{"took":198,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":14,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2959277","_score":13.758988,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"Back in XXXX I contacted BMW Financial about my closed and paid account not reporting to XXXX, also stated that I've spoken to the credit reporting agency XXXX and they stated the account was deleted in XX/XX/XXXX. In XXXX I sent in a goodwill letter and also sent in another paper that made the complaint about the account not showing on XXXX. The complaint in XXXX was verbal and the complaint in XXXX was through postal service. I have attached the copy of letter and credit reporting complaint attached. When I contacted BMW both in XXXX and XXXX I was told the situation would be fixed. \n\nTill date, the situation hasn't been fixed. BMW tried to fix the mistake in XXXX by reporting account, but you can't report an account that was deleted. This info has been given to me by XXXX  representative and also their executive offices. BMW FAILED TO REINSERT THE ACCOUNT. \n\nAfter my postal letter for Goodwill and my CR Complaint was received on XXXX nut uploaded in their system on XX/XX/XXXX I contacted BMW in regards to receiving it and asking them to reinsert the account they deleted. They claimed they received the documents and will work with the CR Team. \n\nAfter everything by Goodwill letter was denied and also by CR remained unchanged. When I spoke to a representative they stated they reported my account again on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nSee, someone trained in this CR Department would know if the account was deleted, even when reported, would not populate, therefore the account would have to be reinserted for the reporting to populate. I stated this many times and even had some representatives agree. \n\nI've spent over 15 hours on the phone with BMW to resolve the issue, which doesn't include the time on the phone with XXXX. \n\nAfter so many attempts, I had a convo with XXXX or XXXX a SUpervisor at BMW. Sweetest gentlemen I've spoken with this year probably. He actually listened and went a step further and had me call XXXX to hear it personally. \n\nAfter getting told the same info that the account would have to be reinserted and also they can call the XXXX Maintenance number and have the account updated in real time, he said he would let the CR Team at BMW know and the case should be resolved soon.\n\nEver since then the CR Team has said they called XXXX and have been waiting for a call back on an issue that has been an excuse over a week now. Yesterday on XX/XX/XXXX I get a call stating they can't do anything because they're not getting a callback from XXXX. \n\nHow can a customer get the Exectuive Offices at XXXX from the customer service line and a whole creditor can't get someone on the phone? Sounds like I'm just getting the run around at this point. \n\nAfter the call, I immediately called back and spoke to another SUpervisor named XXXX, which I spoke to in the past. XXXX was the supervisor which made me send proof of all the of my credit reports just to substantiate that I guess \" I wasn't making up a lie '' about account not showing on XXXX Report. \n\nI sent in the info on XX/XX/XXXX. Track forward to today I find out that BMW used that email and stated that the dispute started on that date but they have 30 days. Mind you this has been an ongoing issue that has been almost 60days in with no resolution in sight. This info was given to me by the supervisor XXXX. \n\nWhen I also spoke to XXXX yesterday he stated the reason they can't upload my file is that my file is suppressed and that was the information they got this morning. But the conversation I had with a REP said something completely different. \n\nShe stated that she just got off the phone with the person handling my case in the CR Department and they're waiting for this PHONE CALL - STILL? \n\nNow, something is fishy? Everybody is running in circles and now making up lies. ANd I believe the lies just fall in not wanting to do the work for a 60 day plus dispute. \n\nWhen I spoke to XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX he stated pretty much, take a seat and in 30 days will get back to you. So really this dispute will be going on 90 days, with no resolution just the runaround. \n\nBMW fails to understand that the account now showing hurts my credit tremendously. The same issue which is preventing me from getting the best rate personal loan at my Credit Union which pulls XXXX for XXXX, which I've postponed 2 times now, waiting on BMW. I contacted my Doctor today and I will have to find a new XXXX   because they can't keep rescheduling me anymore.\n\nNow I have to pay for my doctor visits and test, all out of pocket.\n\nSomething BMW financial is not helping with but causing the issue. I've sat her in pain and in patience and can no longer deal anymore. CFPB is my last and final option before seeking LEGAL ACTION.\n\nHow somebody can call begging for 15 hours total and nothing is being done is just disrespectful and cruel. \n\nI do thank XXXX and the other representative I spoke to the day after we first talked for probably being the most professional and caring individuals I've ever spoken with. \n\nI can't keep being in pain with XXXX  of XXXX at XXXX when the ideal is XXXX. Makes no sense, how I'm being treated.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-07-10T15:20:17.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"75022","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2959277","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BMW Financial Services NA, LLC","date_received":"2018-07-10T14:24:44.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Back in XXXX I contacted BMW Financial <em>about</em> my closed and paid account not <em>reporting</em> to XXXX, also stated that I've spoken to the <em>credit</em> <em>reporting</em> agency XXXX and they stated the account was deleted in XX/XX/XXXX. In XXXX I sent in a goodwill letter and also sent in another paper that made the <em>complaint</em> <em>about</em> the account not showing on XXXX. The <em>complaint</em> in XXXX was verbal and the <em>complaint</em> in XXXX was through postal service."],"issue":["Problem with a <em>credit</em> <em>reporting</em> company's investigation into an existing problem"]},"sort":[13.758988,"2959277"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6383093","_score":11.337631,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX I purchased a vehicle from an online platform ( i.e., XXXX ), which was easy, convenient, and fast. I also obtained funding for the loan to purchase ( i.e., Bridgecrest ) through the same platform. All of that was perfect. \n\nWhat I and the world did not anticipate at the time of the purchase, was the advent of the XXXX XXXX pandemic. A month after my purchase, the world literally closed due to the pandemic. Huge financial strains emerged due to the lockdowns and loss of income streams. My lender ( i.e., Bridgecrest ), would call almost 3 times a week seeking car payments that I had fallen back on. It was massive stress and a mental drain every day. I was never offered or informed of the options for relief and at some point, my vehicle was repossessed the night I caught up on the payments. Even though I had caught up on the payments that night before the repossession, my vehicle was still repossessed, and was told to pay a repossession fee to get it back, which I did. The repossession fee again drove me back on my payments. Increasingly being called sometimes as late as XXXX XXXX  in the night by Bridgecrest asking for a payment. It was so much harassment that I stopped answering. \n\nToday, I know that in response to the ongoing pandemic, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security ( CARES ) Act would have made it possible for those impacted to receive certain payment accommodations, such as account forbearance or deferment, which I was never told or offered even when I asked. For example, because I was facing hardship due to the pandemic, I had the right to request a forbearance for up to 180 days, with the option to extend it another 180 days. I now know, after personal education on the law that while some other CARES Act provisions have expired, or will soon, I still have options available. \n\nYes, I caught up on my payments again this past XXXX. Surprisingly, the day I caught up, is the day Bridgecrest offered me a 3-month deferment on my loan. That is ridiculous! My car was illegally repossessed because I had made my payments current and they charged me. Then after catching up on my payments, they kept reporting my balance as not current. Today as I write this complaint, my car loan is not current with major credit bureaus even if all my payments are. They are financially struggling my chances to succeed by accumulating unfair late payments on my record. \n\nLastly, this week on Thursday morning ( i.e., XX/XX/XXXX ), I received a scare from Bridgecrest. Between XXXX XXXX  and XXXX XXXX, all the debit cards I have ever used for my car payments ( i.e., even the ones I had deleted a year or two, ago, were charged different unauthorized amounts 17 times. I called Bridgecrest to ask why someone was charging my cards so many unauthorized amounts so many times and didn't get an explanation or assurance of resolution. Neither did I get an apology. \n\nI have now canceled all my debit cards and ordered new ones. The pain of getting through the end of the year waiting on new cards and having to worry about what just happened is wrong. It is against the law and I know that I'm unfairly being treated by Bridgecrest. I need help from someone with a voice on this.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-12-31T19:28:39.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"60638","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6383093","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Bridgecrest Acceptance Corporation","date_received":"2022-12-31T18:11:28.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Then after catching up on my payments, they kept <em>reporting</em> my balance as not current. Today as I write this <em>complaint</em>, my car loan is not current with major <em>credit</em> bureaus even if all my payments are. They are financially struggling my chances to succeed by accumulating unfair late payments on my record. \n\nLastly, this week on Thursday morning ( i.e., XX/XX/XXXX ), I received a scare from Bridgecrest."],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[11.337631,"6383093"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3377580","_score":10.847634,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Amounts of USD {$210.00} on XX/XX/XXXX and amount of USD {$280.00} on XX/XX/XXXX were wrongfully charged to my account. \n\nI filed the first fraud complaint to Bank of America ( BoA ) in XX/XX/XXXX and again repeatedly almost every month since XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI spoke with the BoA fraud department and credit card department at least once per month since XX/XX/XXXX to try and urge the bank to conduct a proper and thorough investigation. They promised me several times that they would contact the store where the card was used to make the fraudulent transactions ( the only information BoA gave to me was that the card was used in person to buy furniture from a chain department store specifically located in XXXX on a date that I was not even in that city, at a store that I had never heard of and had never stepped foot into, certainly I had never bought furniture as a I was a tourist! ). Bank of America closed my fraud case on three occasions stating that they had no proof that I had not made those payments, but without providing me any proof from their supposed 'investigation ' findings ( despite their promise to do so ). Had BoA actually taken steps to conduct a thorough investigation, they could have easily requested the security tapes from the department store which would have shown who made these payments ( since BoA did have information, they told me, that the charges were made using my card and in person at the store ). Clearly BoA did not conduct any significant investigation, else they would have information to share with me about the fraudulent activity, and they would have found evidence that could have protected me, proven that it was not me, and helped ensure my trust in the bank which I have been a loyal customer of for more than 15 years! \n\nAlso, my card was blocked by BoA and only after several months I reported the fraudulent activity many times, did I receive a replacement card in the mail, still it has not been secure for me to use my credit card, especially since BoA did not conduct a thorough investigation and did not provide me with any information about what happened nor information about how I could set up more security to protect me from any potential future fraud on my card ; and thus I have had to suffer from not having the option to use my card -very important for my security in making payments while travelling ( ATM withdraws are very dangerous in XXXX due to the high rate of ATM scams and robberies ), which is difficult as I am a tourist traveling in XXXX XXXX all these months. I asked BoA to put some extra layers of security on my credit card so that we could try and prevent future fraudulent activity but they said to me that there were no options to do so, not even placing a pin number on the card! \n\nI conducted my own research and found several potential reasons for this fraudulent activity on my credit card : ( 1 ) perhaps my card was cloned by someone unknown when I had used it at a restaurant or store to make an authentic purchase previous to the date of the fraud activity ( I hear that this has happened in XXXX ) ; ( 2 ) I had requested BoA to send me new credit and debit cards in the mail last fall previous to the incident because my cards ' chips were scratched and not able to be read in swiping for payment in card readers -BoA was supposed to send me a replacement card and I hadn't received it, so I called to complain last fall and I think what they did was maybe send another card after my complaint but in the meantime maybe the first replacement card they sent was not cancelled by BoA and then maybe arrived to some location in XXXX without my knowing. I had asked BoA to cancel their first replacement card sent, and to send me a new one with new security details ( with a new credit card number ) so that it was not a 'replacement card ' / 'copy ' but rather a new card with a new number, but I think BoA failed to make this security assurance and perhaps two cards arrived in the mail to XXXX with one being stolen by some other person.. ; ( 3 ) perhaps this was part of a larger BoA scam from within the company. Regarding this last point, I am not accusing BoA of frauding my account, but it does not rule out the possibility of this happening. I looked at the consumer complaint database on the CFPB website, using the filtration system, I searched for complaints against BoA for credit card fraud / wrongful charges on customers ' credit cards, and found about 200 of 1,384,105 reported complaints similar to mine. This said I would want CFPB to conduct an investigation to find out why so many customers of one of America 's largest and important banks all experienced the same thing? \n\nOn top of all of this, BoA made me feel like a criminal as they accused me of making the fraudulent payments when I called them on the phone on several occasions. \n\nI had to undergo extreme financial stress as I didnt have access to using my card all those months, I underwent emotional, psychological trauma and in consequence personal problems in my relationships and this also affected my ability to work. I also underwent financial and time loss as I had to call BoA and wait for hours on the phone, I was consistently disconnected and had to call again and again waiting for 40 minutes each time to reach a representative, then disconnected when transferring me to different departments.. It was a living nightmare of 8 months that I experienced because of BoA 's negligence, accusatory behavior, failure to be organized and take seriously a fraudulent case against one of its loyal customers, failure to help a customer set up security and prevent fraud. \n\nAll this while I have been in a serious semi / permanent health condition suffering serious injury to my XXXX and I told BoA on the phone each time every month that I had to wait and struggle with them, that all this stress was causing my physical condition to worsen, but they did not give me any care for my XXXX by speeding up the process or taking extra care to reduce my pain and stress. I have suffered further from my injury because of the disrespect of BoA towards me in failing to put care into my case. \n\nI first filed a complaint against BoA with CFPB in XX/XX/2019 and BoA responded to CFPB 's letter to BoA regarding my case with refunding me the money. However, this is only half justice, I suffered so much for 8 months because of BoA incompetencies and maybe corruption against its customers. I am writing to CFPB asking for help with the following : 1. please write to / contact BoA to give them the chance to do right on their wrong towards me in not providing me with information from their investigation findings that shows evidence on what exactly happened with the fraud case on my card. I was promised by BoA that they would do this and inform me of findings, but they never did so and never communicated any findings to me. They simply accused me of making those payments without any proof either way..\n\n2. I want to file a suit against BoA and know that CFPB does not provide legal advice in any way, however, I would ask CFPB if it could provide any further information about those 200 cases of consumer complaints against BoA, all of which were for wrongful charges on their cards, just like mine. I would want to know when exactly those other credit card fraud cases happened ( were they during similar times as mine -I put in a filter on timing ranging dates similar to those I experienced fraud ) ; I would also want to know more about those cases, whether they received refunds, whether the banks gave reason and proof /evidence from their investigations.. If there is just cause, I would want to file a class action suit against BoA.\n\nThank you and I appreciate your further help in ( 1 ) trying to get BoA to provide details about what happened in my fraud case, and ( 2 ) help provide me any information about the other cases of reported credit card fraud / wrongful charges on BoA customers as filed on your customer complaint database.. \n\nI hope you received this mail and would be happy to speak with you soon. Feel free to reach out to me at your soonest availability. \n\nI have all evidential documents and can provide you with anything you want upon your request. \n\nRegards XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX currently in XXXX, number : XXXX NOTE : you are welcome to publish my description above but please do NOT publish my personal information or contact details. Thank you!","date_sent_to_company":"2019-09-17T17:59:35.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"052XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3377580","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2019-09-17T17:01:48.000Z","state":"VT","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Regarding this last <em>point</em>, I am not accusing BoA of frauding my account, but it does not rule out the possibility of this happening. I looked at the consumer <em>complaint</em> database on the CFPB website, using the filtration system, I searched for <em>complaints</em> against BoA for <em>credit</em> card fraud / wrongful charges on customers ' <em>credit</em> cards, and found <em>about</em> 200 of 1,384,105 <em>reported</em> <em>complaints</em> similar to mine."],"product":["<em>Credit</em> card or prepaid card"],"sub_product":["General-purpose <em>credit</em> card or charge card"]},"sort":[10.847634,"3377580"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3821133","_score":8.5153675,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I have suffered actual damages in the form of emotional and mental pain and anguish, stress, humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety and nervousness, from the actions or lack of actions, of Experian, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Hereafter The Credit Reporting Agencies ) and will continue to suffer the same for an indefinite time in the future, all to my great detriment and loss. \n\nAs a result of The Credit Reporting Agencies conduct, I have suffered actual damages in the form of injury to credit rating and reputation, and a decreased credit score, and I will continue to suffer the same for an indefinite time in the future, all to my great detriment and loss.\n\nAt all times hereto, The Credit Reporting Agencies is a person associate employed by the consumer reporting agencies, and consumer reporting agency as those terms are defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( b ) and ( f ).\n\nAt all times pertinent hereto, I am a consumer as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( c ).\n\nAt all times pertinent hereto, the below-mentioned credit were consumer reports as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( d ).\n\nPursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 15 U.S.C. 1681o, Credit Reporting Agency is liable to me as a consumer for engaging in the following conduct : 1 ) Reporting aged debts, as new in 2020 on my credit file. \nXXXX XXXX outgoing communication requesting debt validation, of a reported error on my credit file, without California residents consent to solicit any creditor for my information or proof of what is being reported. The Credit agencies do not have my consent to solicit information from anyone on me.\n\n3 ) In all past reports submitted to the Credit Reporting Agencies, via consumer protection port the credit reporting agencies sent a request to the creditor reporting wrong information, asking for the creditor to respond. This was done without my consent. I did not give consent nor imply consent to send out a request to a third party to request my personal information or the derogatory account being falsely reported. \n\n\nFirstly, I am a California resident, and live in a state protected by its own constitution and privacy laws. I hereby revoke any and all permissions of XXXX, XXXX, and Experian, together with XXXX XXXX, XXXX to sell my derogatory information, or supply my derogatory information to third party banks. Moreover, let it be noted hereto [ a ] ny new debt, reported on my credit in 2020 or credit pull, I have not agreed to, nor applied for. I have no new debt. The resent 2020 addition of an alleged new debt to my credit file is unlawful, false and misleading. I do not give XXXX, Experian, or XXXX or any associated entities my consent, to communicate with the creditor falsely reporting the alleged new debt in 2020. \nFor Experian to communicate with any third party regarding the validity of the reported debt will be a violation of California privacy, laws. A cursory review of my credit file will show the debt has been on my credit file for longer than 7 years, and thus even under the circumstance of the debt being sold or transferred to another LLC, the LLC holding the old debt can't report a debt as new. \n\nThis complaint asserts, XXXX, Experian, or XXXX is in perceived potential violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( hereafter the FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 and reporting misleading and false derogatory and inaccurate statements and information relating to myself, and credit history to third parties. Due to XXXX, Experian, or XXXX ( hereafter the Credit Reporting Agencies ) faulty procedures, the credit worthiness is impacted.\n\nA very good parallel case of Credit Reporting Agencies faulty procedures has emerged in the new 2020 class action lawsuit filed ref ; Sass et al. v. Great Lakes. In the current class action, It is alleged, Experian, XXXX and XXXX has illegally damaged the credit, of Millions of student loan Borrowers by reporting inaccurate information on consumers credit, passed onto the Credit Reporting Agencies by creditors. The complaint alleges 8 million federal student loan lenders mishandled the implementation COVID-19 relief by illegally providing inaccurate information about millions of its customers to XXXX, XXXX, and Experian, each CREDIT REPORTING AGENCY of which in turn HAS illegally reported this information. Damaging the credit of millions of people. Further, each of these companies, in their capacities as the joint owners of XXXX XXXX, XXXX, which was also named in the complaint, treated this inaccurate information as derogatory and sold borrowers improperly damaged credit scores to third parties. \n\nI hereby file formal notice, to the Credit Reporting Agencies, for the purpose of recorded evidence, too. And the use of this in a potential future lawsuit, and I elect by free will to allow the Consumer Protection Bure to make this document public, and allow the plaintiff in the current lawsuit Sass et al. v. Great Lakes the right to use this complaint as evidence to support the exsiting 2020 class action lawsuit alleging \" Faulty Practices '' of the Credit reporting agencies. The Credit Reporting Agencies have been notified, by me as an individual, the reporting of new debt on my credit report in 2020 is not true, and inaccurate. Keeping it on my credit past XX/XX/2020 is inappropriate. \n\nMoreover, allowing for a new entity, to report an old debt as new is alleged to be a lack of due diligence. This illuminates simmilar faulty practices the Credit Reporting Agencies are currently in a class action lawsuit on. In the lawsuit, it is alleged the student lenders passed the derogatory information onto the credit reporting agencies ( COVID-19 laws did not allow for ) and the Credit Reporting Agencies are alleged to have just gone ahead and reported it, on public record, of millions of people, without validating the lenders ' accuracy. A key point of the currnet lawsuit, iscredit reporting agencies are alleged to have not conducted due dalliance to validate if the lenders were being compliant with the law and new COVID-19 laws in particular, reporting unpaid student loans during COVID-19. \n\nThe fair credit reporting act, does not allow for the reporting of a debt more than a statute f limitations on the credit report. In 2020 there is a new debt on my credit. A simple cursory review of my credit report will reveal is report for more than 7 years. The Credit agencies has failed to pick up the debt has been sold to another company, and there is no evidence to show it was lawfully sold to the new entity wrongfully reporting the debt as new. It is clear that this is the same debt, that has been reported for years. The current 2020 lawsuit this, has very close parallel circumstances to my credit file and the Credit Reporting Agencies Faulty practices.\n\nThe Credit reporting agencies protocol when receiving this letter is to send out a letter to the creditor falsely reporting my information, to verify the information. However, I do not give The Credit Reporting Agencies my permission or consent to communicate to a third party or request information on me. To do so is a violation of the California privacy laws. \n\nWhen I advise The Credit Reporting Agencies the information being reported is inaccurate, I consider it a mental torment, and harassment that instead of removing the offending and misleading data, the Credit reporting Agencies send a request to the creditor alleged to be reporting the wrong information, requesting the creditor to validate the information on my credit file. Who gave the credit reporting agencies consent to request information on me from a 3rd party? I do not. It seems again, faulty practices and processes. \n\nI hereby demand the credit reporting agencies remove immediately, the derogatory information on my credit report. \n\n1 ) XXXX XXXX, and any other entities the debt appear in, including but not limeted to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and the new 2020 entity created displaying the old XXXX XXXX debt. \n\n2 ) XXXX XXXX 3 ) XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-08-29T07:17:46.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"91101","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3821133","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2020-08-29T06:55:48.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The <em>complaint</em> alleges 8 million federal student loan lenders mishandled the implementation COVID-19 relief by illegally providing inaccurate information <em>about</em> millions of its customers to XXXX, XXXX, and Experian, each <em>CREDIT</em> <em>REPORTING</em> AGENCY of which in turn HAS illegally <em>reported</em> this information. Damaging the <em>credit</em> of millions of people."],"product":["<em>Credit</em> <em>reporting</em>, <em>credit</em> repair services, or <em>other</em> <em>personal</em> consumer reports"],"issue":["Problem with a <em>credit</em> <em>reporting</em> company's investigation into an existing problem"],"sub_product":["<em>Credit</em> <em>reporting</em>"],"sub_issue":["Their investigation did not fix an error on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[8.5153675,"3821133"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3821140","_score":8.501802,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I have suffered actual damages in the form of emotional and mental pain and anguish, stress, humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety and nervousness, from the actions or lack of actions, of XXXX, Equifax, XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Hereafter The Credit Reporting Agencies ) and will continue to suffer the same for an indefinite time in the future, all to my great detriment and loss. \n\nAs a result of The Credit Reporting Agencies conduct, I have suffered actual damages in the form of injury to credit rating and reputation, and a decreased credit score, and I will continue to suffer the same for an indefinite time in the future, all to my great detriment and loss.