{"took":846,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":8,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2224932","_score":16.272802,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"My wife and I share a Discover Credit Card account. We were both at a XXXX, when I began to receive alerts of purchases being made on our Discover Card at stores near our zip code. Many of the stores were merchants and store locations we have never visited. I used my Discover app to \" Freeze '' my card and immediately called Discover to report the fraudulent activity. The representative explained they would investigate the purchases, but assured us the activity was now blocked. The Discover App Alerts were instrumental in limited the loss ( well over {$1000.00} in a matter of hours ), but the damage to the merchants and Discover was done. These events occurred a couple of months ago. Just yesterday, I received a letter from Discover stating that the matter was under a probe and if they deemed that we were indeed responsible for the activity, the chargebacks would be reversed and we would be held responsible. Although I understand this is probably \" canned '' language, and I have not suffered a personal loss at this point, I 'm taking the time to report a suggestion to the credit card industry as a whole. With the amount of information floating frivolously XXXX, the potential for theft is overwhelmingly on the rise and more difficult to guard against. Our economy is being bled out my amateur and advanced, domestic and foreign hacks. I 'm sure cost/benefit analysis favor ease of use by consumers over risk-mitigation controls, but the truth is, time/speed/rapid response analytics provide the choke point. \n\nMy wife and I also have a XXXX, and the analytic capabilities displayed by this financial institution ( FI ) can be inconvenient, but the risk of loss to both consumer and FI is greatly limited when real-time analytics detect aberrations in activity and block the use of the card. Thieves might get away with the credit, but they most likely will not invest the time to mimic spending patterns used by the actual consumer. More effort may be invested in creating apps with consumer approved patterns of use. A link between a communication device and a card could allow new merchant locations to be added to a list of approved merchants. An app which allows the consumer to select and deselect merchant/retail locations in real-time would be much more cost-effective and provide more protection to the XXXX economy than chasing the culprits after the fact. Stats show people in the XXXX are more concerned with Identity ( credit card ) theft than they are with XXXX, most likely because most of us have been personally affected by this type of crime than the inverse. In fact, this subtle attack on the XXXX economy is like a silent XXXX in its own right ... a destructive XXXX. \n\nXXXX a high-caliber focus-group/analytic team, and I believe you will find a rise in consumers who are more willing to be inconvenienced with contributing seconds of real-time intelligent data to consumer protection apps. I believe FI which prioritize protection over convenience will see a migration TO and XXXX away from the majority of consumers. I know I must call my XXXX ahead of time if I will be conducting business in an abnormal pattern ( travel or amounts, etc ) before I use the card, but I would happily notify them than having a looming, daunting feeling that even though my wife and I were obviously victims of a crime, we ca n't help but feel accused by the letter we received from Discover. XXXX of the charges is now being charged to us at a store location we have never visited before!!!! ( We are out {$260.00} so far and with potential for more personal loss ). Ughh! We love our Discover card, but I 'd prefer protective analytics more like the XXXX analytics. \n\nThanks, XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2016-11-28T19:33:46.000Z","issue":"Credit card protection / Debt protection","sub_product":null,"zip_code":"85225","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2224932","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"DISCOVER BANK","date_received":"2016-11-28T19:33:45.000Z","state":"AZ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I 'm sure cost/benefit analysis favor ease of use by <em>consumers</em> over <em>risk</em>-mitigation controls, but the truth is, time/speed/rapid response analytics provide the choke point. \n\nMy wife and I also have a XXXX, and the analytic capabilities displayed by this financial institution ( FI ) can be inconvenient, but the <em>risk</em> of <em>loss</em> to <em>both</em> <em>consumer</em> and FI is <em>greatly</em> limited when real-time analytics detect aberrations in activity and block the use of the card."]