ever in an FCRA lawsuit. \n\nXXXX. The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) has previously imposed a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX against Experian for FCRA violations. \n\n8. In another significant case, Experian agreed to pay XXXX XXXX  to settle a class action lawsuit ( XXXX v. Experian ) for allegedly disclosing consumers ' credit checks to a debt collector in violation of the FCRA. The lawsuit alleged that Experian failed to confirm that the debt collector was using the credit reports for a permissible purpose. \n\n9. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) fined Experian XXXX XXXX for deceiving consumers about the use of credit scores, falsely representing that the credit scores it marketed and provided to consumers were the same scores lenders use to make credit decisions. \n\n10. Experian 's history of misusing consumer credit information and conducting inadequate investigations of disputes demonstrates a pattern of willful violations of the FCRA that courts have consistently penalized with significant monetary damages.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-12T08:36:34.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"713XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12956232","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-04-12T08:30:37.000Z","state":"LA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>settlement</em> was approved <em>against</em> the three major credit bureaus, including Experian, for violations of the FCRA by \" recklessly failing to follow reasonable procedures to ensure accurate reporting '' - which was noted as the second-largest <em>settlement</em> ever in an FCRA <em>lawsuit</em>. \n\n<em>XXXX</em>. The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) has previously imposed a <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>against</em> Experian for FCRA violations. \n\n8."]},"sort":[14.527901,"12956232"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12088515","_score":14.288127,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint has been filed against XXXX XXXX, however the loan has now been transfered to Mohela, however, contact information, including bank account numbers, have remained the same, implying Mohela is a related party to XXXX XXXX. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( hereafter referred to as XXXX due to XXXX XXXX divesting that segment ) overtook ownership of two student loan accounts ( hereafter referred to as loans ) of a US citizen with XXXX XXXX outside of the United States. XXXX overtook the loans despite not having the proper basic processes in place to service an account XXXX XXXX XXXX reXXXX within the United States. This included : - Only accepting payment via paper-check issued by a XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  - No telephone numbers that were accessible outside the continental United States. - No subject matter experts to resolve unique issues - Policy that prohibited representatives from following a case after phone conversations had ended During the period from XX/XX/XXXX until XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX representatives, acting in an advisory capacity, with the same access to documentation and proclaiming to be experts in Student Loan processes and procedures, repeatedly stated that there was no solution to the lack of a valid method of payment. They continually recommended that the account be placed on forbearance as a temporary solution to prevent the account from going into default. However, they did not disclose that the loan could be moved to a new service provider with different payment facilities via the loan consolidation process. This behavior was reflected in a class action lawsuit against XXXX. In a settlement announcement on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, Pennsylvania Attorney General XXXX XXXX was quoted : Our investigation uncovered two deceptive and unfair schemes XXXX was using that broke the law and put their own profits ahead of the people they served. The first scheme involved XXXX issuing subprime private loans to borrowers they knew could not pay the money back similar to the mortgage crisis in XXXX. The second scheme we uncovered was XXXX drive to mislead borrowers into forbearances, which stopped them from paying down the principal on their loan and led many to accumulate more debt and never-ending interest payments, said AG XXXX XXXX As a result, when payments were initiated to XXXX in XXXX, pending interest of over 50 % of the initial disbursement was capitalized. When initially contacted about this issue, a XXXX consumer advocate agreed with the complaint and credited all late fees that had accumulated during the period in question, however the interest was not discussed until with a new consumer advocate in XXXX. The most recent ground for rejecting the request to reverse the capitalized interest was that, although XXXX had acted as expert student loan advisor and, between XXXX and XXXX, had specifically stated that there was no solution to the issue, there was a reference to the US Department of Education website. The was also misleading one to believe that the US Department of Education was a governing body for XXXX regarding student loans.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-21T21:11:36.