\n\nAt all times hereto, The Credit Reporting Agencies is a person associate employed by the consumer reporting agencies, and consumer reporting agency as those terms are defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( b ) and ( f ).\n\nAt all times pertinent hereto, I am a consumer as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( c ). \nAt all times pertinent hereto, the below-mentioned credit were consumer reports as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( d ).\n\nPursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 15 U.S.C. 1681o, Credit Reporting Agency is liable to me as a consumer for engaging in the following conduct : 1 ) Reporting aged debts, as new in 2020 on my credit file.\n\n2 ) outgoing communication requesting debt validation, of a reported  error on my credit file, without California residents consent to solicit any creditor for my information or proof of what is being reported. The Credit agencies do not have my consent to solicit information from anyone on me.\n\n3 ) In all past reports submitted to the Credit Reporting Agencies, via consumer protection port the credit reporting agencies sent a request to the creditor reporting wrong information, asking for the creditor to respond. This was done without my consent. I did not give consent nor imply consent to send out a request to a third party to request my personal information or the derogatory account being falsely reported. \n\n\nFirstly, I am a California resident, and live in a state protected by its own constitution and privacy laws. I hereby revoke any and all permissions of Equifax, XXXX, and XXXX, together with XXXX XXXX, XXXX to sell my derogatory information, or supply my derogatory information to third party banks. Moreover, let it be noted hereto [ a ] ny new debt, reported on my credit in 2020 or credit pull, I have not agreed to, nor applied for. I have no new debt. The resent 2020 addition of an alleged new debt to my credit file is unlawful, false and misleading. I do not give Equifax, XXXX, or XXXX or any associated entities my consent, to communicate with the creditor falsely reporting the alleged new debt in 2020. \nFor XXXX to communicate with any third party regarding the validity of the reported debt will be a violation of California privacy, laws. A cursory review of my credit file will show the debt has been on my credit file for longer than 7 years, and thus even under the circumstance of the debt being sold or transferred to another LLC, the LLC holding the old debt can't report a debt as new.\n\nThis complaint asserts, Equifax, XXXX, or XXXX is in perceived potential violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( hereafter the FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 and reporting misleading and  false derogatory and inaccurate statements and information relating to myself, and credit history to third parties. Due to Equifax, XXXX, or XXXX ( hereafter the Credit Reporting Agencies ) faulty  procedures, the credit worthiness is impacted.\n\nA very good parallel case of Credit Reporting Agencies faulty procedures has emerged in the new 2020 class action lawsuit filed ref ; Sass et al. v. Great Lakes. In the current class action, It is alleged, XXXX, Equifax and XXXX has illegally damaged the credit, of Millions of student loan Borrowers by reporting inaccurate information on consumers credit, passed onto the Credit Reporting Agencies by creditors. The complaint alleges 8 million federal student loan lenders mishandled the implementation COVID-19 relief by illegally providing inaccurate information about millions of its customers to Equifax, XXXX, and XXXX, each CREDIT REPORTING AGENCY of which in turn HAS illegally reported this information. Damaging the credit of millions of people. Further, each of these companies, in their capacities as the joint owners of XXXX XXXX, XXXX, which was also named in the complaint, treated this inaccurate information as derogatory and sold borrowers improperly damaged credit scores to third parties. \n\nI hereby file formal notice, to the Credit Reporting Agencies, for the purpose of recorded evidence, too. And the use of this in a potential future lawsuit, and I elect by free will to allow the Consumer Protection Bure to make this document public, and allow the plaintiff in the current lawsuit Sass et al. v. Great Lakes the right to use this complaint as evidence to support the exsiting 2020 class action lawsuit alleging \" Faulty Practices '' of the Credit reporting agencies. The Credit Reporting Agencies have been notified, by me as an individual, the reporting of new debt on my credit report in 2020 is not true, and inaccurate. Keeping it on my credit past XX/XX/2020 is inappropriate. \n\nMoreover, allowing for a new entity, to report an old debt as new is alleged to be a lack of due diligence. This illuminates simmilar faulty practices the Credit Reporting Agencies are currently in a class action lawsuit on. In the lawsuit, it is alleged the student lenders passed the derogatory information onto the credit reporting agencies ( COVID-19 laws did not allow for ) and the Credit Reporting Agencies are alleged to have just gone ahead and reported it, on public record, of millions of people, without validating the lenders ' accuracy. A key point of the currnet lawsuit, iscredit reporting agencies are alleged to have not conducted due dalliance to validate if the lenders were being compliant with the law and new COVID-19 laws in particular, reporting unpaid student loans during COVID-19. \n\nThe fair credit reporting act, does not allow for the reporting of a debt more than a statute f limitations on the credit report. In 2020 there is a new debt on my credit. A simple cursory review of my credit report will reveal is report for more than 7 years. The Credit agencies has failed to pick up the debt has been sold to another company, and there is no evidence to show it was lawfully sold to the new entity wrongfully reporting the debt as new. It is clear that this is the same debt, that has been reported for years. The current 2020 lawsuit this, has very close parallel circumstances to my credit file and the Credit Reporting Agencies Faulty practices. \n\nThe Credit reporting agencies protocol when receiving this letter is to send out a letter to the creditor falsely reporting my information, to verify the information. However, I do not give The Credit Reporting Agencies my permission or consent to communicate to a third party or request information on me. To do so is a violation of the California privacy laws. \n\nWhen I advise The Credit Reporting Agencies the information being reported is inaccurate, I consider it a mental torment, and harassment that instead of removing the offending and misleading data, the Credit reporting Agencies send a request to the creditor alleged to be reporting the wrong information, requesting the creditor to validate the information on my credit file. Who gave the credit reporting agencies consent to request information on me from a 3rd party? I do not. It seems again, faulty practices and processes. \n\nI hereby demand the credit reporting agencies remove immediately, the derogatory information on my credit report. \n\n1 ) XXXX XXXX, and any other entities the debt appear in, including but not limeted to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and the new 2020 entity created displaying the old XXXX XXXX debt. \n\n2 ) XXXX XXXX 3 ) XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-08-29T07:17:55.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"91101","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3821140","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2020-08-29T07:17:51.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The <em>complaint</em> alleges 8 million federal student loan lenders mishandled the implementation COVID-19 relief by illegally providing inaccurate information <em>about</em> millions of its customers to Equifax, XXXX, and XXXX, each <em>CREDIT</em> <em>REPORTING</em> AGENCY of which in turn HAS illegally <em>reported</em> this information. Damaging the <em>credit</em> of millions of people."],"product":["<em>Credit</em> <em>reporting</em>, <em>credit</em> repair services, or <em>other</em> <em>personal</em> consumer reports"],"issue":["Problem with a <em>credit</em> <em>reporting</em> company's investigation into an existing problem"],"sub_product":["<em>Credit</em> <em>reporting</em>"],"sub_issue":["Their investigation did not fix an error on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[8.501802,"3821140"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3821217","_score":8.499598,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I have suffered actual damages in the form of emotional and mental pain and anguish, stress, humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety and nervousness, from the actions or lack of actions, of XXXX, XXXX, TransUnion, XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( Hereafter The Credit Reporting Agencies ) and will continue to suffer the same for an indefinite time in the future, all to my great detriment and loss. \n\nAs a result of The Credit Reporting Agencies conduct, I have suffered actual damages in the form of injury to credit rating and reputation, and a decreased credit score, and I will continue to suffer the same for an indefinite time in the future, all to my great detriment and loss.\n\nAt all times hereto, The Credit Reporting Agencies is a person associate employed by the consumer reporting agencies, and consumer reporting agency as those terms are defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( b ) and ( f ). \nAt all times pertinent hereto, I am a consumer as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( c ).\n\nAt all times pertinent hereto, the below-mentioned credit were consumer reports as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( d ).\n\nPursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 15 U.S.C. 1681o, Credit Reporting Agency is liable to me as a consumer for engaging in the following conduct : 1 ) Reporting aged debts, as new in 2020 on my credit file.\n\n2 ) outgoing communication requesting debt validation, of a reported  error on my credit file, without California residents consent to solicit any creditor for my information or proof of what is being reported. The Credit agencies do not have my consent to solicit information from anyone on me.\n\n3 ) In all past reports submitted to the Credit Reporting Agencies, via  consumer protection port the credit reporting agencies sent a request to the creditor reporting wrong information, asking for the creditor to respond. This was done without my consent. I did not give consent nor imply consent to send out a request to a third party to request my personal information or the derogatory account being falsely reported. \n\n\nFirstly, I am a California resident, and live in a state protected by its own constitution and privacy laws. I hereby revoke any and all permissions of XXXX, TransUnion, and XXXX, together with XXXX XXXX, XXXX to sell my derogatory information, or supply my derogatory information to third party banks. Moreover, let it be noted hereto [ a ] ny new debt, reported on my credit in 2020 or credit pull, I have not agreed to, nor applied for. I have no new debt. The resent 2020 addition of an alleged new debt to my credit file is unlawful, false and misleading. I do not give XXXX, XXXX, or TransUnion or any associated entities my consent, to communicate with the creditor falsely reporting the alleged new debt in 2020. \nFor XXXX to communicate with any third party regarding the validity of the reported debt will be a violation of California privacy, laws. A cursory review of my credit file will show the debt has been on my credit file for longer than 7 years, and thus even under the circumstance of the debt being sold or transferred to another LLC, the LLC holding the old debt can't report a debt as new. \n\nThis complaint asserts, XXXX, XXXX, or TransUnion is in perceived potential violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( hereafter the FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 and reporting misleading and false derogatory and inaccurate statements and information relating to myself, and credit history to third parties. Due to XXXX, XXXX, or TransUnion ( hereafter the Credit Reporting Agencies ) faulty procedures, the credit worthiness is impacted.\n\nA very good parallel case of Credit Reporting Agencies faulty  procedures has emerged in the new 2020 class action lawsuit filed ref ; Sass et al. v. Great Lakes. In the current class action, It is alleged, XXXX, XXXX and TransUnion has illegally damaged the credit, of Millions of student loan Borrowers by reporting inaccurate information on consumers credit, passed onto the Credit Reporting Agencies by creditors. The complaint alleges 8 million federal student loan lenders mishandled the implementation COVID-19 relief by illegally providing inaccurate information about millions of its customers to XXXX, TransUnion, and XXXX, each CREDIT REPORTING AGENCY of which in turn HAS illegally reported this information. Damaging the credit of millions of people. Further, each of these companies, in their capacities as the joint owners of XXXX XXXX, XXXX, which was also named in the complaint, treated this inaccurate information as derogatory and sold borrowers improperly damaged credit scores to third parties.\n\nI hereby file formal notice, to the Credit Reporting Agencies, for the purpose of recorded evidence, too. And the use of this in a potential future lawsuit, and I elect by free will to allow the Consumer Protection Bure to make this document public, and allow the plaintiff in the current lawsuit Sass et al. v. Great Lakes the right to use this complaint as evidence to support the exsiting 2020 class action lawsuit alleging \" Faulty Practices '' of the Credit reporting agencies. The Credit Reporting Agencies have been notified, by me as an individual, the reporting of new debt on my credit report in 2020 is not true, and inaccurate. Keeping it on my credit past XX/XX/2020 is inappropriate. \n\nMoreover, allowing for a new entity, to report an old debt as new is alleged to be a lack of due diligence. This illuminates simmilar faulty practices the Credit Reporting Agencies are currently in a class action lawsuit on. In the lawsuit, it is alleged the student lenders passed the derogatory information onto the credit reporting agencies ( COVID-19 laws did not allow for ) and the Credit Reporting Agencies are alleged to have just gone ahead and reported it, on public record, of millions of people, without validating the lenders ' accuracy. A key point of the currnet lawsuit, iscredit reporting agencies are alleged to have not conducted due dalliance to validate if the lenders were being compliant with the law and new COVID-19 laws in particular, reporting unpaid student loans during COVID-19.\n\nThe fair credit reporting act, does not allow for the reporting of a debt more than a statute f limitations on the credit report. In 2020 there is a new debt on my credit. A simple cursory review of my credit report will reveal is report for more than 7 years. The Credit agencies has failed to pick up the debt has been sold to another company, and there is no evidence to show it was lawfully sold to the new entity wrongfully reporting the debt as new. It is clear that this is the same debt, that has been reported for years. The current 2020 lawsuit this, has very close parallel circumstances to my credit file and the Credit Reporting Agencies Faulty practices.\n\nThe Credit reporting agencies protocol when receiving this letter is to send out a letter to the creditor falsely reporting my information, to verify the information. However, I do not give The Credit Reporting Agencies my permission or consent to communicate to a third party or request information on me. To do so is a violation of the California privacy laws. \n\nWhen I advise The Credit Reporting Agencies the information being reported is inaccurate, I consider it a mental torment, and harassment that instead of removing the offending and misleading data, the Credit reporting Agencies send a request to the creditor alleged to be reporting the wrong information, requesting the creditor to validate the information on my credit file. Who gave the credit reporting agencies consent to request information on me from a 3rd party? I do not. It seems again, faulty practices and processes. \n\nI hereby demand the credit reporting agencies remove immediately, the derogatory information on my credit report. \n\n1 ) XXXX XXXX, and any other entities the debt appear in, including but not limeted to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and the new 2020 entity created displaying the old XXXX XXXX debt. \n\n2 ) XXXX XXXX 3 ) XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-08-29T07:17:55.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"91101","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3821217","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2020-08-29T07:17:51.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The <em>complaint</em> alleges 8 million federal student loan lenders mishandled the implementation COVID-19 relief by illegally providing inaccurate information <em>about</em> millions of its customers to XXXX, TransUnion, and XXXX, each <em>CREDIT</em> <em>REPORTING</em> AGENCY of which in turn HAS illegally <em>reported</em> this information. Damaging the <em>credit</em> of millions of people."],"product":["<em>Credit</em> <em>reporting</em>, <em>credit</em> repair services, or <em>other</em> <em>personal</em> consumer reports"],"issue":["Problem with a <em>credit</em> <em>reporting</em> company's investigation into an existing problem"],"sub_product":["<em>Credit</em> <em>reporting</em>"],"sub_issue":["Their investigation did not fix an error on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[8.499598,"3821217"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3180846","_score":8.370498,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"I am an XXXX Veteran, I was lied to that my Tuition Assistance  would have take care of my education. Now I am stuck with this debt. The XXXX XXXX XXXX pressured me into a high expensive private loan ( 6 % ) telling me once my TA will come in that it would pay it off. He also encouraged me to apply for XXXX XXXX, which I never received any of that. I had never used my TA before with the XXXX and I didnt know how it worked. I didnt think the Staff Member would have lied to me and I believed this was true. Once the school started I was unable to request TA because it needed to be approved before I started and the Admissions started me quickly. XXXX XXXX College had high-pressured sales tactics to get students to enroll and remained enrolled. It is proven that XXXX XXXX also deceived and misled students about financial aid options, salary rates after graduation, the transfer of credits, and career placement assistance. I knew I didnt want to stop my education after career point. One of the most important things I asked was if my credits were going to be transferred to other schools so I can continue my education. They assured me that they were all transferable and later found out that no school took my credits to continue my education. After I finished the program there was another 100 % guarantee that there would be job placement. What this meant was me showing up and looking for jobs on their computers. No one guiding me through where to look. I had no experience just the XXXX XXXX  diploma. I finally found a job that wasnt in my program. I was lied to and now I was left with a big loan that TA was supposed to take care of. My personal life is still being affect by these student loans I am unable to pay for. I have defaulted on them numerous of time because I am unable to pay the loan of {$19000.00} back. In XXXX, XXXX XXXX was on local TV news, lamenting the demise of XXXX XXXX, which operated campuses in XXXX XXXX and XXXX, Texas, and XXXX, Oklahoma. Faced with findings by the XXXX Department of Education that XXXX XXXX had engaged in financial aid fraud and mismanagement, and with lawsuits filed by a growing number of his former students, XXXX told an interviewer, None of my salesmen have ever been accused of lying to students. \nStudent loans underwater Tuition and fees for XXXX XXXX 's medical assistant certificate program totaled {$19000.00}, according to financial aid documentation in the lawsuit. The interest rate for a roughly {$5900.00} in subsidized loans and {$4600.00} in subsidized loans was described to be 4 percent each. The bulk of the degree would stem from a XXXX XXXX estimated to be more than {$8800.00}. If the total loan package was {$10000.00} and the repayment term was 120 months, which is the standard, the student would pay {$13000.00} over 10 years. But each of the students said they owe {$21000.00} to {$30000.00} in loans, but didn't specify the interest rate. The entry-level salary for XXXX XXXX in the XXXX XXXX XXXX area is only {$21000.00}, according to the Texas Workforce Commission. For experienced workers, the average pay in the local region is {$32000.00}. \nFederal funds not accounted for The U.S. Department of Education confirmed that XXXX XXXX College has not paid credit balances for graduated students, which total {$420000.00} and that the school has not returned {>= $1,000,000} of XXXX  XXXX program funds wired to the school for students who had withdrawn from the college. After XXXX XXXX reported employee mismanagement, the federal agency changed the way it distributed funds to the college from a method that enabled the school to get payments in advance for students to a reimbursement process. In addition, it enacted more monitoring of the college 's financial accounts related to student funds. XXXX XXXX was offered the option to obtain a {$10.00} million letter of credit from a financial institution, or 25 percent of the federal funds it received, which would have enabled it to continue operating under stricter supervision. The company 's XXXX XXXX campus annual revenue was roughly {$20.00} million, but it had a profit margin of less than {$3.00} million each year, according to self-reported state records. The student attorneys in the first case are seeking a temporary restraining order and temporary injunction to stop the school from altering existing documents, transferring money out of the business beyond ordinary transactions and moving assets. \nStudents missing money The students ' attorney XXXX XXXX, at XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX asserted that XXXX XXXX employees did not inform students that the college must release funds to students obtained through the XXXX XXXX programs, whether it was grants or loans. Beyond that, some students claimed the funds allotted to them were missing. \" Certain plaintiffs never received a penny of their XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX 's use of these funds remains unknown, '' XXXX said in the court documents. \" XXXX XXXX even went so far as to charge its own students for appointments with the financial aid office, taking further advantage of their students ' limited financial resources. '' XXXX & XXXX The attorneys allege that even after reporting its own employees misconduct to the U.S. Department of Education, the school continued to enroll new students up until XX/XX/XXXX. \" The defendants ' actions are deceptive, fraudulent and were clearly designed to keep the money flowing, '' XXXX argued. \" XXXX XXXX promised its students a bright future. Instead it breached its contract with plaintiffs, leaving a dark cloud over their future. '' Furthermore, the attorney claims that XXXX XXXX did not alert Texas authorities that it had been added to the U.S. Department of Education 's heightened cash monitoring list, such as the Texas XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nA former XXXX XXXX admissions employee, XXXX XXXX, complained to Texas authorities in XXXX that she was laid off after four and a half years after she raised concerns about misconduct at the school. ( XXXX provided me with a copy of the complaint that same year. ) Among the bad behavior XXXX alleged in her written complaint to the Texas Workforce Commission : that the school would input grades that did not exist to ensure the student had enough credits to validate collecting more money ; that XXXX XXXX is aware of the Federal Financial Aid Fraud that has taken place in the form of Admissions Reps. instructing students to electronically sign Parent Plus Loans for parents who would not sign ; that Fraudulent Tax Advisor Id Numbers were being used by Admissions to get students through the Federal Financial Aid process when they did not have the adequate documentation ; and that the school allowed enrolling mentally ill students who do not have support groups and whom Admissions had them randomly acquire numbers from phone books to get them through Financial Aid ( FA ) since the Financial Aid form has to have six support group numbers listed. \nXXXX complaint further claimed, In Admissions, we were trained about the sales practice of making a friend to get the students to trust us and then we were supposed to make them feel the pain of how lousy their lives were so that we could then get them to think XXXX XXXX could save them. We were trained that good sales reps. could make the prospective students cry. We were trained that once we broke them down, we could build them back up with the concept that we were there to change their meaningless lives .... If a student came in and completed FA but decided that they wanted to go home to think about it, team leads would be called to do their hard sales pitch. If they were not successful, the prospective student was then taken to the Director of Admissions to be even pressured further. The tactic of making them feel worthless was reiterated until they signed up for school. This was done to mentally ill prospects as well. \nThe XXXX complaint also alleged that the school concealed the felony convictions of new students to ensure their eligibility for financial aid. When one graduate complained to the school that she then couldnt get the job she sought because her felony conviction was deemed disqualifying, and then learned that a school official had apparently forged her signature on documents, she filed a police report. According to XXXX XXXX complaint, the school then covered that students loans in exchange for her dropping the charge. \nXXXX further claimed that XXXX XXXX hired its own graduates on campus to increase reported job placement rates ; but, As soon as those students are accounted for as being placed, they are laid off.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-03-15T16:40:24.000Z","issue":"Getting a loan","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"77356","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3180846","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","date_received":"2019-03-15T16:31:53.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Fraudulent loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It is proven that XXXX XXXX also deceived and misled students <em>about</em> financial aid options, salary rates after graduation, the transfer of <em>credits</em>, and career placement assistance. I knew I didnt want to stop my education after career <em>point</em>. One of the most important things I asked was if my <em>credits</em> were going to be transferred to <em>other</em> schools so I can continue my education."]},"sort":[8.370498,"3180846"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3421922","_score":5.7230563,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I was excited to purchase my first home, a newly constructed townhome, and selected Ally to be my LendeXXXX. However, finalizing and closing on this conventional mortgage was an outrageously horrible experience over the past few weeks that brought me economic, mental, and physical harm. To summarize my hardships and complaints with how my loan was handled : I was denied the right to view the revised HMDA closing disclosure 1 business day prior to closing ; The Ally loan team engaged in deceptive advertising and communication ; I was subject to Allys negligent oversight of third-party appraisers ; and, My Ally loan team was incompetent in executing, and grossly negligent in oversight of internal service level obligations in place to ensure loans close in time. As a result, I bore the physical, mental, and economic harm. \n\n\n\nI travel extensively for work, so to conduct a timely and successful move, I modified my work and personal obligations to permit me to be local and available during the time period surrounding my scheduled closing date ( XX/XX/XXXX ). I scheduled movers, deliveries, technicians, etc. to coincide with this time frame. Any delays or altercations to these scheduled activities would likely result a negative domino effect and jeopardize my move. \n\n\n\nIn an effort to reduce delays for my closing, I spent an estimated 15 hours to proactively engage the lending team, follow up, request escalations, and effectively project manage the tasks required to finalize closing. Had I not done so, I am confident that the loan would have suffered additional unnecessary delays. Moreover, what is concerning and aggravating is that the delays detailed below show that these pain-points should have been easily avoidable, as enough information was readily available to the team prior to the last hours of closing. For example, the team had all the information to resolve the condo/townhome issue, at least by XX/XX/XXXX, if not much earlier, yet the team requested I reschedule my closing ( and thereby everything else ) to accommodate the operational failures to obtain a proper appraisal. Further, the accounting errors in the closing disclosures were with respect to specific line items that I emailed the team about on XX/XX/XXXX, and provided evidence for on XX/XX/XXXX. Why these items took multiple This complaint is not meant to be a comprehensive inventory of harm experienced but I can say that this experience resulted in the economic loss of 1 days use of my new home and damaged my well-being by subjecting me to undue stress. This was such an awful experience I feel like I need to advocate to my coworkers, clients, friends, and family to never use a product or service from Ally to spare them the potential grief of the likes I experienced. I am writing this complaint with the hopes that internally, Ally can examine and correct their people / process / technology operating model so that other consumers are not subject to a similar experience. \n\n\n\nDetailed Timeline of Relevant Events : XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX : I provide all requested documentation in a timely manner, at times providing documentation within the hour, or within the day. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX Speaking with the loan officer ( XXXX ), I am told that loans close typically close in 25 days, and as early as 21 days if the consumer is responsive in providing all necessary documentation ( as evidenced by my timeline, this time-to-close estimate does not even seem remotely plausible ). Based on this information and the Loan officers responsiveness to my inquiries and documentation, I chose Ally to be my lender. I request a rate lock, intent to move forward, provide credit card information for the required Lenders appraisal, etc. \n\n\n\nI provide the scheduled closing date of XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX Appraisal completed ( XXXX ) and report submitted ( XXXX ). \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX XXXX emails me and is confused because the property is a townhome, yet the XXXX and title agency curiously classified it as a condo. All documentation and communication provided by me and my realtor has consistently described the home as a townhome. Request is made for me or my realtor to contact the HOA and help us verify what is needed. We connect the HOA with XXXX to sort out any of this confusion. \n\n\n\nI also request that the Loan Estimate be updated to reflect all 3 of the payments Ive made on the property, as a payment of {$8200.00} had not been accounted for. XXXX confirms this will be properly updated this afternoon. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX My agent provides the recorded plat for additional confirmation of townhome status. XXXX replies in that he is coordinating with the appraiser to see if they can have the report amended. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX XXXX communicates to me that Ally had cleared the condo/townhouse issue up on our end. I provide proof of home owners insurance ( HOI ) payment. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX XXXX requests HOA to provide Ally with a statement of the monthly dues, which was provided by the HOA within 40 minutes. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX ( 3 business days prior to scheduled close ) XXXX - Without hearing anything from Ally, I proactively reached out to confirm that everything was still on track. \n\nXXXX - XXXX responded that the appraisal requires revision to more formally not [ e ] the change from a condo to a townhouse, and requests postponing of my close my at minimum two additional days to XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n\n\nI call the XXXX for more information and was informed that ( a ) despite knowledge that the appraisal was completed on XX/XX/XXXX listing my home as a condo, and the confusion this caused the week prior, the request to revise the appraisal was not made to the appraisal management company until Monday, XX/XX/XXXX ; ( b ) Ally requires the revised appraisal to issue the initial closing disclosure ; ( XXXX ) Ally did not expect to receive the revised appraisal before business close on Thursday ; and ( d ) To comply with regulations, closing can not occur until XXXX business days after the initial closing disclosure is issued and acknowledged by me. \n\n\n\nUnderstanding that time was of the essence, I requested to escalate my discussion to a supervisor ( XXXX ). After communicating my concerns with how the process had been managed and was being executed, XXXX communicated that an underwriting exception was granted to allow the initial disclosure to be issued in advance of receipt of the revised appraisal. XXXX stated that the team would call me tomorrow morning to review the remaining steps. I reviewed and acknowledged the initial disclosure, and went to bed thinking that we were back on track. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX ( 2 business days prior to scheduled close ) Friday morning - No contact made from Ally team to review remaining steps. \n\nXXXX I email the closing expert ( XXXX ) to further confirm if everything was going on track, including the revised appraisal. \n\nXXXX - I email XXXX XXXX to communicate errors that were made when preparing the initial closing disclosure. The initial closing disclosure did not give me credit for the pre-paid home owners insurance ( which was provided on XX/XX/XXXX ) and also incorrectly counted the payments that I had made to the home ( which I had previously notified the team on XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nXXXX - XXXX responds confirming that closing disclosure will be updated to reflect the correct amounts. \n\nXXXX I follow up to see if they have made the updates to the revised appraisal. \n\nXXXX - My realtor follows up because the closing attorney still had not received the revised closing disclosure or loan package. At this point, Ally has missed the previously communicated deadline to provide all documents by XXXX the business day prior to closing. I now have to postpone my closing. Luckily the closing attorneys had a XXXX slot, however, due to the late time, they will not be able to record the same day, delaying my effective ownership of the property by at least 1 day. \n\nXXXX I receive an email from XXXX XXXX the closing disclosure has been updated and sent to the attorney. I log on the Ally portal and see a document titled as a closing disclosure, but upon viewing the document, it was actually the loan package, and not the closing disclosure. I make calls to Ally to get the revised closing disclosure, and am informed that the closing team is still working on it ( thereby making me seriously wonder what XXXX sent to the closing attorney ). The closing team tells me they will provide the revised closing disclosure that evening before business close. \n\nLater that evening, I receive notification that the disclosure has been updated. Upon review of the disclosure, I am disheartened to see that it still contains errors, namely the same two errors I notified the team with earlier ( HOI was marked as to be paid at closing incorrect accounting of payments already made ). \n\nXXXX - I reach out to the closing team and their supervisors to re communicate the errors on the closing disclosures and request that, given the difficulties already experienced, the team does not wait until Monday to resolve the closing disclosure. My revised closing time at XX/XX/XXXX XXXX requires all documentation to be received by XXXX the same day. I reiterated that I would be fully available during the weekend to finalize. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX ( 1 business day prior to scheduled close ) I follow up via email with the team to plead for assistance in resolving the closing disclosure before Monday morning. I make phone calls and come into contact with XXXX, who after I explain the events of the loan, along with my concerns with completing the transaction on time, was able to contact members of the closing team. XXXX was able to confirm that all documentation would be completed and provided to the closing attorney by XXXX on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, and that I should be able to complete closing at the scheduled ( XXXX ) time on XXXX. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX XXXX - XXXX emails me confirming that he has made the necessary changes to the closing disclosure. Because the closing disclosure had not been completed by Saturday, I forced with the decision of ( a ) postpone my closing ( and incur economic penalties, among others ) to afford myself the right to review the revised closing disclosure 1 business day prior to close or ( b ) forfeit my right to review the revised closing disclosure 1 business day prior to close and close on time, thereby not incurring economic penalties and other hardships. I chose the latter. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX XXXX - XXXX emails me to confirm that the appraisal revisions have been completed. \n\nXXXX XXXX - I sign all documentation at my scheduled closing. Due to the delayed closing time, the documents were not able to be recorded ( county offices close at XXXX ), and I am unable to use my new home. \n\nXXXX - I receive email confirmation from XXXX that Ally had received the signed loan documents, and notification at XXXX that the loan was funded. \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX XXXX - We asked the closing attorneys to notify us once the loan is recorded so that I can officially get the keys and use my new home. \n\nXXXX - the closing attorneys notify us that they were waiting on permission to record from the lender. I think the underwriter needed to recheck something on the appraisal. After hearing this, I call the closing team and am told that they should have the loan finalized by end of day. I communicate that this is unacceptable and that the loan still needs to be recorded, so a end of day XXXX means the loan could not be recorded until the following ( XX/XX/XXXX ) morning, further delaying effective use of my home, and request this be expedited to allow for time to record same day. \n\nXXXX - I receive notification by the attorneys that they had recorded the loan. XXXX ( hopefully ) ends the fiasco to close a conventional loan.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-10-29T05:02:18.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"28205","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3421922","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ALLY FINANCIAL INC.","date_received":"2019-10-29T04:36:38.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I request a rate lock, intent to move forward, provide <em>credit</em> card information for the required Lenders appraisal, etc. \n\n\n\nI provide the scheduled closing date of XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX Appraisal completed ( XXXX ) and <em>report</em> submitted ( XXXX ). \n\n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX XXXX emails me and is confused because the property is a townhome, yet the XXXX and title agency curiously classified it as a condo."]},"sort":[5.7230563,"3421922"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3181801","_score":5.620242,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I received XXXX XXXX on my right XXXX  to repair XXXX XXXX and XXXX. Shortly thereafter, on or ab out XX/XX/XXXX, I was admitted into the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX after experiencing XXXX related issues. I was placed in the intensive care unit for a number a days and thereafter, released from the hospital. Thereafter, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, I was wrongfully terminated from my place of employment that I held for approximately ten years. \n\nAfter experiencing three major life-changing experiences and being unemployed, I continued to make my mortgage payments via my personal savings. Thereafter, I requested assistance from then Washington Mutual, which was later purchased by JP Morgan Chase Bank and or Chase Home Financing all to no avail. I was instructed to continue making my mortgage payments and received absolutely no assistance from either bank! Thereafter, I learned that Chase Bank and or Chase Home financing signed a \" Servicer Participation Agreement for the Home Affordable Modification Program '' ( \" the HARP contract '' ) on XX/XX/XXXX with XXXX XXXX ( see-attached document labeled exhibit A ) on information and belief Chase Home Finance, LLC also signed a HAMP contract with XXXX   XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nWith this newfound knowledge, I demand assistance from JP Morgan Chase Bank and or Chase Home Finance with negative results. Over 95 % of the time I attempted to contact Chase by telephone, I faced long periods of holding time and whenever I attempted to leave a message with their assigned representative, the service providers mailbox would inform me that it was \" full '' and can not accept any messages. In addition, Chase routinely gave false statements by stating that my documents were never received, but failed to specify what documents. \n\nChase Home Finance stated in a letter to Plaintiff, \" A review of our records indicates that Chase made numerous, unsuccessful contact attempts in order to try and facilitate a short sale. '' However, Plaintiff taped recordings tells a different story. The recordings shows Chase Home Finance had Plaintiffs correct telephone number, but intentionally and deliberately called the wrong number to prevent Plaintiff from receiving any assistance. \n\nTheir criminal practice carried on routinely and I submitted overwhelming documents and taped telephone conversations to prove that Chase Bank intentionally and deliberately failed to assist me. They continuously and repeatedly lied by alleging they did not receive any of the my documents TO AVOID PROVIDING THE ME WITH ANY RELIEF OR APPROVE A SHORT SALE BECAUSE SERVICING THE MORTGAGE WAS MORE LUCRATIVE TO THEM THAN PROVIDING ME WITH ANY RELIEF. \n\nJP Morgan Chase and/or Chase Home Finance are intentionally ignoring a grave fact that I sent the requested documents and they INTENTIONALLY LIED by stating that they never received my documents. As a direct result, I was forced into bankruptcy, my property went into foreclosure and my requests for assistance were denied for alleged insufficient documentation. Although, I have records to disprove their false statements and prove that the documents were sent to the defendants via certified mail RR, express mail, postal mail and facsimile ( Please see attached ). \n\nChase Home Finance also state in their letter to Plaintiff, \" Indications are that the property is fire damaged. '' Plaintiff vehemently disputed defendants false accusations and obtained a letter from the City of XXXX, New Jersey Fire Chief XXXX XXXX. In his letter ( See attached ) to Chief XXXX XXXX, Chief XXXX states that there have been no responses to the property in question during the periods I owned the property. In addition, Plaintiff took numerous photographs of the property, which clearly showed that there is absolutely no evidence of fire damage. \n\nContinuing with their misconduct, Chase called me at my home telephone number and left a message on the evening prior to the short-sale. At XXXX, XXXX XXXX ( phonetic ) of Chase Home Finance called from telephone No. XXXX and left a message on my voicemail stating that the short sale would be declined due to insufficient documentations that were never submitted. Plaintiff sent the documents via certified mail, express mail & facsimile. ( Please see attached receipts ) Beginning in the XXXX of XXXX, the federal government instituted several measures to try to stabilize the housing and credit markets and assist troubled homeowners. In XX/XX/XXXX, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 ( EESA ) was passed to promote stability and liquidity in the financial system. Among other things, EESA authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to establish the Troubled Asset Relief Program ( TARP ). TARP funds were used, in part, to promote various mortgage loan modification programs. \n\nThese programs were, The Making Home Affordable ( MHA ) Program, Home Affordable Modification Program ( HAMP ), \" The Home Price Decline Protection Incentives ( HPDP ) initiative, The Principal Reduction Alternative ( PRA ), The Home Affordable Unemployment Program ( UP ), The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program ( HAFA ), The Second Lien Modification Program ( 2MP ), The FHA-HAMP Program, The Treasury/FHA Second-Lien Program ( FHA2LP ), The FHA Refinance for Borrowers with Negative Equity ( FHA Short Refinance ) Program, Housing Finance Agency Hardest Hit Fund ( HHF ) Despite the voluminous number of programs available, Chase Bank and or Chase Home Finance did not recommend nor offer any of the programs. Instead, they allowed me to go further into debt, foreclosure and then bankruptcy, while defendants continued profiting from servicing Plaintiffs mortgage and receiving credit from the United States Government. \n\nFurthermore, Chase Home Finance states, \" Chase did not receive the necessary documents in order to conduct a short sale review. '' Once again, Chase Home Finance intentionally and deliberately gave false statements in order to manipulate their requirements of the signed contract agreement with XXXX XXXX and other signed consent agreements with the United State government and the state of New Jersey. However, the facts will show that Chase Home Finance received their requested documents via express mail, certified mail and facsimile ( see attached documents ). \n\nChase Home Finance also state in their letter, \" Indications are that the property is fire damaged. '' Once again, this is a false statement. Attached hereto is a letter ( See attached document ) from the City of XXXX, New Jersey Fire Chief XXXX XXXX to Fire Official XXXX XXXX. In his letter to Chief XXXX XXXX, Chief XXXX states that there have been no responses to the property in question during the periods I owned the property. More importantly, I have taken numerous photographs of the property, which clearly shows that there is absolutely no evidence of fire damage. \n\nTo make it appear as though they made an effort to provide me with relief, Chase Home Finance called me at my home telephone number and left a message on the evening prior to the short-sale. At XXXX, XXXX XXXX ( phonetic ) of Chase Home Finance called me from telephone No. XXXX left a message on my voicemail stating that the short sale would be declined due to insufficient documentations that were never submitted. However, Mrs. XXXX statement that documents were never submitted is contradicted by my attached documents that prove otherwise. \n\nOn or about XX/XX/XXXX, the City of XXXX, New Jersey adopted a vacant property registration ordinance in which they began charging fees to register vacant homes ( See attached ). Unbeknownst to me, I paid the City of XXXX {$500.00} for the first initial registration fee, and {$1500.00} for the second registration fee. ( See attached documents ). \n\nOn or about XX/XX/XXXX, I responded to City of XXXX, NJ, spoke with Mrs. XXXX XXXX XXXX, and advised her that I could no longer afford to make the vacant property registration payments. Mrs. XXXX advised me to submit my statements in a letter addressed to her and as she requested, the letter was sent to her via priority mail. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email from a City of XXXX, New Jersey official, XXXX XXXX from the Department of Economic Housing Development Department. Mr. XXXX wrote to enquire about my payment of the vacant property registration fee. ( See attached ) I responded to Mr. XXXX email ( See attached ) and advised Mr. XXXX of the following : Attached hereto is a copy of the letter I sent to your office via priority mail # XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX. It is in response to a letter from your office dated XX/XX/XXXX. Thereafter, I receive a telephone call from your office stating that Chase Bank is responsible for making the vacant property payments and that I would be receiving a refund. Since then, I have NOT received a refund or call from your office in regards to my refund, except your email in regards to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on or about XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI am XXXX and CAN NOT afford to make the payments, in addition, Chase Bank REFUSES to liquidate the property and they have refused to make the REQUIRED vacant property payments and somehow, your office is deciding to go after the XXXX person with NO FUNDS and Chase Bank has BILLIONS of dollars and refuses to pay! \n\nPlease help/assist me in resolving this matter because I can not afford these payments. In addition, I am anticipating a refund from your office, not a notice to payment with penalties. \n\n\nCoincidently, Chase Bank released their lien to the property ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NJ ) on or about XX/XX/XXXX, in order to avoid paying the City of XXXX, New Jersey the vacant Property registration fee. Unfortunately, I was not given notice from Chase Bank until AFTER XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nChase Bank is fully aware they are responsible for making the vacant property registration payment with the City of XXXX, New Jersey, however they intentionally failed to do so. I received numerous tickets on the property and made numerous court appearances because Chase Bank refused to maintain the property. \n\nI filed a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, more succinctly on or about XX/XX/XXXX. ( See attached ) Chase Bank responded with THREE separate letters addressed to me, admitting they owed XXXX XXXX {$2000.00}. We previously agreed to reimburse you {$2000.00} for certain fees based on the receipts you submitted in XX/XX/XXXX. WE WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL REGISTRATION PERIODS UNTIL THE LIEN WAS RELEASED. \n\nChase Bank requested that I sign a release agreement that did not include any reimbursement for my cost of cleaning up the debris, reimbursement for paid back taxes, reimbursement for travel & cost for several court appearances because Chase Bank refuse to maintain the property or have it secured, nor did the document have a date in which I would be paid for my cost, so I refused because Chase Bank was not negotiating in good faith. \n\nOn or about XX/XX/XXXX, I filed a Complaint, alleging various violations of New Jersey 's Consumer Fraud Act ( CFA ), which protects consumers from deceptive, false, or fraudulent business practices because Chase Bank refused to pay. The Complaint alleges that Defendants falsely, erroneously and deceptively, denied Plaintiff any relief with respect to his mortgage loan with the defendants. ( See attached ) Chase Bank responded by lying to the court and denying owing me any monies. ( See attached brief by Chase Bank outside attorneys ) Chase Bank denied owing me the money for the vacant property registration fees and they denied having a responsibility to provide me with any relief with my property DESPITE SIGNING CONSENT AGREEMENTS WITH THE FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS STATING THAT THEY WOULD PROVIDE HOMEOWNERS LIKE MYSELF RELIEF! INSTEAD, CHASE BANK CHOSE TO INTENTIONALLY, WILLFULLY & KNOWINGLY LIE IN A SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY. \n\nFurthermore, there is no right to a loan modification under New Jersey Law and a servicer can not be compelled to accept a short sale. The crux of Plaintiffs Complaint appears to be loss mitigation. It is well accepted that \" there is no right to a loan modification under New Jersey law. '' Plaintiff also claims that Chase should be required to reimburse him for fees he paid to the City of XXXX for Vacant Property Registration and expenses paid to have the Property secured and debris removed. See Complaint, Prayer for Relief 6-7. However, Plaintiff entirely fails to present a cognizant basis as to why Chase should be responsible for these fees. \n\nFurthermore, there is no right to a loan modification under New Jersey Law and a servicer can not be compelled to accept a short sale. The crux of Plaintiffs Complaint appears to be loss mitigation. It is well-accepted that \" there is no right to a loan modification under New Jersey law. '' The Banks Unfair, Deceptive, and Unlawful Loan Modification and Loss Mitigation Processes Under the States consumer protection laws, Chase Bank is prohibited from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices with respect to consumers. \nPursuant to HUD regulations and FHA guidance, FHA-approved mortgage lenders and their servicers are required to engage in loss-mitigation efforts to avoid the foreclosure of HUD-insured mortgages. E.g., 24 C.F.R. 203.500 et seq. ; Mortgagee Letter 2008-07 ( Treble Damages for Failure to Engage in Loss Mitigation ) ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) ; Mortgagee Letter 1996-25 ( Existing Alternatives to Foreclosure -- Loss Mitigation ) ( XX/XX/XXXX ). Thus, when acting as a servicer, Chase Bank was required to refrain from foreclosing on any FHA insured mortgage where a default could be addressed by modifying the terms of the mortgage or other less-costly alternatives to foreclosure were available. \n\nUnder the Treasurys various rescue and stimulus programs, Chase Bank received monetary incentives from the Federal government in exchange for the commitment to make efforts to modify defaulting borrowers residential mortgages. See, e.g., Making Home Affordable Handbook v.1.0, ch. 13 ( Incentive Compensation ) ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ). Under the programs, Chase Bank agreed to fulfill requirements set forth in program guidelines and servicer participation agreements. \n\nChase Bank regularly conducts or manages loan modifications on behalf of the entities that hold the loans and mortgages and that hired the Banks as servicers. In the course of their servicing and oversight of mortgage loans, Chase Bank violated federal laws, program requirements and contractual requirements governing loss mitigation. \n\n\nChase Bank attorneys statements in the briefs to the Superior Court of New Jersey Plaintiff also  claims that Chase should be required to reimburse him for fees he paid to the City of XXXX for Vacant Property Registration and expenses paid to have the Property secured and debris removed. See Complaint, Prayer for Relief 6-7. However, Plaintiff entirely fails to present a cognizant basis as to why Chase should be responsible for these fees. \n\nIn no event shall JPMC or XXXX request or require any borrower to execute a waiver of any claims against JPMC or XXXX ( including any agent of JPMC or XXXX ) in connection with any payment or Foreclosure Prevention assistance provided pursuant to paragraphs 3 or 4 of this Order. However, nothing herein shall operate to bar JPMC or XXXX from asserting in the future in any separate litigation, or as part of a settlement related to JPMCs or XXXX XXXX foreclosure and servicing practices, any right that may exist under applicable law to offset the amounts received by a borrower through the distribution process set forth above. Nothing herein shall operate to amend or modify in any respect any preexisting settlement between JPMC, XXXX, or an affiliate of either and a borrower in the In-Scope Borrower Population. By Order of the Board of Governors. \n\nLoss Mitigation Requirements. \n\nSERVICER SHALL BE REQUIRED TO NOTIFY POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE BORROWERS OF CURRENTLY AVAILABLE LOSS MITIGATION OPTIONS PRIOR TO FORECLOSURE REFERRAL. Upon the timely receipt of a complete loan modification application, Servicer shall evaluate borrowers for all available loan modification options for which they are eligible prior to referring a borrower to foreclosure and shall facilitate the submission and review of loss mitigation applications. The foregoing notwithstanding, Servicer shall have no obligation to solicit borrowers who are in bankruptcy. \n\nServicer shall offer and facilitate loan modifications for borrowers rather than initiate foreclosure when such loan modifications for which they are eligible are net present value ( NPV ) positive and meet other investor, guarantor, insurer and program requirements. \n\nAs indicated in paragraph I.A.18, Servicer shall send a statement to the borrower outlining loss mitigation efforts undertaken with respect to the borrower prior to foreclosure referral. If no loss mitigation efforts were offered or undertaken, Servicer shall state whether it contacted or attempted to contact the borrower and, if applicable, why the borrower was ineligible for a loan modification or other loss mitigation options. \n\nServicer shall ensure timely and accurate communication of or access to relevant loss mitigation status and changes in status to its foreclosure attorneys, bankruptcy attorneys and foreclosure trustees and, where applicable, to court-mandated mediators. \n\nSingle Point of Contact 4. The SPOC SHALL, at a minimum, provide the following services to borrowers : a. Contact borrower and introduce himself/herself as the borrowers SPOC ; b. Explain programs for which the borrower is eligible ; c. Explain the requirements of the programs for which the borrower is eligible ; d. Explain program documentation requirements ; e. Provide basic information about the status of borrowers account, including pending loan modification applications, other loss mitigation alternatives, and foreclosure activity ; f. Notify borrower of missing documents and provide an address or electronic means for submission of documents by borrower in order to complete the loan modification application ; g. Communicate Servicers decision regarding loan modification applications and other loss mitigation alternatives to borrower in writing ; h. Assist the borrower in pursuing alternative non-foreclosure options upon denial of a loan modification ; i. If a loan modification is approved, call borrower to explain the program ; j. Provide information regarding credit counseling where necessary ; k. Help to clear for borrower any internal processing requirements ; and l. Have access to individuals with the ability to stop foreclosure proceedings when necessary to comply with the MHA Program or this Agreement. \nThe SPOC shall remain assigned to borrowers account and available to borrower until such time as Servicer determines in good faith that all loss mitigation options have been exhausted, borrowers account becomes current or, in the case of a borrower in bankruptcy, the borrower has exhausted all loss mitigation options for which the borrower is