},"sort":[16.272802,"2224932"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7073025","_score":13.678457,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Urgent Matter : Fraudulent Transaction and Lack of Resolution Dear Sir or Madam, I am writing to bring to your attention a serious issue that I recently encountered with Cash App, the digital payment service. I believe their handling of this matter directly contravenes federal laws concerning fraudulent transactions. \n\nOn XXXX of 2023, I discovered that an unauthorized individual had transferred {$500.00} into my Cash App account. This person then proceeded to send these funds to another account under the name XXXX XXXX, all without my knowledge or consent. I had never granted this individual access to my account, and this incident has put my financial security at considerable risk. \n\nImmediately upon noticing the incident, I reported the fraudulent transaction to my bank, XXXX XXXX, who began a dispute process. Simultaneously, I contacted Cash App requesting them to reverse the funds to prevent my account from going into a negative balance. Despite my prompt communication, I received no assistance from Cash App. \n\nToday, my Cash App account is in the negative, and Cash App 's customer service has declined to investigate or provide any form of remedy. This disregard for my legitimate concern is not only extremely disappointing but also, as I understand it, a direct violation of federal regulations. \n\nAs per Federal Trade Commission regulations ( FTC ), consumers are not held liable for unauthorized transactions that occur due to the loss or theft of their access devices, provided these are reported promptly ( Regulation E, Electronic Fund Transfer Act ). I promptly reported the unauthorized activity to both my bank and Cash App, fulfilling my obligations under the law. \n\nCash App 's failure to assist me or investigate my claim effectively denies me the protection provided under federal law. It is important that their non-compliant behavior is addressed promptly to ensure that other consumers do not experience similar problems in the future. \n\nI request your immediate assistance in this matter, and I would greatly appreciate any help or guidance you could provide in getting Cash App to comply with their legal obligations and resolve this troubling situation. \n\nThank you for your time and consideration. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Tennessee XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-06-05T23:05:01.000Z","issue":"Problem caused by your funds being low","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"381XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7073025","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Block, Inc.","date_received":"2023-06-05T22:51:50.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Overdrafts and overdraft fees"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As per Federal Trade Commission regulations ( FTC ), <em>consumers</em> are not held liable for unauthorized transactions that occur due to the <em>loss</em> or theft of their access devices, provided these are reported promptly ( Regulation E, Electronic Fund Transfer Act ). I promptly reported the unauthorized activity to <em>both</em> my bank and Cash App, fulfilling my obligations under the law. \n\nCash App 's failure to assist me or investigate my claim effectively denies me the protection provided under federal law."]},"sort":[13.678457,"7073025"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6482545","_score":10.684721,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Consumer Financial Protection Bureau\nP.O. Box 2900\nClinton, \nIA 52733-2900 TRUIST BANK  BREACH OF DUTY OF CARE\n \t \t \t \nDear Sir/Madam of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,  \n\nPlease take the time to read this information pack as it will explain the reason for my complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. \n\nOn XXXX XXXX XXXX, I fell victim to a multilayered scam operation orchestrated\nby XXXX XXXX (the Scammer) and innocently lost XXXX  USD of my hard-earned life-savings.  I advised Truist Bank of this fact on XXXX XXXX XXXX and I havent received any satisfactory response so far.\n\nTruist Bank had a duty to exercise reasonable professionalism, care, pay due to regards to the interest of their customers and follow good industry practices (GIP) to keep customers accounts safe. This includes identifying vulnerable consumers who may be particularly susceptible to scams and looking out for payments which might indicate the consumer is at risk of financial harm.   \n \nSince XXXX XXXX, I have been attempting to resolve this matter with Truist Bank, but they have failed to settle this matter satisfactorily. I have been dealing with Truist Bank in good faith and am deeply disappointed in how they have handled this matter thus far.  \n   \nI find it baffling and reprehensible that my money has been so egregiously misused in a fashion that violates their principles, which call me to defend my rights. This is poorly thought out and vaguely defined nonsense. I doubt they care however since nonsense is what renders unscrupulous businesses financially successful. \nAccordingly, I respectfully insist that Truist Bank covers all overdrafts (560,000.00 USD) on the account. This is fair and reasonable given I was given no appropriate warning about the possibility of a scam. I have been a loyal customer of Truist Bank and have never had any difficulties of this kind before.\n\nFURTHER POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION \n\nThe examples of good and bad practices around investment fraud. Good practice included but was not limited to:\n\tA bank regularly assesses the risk to itself and its customers of losses from fraud, including investment fraud, in accordance with their established risk management framework. The risk assessment does not only cover situations where the bank could cover losses, but also where customers could lose and not be reimbursed by the bank. Resource allocation and mitigation measures are informed by this assessment.