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12088515","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"MOHELA","date_received":"2025-02-14T11:26:21.000Z","state":null,"company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This behavior was reflected in a class action <em>lawsuit</em> <em>against</em> <em>XXXX</em>. In a <em>settlement</em> announcement on <em>XXXX</em> XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, Pennsylvania Attorney General <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> was quoted : Our investigation uncovered two deceptive and unfair schemes <em>XXXX</em> was using that broke the law and put their own profits ahead of the people they served. The first scheme involved <em>XXXX</em> issuing <em>subprime</em> private loans to borrowers they knew could not pay the money back similar to the mortgage crisis in <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[14.288127,"12088515"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11987273","_score":14.210799,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"In XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( hereafter referred to as Navient due to XXXX XXXX divesting that segment ) overtook ownership of XXXX student loan accounts ( hereafter referred to as loans ) of a XXXX citizen with permanent residence outside of the United States. \n\nNavient overtook the loans despite not having the proper basic processes in place to service an account without a physical residence within the United States. \n\nThis included : - Only accepting payment via paper-check issued by a XXXX bank XXXX \n- No telephone numbers that were accessible outside the continental United States. \n- No subject matter experts to resolve unique issues - Policy that prohibited representatives from following a case after phone conversations had ended During the period from XX/XX/XXXX until XX/XX/XXXX, Navient representatives, acting in an advisory capacity, with the same access to documentation and proclaiming to be experts in Student Loan processes and procedures, repeatedly stated that there was no solution to the lack of a valid method of payment. They continually recommended that the account be placed on forbearance as a temporary solution to prevent the account from going into default. However, they did not disclose that the loan could be moved to a new service provider with different payment facilities via the loan consolidation process. \n\nThis behavior was reflected in a class action lawsuit against Navient. In a settlement announcement on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, Pennsylvania Attorney General XXXX XXXX was quoted : Our investigation uncovered XXXX deceptive and unfair schemes Navient was using that broke the law and put their own profits ahead of the people they served. The first scheme involved Navient issuing subprime private loans to borrowers they knew could not pay the money back similar to the mortgage crisis in XXXX. The second scheme we uncovered was XXXX XXXX to mislead borrowers into forbearances, which stopped them from paying down the principal on their loan and led many to accumulate more debt and never-ending interest payments, said XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nAs a result, when payments were initiated to Navient in XXXX, pending interest of over XXXX  % of the initial disbursement was capitalized. When initially contacted about this issue, a Navient consumer advocate agreed with the complaint and credited all late fees that had accumulated during the period in question, however the interest was not discussed until with a new consumer advocate in XXXX. \n\nThe most recent ground for rejecting the request to reverse the capitalized interest was that, although Navient had acted as expert student loan advisor and, between XXXX and XXXX, had specifically stated that there was no solution to the issue, there was a reference to the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX website. The was also misleading XXXX to believe that the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was a governing body for Navient regarding student loans.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-07T13:46:23.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11987273","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","date_received":"2025-02-07T12:57:28.000Z","state":null,"company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This behavior was reflected in a class action <em>lawsuit</em> <em>against</em> Navient. In a <em>settlement</em> announcement on <em>XXXX</em> XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, Pennsylvania Attorney General <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> was quoted : Our investigation uncovered <em>XXXX</em> deceptive and unfair schemes Navient was using that broke the law and put their own profits ahead of the people they served. The first scheme involved Navient issuing <em>subprime</em> private loans to borrowers they knew could not pay the money back similar to the mortgage crisis in <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[14.210799,"11987273"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9848553","_score":13.682448,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"The loan originated in XX/XX/XXXX. It was a XX/XX/XXXX mortgage with XXXX and Full Spectrum home loans aka \" Piggy- back loans ''. The loan was later transferred to XXXX XXXX XXXX and subsequently Real time Resolution, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX perhaps in XXXX? Due to the complex nature of theses transfers ; to include the XXXX Attorney General XXXX filing a {$8.00} XXXX dollar lawsuit settlement against XXXX subprime Scandal predatory lending practices Loan modifications were enforced by Attorney General XXXX to erase penalties, fees and balloon payments and other predatory practices.The Making Home Affordable ( XXXX ) launched in XX/XX/XXXX, to provide additional assistance to struggling homeowners affected by predatory lending practices. You see, home Loans prior to XXXX XXXX XXXX acquisition in XX/XX/XXXX, deceived borrowers by misrepresenting loan terms, and disallowing borrowers ability to pay. The lawsuit claimed loan servicing also charged homeowners who were behind on their mortgages with inflated fees and penalties ( oag.ca.gov, XXXX ) .The settlement included loan modifications who were 60 days or more behind. Due to the above, I felt I was not a part though struggling to make ends meet. I was unaware of my debt status as many transfer of loans took place I did not receive regular bank statements of the second position loan.In fact, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX notified me of the transfer to Real Time Resolution after a