potentially eligible and has applied. \n\nServicer shall ensure that a SPOC can refer and transfer a borrower to an appropriate supervisor upon request of the borrower. \nServicer shall ensure that relevant records relating to borrowers account are promptly available to the borrowers SPOC, so that the SPOC can timely, adequately and accurately inform the borrower of the current status of loss mitigation, loan modification, and foreclosure activities. \nServicer shall designate one or more management level employees to be the primary contact for the Attorneys General, state financial regulators, the Executive Office of U.S. Trustee, each regional office of the U.S. Trustee, and federal regulators for communication regarding complaints and inquiries from individual borrowers who are in default and/or have applied for loan modifications. Servicer shall provide a written acknowledgment to all such inquiries within 10 business days. Servicer shall provide a substantive written response to all such inquiries within 30 days. Servicer shall provide relevant loan information to borrower and to Attorneys General, state financial regulators, federal regulators, the Executive Office of the U.S. Trustee, and each U.S. Trustee upon written request and if properly authorized. A written complaint filed by a borrower and forwarded by a state attorney general or financial regulatory agency to Servicer shall be deemed to have proper authorization. \nServicer shall establish and make available to Chapter XXXX trustees a toll-free number staffed by persons trained in bankruptcy to respond to inquiries from Chapter XXXX trustees. \nServicer shall consider partnering with third parties, including national chain retailers, and shall consider the use of select bank branches affiliated with Servicer, to set up programs to allow borrowers to copy, fax, scan, transmit by overnight delivery, or mail or email documents to Servicer free of charge. \n\nDevelopment of Loan Portals. \n\n1. Servicer shall develop or contract with a third-party vendor to develop an online portal linked to Servicers primary servicing system where borrowers can check, at no cost, the status of their first lien loan modifications. \n2. Servicer shall design portals that may, among other things : a. Enable borrowers to submit documents electronically ; b. Provide an electronic receipt for any documents submitted ; Provide information and eligibility factors for proprietary loan modification and other loss mitigation programs ; and c. Permit Servicer to communicate with borrowers to satisfy any written communications required to be provided by Servicer, if borrowers submit documents electronically. \n3. Servicer shall participate in the development and implementation of a neutral, nationwide loan portal system linked to Servicers primary servicing system, such as Hope LoanPort to enhance communications with housing counselors, including using the technology used for the Borrower Portal, and containing similar features to the Borrower Portal. \n4. Servicer shall update the status of each pending loan modification on these portals at least every 10 business days and ensure that each portal is updated on such a schedule as to maintain consistency. \n\nLoan Modification Timelines. \n\n1. Servicer shall provide written acknowledgement of the receipt of documentation submitted by the borrower in connection with a first lien loan modification application within 3 business days. In its initial acknowledgment, Servicer shall briefly describe the loan modification process and identify deadlines and expiration dates for submitted documents. \n2. Servicer shall notify borrower of any known deficiency in borrowers initial submission of information, no later than 5 business days after receipt, including any missing information or documentation required for the loan modification to be considered complete. \n3. Subject to section IV.B, Servicer shall afford borrower 30 days from the date of Servicers notification of any missing information or documentation to supplement borrowers submission of information prior to making a determination on whether or not to grant an initial loan modification. \n4. Servicer shall review the complete first lien loan modification application submitted by borrower and shall determine the disposition of borrowers trial or preliminary loan modification request no later than 30 days after receipt of the complete loan modification application, absent compelling circumstances beyond Servicers control. \n5. Servicer shall implement processes to ensure that second lien loan modification requests are evaluated on a timely basis. When a borrower qualifies for a second lien loan modification after a first lien loan modification in accordance with Section 2.c.i of the General Framework for Consumer Relief Provisions, the Servicer of the second lien loan shall ( absent compelling circumstances beyond Servicers control ) send loan modification documents to borrower no later than 45 days after the Servicer receives official notification of the successful completion of the related first lien loan modification and the essential terms. \n6. For all proprietary first lien loan modification programs, Servicer shall allow properly borrower financials to be used for 90 days from the date the documents are received, unless Servicer learns that there has been a material change in circumstances or unless investor requirements mandate a shorter time frame. \n\nIndependent Evaluation of First Lien Loan Modification Denials. \n\nExcept when evaluated as provided in paragraphs IV.B.8 or IV.B.9, Servicers initial denial of an eligible borrowers request for first lien loan modification following the submission of a complete loan modification application shall be subject to an independent evaluation. Such evaluation shall be performed by an independent entity or a different employee who has not been involved with the particular loan modification. \n\nServicer shall not, in the ordinary course, require a borrower to waive or release claims and defenses as a condition of approval for a loan modification program or other loss mitigation relief. However, nothing herein shall preclude Servicer from requiring a waiver or release of claims and defenses with respect to a loan modification offered in connection with the resolution of a contested claim, when the borrower would not otherwise be qualified for the loan modification under existing Servicer programs. \n\nShort Sales 1. Servicer shall make publicly available information on general requirements for the short sale process. \n2. Servicer shall consider appropriate monetary incentives to underwater borrowers to facilitate short sale options. \n3. Servicer shall develop a cooperative short sale process, which allows the borrower the opportunity to engage with Servicer to pursue a short sale evaluation prior to putting home on the market. \n4. Servicer shall send written confirmation of the borrowers first request for a short sale to the borrower or his or her agent within 10 business days of receipt of the request and proper written authorization from the borrower allowing Servicer to communicate with the borrowers agent. The confirmation shall include basic information about the short sale process and Servicers requirements, and will state clearly and conspicuously that the Servicer may demand a deficiency payment if such deficiency claim is permitted by applicable law. \n\n5. Servicer shall send borrower at borrowers address of record or to borrowers agent timely written notice of any missing required documents for consideration of short sale within 30 days of receiving borrowers request for a short sale. \n6. Servicer shall review the short sale request submitted by borrower and communicate the disposition of borrowers request no later than 30 days after receipt of all required information and third-party consents. \n7. If the short sale request is accepted, Servicer shall contemporaneously notify the borrower whether Servicer or investor will demand a deficiency payment or related cash contribution and the approximate amount of that deficiency, if such deficiency obligation is permitted by applicable law. If the short sale request is denied, Servicer shall provide reasons for the denial in the written notice. If Servicer waives a deficiency claim, it shall not sell or transfer such claim to a third-party debt collector or debt buyer for collection. \n\nServicer shall develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that REO properties do not become blighted. \n\nE. Potential Violations and Right to Cure 1. A Potential Violation of this Consent Judgment occurs if the Servicer has exceeded the Threshold Error Rate set for a Metric in a given Quarter. In the event of a Potential Violation, Servicer shall meet and confer with the Monitoring Committee within 15 days of the Quarterly Report or Monitor Report indicating such Potential Violation. \n2. Servicer shall have a right to cure any Potential Violation. \n3. Subject to Section E.4, a Potential Violation is cured if ( a ) a corrective action plan approved by the Monitor ( the Corrective Action Plan ) is determined by the Monitor to have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the terms thereof ; and ( b ) a Quarterly Report covering the Cure Period reflects that the Threshold Error Rate has not been exceeded with respect to the same Metric and the Monitor confirms the accuracy of said report using his or her ordinary testing procedures. The Cure Period shall be the first full quarter after completion of the Corrective Action Plan or, if the completion of the Corrective Action Plan occurs within the first month of a Quarter and if the Monitor determines that there is sufficient time remaining, the period between completion of the Corrective Action Plan and the end of that Quarter. \n4. If after Servicer cures a Potential Violation pursuant to the previous section, another violation occurs with respect to the same Metric, then the second Potential Violation shall immediately constitute an uncured violation for purposes of Section J.3, provided, however, that such second Potential Violation occurs in either the Cure Period or the quarter immediately following the Cure Period. \n\n5. In addition to the Servicers obligation to cure a Potential Violation through the Corrective Action Plan, Servicer must remediate any material harm to particular borrowers identified through work conducted under the Work Plan. In the event that a Servicer has a Potential Violation that so far exceeds the Threshold Error Rate for a metric that the Monitor concludes that the error is widespread, Servicer shall, under the supervision of the Monitor, identify other borrowers who may have been harmed by such noncompliance and remediate all such harms to the extent that the harm has not been otherwise remediated. \n\nIn conclusion, Chase Bank and or Chase Home Finance has breached their contract with me, violated the terms of their various signed consent decrees with the United States and state governments and intentionally drove me into foreclosure and bankruptcy because it was more lucrative for me to fail than to provide me with any relief. \n\nJP Morgan Chase Bank sent me THREE SEPARATE letters admitting that they owe me the money for the vacant property registration and refuse to reimburse me for the back taxes, clean up & multiple court appearances. Thereafter, they hired outside attorneys to lie for them in the Superior Court of New Jersey and state that they do not owe me any money for vacant property fees and they do not have to reimburse me for any of my cost and expense. JP Morgan Chase Bank auctions are criminal! \n\nI believe I have provided overwhelming documents that proves ; Chase Bank received ALL of my requested documents and they intentionally lied and ignored my repeated request for assistance because they knew they were going to be compensated by servicing the loan AND receiving credits from the federal government. \n\nI am requesting full reimbursement and to be made whole for the following reason : 1. Full reimbursement for vacant property fees 2. Full reimbursement for paid taxes/back taxes 3. Full reimbursement for court appearances and parking 4. Pain & Suffering 5 Intentional infliction of emotional distress 6. Negligent infliction of emotional distress 7. Committing malice in their wrongful conduct 8. Breach of Contract 9. Lost of Property","date_sent_to_company":"2019-03-16T16:29:15.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"07103","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3181801","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2019-03-16T15:08:47.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["On or <em>about</em> XX/XX/XXXX, I filed a <em>Complaint</em>, alleging various violations of New Jersey 's Consumer Fraud Act ( CFA ), which protects consumers from deceptive, false, or fraudulent business practices because Chase Bank refused to pay."]},"sort":[5.620242,"3181801"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3772336","_score":5.5851684,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"I am a victim of Wells Fargos shady business practices. I am only one of  many. This is my story. \n\nBack in XXXX, Wells Fargo illegally put CPI insurance on my auto loan, then they repossessed my vehicle when I couldnt pay the bloated payments. I recently learned that there was a class action lawsuit against them in regards to that issue. They lost the case and were ordered to pay class action members millions of dollars. I was a member of that lawsuit. This is how those events have impacted my life. \n\nBACKGROUND It would be difficult to explain the impact that the criminal actions of Wells Fargo have had on my life without giving personal context. Please bear with me as this isnt my strong suit. \n\nAt the time that Wells Fargo came into my life, I was a young, single, working mother with XXXX small sons. Previously, I had worked as a XXXX, then a XXXX XXXX, but a few years prior, I had taken a XXXX job in a different field that provided better pay and benefits and allowed me to rather quickly work from living in subsidized housing, to paying my own rent in a townhouse, and then to being approved for a government program that helped you buy a first time home. My American Dream was almost complete. All I had left was to get out of the jalopy I was driving and find something more reliable. Enter Wells Fargo, the wolf in sheeps clothing. \n\nTHE PURCHASE For months, everyone I knew kept telling me I needed to get a better, newer car, but even though the one I had was nickel and diming me to death, it was paid off and I liked that. I had no monthly car note to pay, and I didnt have to carry full coverage insurance on it. I liked the small cushion of comfort I had at the end of each paycheck and was hesitant to give it up by financing a vehicle, but then one day the junker unceremoniously decided to give up the ghost on the way to work and I knew the time had come. So I found a used car dealer nearby that had an older SUV ( it was a XXXX and this occurred in XXXX ) that seemed like a decent fit. It had room enough for the kids and the payments wouldnt break the break or so I thought. \n\nTHE BREAKDOWN I barely had time to relax into the experience of moving into a new house and getting a decent vehicle when things started going south. Only a couple months after I signed the loan, my safe, reliable vehicle took a spectacular XXXX. The transmission went out, apparently causing a lot of damage when it did, and the repair bill was nearly {$4000.00}. The dealer refused to help ( yes, I was naive enough to think they would ), so I was forced to borrow money so I wouldnt be left without transportation. I had to get the kids to daycare and school and I had to get to work. I didnt have anyone to help with that. I had no choice. \n\nSo I got the vehicle fixed and was left stretching to pay all these extra expenses, but I was getting by. However, very shortly after, without warning, my auto loan payment amount spiked. I had no idea why, so I called Wells Fargo. The explanation I got was as clear as mud, but basically I was told that this was just a new requirement for me. I was led to believe it had something to do with my credit getting worse. I was never once asked for proof of insurance. In fact, I dont recall ever even being asked if I had any. ( If I had been, it would have been simple for me to provide proof at that time. ) So though I didnt like it one bit, I didnt question what I was being told too much because my credit HAD gotten worse since I had acquired all this new vehicle-related debt, so I guess it just seemed plausible to me. XXXX, but plausible. Like I said, I used to be pretty naive - I knew that businesses were in it for the profit, but I believed that companies were, for the most part, at least on the up and up. \n\nSo I was left thinking that this was simply a new company policy that I couldnt fight, it was out of my control, and that I would simply have to figure out how to make it work. I tried desperately to do just that. I stopped paying other bills so I could cover the car note. After all, if I couldnt get to work, I couldnt keep the household afloat. \n\nAs time went on, I just couldnt figure out how they arrived at their figures. It seemed like I was always behind with them, and I didnt even know how it had happened. I mean, I had always paid all my bills - the important ones, anyway. House, heat, car, insurance, etc. Now, I was suddenly, inexplicably delinquent no matter what. If I tried to talk to them, they treated me like I was a criminal just trying to lie to get out of trouble. For all their threats and strong arming though, the one thing they did not tell me was that I could be in danger of losing the vehicle. \n\nTHE REPOSSESSION And then I woke up one morning, not long after, and went to run the trash out before I got ready for work and the truck was gone. I was literally so shocked that I just walked back inside and sat down on the couch. I couldnt get my head around what was happening. Eventually, I came out of it a little and called my mom crying, saying my truck had been stolen. She told me to call the police. When I called, I dont know how they knew, but they were the ones who told me it was repossessed. I still just couldnt believe it, but I called around until I found out that it was true - my car had been repossessed. I asked to get my personal belongings back ( my only coat and my sons school bag were in there ), but was told that I would have to pay all the past due charges and the repo-related fees first. I couldnt even buy a cup of coffee at that point, so I didnt get my belongings back and never saw the vehicle again. \n\nTHE AFTERMATH Even now, after I have had so much time to reflect, its hard for me to describe the state of disbelief I was in. Things had escalated so quickly, and I had been TRYING the whole time, I wasnt being non compliant or uncommunicative - I didnt just take the car and run and not make any payments - so I never believed they would go from loan signing to repossession in such a short time.. How did that benefit them? I still dont understand that part. The car was supposedly sold at auction for a considerable loss ( they told me I still owed {$8000.00} after ). Why take it away from someone who was at least trying to make all the payments you demanded and instead pay all those extra costs to the repo man, the auctioneer, etc. and not even recoup the sales price? That part makes what followed even more difficult to swallow. I know that, in the great scope of things, what I experienced was minor ( even knowing what was yet to come ) compared to the trauma and devastation that some people face in their lives, but to say that my life imploded all because of this one incident isnt much of an exaggeration. \n\nNow I had no car and I worked on the outskirts of a town with a woefully inadequate public transportation system. It was too far to reasonably walk, and even if I could, what would I do with the kids? I didnt have enough friends or acquaintances with schedules that matched mine who could drive me around. So I couldnt get to work consistently. In a situation like that, it doesnt take long to point out of even a generous attendance policy. Which is what happened. I lost my job. I had never been let go before. \n\nNow I had no car and no income. I couldnt transport my children where they needed to go. I couldnt get to stores, appointments, doctors. Even if the places were on the bus routes, I didnt have bus fare. Especially for all three of us. You even needed a car to apply for state aid - in those days there weren't any online applications. I couldnt pay my bills. My power ( and heat ) was turned off. That had never happened to me. I couldnt keep my children warm or cook for them. I couldnt pay the housing bill and was kicked off the home buyers program. I lost the house. \n\nNow I had no car, no income, and no place to live. I had nowhere to go except a shelter or a relatives couch. I chose the couch, but I still couldnt take our belongings. Even if there had been room, I had no way to transport them. Since we could only pack very few things, I didnt waste space on paperwork ( like auto insurance documents for a vehicle I no longer owned ). That would just take up space where I could put one more of my little boys beloved stuffed toys. Pay attention - that little detail comes back to bite me. \n\nAs I have said, we have a small, XXXX family unit anyway, but help from the few people I did have around was even less forthcoming because they all found my story so unbelievable that they just couldnt believe that I hadnt just been somehow grossly negligent and brought this all on myself and so, in turn, upon them. Apparently, in their minds, it was easier to believe that I had suddenly completely stopped being the responsible person I had a history of being and just I dont know goofed off? I guess I wasnt the only naive one around. \n\nFor those of you fortunate enough never to fall into a hole, let me tell you - it is a whole lot harder to dig yourself out once you hit bottom. Its not as simple as just getting to work digging. There are suddenly so many more obstacles down there. I couldnt get a job because I had no car, I couldnt get a car because I had no money. I couldnt get a house because I had no income and bad credit. I couldnt go to interviews because I had no transportation, no clothes, no self-esteem, not even a phone to schedule them. I had no phone, no internet, no hope. My XXXX  health conditions worsened - I have had XXXX XXXX since I was XXXX years old and have XXXX XXXX. I was XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX from XXXX ( later diagnosed ). \n\nYou may notice that one topic is mostly absent here - the impact on my children. I will not be discussing that topic. Dredging up the memories of that time is already costing me a lot - whether or not anyone feels it is justified or not, I am emotionally wiped by this exercise - trying to explain the damage to my children is more than I can bear. The pain, guilt, and shame is too much. If you must, just imagine what it would be like for your child to wake up and suddenly lose everything they held dear and made them feel safe - their house, their beds, their toys, their computer and games, their dog. They cant go out anymore, but they have no real place to be. They have to be quiet and cant move around much inside, but its a dangerous neighborhood outside. And their mom isnt the same person anymore. Shes sad and mad and sick. ... Yeah. Imagine that. \n\nTHE UPSWING And so we went on like that for almost three years until I finally was able to secure an entry level position at a nearby call center. It wasnt my field, but the office was in the neighborhood. I took the bus and showed up in the only clothes I had - ripped leggings that smelled like cat pee from the couch I slept on - and sat in a plush conference room at a vast mahogany table across from the fully-suited owner of the company and XXXX  my way through the interview. I got the job. It was XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, the landlady of the house next door to where I had been staying agreed to give me a chance now that I had steady income, despite my terrible credit. Afterall, I had a repossession on my record, you know. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, I bought another car. My first since the repo. Bought it outright. Paid a whopping {$600.00} for it. It was a rust bucket, but it was mine. \n\nIn the fall of XXXX, a year after I was hired in, I was promoted. I was now assistant to the president of the company. My income improved. So did my outlook. I started planning. I started attending college online. I made a three year plan to get out of the ghetto and buy my first houseagain. \n\nBy the end of XXXX, I had paid off most of my debt - over {$11000.00}. I was working with another home buyers program which included educational classes and debt counselling. They liked where I was heading. \n\nIn XXXX of XXXX, I got the keys for our second first house. And it is a nice house. In a nice neighborhood. My kids can feel safe and secure here. And even though they arent little boys anymore ( they were XXXX and XXXX then ), I set to work trying to repair some of the lost trust they had in the world. \n\nLASTING EFFECTS In XXXX my XXXX  flared up and worsened to the point that I had to give up my job. When that happened, I was thrust back into the position where I was unable to pay my bills and my home stability was threatened, and that triggered my XXXX from the previous trauma from the Wells Fargo incident. My symptoms were so severe that I ended up hospitalized. After release, I spent more than a year in therapy working through those issues, but never have been able to go back to work and currently live off of XXXX. While I did regain stability again, my life isnt nearly what it used to be. I am no longer the active, vital member of the community and workforce that I used to be. My confidence is gone, my tolerance for stress is greatly diminished, and I am plagued with bouts of XXXX. My childrens lives and personalities have been irreversibly impacted. For example, one of them, still to this day as an adult, has food hoarding issues resulting from the days in his formative years when his next meal wasnt guaranteed. \n\nTHE RELAPSE Just when I thought I was back on an even keel, out of the blue in the fall of XXXX, I received a letter stating that I was a member of a class action lawsuit against Wells Fargo for their unlawful application of XXXX to auto loans. The letter gave the date of my original loan as XX/XX/XXXX. I did some research online and was surprised to discover that my experience wasnt isolated. You might think that the news would be welcome, but at the time, I was just upset that they had come out of the woodwork to victimize me again by making me relive those memories all over again. So I put the letter in a basket and ignored it for some time. \n\nTHE LAWSUIT : A TIMELINE On XX/XX/XXXX, I decided to call the number on the class action notice to find out more. I was told that no action on my part would be required and that checks would be issued through late XXXX and early XXXX. \n\nDuring the winter of XXXX, I saw online that some people were being asked to provide proof of insurance coverage, but I had read that my state ( Michigan ) was one of the five states exempt from needing to provide proof of insurance, so I thought that was why I didnt receive a request for documents. \n\nI didnt hear anything more until XX/XX/XXXX when I received a letter from Wells Fargo. It said : We purchased the following CPI policy ( ies ) on your behalf because our records reflected that you did not have your own comprehensive and collision insurance coverage. CPI policy effective XX/XX/XXXX to XXXX XXXX, XXXX. We do not have record of your personal insurance coverage for this entire period. \n\nOur records show that your loan was originally sold to XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX and that XXXX XXXX no longer owns your loan ( because it was subsequently sold to a different company ). We may need to contact the current owner of your loan in order to complete additional research. If you can provide the name of the company that currently owns your loan, please call us at XXXX. \n\nThough I usually save important information, because I was forced to leave behind most of my belongings when I became homeless, I do not have proof of my full coverage insurance in XXXX. I called my insurance company and was told that they do not store records that long. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I called and opened a complaint with Wells Fargo Office of the President asking why they were demanding proof of insurance from me when I am in Michigan and supposedly exempt from that requirement. I was assigned a case number XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and an agent, named XXXX. She never answered my question about exemption. She was persistent in asking for my insurance information and I relented and confirmed who my insurance provider was at the time. Since it had been the same provider since I opened the account, I figured they already had this information, so it shouldnt be harmful to tell them. I also told the story about why I did not have records ( repossession, etc. ) and also explained that the insurance agency told me they didnt have the records on file. Since their letter asked about the debt holder, I mentioned that there should be no current loan holder as I had to pay all the collection accounts on my credit report off in order to repair my credit enough to be able to purchase my home. She did not comment, nor ask for any further information. She just told me that the issue would be escalated for review and would be resolved within ten business days, so that should be XX/XX/XXXX but that the entire process could take up to 120 days, but she would call every five days until resolved. I didnt hear back, so called for update on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX and was told both times that there was no new information On XX/XX/XXXX, I received another letter from Wells Fargo. It said : According to our records, we did not receive proof of insurance from you or your insurance company for the following time period ( s ) : CPI policy effective XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. We do not have records of your personal insurance for this time period. Upon account review, we determined you are not eligible for a refund. \n\n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, To add insult to injury, I received a check from the class action settlement group, in the whopping amount of {$2.00}. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I called the Wells Fargo Office of the President and spoke to an agent named XXXX who assigned me a case number ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and opened a second complaint. He said that someone would be returning my call to gather details. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, An agent named XXXX called and said he had been assigned to my case and asked what my complaint was. I stated that I disagreed with the denial - just because the insurance company and I dont still have records from 14 years ago, doesnt mean I didnt have insurance. The policy ended when the car was repossessed. XXXX said he was unaware that I had a repossession, that information wasnt in my account. I told him that I had told the previous agent ( XXXX ) and that she was supposedly going to investigate. He said he would escalate to his research team and that the issue would be resolved within 10 business days, but that I would hear from him by next Monday or Tuesday ( XX/XX/XXXX or XX/XX/XXXX ) for a follow up. I didnt hear back from him. \n\nIn the meantime, on XX/XX/XXXX, I called the Wells Fargo CPI Class Action Settlement group regarding the {$2.00} check and spoke to an  agent named XXXX. I asked how that amount could be correct, when the information they provided stated that individuals in my situation would receive considerably more. He would only say that there is no appeals process for distribution plan members, but that he would create an escalation and I should hear back from someone by Monday or Tuesday ( XX/XX/XXXX or XX/XX/XXXX ). He did not explain exactly what the purpose of the escalation was. I never heard back from anyone. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I called the Wells Fargo Office of the President for an update and spoke to an agent named XXXX who said that XXXX wasnt online and she didnt know his work schedule so she would send him an email asking him to get back to me. She would not provide any information about my case. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX returned my call and said that the investigative team determined that there was no evidence that I had my own insurance. When I tried to discuss ( again ) the fact that just because the records werent available any longer, it doesnt mean that I didnt have insurance, he said he isnt privy to the information that the investigative team has or what they base their decision on, and that my only recourse would be to try again after you receive the denial letter. I asked about the repossession and he said they have no record of that occurring. I asked if that meant a random company just stole my truck. He declined to comment. \n\nIMPACT OF THE LAWSUIT At this point, the lawsuit has served only to reopen old wounds and revictimize me by forcing me to jump through impossible hoops in hopes of receiving a paltry monetary restitution for an error ( criminal act ) that wasnt mine only to deny me twice. I am exhausted, destabilized, and experiencing mood disruptions that are affecting my quality of life. I am also angry. Why, despite a preponderance of evidence of their criminal acts, is Wells Fargo still being allowed to victimize people? \n\nCLOSING THOUGHTS I cant for the life of me understand how a company can be caught red-handed multiple times illegally, intentionally, and maliciously victimizing countless numbers of their customers and still remain in business. In the past few months, to my dismay, I have read dozens of firsthand accounts from people who, like myself, experienced massive, life-altering damages at the hands of Wells Fargo. \n\nIn those stories, the refrain I hear most often is, I thought it was just me and I can relate so well to that statement. For years, I felt exactly the same way ; alone in this. In some small way, knowing that others have had similar experiences with Wells Fargo, brings me a sense of relief from the validation that Im not crazy, that this wasnt somehow all my fault - because, despite the fact that I rationally knew better, my story was so dramatic no, TRAUMATIC that I often convinced myself it couldnt be true - but mostly, reading their stories just makes me heartsick. Knowing what so many have suffered through at the hands of an unscrupulous, crooked bank all in the name of profit saddens me deeply. \n\nIt was suggested to me by someone who has been active in trying to help folks like me who have suffered due to the irresponsible actions of this company, that I sit down and write my testimony regarding my experience. Im not sure what good it will do, but I guess if it could possibly reach someone and make them feel less alone, then it was worth it.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-07-31T05:15:51.000Z","issue":"Managing the loan or lease","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"492XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3772336","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2020-07-31T01:04:34.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem with fees charged"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I also told the story <em>about</em> why I did not have records ( repossession, etc. ) and also explained that the insurance agency told me they didnt have the records on file. Since their letter asked <em>about</em> the debt holder, I mentioned that there should be no current loan holder as I had to pay all the collection accounts on my <em>credit</em> <em>report</em> off in order to repair my <em>credit</em> enough to be able to purchase my home. She did not comment, nor ask for any further information."]},"sort":[5.5851684,"3772336"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"20992552","_score":5.2429123,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB SUPPLEMENTAL COMPLAINT Truist Bank CFPB Complaint ID : XXXX Re : Supplemental Complaint and Rebuttal to Truists XX/XX/XXXX Response Truists XX/XX/XXXX response fails to address material evidence, omits critical facts, and reflects an investigation that was neither reasonable nor complete under XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX ( XXXX ) or XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ). \n\nKey Undisputed Fact : Truist has admitted that its notice did not indicate the loan restriction status which prevented [ the borrower ] from processing a regular payment. This complaint can be resolved administratively based on this admitted notice deficiency and the borrowers documented good-faith payment attempts. \nThe factual background, payment chronology, and deficiencies described in the borrowers XXXX and VA XXXX XXXX XXXX complaints are incorporated herein by reference. \n\nThe Core Issue : A Pattern, Not a Single Error Preliminary note : I acknowledge that prior returned ACH payments in XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX resulted in Truist imposing a guaranteed funds restriction on my account. Truists XX/XX/XXXX response also references a letter mailed XX/XX/XXXX, regarding this restriction. The issue before the CFPB is not whether the restriction was warranted or whether a letter was mailed. The issue is whether Truist provided operationally clear instructions on how to comply with the restriction. Truists own XX/XX/XXXX response admits that its notice did not indicate the loan restriction status which prevented [ the borrower ] from processing a regular payment. If even Truists own XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) could not resolve the issue at the branch level and had to direct the borrower to the mortgage department, the restriction was not effectively communicated to Truists own personnel let alone to the borrower. \nThis complaint involves a documented pattern of inconsistent, contradictory, and operationally deficient instructions provided by Truist across every servicing channel to a 100 % Permanent and Total XXXX Combat Veteran ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) with XXXX VA-recognized service-connected conditions including XXXX, XXXX, and hearing XXXX : XXXX. Online Portal : Payment failed to process. No clear error or restriction notice. I informed Truist I could not complete payment online. \nXXXX. Mortgage Phone Operators ( Call XXXX ) : I called Truist. I informed the operator of my XXXX and hearing loss. I requested instructions. I followed them. The payment attempt failed. \nXXXX. Mortgage Phone Operators ( Call XXXX ) : I called again. I again informed the operator of my XXXX. I again followed their instructions. The payment attempt again failed. \nXXXX. Branch Teller ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : I went in person. I informed XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) of my XXXX. I confirmed payment by check was acceptable. She confirmed it was. She accepted and receipted the payment. It was returned XXXX days later. \nXXXX. Teller Voicemail ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : XXXX XXXX left a voicemail confirming she accepted the payment, asking if borrower resolved the issue by phone, and directing borrower to the mortgage department at XXXX confirming branch personnel were unaware of the restriction. I have preserved this voicemail recording. A transcription is attached as Exhibit XXXX. \nXXXX. Branch Manager ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : Could not explain why the accepted payment did not post. Had to contact the mortgage department. \nXXXX. Written Notice ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : Required guaranteed funds but directed payment online, by phone, or by mail. Did not define the term or explain compliance. \nXXXX. Internal Resolution Specialist ( XXXX ) : Spoke with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and Client Resolution Research XXXX. XXXX XXXX advised escalation to the VA confirming the issue could not be resolved at Truists resolution level. \n\nTruists Critical Admission Establishes Servicer-Caused Delinquency Truists own response states : The letter did not indicate the loan restriction status which prevented you from processing a regular payment. \nThis is not a minor procedural admission. It supports causation. Truist : ( XXXX ) imposed a payment restriction on my account; ( XXXX ) failed to clearly communicate that restriction; and ( XXXX ) that failure materially contributed to my inability to make a compliant payment despite multiple good-faith attempts. Despite acknowledging this deficiency, Truist did not evaluate whether its failure to provide adequate notice contributed to the reported delinquency and did not correct the reporting. \nThe reported delinquency was not the result of nonpayment. It was materially affected by Truists failure to provide clear and accurate payment instructions and its subsequent handling and return of payments made in good faith. \nThe issue is not whether a payment posted after a due date, but whether the servicers own conduct including deficient notice, inconsistent instructions, and failure to investigate identified communications materially affected the borrowers ability to make a compliant payment, rendering the reported delinquency at minimum materially misleading. \nBut for Truists failure to provide operationally clear instructions regarding the guaranteed-funds restriction, the XX/XX/XXXX payment would have been successfully completed and no delinquency would have occurred. \nTruists own conduct prevented the borrower from making a timely compliant payment, and therefore the resulting delinquency reflects a servicer-caused failure rather than a true payment default. \n\nPoint-by-Point Rebuttal to Truists XX/XX/XXXX Response The following addresses each specific deficiency in Truists response, with the applicable legal obligation identified : XXXX. FAILURE TO ADDRESS REQUESTED CALL RECORDINGS Legal obligation : XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX ( XXXX ) requires a servicer to conduct a reasonable investigation of a Notice of Error and provide a written response that addresses the asserted error.\n\nMy Notice of Error expressly required Truist to preserve and review call recordings from XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, identify calls by date, time, and department, and provide written summaries of payment instructions given. Truists response does not reference call recordings, does not confirm whether they were retrieved, and does not provide any summary of instructions. This is a material omission because the core issue is whether I relied on instructions provided by Truists own representatives and whether those instructions were accurate. \n\nXXXX. FAILURE TO ADDRESS MY INBOUND CALLS Legal obligation : XXXXXX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX ) ; XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ) requires a furnisher upon dispute to review all relevant information provided. \nI contacted Truist Mortgage Phone Operators on XXXX separate occasions after I was unable to complete payment online. On each call, I informed the operator of my XXXX and requested instructions. Truists response references only outbound collection activity ( XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ). It does not acknowledge that I called Truist, what instructions I was given, or whether those instructions were accurate. Truist substituted its own outbound collection attempts for actual investigation of the inbound communications that are central to this dispute. This omission is critical because my dispute centers on reliance on Truists own instructions. \n\nXXXX. FAILURE TO ADDRESS TELLER INTERACTION AND VOICEMAIL Legal obligation : XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX ( XXXX ) ; XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( an act is deceptive when a representation misleads a consumer acting reasonably ). \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I confirmed with XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) that payment by personal check was acceptable. She confirmed it was. She accepted the payment and issued a receipt. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX left a voicemail ( Exhibit XXXX ) in which she confirmed she had accepted a mortgage payment from me, asked if I had been able to resolve anything by phone, and provided the direct number for the mortgage department as XXXX. This contemporaneous communication reflects that, immediately after accepting the payment, branch-level personnel were not able to resolve the issue and directed the borrower to the mortgage department. Notably, the number XXXX XXXX provided differs from the number on Truists XX/XX/XXXX letter ( XXXX ). Truists response does not address XXXX XXXX confirmation of the payment, her follow-up voicemail, or this phone number discrepancy. \n\nXXXX. FAILURE TO ADDRESS BRANCH MANAGER ESCALATION Legal obligation : XXXXXX/XX/XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) requires investigation of the specific error asserted, including servicer communication failures. \nIn XX/XX/XXXX, the Branch Manager was unable to explain why the XX/XX/XXXX payment did not post despite having been accepted and receipted. She had to contact the mortgage department for clarification. Truists response does not address this escalation or the internal confusion it reveals. This is evidence that the guaranteed funds restriction was not communicated to branch-level personnel. \n\nXXXX. CONTRADICTORY AND INCOMPLETE GUARANTEED FUNDS NOTICE Legal obligation : XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( an act is unfair when it causes substantial injury not reasonably avoidable and not outweighed by countervailing benefits ) ; XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( unfair or deceptive trade practices ). \nTruists XX/XX/XXXX notice stated guaranteed funds are required due to the loan status. The same notice directed payment online, by phone, or by mail. The notice did not define guaranteed funds, did not identify acceptable payment forms ( cashiers check, money order, wire transfer, etc. ), and did not explain how paying online, by phone, or by mail would satisfy the restriction. This notice was not merely unclear it was an operationally unclear and materially incomplete instruction. The XXXX listed payment methods are standard non-guaranteed channels, yet the notice simultaneously required guaranteed funds. These instructions directly contradict each other. A reasonable consumer could not determine from this notice what action to take. The resulting harm was not reasonably avoidable because I relied on Truists own notice and representatives. Truists own response admits this notice was deficient. Truist required guaranteed funds while directing payment through channels that do not operationally accept guaranteed funds without additional instruction, rendering compliance not reasonably achievable. \nAn adequate notice would have : ( XXXX ) defined guaranteed funds ; ( XXXX ) identified which specific payment forms satisfy the restriction ( e.g., cashiers check, money order, wire transfer ) ; ( XXXX ) identified which payment channels accept those forms; and ( XXXX ) provided a specific phone number and point of contact for assistance. Truists notice did none of these. \n\nXXXX. FAILURE TO EXPLAIN ACH DEBIT AND RETURN Legal obligation : XXXX XX/XX/XXXXXXXX ( b ) ( XXXX ) ( errors relating to the payment of a periodic payment ) ; XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) ( investigation and response to qualified written requests and NOEs ). \nThe record shows that an ACH payment of {$2600.00} was debited from my bank account on XX/XX/XXXX, and returned by Truist on XX/XX/XXXX. My Notice of Error requested transaction detail and return information, including return codes and trace data. Truists response does not explain why the ACH was accepted and then returned, what system condition caused the return, or produce the requested return data. \n\nXXXX. FAILURE TO EXPLAIN ACCEPTANCE AND RETURN OF CHECK PAYMENT Legal obligation : XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( harm not reasonably avoidable when borrower relies on servicers own confirmation ) ; XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX ( b ) ( XXXX ). \nThe XX/XX/XXXX payment of {$2700.00} was accepted at the branch, receipted by the teller, and then returned XXXX days later by disbursement check on XX/XX/XXXX. Truists response states only that the funds were not in the form of guaranteed funds. It does not address why the payment was accepted initially, why branch personnel confirmed it was acceptable, or why the branch did not know about the restriction. A payment accepted and receipted by the servicers own branch creates reasonable reliance. \n\nXXXX. XXXX CONTEXT ( SUPPLEMENTARY ) Legal context : XXXX XXXX. XXXX ;XX/XX/XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ). This section provides supplementary context for the primary RESPA, FCRA, and UDAAP claims above. It is not asserted as the central legal theory. \nMy Notice of Error stated that I am a 100 % Permanent and Total XXXX veteran with XXXX, XXXX, and hearing loss requiring VA-issuedXX/XX/XXXXXXXX. It expressly invoked XXXX XXXX. XXXX and requested reasonable accommodation including clear written payment instructions and written summaries of telephone guidance. I informed Truist of my XXXX on every interaction : XXXX phone calls, with XXXX XXXX, in person with the teller, and in person with the Branch Manager. Truists response does not acknowledge the accommodation request, does not reference my XXXX, and relies on unanswered telephone calls as evidence of adequate communication to a veteran with documented hearing loss. Truist did not acknowledge or respond to the accommodation request despite being informed of hearing-related limitations on every interaction. \n\nXXXX. CONCLUSORY DENIAL WITHOUT CAUSATION ANALYSIS Legal obligation : 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( b ) ( furnisher must conduct a reasonable investigation and review all relevant information ) ; XXXX XX/XX/XXXXXXXX ( reasonable policies to ensure accuracy and integrity of furnished information ). \nTruists response states : Our review indicates that our reporting to the credit agencies has been accurate ; therefore, an update is not warranted. This statement is conclusory. It relies solely on payment posting dates without evaluating whether Truists own instructions contributed to the payment failure, whether inconsistent guidance across channels prevented timely payment, or whether the reported delinquency was servicer-caused and therefore materially misleading under 15 U.S.C. XXXX ( a ). A reasonable investigation under the FCRA requires review of all relevant information not merely a payment ledger. \n\nComplete Escalation Chain Every internal remedy was exhausted : front-line operators branch ( XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX branch manager written notice Notice of Error Client Resolution Research XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, who advised escalation to the VA ) CFPB complaint this supplemental complaint. Despite reaching Truists Officer-level resolution staff, the issue was not resolved internally. \n\nXXXX and Communication Failure I informed Truist of my XXXX on every single interaction : on XXXX phone calls to Mortgage Phone Operators, with Client Advocacy, in person with XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ), and in person with the Branch Manager. Each time I explained I have hearing loss requiring XX/XX/XXXXXXXX, XXXX, and XXXX, and that I need clear, consistent instructions. \nTruists reliance on unanswered collection calls ( XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ) as evidence of adequate communication to a veteran with documented hearing loss is inappropriate and raises concerns under XXXX XXXX. XXXX and XXXX XXXX. XXXX. \n\nFederal and State Laws Implicated by Truists Conduct Applicable case law standard ( XXXX XXXX ) : In XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), the XXXX XXXX held that when a furnisher does not already possess evidence establishing that disputed information is true, the FCRA requires the furnisher to seek out and obtain evidence before reporting the information as verified. In XXXX v. XXXX University, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX ), the XXXX XXXX held that technically correct information XXXX nonetheless be inaccurate under the FCRA if, through omission, it creates a materially misleading impression. Truists reporting of a XXXXday delinquency without context omitting its own admitted notice deficiency, its inconsistent instructions, and the borrowers multiple good-faith payment attempts creates precisely such a materially misleading impression. \nDistinguishing adverse precedent : In XXXX v. XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), the XXXX XXXX held that delinquency reporting was accurate where the borrower was making reduced forbearance payments below the contractual amount. That case is distinguishable because the borrower in XXXX was informed of and understood the forbearance terms. Here, the borrower was not informed of how to comply with the guaranteed funds restriction Truist admits this. Additionally, courts that have upheld delinquency reporting have done so where the borrower failed to follow clear payment instructions. Here, the instructions were not clear they were contradictory and operationally incomplete, and Truists own branch employee could not resolve the issue. \n\nXXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) ; XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX ( RESPA ) : Inadequate investigation of Notice of Error. Failed to address inbound calls, branch interactions, voicemail, or XXXX. \n15 U.S.C. XXXX ( a ) and ( b ) ( FCRA ) : Furnishing information the furnisher has reasonable cause to believe is inaccurate. Conclusory investigation without meaningful review of disputed facts. \nXXXX XXXX. Part XXXX, Regulation XXXX : Failure to maintain reasonable policies to ensure accuracy and integrity of furnished information. \nXXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) : Deceptive notice ; harm not reasonably avoidable ; substantial injury. \nXXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX supplementary ) : Failure to respond to formal accommodation request. Supporting context for primary claims. \nXXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : Unfair and deceptive trade practices. \nXXXX XXXX. XXXX : Communication of information regarding indebtedness known to be misleading. \n\nDocumented Harm Credit score damage : On XX/XX/XXXX before the delinquency was reported my credit scores were :XX/XX/XXXX XXXX ( Good ),XX/XX/XXXXXXXX,XX/XX/XXXXXXXX. As of XX/XX/XXXX, my XX/XX/XXXXFICO Score XXXX has dropped to XXXX ( Fair ) a XXXX decline closely associated in time with the reported XXXXday delinquency. Screenshots documenting both pre-incident and post-incident scores are attached as Exhibit XXXX. \nLivelihood impact : I am a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business ( XXXX ) owner registered with SAM.gov. Government contracts in my target range require surety bonding, and bonding underwriters evaluate personal credit as a primary factor in determining bonding capacity and premium rates. The XXXX credit score decline from XXXX ( Good ) to XXXX ( Fair ) has materially impaired my ability to pursue government contracts requiring bonding. I have been deterred from submitting bonding applications for contracts I would otherwise pursue because the current score creates a material risk of denial or less favorable underwriting terms. This directly affects my livelihood. My business operations are supported by attached documentation confirming active Florida XXXX registration and federal XX/XX/XXXXcertification ( Exhibits XXXX and XXXX ). \n\nAdditional Context Regarding Communication Limitations : Due to my service-connected XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX ( TBI ) , I am prescribed and take multiple daily medications as part of my ongoing VA treatment. The VAs own XX/XX/XXXX Rating Decision assessed my XXXX as causing occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity including mild memory loss, such as forgetting names, directions or recent events and difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. These documented cognitive effects, in combination with medication side effects and documented hearing loss requiring VA-issuedXX/XX/XXXXXXXX ( subsequently diagnosed by VA audiology with tinnitus and mild bilateral hearing loss, for whichXX/XX/XXXXXXXX were prescribed ), increase my reliance on clear, consistent, and unambiguous communication when managing financial obligations. \nOngoing Treatment and Documentation : I am under continuous medical treatment for my service-connected XXXX, anxiety, and XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ), which includes multiple prescribed daily medications for XXXX, XXXX, anxiety, pain, and related conditions. Documentation of this treatment can be provided if necessary as this matter proceeds. \n\n\nConclusion Taken together, the documented servicing failures, admitted notice deficiency, incomplete investigation, and resulting measurable credit and business harm demonstrate a servicer-driven breakdown that has produced materially misleading reporting requiring correction. \n\nNotice of Intent If Truist does not correct the inaccurate reporting within XX/XX/XXXX days, I intend to pursue all available remedies including private action under 15 U.S.C. XXXX and XXXX ( FCRA ), XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( f ) ( RESPA ), XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ), and XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) in the United States District Court, XXXX XXXX of Florida, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX \n\nRespectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX XXXX 100 % VA XXXX and Total XXXX Veteran","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-06T23:22:14.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"VA mortgage","zip_code":"32092","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"20992552","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2026-04-06T21:01:52.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Government contracts in my target range require surety bonding, and bonding underwriters evaluate <em>personal</em> <em>credit</em> as a primary factor in determining bonding capacity and premium rates. The XXXX <em>credit</em> score decline from XXXX ( Good ) to XXXX ( Fair ) has materially impaired my ability to pursue government contracts requiring bonding."]},"sort":[5.2429123,"20992552"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3130534","_score":5.1541004,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I would like for the CFPB to reopen & review all the facts and evidence in my Debit Card Dispute # XXXX from XX/XX/XXXX on file with my bank, Ally Bank. The disputes are for about 50-60 seperate online transactions totaling about {$4500.00} from XXXX XXXX / XXXX Ally Bank says that i missed the deadline by a few weeks to file these disputes to be totally covered for all of the charges totaling about {$4500.00}. I was lucky to even piece together this fraud at all.\n\nAfter 90 days of waiting XXXX only refunded me via that dispute {$200.00} from the total {$4500.00} due. XXXX was not willing to cooperate.\n\nDue to the overwhelming evidence of fraud, that timeline should be waived, I should be 100 % protected as a consumer and a Government Agency needs to step in and have the computer system just refund me my money automatically.\n\nThe CFPB needs to approve my complete chargeback and have the dispute team at Ally Bank & XXXX , Inc reverse all of the charges and refund me my {$4500.00}.