\n\tA bank contacts customers if it suspects a payment is being made to an investment fraudster.\n\tA bank has transaction monitoring rules designed to detect specific types of investment fraud. Investment fraud subject matter experts help set these rules.\n\tReal-time payment screening against a well-formulated watch list; transaction monitoring rules designed to detect specific types of investment fraud\n\tBanks actively contacting customers if suspect payments are identified\n\tBanks placing material on investment fraud on its website\n\tWork to detect and prevent investment fraud from being integrated with a banks vulnerable customers initiative\n\nTaking into account the law, regulatory rules and guidance, relevant codes of practice and what should consider having been good industry practice at the time, Truist Bank should reasonably and reasonably consider:\n\tHave been monitoring accountsand any payments made or receivedto counter various risks, including anti-money-laundering, countering the financing of terrorism, and preventing fraud and scams;\n\tHave had systems in place to look out for unusual transactions or other signs that might indicate its customers were at risk of fraud (amongst other things). This is particularly so given the increase in sophisticated fraud and scams in recent years, which banks are generally more familiar with than the average customer; and\n\tIn some circumstances, irrespective of the payment channel used, have taken additional steps, or made additional checks, before processed a payment, or in some cases declined to make a payment altogether, to help protect customers from the possibility of financial harm from fraud.\n\nDespite the regulatory and statutory requirements Truist Bank shall abide by as a licensed and regulated financial institution, instead of detecting patterns, drawing certain conclusions, and taking actions accordingly, Truist Bank may have insufficiently performed some hasty and haphazard review of the transaction(s) regarding the suspicious activities, but it seems that rather than being careful, methodical, and vigilant, they took no notice of what was happening.\n\nPlease be noted that I will not in any way quietly tolerate the consequences of Truist Bank actions (or more precisely, the lack thereof). It is perfectly obvious that they could have, and should have, utilized various risk-based examination procedures and techniques, all of which are within their purview and could have entirely prevented this disastrous outcome.\nAs previously advised, they should have known, suspected, or had reason to suspect that the transactions (or pattern of transactions):\n\tinvolve funds the ultimate purpose of which was to fuel an illegal enterprise;\n\tis intended to disguise funds the ultimate purpose of which was to fuel an illegal enterprise, in an attempt to avoid and thus violate regulations;\n\tis intentionally designed to defraud your customer;\n\tserves no legitimate or lawful purpose; and\n\tinvolve the use of your services to facilitate criminal activity.\n\nThere are so many other ways in which measures related to fraud prevention and mitigation could have been useful. Further factors that should have been taken into consideration include, but are not limited to, the following:\n\tThe timing, volume, frequency, and nature of the transactions in question;\n\tThe abnormality of such transactions against the background of your experience with me as a customer and other entities associated with the transactions (if any);\n\tThe suspicious nature of such transactions based on my overall risk profile including vulnerability and identification and research of high-risk services/products;\n\tSystemic filtering mechanisms, whether manual or automatic, for the identification of unusual activities; and\n\tPeriodic evaluation of the usefulness, appropriateness and effectiveness of anti-fraud programs, and other associated policies and procedures.\n\nRelevant industry practices at the time of the victimization:\nTruist Bank is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may be being perpetuated. If you don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the customer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is:\n\tparticularly vulnerable, or\n\tif the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected.\n\nThere are some recommendations to organizations for protecting customers from financial harm that might occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse; and gives guidance on how to recognize customers who might be at risk, how to assess the potential risks to the individual and how to take the necessary actions to prevent or minimize financial harm.