year later. I have not received correspondence from XXXX XXXX  XXXX as they no longer acquired the mortgage effective XXXX. I am a regular account holder of Bank XXXX XXXX for over XXXX plus years. In XXXX, XXXX I received a chapter XXXX discharge. \nIn XXXX, I received letter from Real Time Resolution ( RTR ) stating \" if you received a bankruptcy discharge this letter is for informational purposes only '' ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \nIn XX/XX/XXXX, I received a Notice of Default place on several areas of my home. I was ashamed and confused.When I contacted XXXX in XXXX, I was advised to pay a lump sum fee of {$20000.00} plus penalties and interest. I asked why they had not contacted me prior, and was told because I had a XXXX XXXX XXXX discharged this does not apply. Meanwhile, the lien in XXXX was placed on my home and in my name at the county recorders office for all to see. I received phone calls and door knocking all hours of the day and night. My mailbox was filled with negative responses regarding the foreclosure sale or quick sale to investors.RTR response was \" We are only interested in your home '' XXXX immediately sought legal advice. RTR refused to work with me. In XXXX a Notice of Sale was placed. The original loan amount of {$75000.00} has now exceeded to over XXXX XXXX ( {$200000.00} ) XXXX dollars which includes foreclosure inspections, late fees penalty costs and other unknowns. \nThe attorneys advised me to seek additional legal counsel.When asked for verification of debt from RTR, I received a summary of foreclosure cost, appraisals costs and \" Investor '' loan purchase dated on XX/XX/XXXX. To this date, I have not received monthly bank statements. \nIn XX/XX/XXXX, I began to investigate what exactly is going on. I visited the XXXX XXXX recorders office. This is what was discovered... \nTo my surprise, on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX home loans holder of the deed whose address is the same as Bank XXXX XXXX located at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX Florida XXXX assigned Trust unto XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX are so many gaps from XXXX to XXXX and irregularities in how the loan was processed or transferred after XXXX XXXX. I do not receive statements from XXXX XXXX  XXXX, RealTime Resolution ( RTR ) nor any entity involved to include new XXXX XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX RRA CP OPPORTUNITY TRUST XXXX. \nIt Transparent Real Time ResoLution ( RTR ), is trying to bi-pass the Attorney Generals Ruling of XXXX by forcing the XXXX original balloon loan along with fees, interests and penalties which is equivalent to XXXX predatory practice ruling. Country wide obligation was to modify those predatory sub-prime loans.This is a continuation of the original predatory practices and should include a statutes of limitations reset.RTR is violating the terms. The original terms should not be enforceable due to XXXX home loan recognized predatory practices..The fact that my primary lender acknowledges the XXXX XXXXdischarge in XXXX and has made payment arrangements following the legal requirements post-discharge and sending monthly statements..RTR has contested and still contesting XXXX chapter XXXX which was filed in XX/XX/XXXX. RTR is trying to enforce the original loan terms and claim that I still owe on a personal liability basis. RTR is acting above -the-law.This is unethical and a global disgrace. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX has recently acknowledged cases similar. He stated '' Some debt XXXX, who sat silent for a decade, are now pursuing homeowners on zombie mortgages inflated with interest and fees ''. \" We are making clear that threatening to sue to collect on expired zombie mortgage debt is illegal '' ( XXXX XXXX ). \nTo date, RTR has hopefully postponed the XX/XX/XXXX Notice of Sale which is set at the XXXX XXXX court house in the next XXXX hours. The Next meeting with the Bankruptcy court XXXX ruling is set on XXXX XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-08-19T19:29:14.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"95758","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9848553","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Real Time Group, Inc.","date_received":"2024-08-19T03:15:12.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Seized or attempted to seize your property"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Due to the complex nature of theses transfers ; to include the <em>XXXX</em> Attorney General <em>XXXX</em> filing a {$8.00} <em>XXXX</em> dollar <em>lawsuit</em> <em>settlement</em> <em>against</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>subprime</em> Scandal predatory lending practices Loan modifications were enforced by Attorney General <em>XXXX</em> to erase penalties, fees and balloon payments and other predatory practices.The Making Home Affordable ( <em>XXXX</em> ) launched in XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, to provide additional assistance to struggling homeowners affected by predatory lending practices."]},"sort":[13.682448,"9848553"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10160101","_score":13.261556,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"To whom it may concern, The total balance of my federal loans was incurred through predatory practices from XXXX and its sister company XXXX XXXX as it relates to the federal loans listed below. Starting from roughly a year after my graduation in XXXX, I began getting emails regarding the maturity of the loan repayment timeline. They did not offer any plan choices that would take into account my current financial hardship. I was unable for find work for at least three years ( XXXX ) while I was still billed for the predatory loans. I applied for a forbearance, which was hidden deep in the websitess structure, due to financial difficulty on XX/XX/XXXX and continued to struggle to make payments. My loans went past due in XXXX and XXXX continued to hound me with predatory