\n\nAlly Bank says that its limited as to what it can do but I need the CFPB to step in here and resolve my case.\n\nXXXX should not even be allowed to have a credit card machine or bank account.\n\nI have reported this to over 15 Government Agencys Including : The XXXX XXXX XXXX : Case XXXX  The Federal Trade Commission : Case # XXXX   The California Dept of Insurance : Case # XXXX  The Florida Dept of Financial Services : Case # : SR # :XXXX Dispute with My Bank : Ally Bank , Dispute # XXXX  Also see my previous complaint to the CFPB regarding XXXX XXXX XXXX / XXXX   / XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX which the CFPB said on XX/XX/XXXX that it has been forwarded to the FTC . * Complaint number : XXXX * Date submitted to CFPB : XX/XX/XXXX In my case with XXXX XXXX / XXXX / XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX my evidence & findings will show that Renters are provided with vehicles with serious defects, are not warned of potentially dangerous conditions that may exist or develop and are deprived of valuable information as to the true condition of their rental vehicles along with deceptive practices and unfair charges.\n\nXXXX XXXX / XXXX / XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX used deception, deceptive & unfair practices, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation & concealment as well as suppression & omission of material facts.\n\nXXXX XXXX, XXXX rented me 3 junk title, salvage, rebuilt title cars for 90 days at {$50.00} per day with full price insurance for cars that should not even be on the road as if they were new/undamaged at full price / top dollar prices. Their website says no junk title, salvage, rebuilt title cars allowed. When I brought it to their attention with proof they said I'm lying. They gave me the run around & now they even blocked my phone number from being able to call their XXXX Customer Service #. These guys did fraud on me, gave me an unsafe vehicle, gave me a poor quality product that was not as described, they failed to protect me as a consumer, they failed to properly inspect, confirm & certify the products they allow on their platform, they never disclosed anything to me and when confronted with this they lie and deny it all and then when I sent them the proof they totally ignore me & block my phone number. I have proof of all conversations & of all the evidence.\n\nThe full coverage they charged me for was with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX/ Policy # XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , CA XXXX  XXXX XXXX Also, I have reported these guys to every agency that exists. I need help to get my money back.\n\nMy bank via dispute was unable to get me my {$4500.00} back because i missed the deadline to file a dispute by a few weeks.\n\nAfter months of giving me the run around XXXX finally wanted to arbitrate with their company XXXX / Dispute # XXXX / Arbitrator : XXXX XXXX XXXX, License # 193606, State Of California Bar I sent XXXX over 50 pages of evidence and proof that the damages I recieved were financial. After 2 weeks of wasting my time the arbitrator said that I lost the case and I dont even deserve 1 penny.\n\nNow XXXX is not honoring my request to have my decision appealed.\n\nI wrote this to XXXX  & to XXXX : It seems only right that I deserve an appeal and or an award of some sort When you step back and see the bigger picture of what is going on internally with XXXX here you start to notice a pattern.\n\nThe pattern is that XXXX is renting rebuilt, salvage, junk title cars with no disclosure on purpose to consumers as if they were undamaged at the highest possible price that you can rent a real undamaged car for per day at about {$40.00}. Plus they add {$13.00} per day of full coverage insurance for a junk car that is not even really insurable with full coverage. Their computer system must know these cars are junk but they turn a blind eye so they can make false profits.\n\nThen they sit back and wait to see who complains, they give them the run around for as long as they can, then whoever get to XXXX arbitration will never win the case or any money because XXXX has a nice scam going on here with the way they word their contracts.\n\nAnd they save all that money by just paying XXXX  a monthly retainer fee.\n\nThis is unfair and unethical behavior by a business. It really shows alot. XXXX also should not be associated with these fraudsters.\n\nI can't believe that the arbitrator did not even award me one penny. She said I failed to prove any damages. The damages were to my pocket. The damages were financial. Not to mention how they lied about everything and put me on a mission instead of giving me back a 50 % refund of {$2300.00} or so in the beginning.\n\nMy bank said if I would of disputed this in time I would of gotten back all of my {$4500.00}.\n\nSo I can't believe that the arbitrator didn't give me an award. And I am sure a jury will side with me.\n\nI will be fighting this to the end and now today i will include XXXX  as part of this full circle fraud lawsuit with XXXX. The top XXXX   bosses must know about this pattern.\n\nXXXX  and XXXX are putting people in danger and putting profits over human lives and zero regard for people financial stability or safety.\n\nThey basically sold me on a nice chocolate bar wrapped up in a bow with 24k gold paper 4 times in a row but when you start to see, taste and smell the chocolates up close and you start to decipher the recipe and ingredients and you do some research and you stumble on something then you realize that you really just ate 4 bars of dog poop. And with no warning or disclosure on the wrapper or website.\n\nRead My Entire Story Below : XXXX Rented Me 3 Salvage/Rebuilt Title Vehicles as if they were new/undamaged at full price / top dollar prices. Their website doesn't allow these damaged cars at all.\n\nThe representative said over the phone that the 3 cars seemed to fall threw the cracks and it made it onto their system 3 times in a row unchecked for salvage or rebuilt titles, where i ended renting them at top dollar prices for a junk car thats worth atleast 50 % less in value. They said that the car owner scammed them. I told them that, that is not my fault or problem. They put me in an unsafe vehicle. They never disclosed this to me and the product quality was not that of what i chose & agreed to pay for. I believe i paid off this guys junk cars with all the days that i rented it. Now he has a free car that i got ripped off on and i paid for.\n\nI rented 3 vehicles from the same owner on this platform. I rented these 3 junk cars for about 90 days in a row at {$50.00} per day for a grand total of about {$4500.00}. The rental dates were fromXX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX.\n\nIt came to my attention on about XX/XX/XXXX that these cars all had damage. I contacted XXXX about this. The first rep said that the vehicle owner and his cars would be kicked off the platform. Then i asked for a 50 % refund for having over paid and being ripped off for a subpar product.\n\nThey said they would escalate it to the manager. The manager wrote back to me in 15 minutes and said that after careful review of the Florida DMV Database none of the cars had a rebuilt/salvage title. And he said that because of that reason my 50 % refund would be denied.\n\nI asked for proof of their findings and at the same time i did my own research and provided them with the evidence that all 3 cars were in fact rebuilt/salvage titles. They never responded to me after i sent them the proof. I then told them that they are giving me the run around and that i now want a full 100 % refund. I also tried to call them several times while i waited on hold for 15 minutes and an answering machine says to leave a message that no one will ever respond to. i finally got someone to answer on about XX/XX/XXXX and they said that the manager from the billing department knew about me and my problem and that they would be researching it. They never got back to me and no one answers the XXXX   #.\n\nThis Is The FREE FLORIDA DMV VIN # CHECK WEBSITE : XXXX XXXX XXXX These guys did fraud on me, gave me an unsafe vehicle, gave me a poor quality product that was not as described, they failed to protect me as a consumer, they failed to properly inspect, confirm & certify the products they allow on their platform, they never disclosed anything to me and when confronted with this they lie and deny it all and then when i sent them the proof they totally ignore me. I also had my bank helping me fight this.\n\n( Update : On XX/XX/XXXX My bank via dispute was only able to help me recover {$100.00} for 2 rental days & another {$100.00} for another 2 rental days for a total of {$200.00} for 4 rental days. Every rental day with insurance was exactly {$51.00} ) I have attached that evidence as well.\n\nMy bank was unable to help me recover anything more than the {$200.00}. I missed the deadline for the dispute protection timeline they say because I rented the cars from XX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX but did the chargeback a bit to late towards the end of XX/XX/XXXX when I luckily found out about what XXXX did to me by putting 2 and 2 together and then I started asking XXXX questions. I feel that the dispute timeline should be waived do to the circumstances of fraud and deception that took time to unravel I have proof of all evidence and of the email conversations back and fourth between me and XXXX   which has been attached.\n\nI also believe that they still have these damaged cars on their platform and are charging people top dollar and not disclosing this information to them. I know there are more victims out there even after it has been brought to XXXX  's attention. These are unfair business practices that all of the management and employess in that business are aware of and they practice everyday. They are putting profits before peoples safety.\n\nI believe that these are grounds for a civil / class action lawsuit if they dont refund my money and stop these unfair practices. They are in the stock market under symbol : XXXX, they cant be doing this to people. They are also reporting profits earned that are based on these unfair and unsafe business practices.\n\nXXXX  has put me on a roller coaster ride back and fourth for over 5-6 months trying to recover my money and resolve this. I have wasted an extraordinary amount of time & energy doing research, making phone calls, writing emails, responding to emails, copying and pasting evidence, waiting on hold, and spending countless hours writing, documenting and reviewing all of my writings, documentation and organizing evidence, etc all due to XXXX  continuous lies and ways that they cheat & treat the consumer.\n\nI estimate that I have wasted about 75 hours of my personal time doing all of this work during this ordeal these 5-6 months. Not to mention that XXXX has dragged this on for almost 6 months for no reason when I have been trying to resolve this directly with them in good faith from the beginning.\n\nXXXX  left me out in the cold and they made me feel violated and I felt taken advantage of. I felt as if no one can hear me screaming for help. On top of everything they played games back and fourth and made me feel voiceless and helpless. They blocked my phone number from being able to call their XXXX  customer service number for help and they stopped responding to my emails. This caused me and is still causing me terrible stress.\n\nDuring this entire ordeal I have provided an overwhelming amount of evidence and proof of about 30-50 pages in length and XXXX  has just replied with 3 sentences in total.\n\nThis is what XXXX responded to the XXXX  with : Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this consumer complaint concerning the vehicles they rented on our platform.\n\nOur rentals are offered for ride-share drivers, and the reason for not allowing Salvage or Rebuilt titles on the site is due to most areas not accepting these types of vehicles for use with XXXX / XXXX.\n\nAs the vehicles are listed by the owners, not all states registrations show the salvage or rebuilt status on the documents used to verify a vehicle for the platform.\n\nAll vehicles mentioned by the consumer, including the user who listed them have been permanently removed from our site.\n\nThe price paid for these vehicles is set by the owner and the prices paid for rental of the consumers vehicles was {$30.00} - {$39.00} per day.\n\nDuring the entire duration of these rentals, the vehicles cause no issues for the consumer. We have no records of the consumer reaching out concerning these issues until after the rentals have ended.\n\nIf issues with the mechanical functionality with these rentals had occurred, then a refund would be due, however the renter kept the vehicles without incident and at this time no refund will be honored.\n\nI did NOT accept XXXX response via the XXXX XXXX XXXX Case # XXXX  and i wrote back to them explaining why below : There is NO excuse for allowing me to rent 3 seperate UNSAFE salvage / rebuilt tilte vehicles from the same person. My life was put in danger & so was the lives of my passengers. Your platform must have a robot or a human manually verify each and every vehicle that you have on your website by running the vin number on XXXX or XXXX. it costs money to do that and you guys dont want to pay for that safety check.\n\nYour response for not allowing salvage / rebuilt titles on your site is that : its due to most areas not accepting these types of vehicles for use with XXXX  / XXXX. Instead you should say that you do NOT allow salvage / rebuilt title vehicles on your site because they are unsafe pieces of junk that have been totally damaged and no one knows if someone has even died in these vehicles, these cars are worth XXXX dollars and they are ticking time bombs. I was a driver for only XXXX. I was also let down by XXXX because they didnt catch these junk cars that made it onto their system. XXXX  was the second line of defense to protect me and they also let me down.\n\nXXXX is trying to put the blame on the car owner that put his 3 junk cars on the website, but XXXX can not allow a random person to do that without fully verifying that the vehicle they have is not a junk car / death trap. They have no safety measures in place and that is totally unnaceptable. As the saying goes : \" Trust But Verify ''.\n\nXXXX  says that vehicles are listed by the car owners, and some states car registrations & documents do not show a vehicles title status when they upload a car to their platform.\n\nThat makes no sense. They have to have a way of verifying the junk that people are putting on their platform. I did the research for 3 cars and found everything out in 5 minutes by myself.\n\nNow they say that the user has been kicked out of the platform and all of his cars have been removed, but it is too late for that, he already ripped me off and stole my money. And I was the one that did all of the research and provided the evidence that got him kicked out. I did all the work.\n\nXXXX  also says that : The price paid for these vehicles is set by the owner and the prices paid for rental of the consumers vehicles was {$30.00} - {$39.00} per day. So XXXX allowed this guy to put a junk / salvage / rebuilt title car on their platform that is worth XXXX dollars or maybe {$190.00} PER MONTH at most so he can rent it to me for {$40.00} PER DAY which is equal to {$1200.00} PER MONTH.\n\nI believe that i totally paid of all of this guys junk cars, so now he has a free car that i paid top dollar for when it was worth XXXX. On top of the {$40.00} PER DAY car rental fee i had to pay {$13.00} per day for INSURANCE which is equal to {$400.00} PER MONTH for a junk car that the insurance should really be about {$75.00} PER MONTH. So in total i paid {$1600.00} per month for a car that was really worth at most in good condition about {$300.00} PER MONTH.\n\nI was scammed and overcharged by about 500 % every day / month for those cars.\n\nAll 3 rental cars did cause an issue for me. The nissans transmission broke. The XXXX  's brake system was broken and making a terrible screeching sound and the XXXX XXXX had a tire that exploded and has no spare tire, jack, or lug nut removal tool in the trunk. And all 3 cars were junk / rebuilt / salvage title.\n\nXXXX  says : During the entire duration of these rentals, the vehicles caused no issues for the consumer. We have no records of the consumer reaching out concerning these issues until after the rentals have ended. If issues with the mechanical functionality with these rentals had occurred, then a refund would be due, however the renter kept the vehicles without incident and at this time no refund will be honored.\n\nEverytime a car had a problem i would contact the car owner directly and he would say to not tell XXXX about it that he would just get me another better car. I obviously had 3 seperate mechanical problems with 3 seperate junk cars and a refund is due.\n\nAlso, I made no money buy using these junk cars for XXXX. I paid an average of {$53.00} PER DAY for the rental car with the insurance PLUS {$25.00} per day in gas that these junk cars were excessively consuming. So i paid for the car, insurance and gas daily about {$80.00}. On an average day with XXXX  i would only make $ XXXX- {$75.00} in a 8 hour - 10 hour period. I was just working to pay the car, i never made any profit from this. i lost all the way around and i want a 100 % refund. You failed to protect me as a consumer in every way possible. Financially and safety wise. Your website says NO salvage / rebuilt title cars allowed. You failed to deliver as promised for a product that was not as described on your website, aside from all the other thing you have done wrong. I also just checked the XXXX website and the guy that rented me 3 junk cars has a partner that i remembered he told me about, and that partner has a car dealer and he has a bunch of junk / salvage /rebuilt title cars on the XXXX  website right now as i type this note. Im sure that on the XXXX website today atleast 55 % of all the cars on their platform are junk / rebuilt / salvage title. XXXX  must be audited by an independent company to confirm that they are not still doing this to innocent people that work hard for their money. They are putting profits before saftey and they are playing with fire. i want 100 % of my money back. I have also been warning people on other consumer websites and all over social media, XXXX  and XXXX  and all of the car related groups.\n\nNo matter what XXXX says they need to fully verify & validate each vehicles information that a person uploads onto their platform in order to protect the consumer. If they fail to do so they need to fully compensate the person that eneded up renting these junk cars at full price. The XXXX websites says : \" No Junk, Salavage Or Rebuilt Titles Allowed '' plain and simple. They should put a Warning Sign on their website that says : \" We sometimes mess up and allow people to upload their junk, salvage, rebuilt title cars on the platform where unaware consumers pay full price and risk serious injury. '' XXXX  keeps saying that i never reported any problems that i had with each car to them. Car # 1 broke in 2 weeks because the transmission broke. So i called the owner directly and told him the car broke. He said ok no problem I will upload a new car to XXXX  and i will put you in a new car. Car # 2 also had problems with the brake system and the car owner said again ok no problem I will upload a new car to XXXX and i will put you in a new car. Then Car # 3 broke when the tire exploded and had no spare tire or tire removal tools and again he said ok no problem I will upload a new car to XXXX  and i will put you in a new car. At this time i was NOT aware that each of these 3 cars were all junk, rebuilt, salvage titles. XXXX also failed to disclose this to me each time. Obviously each car had a problem. Obivously XXXX never did any verifications on each car. XXXX  always says to contact the car owner directly when there is a problem with the car. After all XXXX says they are only a platform, so what can they do for me if a car breaks? Nothing. The car owner said he has 10 cars i can choose from, so that was the fastest solution for me. The next step & the first step should have been for them to tell the car owner : \" sorry we cant accept your cars on our platform due to the invalid title that came up on our inspection ''.\n\nFor Car # 3 The XXXX XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX I Contacted the XXXX Claims Department because a person very lightly hit the mirror of the car i was driving. I got a police report from the Florida Highway Patrol ( Crash # XXXX  ) for the incident that happened XX/XX/XXXX. The estimated amount of damage was around {$100.00}. I also notified the car owner at the same time so he can contact XXXX and so he can work it out with the driver at fault and their insurance. He was going to pay for the replacement top cover of the drivers side mirror. That was the only cosmetic damage & it did not require a stay at the body shop. The mirror top was going to be painted and then installed. It took about 4 days from XX/XX/XXXX -XX/XX/XXXX for me to hear from the car owner because he said he was out of the country on vacation. The car owner was unavailable and was on vacation out of the country almost every weekend.\n\nAt this point and time during the Claims Process, the XXXX  claims department blocked me as a driver while they investigated everything on their end for this incident they said. After 2 or 3 days of me being blocked from renting, XXXX reinstated my ability to re rent the same vehicle, Car # 3 after everything was squared away with the other drivers insurance and the car owner and XXXX all at the same time.\n\nDURING THIS CLAIMS INVESTIGATION AROUND XX/XX/XXXX NO ONE FROM XXXX CHECKED OR FLAGGED THE VEHICLE FOR HAVING A REBUILT, SALVAGE, JUNK TITLE. THEY JUST LET ME RE RENT IT AGAIN. ONCE AGAIN THEY FAILED TO PROTECT ME.\n\nAlso, for Car # 3 The XXXX XXXX on about XX/XX/XXXX I did a chargeback request to my bank for {$51.00} for the day of XX/XX/XXXX because the car tire exploded while i was driving. The car had no spare tire in the trunk, no lug nut removal tool and no car jack to lift the car. It took me about 4 hours to resolve this tire problem on my own. I had been asking the car owner for several weeks before the tire blew up when was he going to buy new tires because they were looking bald and he would just delay and stall me for time with excuses.\n\nI lost this dispute on XX/XX/XXXX for {$51.00} ( Ally Bank Dispute # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ) because i failed to properly fill out all the forms my bank requested on time because i was just too busy with alot of things going on at once. I felt that i should have recieved this credit for the mission i was put on. I had to push the car by myself on a saturday night as the sun was setting all by myself.\n\nBasically that same day the tire blew up I decided to no longer deal with XXXX  or the car or the car owner. I could no longer concentrate, focus or trust the vehicles that I had been given. I did not feel safe on the road anymore. I lost all faith and felt unsafe and unsure of using these cars that i was being given. I kept feeling worried and afraid that i would break down again in the middle of no where at night all by myself. I emailed XXXX  and the car owner that I would no longer be renting the vehicle and I instructed the car owner to pick up the car at my house. It took him about 4 days to pick up the car because he was out of the country on vacation once again.\n\nXXXX seems to not care or not understand that i did everything correct as a consumer. I followed all of the rules and i played fair. I was the one scammed here.\n\nXXXX also said that they immediately kicked out the car owner and his cars from the site once they were alerted. Yea, i was the one that had to investigate everything by myself and i am the one who brought this to XXXX attention after they first said that they did a full review and said that all the cars titles were good. I then showed them proof that each car was a junk title. Its incredible how i am the one being scammed here and i have had to do all of the work and show all of the proof that XXXX  never did. Its like if i am doing a better job then everyone that works at XXXX.\n\nI am the one that got scammed, i am the one that figured this whole mess out, I am the one having to provide proof of everything while XXXX wants to sit back and put the blame on me and say that i did not do things correctly.\n\nThey want to deny my refund because they say : \" The consumer claims to have been put in danger, however they chose to continue with the rental, and continue making extensions with the rental. '' Well if i would have known that each car was a junk car i would of never of rented it or used it.\n\nXXXX XXXX says that i should of done this or done that, but they did zero to protect me.\n\nI called XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX to speak to a manager about my case. They told me on XX/XX/XXXX that a manager would call me back on XX/XX/XXXX. Mid day on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX still had not called me back, so i called them, the customer service rep said hold on one second while i find a manager, 2 minutes later the rep hung up on me, i called back the XXXX number and they have blocked my phone number from being able to call their XXXX  number for customer service.\n\nThis company is up to no good. Mid XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX I tried to contact at XXXX : XXXX XXXX. Phone : XXXX to let him know about my case. i got this number from the XXXX report. I called the # and this number i am still able to reach but it is just a recording that goes to an answering machine that no one answers or responds to. I will keep the XXXX updated on if they block me from this # as well.\n\nI have attached a snap shot of the video & The Video Link to watch the video that shows and plays the recording of me calling the XXXX  XXXX  customer service number on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX and it says that I am still blocked from being able to call them and then it hangs up on me.\n\nWatch The Video of this on XXXX  : XXXX XXXX XXXX I also ask that XXXX provide & release evidence of all phone records & logs, email communications and recorded phone conversations regarding my account from every single conversation they have had with me. You will hear in these phone conversations the frustration & pain in my voice and the feeling of overwhelming confusion and mental & emotional abuse that I endured while everyone at XXXX played games with me, gave me the wrong information and did sneaky things & lied every single time to try to get rid of me and at the same time try to sweep everything under the rug. All of this abuse took place while I was genuinely trying to resolve everything in good faith with them.\n\nI have heard 5 different reasons & have as evidence & it is documented from 5 different people at XXXX  as to why they did not want to honor my refund, while at the same time no one addressed my concerns.\n\nI have also contacted and reporting eveything that XXXX  has been doing to the SEC ( U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission ) online via the investor compalint form. CASE NUMBER : XXXX.   Their stock symbol is XXXX. i feel that their stockholders and board members and others would like to know that XXXX daily profits involve lying to consumers and the rental of illegal unsafe vehicles to the public with no disclosure.\n\nI RETURNED THE LAST RENTAL ON XX/XX/XXXX. I LET XXXX KNOW ABOUT THESE JUNK, SALVAGE, REBUILT TITLE CARS ON 8/21/18 IMMEDIATELY AFTER I FOUND OUT ABOUT ALL OF THIS BY LUCK WHEN I WAS LOOKING AROUND THE XXXX   WEBSITE ONXX/XX/XXXX BECAUSE I WAS INTERESTED IN BUYING A CAR AND PUTTING IT FOR RENT ON THE XXXX  WEBSITE PLATFORM SO OTHERS COULD RENT IT FROM ME.\n\nI THEN WENT TO THEIR CAR INSURANCE & REGISTRATION SECTION TO READ MORE DETAILS & I SAW IT SAID : \" NO REBUILT OR SALVAGE TITLES ALLOWED ON XXXX. I THEN WENT TO THE TAB FOR MY PAST CAR RENTALS AND I WAS LOOKING AT THE YEAR, MAKES AND MODELS OF THE CARS I HAD RENTED.\n\nI THEN SAW THE VIN NUMBERS & SOMETHING INSIDE ME TOLD ME TO XXXX : HOW TO CHECK A CAR VIN NUMBER FOR FREE ONLINE & THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, VEHICLE INFORMATION CHECK WEBSITE CAME UP.\n\nI ENTERED THE VIN NUMBER FOR 1 CAR IN THE SYSTEM AND I COULD NOT BELIEVE WHAT IT SAID : \" REBUILT/SALVAGE TITLE ''.\n\nMY FACE TURNED RED AND I COULDNT BELIEVE IT. I THEN ENTERED THE OTHER 2 VIN NUMBERS AND THEY WERE ALL THE SAME JUNK AS WELL.\n\nI WAS VERY UPSET & I IMMEDIATLEY CALLED XXXX & EMAILED THEM WITH MY FINDINGS AND THATS WHEN THIS WHOLE PROCESS BEGAN ON XX/XX/XXXX OF XXXX LYING TO ME AND GIVING ME THE RUN AROUND AND MISDIRECTING ME, ETC.\n\nXXXX is complaining that i took about 50 days after i returned the last vehicle to reach out for a refund. I would of reached out & made the same complaints & refund requests wheather i would of found out about this within 1 day or 1 year of having returned the last rental.\n\nI was lucky to even be able to find out about this whole mess, cover up & misdirection that XXXX put me through with these junk, salvage, rebuilt titles.\n\nXXXX  & their Insurance company & The XXXX Claims Department failed to pick up on this scam as it was happening to me live in real time. And it happened with 3 cars in a row. And plus they let me re rent the same car after i was blocked as a driver for the incident on XX/XX/XXXX without disclosing anything to me.\n\nAnd there is no excuse for the way XXXX treated me or handled this incident once i brought it to their attention. Their repeated lies, misdirection & total ignorance to this serious problem leads me to believe that they totally knew about this from the beginning & that they have done this in the past & will continue to do this to unsuspecting victims such as myself in the future. XXXX has to have a network/computer security team in their back office that has some sort of computer program that flags these cars on their platforms once it runs the VIN # s.