\nThese recommendations are established as a general principle, the organization should deliver a service that:\n\n1)\tTakes a proactive approach to minimizing risks, impact and incidences of financial harm and it sets out systems and tools for the prevention and detection of fraud and financial abuse. As a general point, it says organizations should ensure that all systems are developed using technologies and methodologies that are effective in the prevention of fraud and financial abuse, through authorized and unauthorized payments, thereby minimizing the risk of financial harm to customers. As regards to the detection of fraud and financial abuse, it says the organization:\n\nA) should have measures in place across all payment channels and products to detect suspicious transactions or activities that might indicate fraud or financial abuse. It then lists the following examples of suspicious activity on customer accounts:\na. multiple cheque books;\nb. sudden increased spending;\nc. transfers to other accounts;\nd. multiple password attempts;\ne. logins from new devices, multiple geographical locations;\nf. sudden changes to the operation of the account; Unusual transactions are transactions whose amount, characteristics and frequency bear no relation to the economic activity of the customer, exceed normal market parameters or have no apparent legal justification.\ng. a withdrawal or payment for a large amount;\nh. a payment or series of payments to a new payee;\ni. financial activity that matches a known method of fraud or financial abuse.\n\nB) organizations should have a process in place to ensure that staff make contact with the customer to verify the financial activity, challenge its authenticity, explain the nature of the suspected or detected fraud and discuss an appropriate plan of action.\n\nMy true issue with the bank is their limited understanding of the kind of recall I was requesting to raise. The most common reason for a recall is where the account holder says the transaction was not authorised; a recall can also be claimed if the goods were not received or if the cardholder paid in another way (eg., with cash).\n\nWhilst I am not denying the demand for the reason code, I am emphasizing to the bank that my case falls under a different reason code. Despite providing the bank with the required explanations of my case, Truist Bank preferred to stick with the authorisation issue which has never been raised by me which already shows the banks lack of understanding of how to treat my case.\n\nTruist Bank could have done more at the time of the payment to warn me of the risks of scams\n\tTaking steps to educate their customers about scams.\n\tTaking steps to identify higher risk payments and customers who have a higher risk of becoming a victim of scams.\n\tProviding effective warnings to customers if the bank identifies a scam risk.\n\tTaking extra steps to protect customers who might be vulnerable to scams.\n\tTalking to customers about payments and even delaying or stopping payments where there are scam concerns.\n\tActing quickly when a scam is reported to it.\n\tTaking steps to stop fraudsters from opening bank accounts.\nBanks and other Payment Services Providers (PSPs) do have a duty to protect customers against the risk of financial loss due to fraud and/or to undertake due diligence on large transactions to guard against money laundering. In broad terms, the starting position at law is that a firm is expected to process payments and withdrawals that a customer authorises it to make, in accordance with the Payment Services Regulations and the terms and conditions of the customers account.\nBut, where the consumer made the payment as a consequence of the actions of a fraudster, it may sometimes be fair and reasonable for the bank to reimburse the consumer even though they authorised the payment.  \nI think Truist Bank shouldve had enough knowledge of this type of scam at the time. Truist Bank could have protected me from this; unlike me, the bank knows about the existence of such scams and how you prey on vulnerable victims like myself, taking advantage of lack of knowledge, awareness, and circumstance. Despite the irregularities in my spending and such untypical patterns, not a single contact was made me question what I was doing. The treatment from Truist Bank is compounded by trauma and anxiety and has left me in the awful situation I now find myself in.\nAlthough it was not Truist Bank that scammed me, they had many obligations to protect my Financial Interest - which they did not uphold if you take a quick look at the bank statements you will realise how the transactions were absolutely out of the usual pattern, there was suddenly increased spending, payments for considerably large amounts, series of payments to a new payee and of course financial activity that matched a known method of fraud or financial abuse.\nAll of the above points were not considered by Truist Bank when I was victimised, and no actions were taken to prevent that victimisation. Of course, I appreciate that they might want to act in good faith and uphold my requests to transfer these payments but the code sets out that organisations should have a process in place, to ensure that (i) staff make contact with the customer to verify the financial activity, (ii) challenge its authenticity, (iii) explain the nature of the suspected or detected fraud and (iv) discuss an appropriate plan of action. \n \nTo further simplify the situation with respect to the nature of the transactions, there are circumstances, irrespective of the payment channel used, where a bank should take additional steps, or make additional checks, before processing a payment, or in some cases decline to make a payment altogether, to help protect customers from the possibility of financial harm. This is particularly so in light of the environment created by the increase in sophisticated fraud and scams in recent years - which banks are generally more familiar with than the average customer.