emails that allowed me to suffer much distress. They utilized the names of associates who became overbearing with their spamming of back to back emails. I have included all of these messages in the attachments to this message. All immediate documentation was suspiciously transferred from XXXX to XXXX in XXXX in lieu of the pending litigation which ended in XXXX. I was fortunately able to recover some information via the new provider. I hereby request the total loan balance to be forgiven due \" mismanaged payment processing, which negatively impacted my credit loans and directed student loan borrowers like myself into more costly repayment plans and away from lower-cost income-based choices. This was my experience during my time of financial hardship. They offered no respite for the psychological strain having to repeatedly pay into expensive repayment plans entailed. Numerous lawsuits filed by the Attorneys General of several states, including Illinois, Washington, Pennsylvania, California, and New Jersey, against XXXX  and its violation of consumer protection laws by engaging in unfair and deceptive servicing and collection practices, made me aware that I was not the only one suffering this horrendous treatment. In my most vulnerable years, I was targeted. I also have been negatively impacted by the abuse of XXXX XXXX, XXXX sister company, which perpetuated similarly \" predatory subprime private student loans. '' Despite promising to help borrowers find the best repayment option to minimize interest costs, XXXX  deceptively steered distressed federal loan borrowers into costly long-term forbearances instead of informing them about the benefits of income-driven repayment plans. Interest that accrued during these forbearances was added to borrowers loan balances, pushing borrowers deeper into debt as was my experience. XXXX  also failed to adequately inform borrowers who did enroll in income-driven repayment of the yearly obligation to re-certify income and family size information. In addition, while operating as XXXX XXXX, XXXX made predatory subprime loans to students attending for-profit schools and colleges with low graduation rates even though it knew that borrowers would be unable to repay the loans. XXXX  made these risky private loans as an inducement to get schools and colleges to use XXXX as a preferred lender for highly profitable federal loansXXXX XXXX engaged in a variety of other unfair and deceptive servicing practices, including failing to follow borrower instructions concerning allocation of payments, asking delinquent borrowers to pay more than the amount necessary to bring their accounts current, and promoting cosigner release benefits for private loans while implementing requirements designed to ensure that very few co-signers were ever released. The Attorneys General in many other states investigated XXXX for these and other violations of consumer protection laws. These lawsuits and investigations by state Attorneys General resulted in this settlement further cementing my experience with their financial misconduct. \n\nI have attempted to contact XXXX for comment and they now parse the issue onto the newer aiadvantage. My account on Navient is now removed and all documentation has been removed from that site regarding my account. \n\nMy loans are all direct loans and thus qualify for forgiveness under the finding. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - Subsidized. Amount : {$5900.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - Subsidized. Amount : {$2900.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX. Amount : {$2900.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Amount : {$10000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX. Amount : {$2900.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX. Amount : {$12000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX. Amount : {$1200.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX. Amount : {$24000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX. Amount : {$1200.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX. Amount : {$3800.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX. Amount : {$3700.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX. Amount : {$1200.00}","date_sent_to_company":"2024-09-19T17:50:28.000Z","issue":"Struggling to repay your loan","sub_product":"Federal student loan servicing","zip_code":"60657","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10160101","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Maximus Federal Services, Inc.","date_received":"2024-09-18T19:10:26.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with forgiveness, cancellation, or discharge"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Numerous <em>lawsuits</em> filed by the Attorneys General of several states, including Illinois, Washington, Pennsylvania, California, and New Jersey, <em>against</em> <em>XXXX</em>  and its violation of consumer protection laws by engaging in unfair and deceptive servicing and collection practices, made me aware that I was not the only one suffering this horrendous treatment. In my most vulnerable years, I was targeted."]},"sort":[13.261556,"10160101"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2981308","_score":12.959117,"_source":{"product":"Payday loan, title loan, or personal loan","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint from Consumer 1 and 2, written by Consumer1 on XXXX Consumer1 and Consumer2 were and continue to be targets of PREDATORY LENDING business practices by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX investors, XXXX XXXX XXXX and Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC.\n\n1. We are both XXXX but were intentionally classified as white in loan documentation XXXX of XXXX. \n2. We found a home to purchase at XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX California early XXXX. \n3. We were verbally pressured to use a PH PREFERRED lender which at the time consisted of XXXX XXXX XXXX  and XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n4. I began working with XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX XXXX. After approximately 8 days of no communication, I called PH and they advised me to relax, XXXX was on vacation. \n5. When XXXX communicated with me again, my application was now with XXXX XXXX XXXX and was in the middle of being processed. His assistant also followed him to XXXX. I was not asked if I granted permission for my application to move from XXXX XXXX XXXX  to XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX, a XXXX XXXX XXXX employee unbeknownst to me, took our loan application and started a new application at his new place of employment XXXX XXXX XXXX I was deceived and mislead. \n6. When I called XXXX XXXX XXXX to trace my application, they had no records of any communication. \n7. I contacted XXXX to discuss the strange circumstances and they assured me that all was fine. That XXXX was indeed a preferred lender and if we used this lender, we would not pay closing costs. Their assurances indicated to us that what had just transpired was not unusual and we took their advice as implied approval of the event. \n8. We never met XXXX XXXX or his assistant. Everything was handled by phone, e-mail and fax. Mostly by phone. \n9. When our final loan documents were mailed to us for signature, there were 2 sets : 1 loan for $ XXXX and another for $ XXXX. I called XXXX XXXX for an explanation and he stated that by bundling the 2 loans vs. 1 Jumbo loan, I would have a lower interest rate, save money. XXXX did not disclose that by placing us into 2 loans, he would be eligible for 2 bonus commissions and did not disclose that we were about to allow XXXX to place 2 liens on our new home which was still being built. That we were about to walk into a very risky mortgage agreement serving only XXXX XXXX XXXX  and the interest of their investors. \n10. We did not know the HELOC of $ XXXX was classified as a subprime, high rate, equity line of credit. These details were not disclosed to us by XXXX XXXX, agent for XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n11. Pressured by XXXX XXXX to close the deal OR give up our place, our opportunity to purchase our new home, we signed the documents after several phone calls and arguments. \n12. We were functioning under the threat of XXXX XXXX to accept the deal and hurry to close the deal without asking any questions or give up our hold on the new home and our deposit so that the house could be sold to someone else. \n13. XXXX did not disclose any of the risky terms until we felt it was too late to back out. We were not informed of our TILA rights but rather threatened to basically shut up and sign. \n14. As a result, XXXX willfully violated TILA and according to the Federal Deposit of Insurance Corporation predatory lending is a crime in California when the lender manages the loan transaction to extract the maximum value for itself without regard for the borrowers ability to repay the loan. \n15. Several months later when the housing market collapsed, I made every effort to modify our mortgage and HELOC which was not with XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n16. I succeeded modifying the $ XXXX loan. \n17. I was informed by XXXX XXXX XXXX ( verbally ) that the XXXX/XXXX  - HELOC at $ XXXX was discharged/charged-off and that I was not required to make any payments at the time or ever. \n18. At one point the $ XXXX HELOC note came under the services of XXXX XXXX. I received a notice from them about the XXXX and again was informed the same > > not an attempt to collect a debt, no payments due, the notice should not be considered an invoice or statement. \n19. I sporadically received Consumer2ual notices and called to inquire about the mail, which looked like an unprofessional flier, and again received the same response as before > > not an attempt to collect a debt, no payments due, the notice should not be considered an invoice or statement. \n20. I then received a notice from Specialized Loan Servicing stating exactly the same as Ive mentioned above > just a notice, no payment required. \n21. Meanwhile I diligently checked my credit reports, recorded documents with the XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX California and NEVER discovered the XXXX Lien for {$64000.00}. I checked Consumer2ually and being that nothing was recorded I assumed this was a scam and ignored the notices. \n22. I recently got divorced and again, I checked my credit and recorded documents with the XXXX XXXX County and found nothing. I was checking to be sure my ex-husband was off title. \n23. Still not at ease, I asked a realtor friend to please order a clean-title report for me. It was only then that I discovered the XXXX XXXX XXXX Lien for $ XXXX plus $ XXXX in interest. \n24. I called SLS, LLC to request historical details about the lien including the name of investor and they have refused. This occurred the week of XX/XX/XXXX. \n25. They ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, SLS, LLC ) will not put anything in writing! \n26. They would not provide me an invoice unless I agreed to pay {$25.00}. \n27. They refused to reply to my e-mail inquiries. \n28. I can call/phone them ( SLS, LLC ) and they can record me, but I cant record them. \n29. I offered {$32000.00} to settle the matter ( if I sold my house ) but they declined and informed me that to make such as offer, I had to agree to have the home appraised by one of their contractors and complete a recovery application for their review. \n30. I was NEVER offered this option while I was in bankruptcy or struggling with payments. \n31. I had ALWAYS been told the HELOC was discharged/Written-off and no payments were expected. \n32. I have done an enormous amount of work tracing the path of this HELOC and I believe its IMPOSSIBLE for me to learn the truth, and I am intentionally kept away from the facts so that the predatory lender/predatory investor can ambush me and take any hard-earned equity or eventually foreclose and take my familys home. Destroy me financially AGAIN. \na. HELOC originated with XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nb. XXXX  XXXX XXXX purchased XXXX. \nc. XXXX XXXX begins to service the HELOC. XXXX XXXX disbands. \nd. SLS, LLC begins to service the HELOC. \ne. Somehow the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX is in the picture. \nf. XXXX refers me back to XXXX XXXX XXXX as the Master servicer. \ng. In a call to XXXX XXXX XXXX I am told the HELOC was a mandatory discharge, mandatory charge-off and that they would send me a letter so that SLS will leave me alone. \nh. Instead I received a letter stating that the HELOC was now with XXXX ; SLS, LLC is owned by XXXX. \n33. It is IMPOSSIBLE for me to easily obtain the facts about this HELOC. \n34. Further XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX and SLS, LLC willfully violate California Civil Code Section 2923.5 to act with and practice due diligence and be sure I am contacted with all the facts of the situation, the deadlines, the options, the demand, etc. \n35. There have been numerous class action lawsuits assembled and settled. I was NOT contacted by anyone to participate nor was Consumer2. \n36. There have been numerous lawsuits set on behalf of XXXX XXXX vs. XXXX XXXX  XXXX that have long been settled. According to several law reviews, investors received restitution from XXXX XXXX XXXX. WHY are these investors seeking a 2nd round of restitution from the Consumer2? \n37. In addition, it is assumed that by now, 11 years after the HELOC was originated, that investors have already listed the investment as a loss and taken income tax credits for such a loss. You cant chase recoupment after youve already accept the loss and tax credits. \n\nWhat do Consumer1 and Consumer2 want? \n1. Send by certified mail satisfaction of XXXX HELOC, approximately {$64000.00}, 2nd lien as paid in full. 100 % satisfied. \n\n2. Strip this lien, referenced above by XX/XX/XXXX Here are a few headlines : XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX  willfully violated TILA and according to the Federal Deposit of Insurance Corporation predatory lending is a crime in California when the lender manages the loan transaction to extract the maximum value for itself without regard for the borrowers ability to repay the loan. \nXXXX  XXXX XXXX Relief for Mortgage Borrowers Is Questioned - By XXXX XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX5 US Dept of Justice web site : Justice Department Reaches {$330.00} XXXX Settlement to Resolve Allegations of Lending Discrimination by XXXX XXXX XXXX - More than 200,000 XXXX and Hispanic Borrowers who Qualified for Loans were Charged Higher Fees or Placed into Subprime Loans United States Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to Pay {$16.00} XXXX in Historic Justice Department Settlement for Financial Fraud Leading up to and During the Financial Crisis After 5 years, XXXX investors are paid {$8.00} XXXX settlement by XXXX XXXX | XX/XX/XXXX Mortgage bond investors are finally getting paid the {$8.00} XXXX settlement theyre owed in an agreement involving XXXX mortgage bonds. \nMortgage bond investors sued over shoddy mortgages originated by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX unit. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, the trustee for the bond investors, originally agreed to accept an {$8.00} XXXX settlement five years ago. But in the ensuing years, a legal battle raged over whether XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   XXXX acted within its authority when it agreed to settle, according to a XXXX report. \n\n\nXXXX XXXX Refunds Go Out to Abused Homeowners The Federal Trade Commission Consumer2ounced last month that it is mailing out refund checks to XXXX XXXX homeowners who were charged excessive fees in their mortgages by XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nRecoupment : This is a legal theory that allows someone to raise defenses against a bank or other business even if the statute of limitations for those claims has passed. Recoupment is an equitable doctrine that allows you set off your claims against what someone is trying to recover from you. In this case, it is used against banks who foreclose. \nFor instance, one case in the First Circuit Court of Appeals, called XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, states that even though foreclosure might be non-judicial, and there is no actual lawsuit filed against the homeowner, the homeowner can still file a lawsuit in recoupment to stop a predatory lender. \nAnother case from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court called XXXX v. XXXX implies that homeowners may be able to assert claims against predatory lenders in recoupment. The Court writes that the right of recoupment contains no time limitations on assertion of the right. This accords with the common-law understanding of recoupment as a defensive mechanism whereby a defendant may, at any time, assert claims against the plaintiff in reduction of the plaintiffs claims when those claims arise out of the same transaction ; it is an offsetting of liabilities within a transaction. \nIn other words, Massachusetts law allows a defendant ( a homeowner ) to assert claims against the plaintiff ( the bank ) for predatory lending, at least to the extent that the claims offset the defendants ( homeowners ) liability.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-08-02T20:26:32.000Z","issue":"Getting a line of credit","sub_product":"Personal line of credit","zip_code":"94513","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2981308","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC","date_received":"2018-08-02T20:03:18.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Recoupment is an equitable doctrine that allows you set off your claims <em>against</em> what someone is trying to recover from you. In this case, it is used <em>against</em> banks who foreclose. \nFor instance, one case in the First Circuit Court of Appeals, called <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, states that even though foreclosure might be non-judicial, and there is no actual <em>lawsuit</em> filed <em>against</em> the homeowner, the homeowner can still file a <em>lawsuit</em> in recoupment to stop a predatory lender."]