\n\nI have tried over and over again from the beginning with XXXX to try and resolve this in good faith but even up till now they are just giving me the run around and there is no excuse for it.\n\nXXXX  did fraud on me, gave me an unsafe vehicle, gave me a poor quality product that was not as described, they failed to protect me as a consumer, they failed to properly inspect, confirm & certify the products they allow on their platform & they never disclosed anything to me.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-01-22T19:03:42.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"33193","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3130534","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ALLY FINANCIAL INC.","date_received":"2019-01-22T17:10:03.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX should not even be allowed to have a <em>credit</em> card machine or bank account."]},"sort":[5.1541004,"3130534"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12556771","_score":5.077422,"_source":{"product":"Prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I am writing to you about an incident that occurred while my wife and I were using and American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX while staying at XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX VA XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. The purpose of our visit was to celebrate our XXXX wedding anniversary and enjoy dinner at our favorite XXXX XXXX XXXX restaurant, XXXX XXXX. Unfortunately, our entire stay and dinner was marred by a theft of funds ( {$950.00} ) from our American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( card # XXXX ) following our presenting the card to the hotel desk staff during our check-in process. \n\nI am specifically writing to you to complain about the total lack of customer service and support I received from your Gift Card Customer Service Team and your Dispute Resolution Team including their respective management teams. The highlighted text in the chronology below provides specific examples of my complaint.\n\nThe following is a chronological outline of the events leading up to and following the incident. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX -- I made my reservation for the XXXX XXXX via my business account on XXXX, my trusted travel management partner. I used my XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX to secure the reservation. The XXXX confirmation number is XXXX. \nXX/XX/XXXX -- I contacted the XXXX XXXX via cellphone to ensure that I could in fact use my American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX  to pay for all charges related to our stay and was assured that I could and that all I needed to do was to advise the check-in staff to hold all charges until we actually checked out on the morning XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX -- My reservation was later acknowledged by the XXXX reservation system which sent me a confirmation email on XX/XX/XXXX citing Confirmation number XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX EST I received an email from XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) welcoming us to the XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX by XXXX from our home at XXXX XXXX to the XXXX XXXX. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX  ESTWe finished brunch at XXXX the XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, VA XXXX. We paid for our meal using our American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX. The transaction successfully processed for {$46.00} leaving a remaining balance on the gift card of {$950.00} as noted on the American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX transaction log ( see attached transaction log ). \nXX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX ESTWe arrived at the XXXX XXXX at and parked our vehicle in the XXXX XXXX XXXX level P2 and proceeded to take the elevator to the lobby. \nXX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX  EST -- We began our check-in at the XXXX  front desk. At this time we advised the young female clerk that we would not be using the credit card that was used to make the reservation, but instead we would be using our American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX. She then asked to see the card and proceeded to swipe the card to place a hold of funds. The initial attempt to process the card was declined by American Express ( see attached transaction log entry at XXXX ; XXXX XXXX EST, {$49.00} Declined XXXX XXXX Autograph XXXX ). A male colleague then assisted the female desk clerk and explained that she had to use the additional security features associated with the card to process the transaction. The male desk clerk the successfully processed a {$1.00} transaction that is noted on the attached American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX Transaction Log at XXXX XXXX EST. The male clerk then explained that they would place a note on our XXXX account advising the morning staff not to use the XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX used to make the reservation, instead wait until the guest checked out using the American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX. The female clerk stated that she would be in on her morning shift and would ensure our checkout was processed correctly. \nXX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX EST -- We were issued our room ( 404 ) key cards ( 2 cards ) and proceeded to our rooms. We unpacked and began getting ready for our XXXX dinner reservations at XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX VA XXXX. \nXX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX EST we departed our room for the one block walk to XXXX XXXX \nXX/XX/XXXX, at approximately XXXX XXXX EST we arrived at XXXX XXXX and were seated in the XXXX dining room next to the window facing XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX PM our waitress began taking our order. See attached XXXX XXXX receipt. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX -- Our waitress attempted to process a transaction against our American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX the amount of {$140.00} and found that the available balance on the Gift card was on {$.00} ( XXXX cents ). I explained there had to be a mistake and that there should be nearly {$950.00} on the card. The manager then ran our card again showing the following : an available balance of $ XXXXand success debit transaction of {$.00} transaction with a card balance of {$0.00}. I immediately logged on to my American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX Account and found that in fact a fraudulent transaction in the amount of {$950.00} has been processed at a XXXX XXXX store in XXXX NH at $ XXXX XXXX  ( see attached American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX Transaction Log ) XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX -- After being publicly embarrassed in XXXX XXXX, we paid the remaining balance of our dinner bill using our XXXX XXXX XXXX and returned to the hotel. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX EST -- I called American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX customer service line ( XXXX ) to report the fraudulent transaction and seek assistance in the recovery of funds. American Express customer service explained that they had to wait for the transaction to go from pending to processed to affect a recovery of the funds and issue me a new card. They further advised me to make appropriate police reports in the jurisdictions where all of the transactions occurred. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX EST -- I contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding the incident since the first use and transaction of the subject XXXX XXXX was at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX referred me to the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX because the restaurant is actually in the Sheriffs jurisdiction outside the the City of XXXX XXXX \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX -- XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Badge # XXXX contacted me and took my statement. My incident report/case number # XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, approximately XXXX XXXX  approached the front desk at the XXXX XXXX and requested to speak with both the senior manager on duty and hotel security. The female desk clerk advised us that neither a manager nor hotel security worked weekends. She asked why I needed to speak with them. I described the situation, and she requested I send copies of the American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX Transaction Log to the following email XXXX. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX AM EST I emailed the transaction logs to the XXXX inbox and verbally confirmed receipt with the front desk clerk. She acknowledged receipt of the email and transaction logs. She then provided me the email of XXXX XXXX XXXX the Manager of both the XXXX and XXXX House properties and suggested I contact him on Monday XX/XX/XXXX when he returns to work to discuss the incident. I then advised the front desk clerk I wanted our entire stay and all charges to be comped for the pain, suffering, and embarrassment we had experienced that literally ruined our XXXX wedding anniversary celebration. She acknowledged my request and did not ask for any form of payment or provide any receipt for our stay. \nXX/XX/XXXX, at approximately XXXX XXXX  we departed the XXXX XXXX via our POV. \nXX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX  EST I contacted XXXX XXXX Fraud and Loss Prevention Department and spoke with XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX policy prohibits release of employees last name or employee number ). XXXX was able to locate the {$950.00} transaction at the XXXX NH XXXX XXXX located at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX NH XXXX in the XXXX XXXX at XXXX. The transaction was an in-person transaction and consisted of a total purchase of {$1600.00} split into two forms of gift card payments. XXXX XXXX advised me that any further information related to the transaction would need to be handled by an authorized law enforcement agency request. \nXXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX EST contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX  based on a recommendation of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Badge # XXXX due to the potential need for XXXX XXXX investigation since it appears that at least some portion of the incident occurred in XXXX PDs jurisdiction ( i.e., Alexandrian Hotel ). XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX # XXXX took my verbal statement via telephone and generated case # XXXX. XXXX XXXX asked if we had the names of the clerks who handle the gift card and I said we did not. He the asked for a physical description which we provided : ( 1 ) female ; dark complexion, dark hair maybe XXXX or similar XXXX  XXXX ethnicity ; XXXX ; age mid to late XXXX ; ( 2 ) male ; dark complexion, dark hair maybe XXXX or similar XXXX XXXX ethnicity ; XXXX XXXX ; no facial hair and black-framed professional eye glasses. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX EST based on the collective advice of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX I contacted the XXXX NH Police Department to file a incident report. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX took my report and open case # XXXX. Detective XXXX proceeded to visit the XXXX NH XXXX XXXX and interviewed the store manager who was able to identify the specific transaction of Friday XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX XXXX EST in the amount of {$950.00}. The store manager was also able to identify and secure the store surveillance video of the checkout station of the transaction. The description of the individual conducting the transaction was a young XXXX female mid to late XXXX. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX EST I called American Express XXXX XXXX Customer Service ( XXXX ) XXXX and provided the entire chronology and details related to the fraudulent use/theft of funds from our gift card. I was told that I should call back no earleir than XX/XX/XXXX to file a \" transaction dispute as American Express must wait until the retail merchant 's transaction complete processes. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX  ESTI called American Express XXXX XXXX Customer Service and was finally advised that I could file a transaction dispute ( see attached dispute case # XXXX ). I was then told it would take between 45 and 90 days to investigate and determine what if restitution would be made. I complained to the customer service representative that that was excessive and unacceptable given I had prvide extensive facts and forensic evidence to prove the card information was fraudulently acquired and the theft of {$950.00} was affected 550 miles from my physical location. I asked to be escalated to a supervisor or manager. I was told no supervisors were available but one would call me back in 24 to 48 hours ... a classic case of deny and delay on American Express ' part. Plus no one bothered to returned my call as promised. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX EDT I called American Express XXXX XXXX Customer Service ( XXXX ) XXXX to inquire as to why I had not recieved a call back from a supervisor or manager. Again, the customer service representative wanted a complete rehash of all the previous calls and when I explained that I am challenging the 45-90-day response timeline and requested to speak to a supervisor. I expereinced the same deny and delay tactics of the representative reading a customer interaction script and also reviewing the American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX FAQ references that this particular representative felt were applicable to my case. Once again I was told a manager/supervisor would return my call within 24 to 48 hours. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX EDT I once again called American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX Customer Service ( XXXX ) XXXX only to get the same run around and scripted responses related to the 4590-day processing time to investigate a transaction dispute. Additionally, I was not escalated to manager when I requested ... in fact the representive put me on hold and eventually the call disconnected. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX  EDT, I call the American Express XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX NY XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX and spoke with a switchboard operator named XXXX XXXX sp ). XXXX was more helpful that any of the previous customer service reps from the Gift Card section ever tried. She transferred me to in her words the American Express XXXX XXXX Fraud Office ( XXXX ) XXXX, option 2. Unfortunately, and through no fault of XXXX 's this was a mis -direct as the office she transferred me to was a generic outsourced \" gift card fraud '' hot line that AMEX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX and numerous other retail gift card companies use as a fraud clearing house. The Gentleman I spoke with was empathetic but was only able to give me the ( XXXX ) XXXX American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX Customer Service number. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX; XXXX EDT I found a number listed as American Express Fraud Department... ( XXXX ) XXXX. When I can in i was challenged by a AI voicebot that attempted to authenticate me via my name and SSAN because I did not have a current AMEX Credit Card Account albeit it did find my expired account ending in XXXX. After a bit of social engineering of the voicebot menu I was routed to an actual American Express Fraud specialist ( XXXX XXXX who took all the info I had regarding my case and indicated he would first connect with the American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX Dispute Resolution team on my behalf iin order to get to a manager. Unfortunately, all he did was initiate a transfer to the same American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX team. This encounter was yet another epic fail with a rep named XXXX XXXX sp ). Yet again I was forced to give the entire background and sorted details. I objected vigorously and stated i wanted to speak with a manager. XXXX refused until I gave the gift card number, expriation date, and PIN and the reason I wanted to speak with a manager. Finally she acquiesced and placed me on hold awating a manager. I was then routed to XXXX ( sp ) a supposed manager. XXXX yet again reiterated all the same FAQ and information about the XXXX day dispute resolution process. I asked him why it takes 45 to 90 days and he could not or would not provide me with an responsive answer. I then requested to be escalated to the next level of management to which I got the well no one is currently available, but someone will call you back in 24 to 48 hours. He further stated that the transcript of all my previous calls did not show that I requested escallation to a manager! At that point I again requested a manager call back and further requested my transcript to reflect my request for manager call back. \nXX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX EDT I once again contact American Express Corporate Headquarters and reached a lady named XXXX who unlike the Gift Card Customer Service Team was extremely helpful. She provided me the XXXX email. \n\nI requested XXXX XXXX to conduct an internal investigation to determine if their employees are involved in the theft of my gift card number, expiration date and security PIN and the ultimate theft of the {$950.00} balance that was used in the XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX fraudulent transaction at the XXXX NH XXXX XXXX. I requested XXXX XXXX and the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXo secure and preserve all relevant surveillance video of the interaction between myself, my wife and the two desk clerks from the time of check-in of XX/XX/XXXX, until the two desk clerks depart the XXXX property at the end of their XX/XX/XXXX, duty shift. Finally, I requested XXXX XXXX, and the Alexandrian conduct a comprehensive XXXX forensic audit of their point-of-sale terminal involved in processing my American Express XXXX Gift XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX to determine if there was/is any malicious malware that compromised my gift card and its data to facilitate the theft of funds. All requests were approved by XXXX XXXX XXXX General Manager, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, The XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX  Properties, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX VA XXXX ; cell phone ( XXXX ) XXXX. While XXXX XXXX was cooperative and empathetic to our situation, he has not shared any results of the internal investigation with me. He indicated that when presented with a lawful search warrant or subpeona from law enforcement he would fully comply with releasing any relevant reports and video surveillence. \n\nThe reason I am suspicious if the XXXX XXXX and its staff who interacted with myself and my wife at check-in as well as your point-of-sale terminal and software is due to the proximity of the interaction to the use of or compromise/theft of the {$950.00} from our American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX at a location 550+ miles from our physical location in XXXX VA. The gift card was initially handled and processed by the female desk clerk and the transaction she attempted was declined ( see American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX transaction log at XXXX XXXX in the amount of {$49.00} declined ). Next the male desk clerk appears to take possession of the card and stated, oh you have to enter the card number, the expiration date and the PIN in order to process a transaction. He successfully ran the {$1.00} transaction which is also recorded at XXXXXXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. It is our understanding that some point-of- sale terminals will display the available card balance following a successful transaction. The very next transaction that occurs on our gift card is XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX ( 1 hour and 26 minutes after the hotel staff handled our card ) in the amount of {$950.00} at a XXXX XXXX in XXXX NH, 550 miles from the XXXXXXXX  XXXX XXXX This transaction was conducted in person by an unknown XXXX female per the in-store video surveillance retained by XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX The only other time the card was handled by someone other than me was at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX VA XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX XXXX EST and that scenario is also being investigated by the XXXX XXXX XXXX Department. However, the time lag between the card use in XXXX and the fraudulent transaction is outside the typical window of either a cyber compromise or physical compromise and theft of the funds. \n\nThis letter and the full chronology and was provided to American Express XXXX XXXX Customer Service on XX/XX/XXXX, the XXXX XXXX VA XXXX Department, the XXXX VA Police Department and the XXXX NH Police Department as well as the appropriate Federal Law Enforcement Agencies responsible for cyber and financial crimes. \n\nGiven my wife and I already experienced a terrible and embarrassing experience of having our American Express XXXX XXXX declined and then the having the {$950.00} balance stolen, I never expected American Express to add insult onto injury with a continuous string of customer no service. I found it to follow that typical insurance industry tactic of delay, deny, depose. \n\nThe final bit of background on how I ended up with {$10000.00} of American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX. In XXXX of XXXX I was notified by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) that I was the Grand Prize Winner of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Amongst the large prizes of a new Customized XXXX XXXX pickup truck, a Customized XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX and {$10000.00} of American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nNeither XXXX nor XXXX XXXX are as yet aware of my negative experience with American Express and the fact that despite following to the letter the security protocol for using the American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX I experienced a fraud/theft of {$950.00}. I am certain both organizations will not look favorably on the situation as it reflects negatively on their respective brands. \n\nIn closing, XXXX XXXX, I want to afford you and your leadership team to engage and correct this unsatisfactory customer service scenario and to expedite the restitution of my {$950.00}. I provided your dispute resolution team the chronology, physical and forensic evidence to substantiate the fraud and theft of card funds by basically doing the research and fact finding in less than 16 hours of my personal timein essence I did their job. \n\nThank you in advance for your engagement and consideration of my request. \n\n\nRespectfully XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX VA XXXXXXXX XXXX : XXXX 3Attachments 1.American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX Transaction Log DATED XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX 2.American Express XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Transaction Dispute case # XXXX 3. IC3 Complaint XX/XX/XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX EST 3 Additional References : 1.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Badge # XXXX incident report/case number # XXXX, Cell # ( XXXX ) XXXX 2.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Badge # XXXX case # XXXX, CELL # ( XXXX ) XXXX 3.XXXX NH XXXX Detective XXXX XXXX took my report and open case # XXXX , Cell # ( XXXX ) XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-19T23:01:23.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","sub_product":"General-purpose prepaid card","zip_code":"231XX","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12556771","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2025-03-19T22:46:50.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Charged for a purchase or transfer you did not make with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["IC3 <em>Complaint</em> XX/XX/XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX EST 3 Additional References : 1.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Badge # XXXX incident <em>report</em>/case number # XXXX, Cell # ( XXXX ) XXXX 2.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Badge # XXXX case # XXXX, CELL # ( XXXX ) XXXX 3.XXXX NH XXXX Detective XXXX XXXX took my <em>report</em> and open case # XXXX , Cell # ( XXXX ) XXXX"]},"sort":[5.077422,"12556771"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2759570","_score":5.055785,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint and web article is an update from XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX To XXXX. XXXX : Stop Playing Games. Turn over the keys! \nAs Standing Trustee, You ALONE, are Responsible for all Matters Related to Our Assets & Property. To Not Comply is in Defiance of Federal & State Laws! \n\nTO : XXXX XXXX XXXX, Chief Executive Officer XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nXXXX, NC XXXX WARNING! \n\n\n\n\n\nTAKE HEED Who is Liable? \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccording to Federal and State Municipal and Local Statutory Laws and Codes, that would be : YOU! \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBecause your subordinates can not be used as a shield to hide you from your legal transgressions. \n\n\n\n( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX Assistant Vice President/Trustee XXXX XXXX : Assistant Vice President, Beneficiary, Bank of America, as \" Servicer '' XXXX XXXX? Mortgage Complaint Resolution ) Legal Sins that continuously and continually are causing the loss of XXXX XXXX and property. \n\n\n\n\n\n\nAt a compounding cost of countless dollars and holdings. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBut not without financial and legally grave consequences. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nBoth Civil and Criminal \" Civil Cases vs. Criminal Cases - Key Differences Civil cases usually involve private disputes between persons or organizations. Criminal cases involve an action that is considered to be harmful to society as a whole. Below is a comparison of the key differences between civil and criminal cases. '' ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) '' For you, it 's the calm before the storm. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nI need those keys, or you 'll be forced out of seclusion by my rightful and legally permitted plan of action. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nI will change the lock ( which I planned to do anywy ) and move in without further notice. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAND ... ..who 'll take the punitive damages liability, the penalty and criminal code punishment if my efforts to extend an Olive Branch to Bank of America falls through? \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThe Bank of America Board Chair and CEO, that 's whom. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nI 've requested the keys to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , CA , but no more. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nNow, I 'm demanding them AND QUICK! \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEspecially since learning that the CEO has the ability to hand over those keys because he has first hand access to the property. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nI will start by confronting you on your tactics, the same asXXXX XXXX XXXX, United States Senator, as he did relative to Bank of America, or should I say, \" your '' Swipe Fees? \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\" First, there is no evidence that your bank could not continue to offer debit cards profitably just with the revenue you will receive under the generous maximum interchange fee rates that the Federal Reserve has established. The Fed found that it costs a bank on average around 7 cents to conduct a debit transaction, and likely far less for a bank with your economies of scale.\n\nUnder the Feds rule you will be allowed to profit handsomely by collecting around 24 cents per transaction. Your decision to charge a new monthly debit fee is an overt attempt to make even more profit off the backs of your customers. \n\n\n\nSecond, I am aware that you and your industry seek to blame swipe fee reform, which I drafted and Congress enacted, for your decision to raise fees on your customers. However, this justification does not add up. According to industry analysts your bank has 38.7 million debit cardholders. Assuming that these cardholders remain your customers and pay your new {$5.00} dollar fee, Bank of America will make an estimated {$2.00} billion annually from this fee on top of the enormous profit it will already receive under the Feds swipe fee rates. \n\n\n\nYet you recently claimed in an SEC filing that the revenue impact of swipe fee reform on your bank would be significantly less than {$2.00} billion - even if the Fed had set a XXXX cent cap rather than the XXXX cent cap they established. It appears that your new fee will result in another windfall for your bank with swipe fee reform as an excuse. \n\n\n\nI challenge you to prove otherwise. \n\n\n\n\n\nThe American people deserve to know the real story about the swipe fee system and the way big banks have colluded to profit excessively at the expense of our nations businesses and consumers. Debit and credit card swipe fees generate billions for your bank each year. But you did not earn these fees by bettering your competitors in a free market, which is how Main Street businesses have to make their money. \n\n\n\nRather, you earned these billions because the Visa and MasterCard duopoly fixed the same high swipe fee rates for your bank that they did for every other bank, thereby immunizing this revenue stream from competitive pressures that would hold fees at a reasonable level. \n\n\n\nNow that the truth about the anti-competitive swipe fee system has been exposed and the process of reform has begun, banks like yours are desperately looking to keep the money flowing like it did in the past. \n\n\n\nAnd as your new fee demonstrates, you are now looking for ways to make even more lucrative profits off of debit cards than you did before. I do not think your customers will be fooled by this. '' The \" American People '' and I, deserve and demand to know why you 're paying lip service to the approval and recording of a \" Clear Title '' Document. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nA Reconveyance indigenous to our referenced property that you knew full well and acknowledged. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThat which already has been evident since XX/XX/XXXX, thanks to a Court Ordered Discharge Decree ofa Chapter XXXX Judge and Trustee. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEspecially in light of your Mortgage racketeering history. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFirst, it was countrywide Loans, CEOXXXX XXXX XXXX illegally concocted a false claim of ownership, even though we never successfully contracted any agreement with that Company. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nWhile under your Trusteeship, XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX joined XXXX XXXX XXXX in a racket to swindle us of possession of our property. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThis charade occurring fewer than two months before we were unceremoniously kicked out of property that you personally declared us as owners, \" Under Penalty of Perjury. '' \" Bank of America tops list of mortgage complaints by borrowers The lender has accounted for 30 % of complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, with two-thirds of them involving modifications. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX|By XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank of America noted that the bureau 's website shows 98 % of the problems ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. , which handles customer service on about 15 % of U.S. home loans, has accounted for 30 % of the mortgage complaints logged by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau , according to a new database made public by the federal watchdog. \n\n\n\nThe level of customer discontent far greater than at home-lending rivals XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reflects BofA 's struggles since its XX/XX/XXXX acquisition of XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n\n\nin XXXX. Countrywide had become the No. 1 mortgage firm by specializing in subprime and other high-risk loans. \n\nBofA, which has recorded tens of billions of dollars in losses on Countrywide loans, was the object of 15,136 mortgage complaints since XX/XX/XXXX,  when the consumer bureau began taking complaints about home loans. \n\n\nThe bank noted that the bureau 's website shows that 98 % of the problems have been resolved. '' The way it looks to me, XXXX XXXX XXXX, has assumed possession of the house XXXX XXXX XXXX Stole from XXXX XXXX & XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n\n\n\n\nIn essence, that makes you the succeeding Swindler. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThat means for each day you withhold possession from us, the more for which you shall answer. \n\n\n\n\" California Theft / Larceny Law Theft ( also calledlarceny ) is a crime against property in California. To provetheft, a prosecutor must establish the defendant 's intent to permanently take or withhold the property owner 's possession or right to the property -- in other words, thespecific intent to steal. Theft can take on many forms depending on the type of property taken as it can involve : Personal property ; Money ; Real property ; or The value of labor or services. \n\n\nCalifornia Code, Penal Code - PEN 484 | '' \" XXXX XXXX XXXX Announces Upsize and Pricing of Public Offering of Common Shares XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX  Eastern Standard Time A story in XXXX, says that several Bank and Mortgage Company CEO 's have \" bought out '' XXXX XXXX, the thief who stole XXXX. \n\n\" Sometimes, it can take place entirely without the owner 's knowledge. However, theft can also occur where an owner entrusts property to another for a temporary or ongoing purpose and the recipient then fails to return the property when due. \n\n\nTheft is either classified as petty theft or grand theft in California, a difference that depends on the value of the property. Generally, grand theft exists where the property is valued above {$950.00}, but there are some exceptions, such as where the property is taken from the victim 's person or where the property taken consists of a firearm. '' XXXX XXXX XXXX  '' Or, put another way ; received Stolen Goods `` Receiving Stolen Property What Does It Mean to \" Receive Stolen Property ''? \n\n\nReceiving stolen property is acrime to purchase or accept property that you know or believe was obtained through theft.The crime is separate from robbery, extortion, or theft.Receiving stolen property is a crime in order to deter people from aiding or rewarding thieves by buying stolen property, concealing stolen property, and to deter theft in general. \n\n\n\nReceiving stolen propertymay be a misdemeanor or felony. '' This is in reference to Our home, our assetsin particular, and a plantation of homes in general. \n\n\n\" In order to be convicted of receiving stolen property, the prosecution must show Property Was In Fact Stolen : In order to be convicted of a receipt of stolen property, the property must actually be in a stolen status. \n\nThis means that the police can not set up the defendant to receive the stolen property just to bust him or her. \n\nKnowledge : The defendant must have knowledge that the property was stolen, or should have known, that the property was stolen Intent to Defraud Owner : The defendant had intent to deprive the owner of his or her property, such as by keeping it, selling it, or giving it away to another party. '' XXXX \" owned '' XXXX XXXX, which now is in the hands of several racketeers. \n\n\nAs in the house he stole from us, we have Proof Of Reconveyance, from a Court Ordered Discharge and several CEO 's. \n\n\n\nAmong them, you, as XXXX XXXX XXXX, Bank ofAmerica. \n\n\n\nHard to extend an Olive Branch to a CEO whose Vice Presidents recorded a Deed on behalf of my spouse and yours truly, and then you assume liability Trusteeship of the house ( s ) XXXX swiped. \n\n\n\n\" XXXX XXXX, BofA XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX are joint book-running managers for the offering, and XXXX XXXX XXXX is a co-manager for the offering. '' \" U.S. CodeTitle 18Part IChapter 31 641 18 U.S. Code 641 - Public money, property or records prev |next Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use or the use of another, or without authority, sells, conveys or disposes of anyrecord, voucher, money, or thing of value of theUnited Statesor of any department or agency thereof, or any property made or being made under contract for theUnited Statesor any department or agency thereof ; or Whoever receives, conceals, or retains the same with intent to convert it to his use or gain, knowing it to have been embezzled, stolen, purloined or converted Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both ; but if thevalueof such property in the aggregate, combining amounts from all the counts for which the defendant is convicted in a single case, does not exceed the sum of {$1000.00}, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. '' In some states, according to \" XXXX XXXX. XXXX, '' the prosecution must show that you intended to aid the thief by purchasing or accepting the stolen property. \n\n\nSome states also differentiate between receiving and possessing stolen property. \n\n\nWell, if we do n't get the keys to the house, or we encounter resistance when we move in, or fail to acquirewritten and literal assistance to repossess the premises, that 's the direct link to the receiving of stolen property. \n\n\n\" XXXX, Ariz. -- ( XXXX XXXX ) -- XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX : XXXX ) ( the Company ) announced today that it priced its underwritten public offering of 20,076,891 of its  common shares at a public offering price of {$32.00} per share. \n\nThe Company is offering 9,600,000 of its common shares, according toXXXX, which it says was upsized from the previously announced 8,000,000 common shares, and the selling shareholders are offering 10,476,891 common shares. '' The gross proceeds to the Company, says the article, will be {$310.00} million. \n\n\nThe Company will not receive any proceeds, it says, from the offering of common shares by the selling shareholders. \n\n\n\" The Company and certain of the selling shareholders have granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 1,505,465 common shares and 1,506,068 common shares from the Company and such selling shareholders, respectively, at the public offering price. \n\nThe offering is expected to close on XX/XX/XXXX, subject to customary closing conditions. '' By proxy of their lingering partnership in Criminal Foreclosures and other Illegal rackets, You, Bank of America CEO XXXX XXXX XXXX are joined at the hip with all the operatives named in the purchase and sale by XXXX XXXX. \n\n\" What If I Did Not Know That the Property Was Stolen? '' The answer : Bank of America is the Trustee So if my spouse an me, as owners possession of the property, then it 's stolen. \n\n\n\n\" The key factor between receiving and possessing stolen property is the timing of the knowledge that it was stolen. If the person receiving the property knew it was stolen at the time of acquisition, then the person is guilty. If the person discovered the property was stolen after accepting it, but still intends to keep it or use it for a dishonest purpose ( such as selling it to someone else ), then the person is guilty of possessing stolen property. '' Because XXXX knows his act of forgery, fraud and embezzlement have caught up to him. \n\n\n\nXXXX has said he wanted out, and now, out he goes. \n\n\n\" Trump friend XXXX XXXX cashes out of XXXX XXXX XXXX '' And just as your swipe fees caught up to you, your actions and racketeering on real estate issues are catching up too. \n\n\n\n\n\n\" Analysts have noted that the real rationale behind your new debit fee is likely not to cover debit processing costs ( which are minimal and easily covered by the Feds generous rule ) but rather to push more consumers to use credit cards whose swipe fees are still unregulated and far exceed debit swipe fees. But here competition will help provide an important check. \n\n\n\nWhen drafting my legislation I anticipated that banks would push consumers toward credit cards so I included a provision allowing merchants to offer discounts for debit versus credit. This provision will help consumers at the cash register and also will constrain your and other big banks efforts to steer customers toward credit cards with all their attendant tricks and traps. \n\n\n\nYour banks spokespeople and advocates have argued strenuously that I am responsible for your decision to charge this new fee on all but your wealthiest customers. In response to this I will simply point out that my legislation was enacted in XX/XX/XXXX. In XX/XX/XXXX, the XXXX XXXX XXXX reported that your bank was preparing new fees on basic banking services for XX/XX/XXXX and that Bank of America customers who only want a low-volume checking account will likely be asked to pay for it. \n\n\n\n( End is Seen to Free CheckingXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ). In other words, it is on the record that your bank was preparing new fees just like this one well before swipe fee reform became law. '' https : //www.durbin.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/letter-to-bank-of-america-ceo-XXXX. '' So now, Bank of America, as Trustee, has no defense for not coming up with those keys. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nEssentially, the Bank CEO has been left holding the Bag by XXXX, as he knows that his Trustee Deed ( s ) Upon Sale, used to steal these homes, are all fraudulent. \n\n\n\n\" What are the Possible Consequences of Receiving Stolen Property? \n\n\nReceipt of stolen property is categorized as a \" wobbler '' meaning that the charge can be a felony or misdemeanor. A charge for a receipt of stolen property charge depends on the value of the property at issue. If the property has a high value, the defendant would be charged a felony. If the property value is low, the defendant would be charged as a misdemeanor. If you are found guilty, the court may do any or all of the following : Imprisonment Restitution Fines ( depending on the value of the property ) Probation '' \" Swipe fee reform is merely your latest excuse for jacking up consumer fees, just like the troubled economy was your excuse in XX/XX/XXXX( Banks Boost Customer Fees to Record HighsXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ), higher costs and consumers increased riskiness was your excuse in XX/XX/XXXX ( Banks find ways to boost fees ; checking accounts latest targetXXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ), and overdraft restrictions was your excuse in XX/XX/XXXX ( Banks return to charging credit card, checking account feesUSA Today, May 18, 2010 ). \n\n\n\nYour bank has never been shy about seeking more fee revenue to add to the revenue you already receive from maintenance fees, ATM fees, overdraft fees, extended overdrawn balance fees, stop payment fees, interchange fees, research fees and other fees not to mention the interest you receive from lending out consumer deposits. But banks do not need to gouge their customers to operate successfully. \n\n\n\nBanks instead must choose whether their priority will be their customers or their profits and paychecks. You could, for example, choose to give 1.8 million of your customers a reprieve from your new fee by returning the {$9.00} million bonus you received on top of your {$950000.00} salary in XX/XX/XXXX. That choice is yours to make. '' I would agree, and so too, I submit, would my former colleague, XXXX XXXX The following article connected to the above headline is writtenByXXXX XXXX/XX/XX/XXXX, a colleague of mine at XXXX XXXX XXXX : \" XXXX XXXX, a close confidant of President Donald Trumps, haswalked away from the rental housing empire he built following the housing bust, cashing out his ownership stake in a move likely to make him hundreds of millions of dollars. '' The move came late Friday, according to XXXX XXXX, one day afterXXXX published an exposon the company he founded. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAccording to afilingwith the Securities and Exchange Commission, says the article 's author, XXXX sold all his stock in XXXX XXXX XXXX and resigned his position as co-chairman of its Board of Trustees. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAbout the time XXXX XXXX sold his holdings, my spouse and me had filed a written complaint against him with the Consumer Financial ProtectionBureau.\n\nWe sent him a Certified package, wherein he found a  copy of Deed ( s ) of Reconveyance from Bank of America ( XX/XX/XXXX ), and a \" Release of Lien \" Letter ( XX/XX/XXXX ) from XXXX XXXX, XXXX, a \" Wholly-Owned '' subsidiary of Bank of America. \n\n\n\n\n\n\" XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. \n\n\nLien Release Department XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX : AZXXXX XXXX, AZ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX RE : Substitution of Trustee and Full Reconveyance Property Address XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX Dear Homeowner, Please be informed that when a mortgage or deed of trust is paid in full, the public records must be cleared using a legal document called a lien release or reconveyance. A lien release is a document which \" releases '' a lien on property included in public records. The lien release serves as notification that the borrower no longer owes that specific debt secured by an interest in the property. \n\nIn the states of California, Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, the Reconveyance is combined or accompanied by a Substitution of Trustee wherein the lender or current holder/beneficiary substitutes the original Trustee with a new trustee. \n\nXXXX XXXX, XXXX, is substituted in the above referenced states to replace the original trustee for the very purpose of releasing a lien on the property. The document is accurate and properly recorded based onthe state statutory guidelines and it removes th encumbrance from your property. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America, N.A., and is  responsible for preparing, executing, notarizing and sending real property lien releases on behalf of Bank of America. \n\nPaid-in-full loans are referred to XXXX XXXX, XXXX, for lien release processing, All lien releases or reconveyances are recorded with the Country Recorder 's office where the original Deed of Trust or Mortgage was recorded. Please retain for your records the lien release or reconveyance you received as that is proof that your loan is paid in full and released from public records. '' Thank you for your business XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. \nLien Release Department '' In addition, we mailed within the packet, copies of Reconveyances from : b ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n\n\nc ) XXXX XXXX XXXX ( both now owned by XXXX XXXX XXXX ) d ) XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) e ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and the Chapter XXXX Banruptcy Case XXXX, via a Purchase and Sale Agreement ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Contracted using the signatures of XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, without our knowledge or permission. \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nThrough the relay racket, possession of our home was left to the clutches of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which then colluded with XXXX XXXX XXXX whose Company then was called \" XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), to steal our home with a forged Trustee Deed. \n\n\n\n\n\nAccording to XXXX the phenomenon XXXX started where tens of thousands of single-family homes are bundled into giant mortgage-backed securities, creating new incentives designed, to skimp on maintenance and maximize rents, says the author, But the phenomenon XXXX started will outlive his ownership. \n\n\n\n\n\n\" XXXX, who often says he likes to befriend the bewildered, has made a career out of profiting off other peoples pain. He began buying houses in XXXX, telling an audience in XXXX that the mass purchases of homes previously foreclosed on was the greatest thing Ive ever done. \n\n\n\n\" Current tenants, however, say the company piles on onerous fees and forces them to live with chronic leaks, mold, mites and even snake infestations. '' While in action with his stolen goods, XXXX XXXX XXXX was making deals with the XXXX, so to speak, and committing acts of treachery against \" tenants '', who probably were the same homeowners from whom the properties were stolen, and converted to Rentals. '' In one county in the XXXX area, says XXXX, the company filed eviction notices against one-third of its tenants, according to a report by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n\n\n\n\nWere just little people in his world, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, said of XXXX. \n\n\n\nTwo weeks after her family moved into a XXXX XXXX home in suburban XXXX, she said a ceiling fan fell on her bed. \n\n\n\nXXXX first signaled his intention to sell in afilingwith the SECon Wednesday, says the article, a week after XXXX contacted the company for comment andfive days after XXXX talked to XXXX by phone, telling him directly that we planned to publish an investigation into poor conditions and mass evictions by XXXX. '' And I and others like me will continue pressing for that investigation, among others, as well as writing to the courts that have Bank of America and the others under foot. \n\n\n\n\n\nNot only will we pressure them into turning on their heretofore partners, but throwing them under the bus to save their own skins. \n\n\n\n\n\nIn this upcoming example, an appeals court made a clear distinction between two separate versions of purchase and sale. \n\n\n\" XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3, California. \nXXXX XXXX, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. et al., Defendants and Responde XXXX Decided : XXXX XXXX XXXX ORDER MODIFYING OPINION ; NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT. \n\nOn the court 's own motion, we modify the opinion by deleting the sentence on page 10, stating, Additionally, the debtor has the right to postpone the foreclosure sale for one day to pay off the outstanding debt. ( XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 1985 ) 165 Cal.App.3d 312, 317320. ) Whatever the Court 's opinion, the distinction they make is clear and decisive, related to mortgages and transfer of title for a sale. \n\n\n\n\n\n\" As we noted at the outset of this opinion, the Legislature has eliminated most of the legal and economic distinctions between a mortgage containing a power of sale and a deed of trust. ( XXXX, supra, 270 Cal.App.2d at p. 553 [ holding same rules are generally applied to mortgages and deeds of trust because there is little practical difference between the two instruments ]. ) However, some distinctions between the two security devices endure. \n\n\n\nProbably the most significant distinction is the execution of a mortgage involves only two parties ( i.e., he mortgagor and mortgagee ) ; whereas the execution of a deed of trust necessarily involves three parties ( i.e., the trustor-debtor, beneficiary-creditor, and trustee ) because title to the real property and the power of sale are conveyed to the third party trustee, who holds the interest for the benefit of the beneficiary-creditor. ( See XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX at p. 1510. ) '' In the case of a Title already transferred, the matter of a Deed of Trust is moot, and any purchase and sale agreement therefore is illegal. \n\n\n\n\n\nAnd if I am pushed to it, or someone challenges my demand for the keys, I will prove to them that the law ( s ) regarding refinancing, Purchase and Sale Contracts have been abused, butchered, broken. \n\n\n\n\n\nMy spouse and I have obtained transfer of the Deed of Trust to a Title all the way back to XX/XX/XXXX, in the U.S. Chapter XXXXBankrupty court ( XXXX ). \n\n\n\nThe court Discharged, our Debt and issued an order directing that the Title be transferred to my spouse and me, based on the \" Final Decree '' submitted byXXXX XXXX as U.S. Chapter XXXX Trustee in the above-referenced case. \n\n\n\n\n\" The Final Decree After the submission of a reorganization plan, the bankruptcy court conducts a hearing for confirmation. In certain cases, there may be some alteration or modification due to the interference of the interested parties. If there is no alteration or modification in the reorganization plan, the bankruptcy court initiates steps for the affirmation of the plan. \n\n\n\nAfter completion of all post-confirmation proceedings of the plan, the bankruptcy court sets time limits for filing a final report and motion for a final decree. \n\n\n\nThe Bankruptcy Code requires the court to close a bankruptcy case immediately after full administration of the real property and the discharge of the US Trustee. In short, the entry of a final decree is meant to close a bankruptcy case. '' An Order for a Deed of Reconveyance came with the Discharge. \n\n\n\nThe Order was fulfilled by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which recorded a Deed of Reconveynance on that same date : XX/XX/XXXX.\n\nIn this upcoming example, again, the appeals court made a clear distinction between two separate versions of purchase and sale. \n\n\n\n\" As the XXXX court explained, section 2932.5 's purpose is not to ensure that borrowers can identify who is holding their loans. Section 2932.5 requires the recorded assignment of a mortgage so that a prospective purchaser knows that the mortgagee has the authority to exercise the power of sale. \n\n\n\nThis is not necessary when a deed of trust is involved, as the trustee conducts the sale and transfers title. [ Citation. ] It is the trustee 's holding and transferring of title that underlies the application of different recording requirements than those required of mortgagees under section 2932.5 [ T ] he literal application of section 2932.5 to  deeds of trust would effectively require the power of sale to be transferred to the lender, contrary to the terms of the trust deed and of section 2934a which provides detailed requirements for the transfer of the power of sale to another trustee. ( XXXX, supra, 205 Cal.App.4th at p. 336, fn. omitted. ) We agree with the XXXX court that the transferee of a promissory note secured by a deed of trust is not a mortgagee, or other encumbrancer to whom a power of sale is given within the meaning of section 2932.5, and such a transferee need not have a duly acknowledged and recorded interest in the promissory note before exercising the power of sale. \n\n\n\n( XXXX, supra, 205 Cal.App.4th at p. 333. ) '' And if pressed to do so, I gladly will embarrass these detractors by proving their treachery, Evasion of Taxes, Embezzlement and Seizure of Assets and of Property without authority or legal standing. \n\n\n\n\" U.S. CodeTitle 12Chapter 38A 3763 12 U.S. Code 3763 - Transfer of title and possession prev|next ( a ) Delivery of deeds The foreclosure commissioner shall, upon delivery of a deed or deeds to the purchaser or purchasers ( which shall be without warranty or covenants to the purchaser or purchasers ) obtain the balance of the purchase price in accordance with the terms of sale provided in the notice ofdefaultand foreclosure sale. \n\n\nNotwithstanding anyStatelaw to the contrary, delivery of a deed by the foreclosure commissioner shall be a conveyance of the property, and constitute passage of title to the mortgaged property, and no judicial proceedings shall be required ancillary or supplementary to the procedures provided in this chapter to assure the validity of the conveyance or confirmation of such conveyance. \n\n\n( b ) Right of possession A purchaser at a foreclosure sale held pursuant to this chapter shall be entitled to possession upon passage of title under subsection ( a ) to the mortgagedproperty, subject to any interest or interests not barred undersection 3765 of this title. \n\nAny person remaining in possession of the mortgaged property after thepassageof title shall be deemed a tenant at sufferance subject to eviction under Penalty of Perjury.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-12-20T08:42:57.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"94538","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2759570","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2017-12-20T03:31:38.000Z","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":["Countrywide had become the No. 1 mortgage firm by specializing in subprime and <em>other</em> high-risk loans. \n\nBofA, which has recorded tens of billions of dollars in losses on Countrywide loans, was the object of 15,136 mortgage <em>complaints</em> since XX/XX/XXXX,  when the consumer bureau began taking <em>complaints</em> <em>about</em> home loans."]},"sort":[5.055785,"2759570"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":14,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":14}]}},"product":{"doc_count":14,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":2},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Prepaid card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose prepaid card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Private student loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":14,"issue":{"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":4,"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":1}]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Getting a loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Fraudulent loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem using a debit or ATM card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing the loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with fees charged","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Charged for a purchase or transfer you did not make with the card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":14,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":14}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":14,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":12},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":2}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":14,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":14}]}},"company":{"doc_count":14,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"ALLY FINANCIAL INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":2},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"BMW Financial Services NA, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Bridgecrest Acceptance Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":14,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":4},{"key":"FL","doc_count":2},{"key":"TX","doc_count":2},{"key":"IL","doc_count":1},{"key":"MI","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA","doc_count":1},{"key":"VT","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":14,"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":7}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":14,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":2},{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":2}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{}}}