\n \nKindly take into account that this case against Truist Bank is not primarily about the scam that happened. My main issue with Truist Bank is its unwillingness to raise a recall under the relevant reason code. It is obvious that they did not take any of my reasonings into account and blatantly focused on the authorisation argument that does not match my case and the issue of whether the transactions were fraudulent according to what is written on the paper. \n\nAnti-Money Laundering Requirements for Financial Institutions and Other Designated Businesses \n\n3.1 What financial institutions and other businesses are subject to anti-money laundering requirements? Describe which professional activities are subject to such requirements and the obligations of the financial institutions and other businesses. The following are subject to the requirement to maintain risk-based AML Programs: \n\n\tBanks, including savings associations, trust companies, credit unions, branches and subsidiaries of foreign banks in the United States, and Edge corporations.\n\tBroker-dealers in securities.\n\tMutual funds. Futures Commission Merchants and Introducing Brokers in Commodities. Money Services Businesses 3.4 What are the requirements for recordkeeping or reporting large currency transactions? When must reports be filed and at what thresholds?\n\nCurrency Transaction Reporting\n\nFinancial institutions (defined as financial institutions under the BSA regulations) must file CTRs with FinCEN on all transactions in (physical) currency in excess of XXXX  (or the foreign equivalent) conducted by, though, or to the financial institution, by or on behalf of the same person, on the same day. 31C.F.R.  1010.310315.\nIt is prohibited to structure transactions to cause a financial institution not to file a CTR or to file an inaccurate CTR by breaking down transactions into smaller amounts at one or more financial institutions over one or more days. 31 C.F.R.  1010.314.\n\nCustomer Due Diligence\nPursuant to regulatory requirements, which became effective May 11, 2018, as part of their AML Programs, certain financial institutions (banks, broker-dealers, mutual funds, FCMs and IB-Cs) must implement formal risk-based CDD programs that include certain minimum elements, including customer identification and verification (under a Customer Identification Program), obtaining information about the nature and purpose of a customers account, ongoing monitoring of customer accounts, obtaining beneficial ownership information at a 25% threshold\nfor legal entity customers and identifying a control person for legal entity customers (with certain exceptions).\n\nThere also is a specific BSA requirement to maintain CDD programs for non-U.S. persons private banking accounts and foreign correspondent accounts. The same covered financial institutions as for CDD programs (banks, broker-dealers, mutual funds, FCMs and IB-Cs) must maintain a CDD program for non-U.S. private banking accounts established on behalf of, or for the benefit of, a non-U.S. person and foreign correspondent customers and an enhanced due diligence (EDD) program for those relationships posing a higher risk. These programs must be designed to detect and report suspicious activity with certain minimum standards. These requirements are based on Section 312 of the PATRIOT Act and are often referred to as Section 312 requirements. 31 C.F.R.  1010.610 (due diligence for foreign correspondent accounts), 1010.620 (due diligence for private banking for non-U.S. persons).\n3.9 What is the criteria for reporting suspicious activity?\n\nFinancial institutions and other businesses subject to the AML Program requirement (except Check Cashers, Operators of Credit Card Systems, and Dealers in Precious Metals, Precious Stones, or Jewels) are required to file SARs with FinCEN under the BSA (and for banks, under parallel requirements of their federal functional regulators). SARs are required where the filer knows, suspects, or has reason to suspect a transaction conducted or attempted by, at\nor through the financial institution: \n\n\tinvolves money laundering;\n\tis designed to evade any BSA regulation or requirement;\n\thas no business or apparent lawful purpose or is not the sort in which a particular customer would engage; or \n\tinvolves the use of the financial institution to facilitate criminal activity or involves any known or suspected violation of federal criminal law. \n\tSee, e.g., 31 C.F.R.  1023.320(c) (SAR requirements for broker-dealers). Generally, the reporting threshold is XXXX or more. For banks, if the suspect is unknown, it is XXXX or more. For MSBs, generally, it is XXXX or more.