},"sort":[12.959117,"2981308"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":48,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":48}]}},"product":{"doc_count":48,"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":9},{"key":"Other type of mortgage","doc_count":5},{"key":"Conventional adjustable mortgage (ARM)","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":12,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Private student loan","doc_count":10},{"key":"Federal student loan servicing","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":8,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":8}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":5,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Auto debt","doc_count":3},{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Payday loan, title loan, or personal loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Personal line of credit","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":48,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":8,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":3},{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":2},{"key":"Problem with personal statement of dispute","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","doc_count":5,"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":"Need information about your loan balance or loan terms","doc_count":1},{"key":"Trouble with how payments are being handled","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":5,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Paying off the loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to repay your loan","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Can't get other flexible options for repaying your loan","doc_count":2},{"key":"Problem with forgiveness, cancellation, or discharge","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Getting a loan","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"High pressure sales tactics or recruiting","doc_count":2},{"key":"Confusing or misleading advertising","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":2},{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":1},{"key":"Debt was already discharged in bankruptcy and is no longer owed","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing the loan or lease","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Billing problem","doc_count":1},{"key":"Problem with the interest rate","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Seized or attempted to seize your property","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closing disclosure or other related disclosures","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Getting a line of credit","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Loan modification,collection,foreclosure","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Loan servicing, payments, escrow account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"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":"Unable to receive car title or other problem after the loan is paid off","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay your loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Lender trying to repossess or disable the vehicle","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":48,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":48}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":48,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":47},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":48,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":48}]}},"company":{"doc_count":48,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","doc_count":9},{"key":"Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.","doc_count":8},{"key":"SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.","doc_count":5},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":3},{"key":"Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC","doc_count":3},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":3},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":2},{"key":"MOHELA","doc_count":2},{"key":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"CL Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"CREDIT ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Exeter Finance, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FCI Lender Services Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Maximus Federal Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"National Credit Adjusters, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"Real Time Group, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":48,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":8},{"key":"LA","doc_count":5},{"key":"AZ","doc_count":3},{"key":"FL","doc_count":3},{"key":"GA","doc_count":3},{"key":"SC","doc_count":3},{"key":"VA","doc_count":3},{"key":"CT","doc_count":2},{"key":"IL","doc_count":2},{"key":"MD","doc_count":2},{"key":"NC","doc_count":2},{"key":"NY","doc_count":2},{"key":"TX","doc_count":2},{"key":"DC","doc_count":1},{"key":"KY","doc_count":1},{"key":"NH","doc_count":1},{"key":"NV","doc_count":1},{"key":"OH","doc_count":1},{"key":"OK","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":48,"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":14},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":6}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":48,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":4},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":4},{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":3}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-15T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-15T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16469162,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[12.958498,"2981308"]}}}