\n\nIn XXXX XXXX the office of the Senator XXXX XXXX  issued a report called: Facilitating Fraud: How Consumers Defrauded on XXXX are Left High and Dry by the Banks that Created It. These are some of the most important statements mentioned in the report:\nIn XXXX XXXX, Senator XXXX opened an investigation to determine the extent of fraudulent activity on XXXX, and to understand how the company and the banks that own and operate it make consumers whole when they are defrauded on the platform. Senators XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  wrote to XXXX seeking information about the frequency of scams and fraud and the companys policies on redressing consumers who have been defrauded. \nThe information provided by XXXX revealed that an estimated XXXX XXXX was lost by XXXX users through frauds and scams in 2021, but that the banks that participate in the network appear not to have provided sufficient recourse to their customers. In particular, XXXX response indicated that XXXX  facilitates fraudulent activity of many kinds That includes activity in which a users account is accessed by a bad actor and used to transfer a payment  often called unauthorized transactions  and activity in which a user is fraudulently induced into transferring a payment to a bad actor  often referred to by XXXX and XXXX-participant banks as authorized transactions.\nSenators XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX then sent letters to the seven big banks that own and operate XXXX parent company to determine the extent of the problems with illegal and fraudulent activity, and to determine how banks were helping consumers who lost money on the platform.\nAt nearly every turn, most of the big banks have stonewalled, refusing to provide the information requested by members of Congress. However, Senators XXXX XXXX XXXX finally obtained commitments from several of the banks CEOs that they would provide the information on XXXX to Congress during a Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs hearing on XXXX XXXX XXXX\nOverall, the three banks that provided complete data sets  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and Truist  reported 35,848 cases of scams, involving over XXXX  million of payments in XXXX  and the first half of XXXX. In the vast majority of these cases, the banks did not repay the customers that reported being scammed. Overall these three banks reported repaying customers in only 3,473 cases (representing nearly 10% of scam claims) and repaid only XXXX XXXX  (representing 11.2% of payments).\nThe findings of this report reveal that fraud and theft on XXXX are widespread and growing, with consumers losing XXXX  each year. The banks that own and profit from the platform are failing to make their customers whole for both authorized and unauthorized fraudulent transactions, while refusing to release information publicly or to their customers that could help keep all consumers safe. Given this uncertain landscape and the banks abdication of responsibility, regulatory clarity is needed to further protect XXXX  users.\nThe CFPB has regulatory authority over peer-to-peer platforms including XXXX, and is reportedly considering issuing guidance to push banks to cover more fraudulently induced transactions, a move that would greatly improve consumer protections on peer-to-peer platforms like XXXX The agency should act to clarify and strengthen Regulation E and include fraud in the Regulations error resolution purview, increasing the responsibility of banks to keep XXXX safe and to ensure that consumers will be protected. The banks that created and profit off of XXXX should be pushed to protect their consumers from bad actors on their platform, and regulators should step in to ensure a fair and consistent process for everyone.\nFrom the report issued by the office of Senator XXXX XXXX, it is clear that the banks dont treat scam victims fairly, only 10% of scam victims get a compensation from the bank, while others just left suffering. Even more, banks keep getting their profit, while more and more people keep being scammed, hacked, simply saying, losing their hard-earned funds.\nAs it is mentioned in the report, such organizations as CFPB should issue a guidance in which it will be written how step-by step, financial institutions need to check each and every transaction that looks suspicious, especially those which are sent to a new payee (e.g., cryptocurrency platforms). In case if the financial institution doesnt follow these rules and their customer is scammed, it shouldnt be blamed only as a victims guilt. Financial institutions need to take their responsibility as well and provide their customer with a decent compensation.\n\nDesired outcome: Truist Bank has to put things into the right perspective for me by reversing the total amount of XXXX  USD paid to scammers as I have suffered a great loss because of this fraud, it had affected me personally, emotionally and financially. \n\n\nYours sincerely, \n\nXXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-01-24T12:46:36.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"International money transfer","zip_code":"20852","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6482545","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2023-01-24T12:41:22.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Good practice included but was not limited to:\n\tA bank regularly assesses the <em>risk</em> to itself and its customers of <em>losses</em> from fraud, including investment fraud, in accordance with their established <em>risk</em> management framework. The <em>risk</em> assessment does not only cover situations where the bank could cover <em>losses</em>, but also where customers could lose and not be reimbursed by the bank. Resource allocation and mitigation measures are informed by this assessment."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the <em>consumer</em> and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[10.684721,"6482545"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7342540","_score":10.205966,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am writing to bring to your attention the significant challenges I have faced while attempting to make payments to Chase Bank. The payment process has been unnecessarily complicated, making it difficult for me to fulfill my obligations. Furthermore, I have encountered multiple issues and frustrations in my efforts to pursue and maintain enrollment in a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) with Chase Bank. Their handling of the payment process not only affects my ability to meet my obligations but also puts my enrollment in the XXXX  at risk, as I have experienced ongoing difficulties with the enrollment process since the beginning. My interactions with their customer service representatives have been disheartening, and I believe it is essential to file a complaint in the hopes of finding a more satisfactory resolution. \n\nIssues with Enrollment in XXXX Firstly, when I initially contacted Chase to inquire about the balance liquidation plan, I encountered a representative with very broken XXXX, making communication extremely difficult. This individual failed to provide me with essential information regarding the stipulations and mechanics of the XXXX leaving me uninformed about the process. \n\nFollowing this conversation, I received correspondence from Chase stating that my account required urgent attention and that I had not completed the setup for the XXXX even though I was assured by the previous representative that everything was taken care of. When I called Chase support again to resolve the issue, I encountered further problems with autopay setup, leading to another letter about incomplete XXXX enrollment. It was not until I made a third attempt to enroll in this program that I had any success. \n\nUnauthorized Transaction leading to disenrollment of BLP Recently, I faced an unauthorized ACH transaction from my XXXX Checking account to Chase, which Chase was responsible for and unable to rectify. As a result, I filed a transaction dispute with XXXX in order to document this occurrence and resolve the issue. XXXX ruled in my favor, returning the funds ; however, as a result, Chase suspended my payment account method for the XXXX \n\nChase 's Additional Demands When seeking assistance from the Chase XXXX support line, I was transferred to multiple departments without clear information about who I was speaking to. Additionally, contradictory instructions were given, and some representatives even claimed they could not find my checking account information, despite having used it for previous transactions. \n\nDuring an extensive phone call with Chase support, I was told that a mail piece needed to be sent to me, which I then had to take to my bank and sign, before faxing it back to Chase to unsuspend my account. In addition to this form, Chase bank required a voided check and a letter on Letterhead from XXXX ( my bank ) affirming that my account number and routing number are correct and that I was authorized to make transactions. When, in fact, Chase bank has full knowledge that both of these are true without needing any form of affirmation from my bank. This convoluted process seemed unnecessary and burdensome, causing further distress. \n\nAssistance at Chase Branch Furthermore, when visiting a Chase branch in person seeking alternative methods for payment account reinstatement for the XXXX I encountered unhelpful responses from the representatives, and even a rude and uncooperative Account Supervisor named XXXX. However, I would like to take a moment to thank the XXXX XXXX, XXXX, for her help and support with this matter. \n\nOverall Customer Service Experience Throughout this ordeal, I felt Chase 's customer service lacked consistency, transparency, and efficiency. Their inability to address the issues with my XXXX enrollment and the unauthorized ACH transactions has left me frustrated and disappointed. Moreover, the lack of clear communication and accountability among representatives made the process more confusing and time-consuming. \n\nFinancial Implications At this point in time, I am unable to make payments towards the XXXX, and Chase is sending correspondence stating that my account is at risk of falling further into delinquency. The account may be assessed additional fees and interest, and there is a possibility of it being charged off. I am unable to pay towards the BLP because Chase has suspended my payment account. The only reason Chase suspended my payment account was because of the filing of the transaction dispute, which ruled in my favor. I filed the transaction dispute because Chase initiated an unauthorized transaction. As a result, I am unable to pay my XXXX facing the risk of disenrollment, loss of the interest rate, increased fees and interest assessed to my account, and reported delinquencyall because of Chase 's mistake. \n\nRequest for Resolution I urgently request your prompt attention to this matter, as it has caused significant financial strain and inconvenience. Given the difficulties I faced with making payments to Chase Bank, as highlighted in the opening paragraph, I am concerned about the potential impact on my enrollment in the balance liquidation plan ( XXXX ). The outlined series of events and interactions with Chase, along with the provided payment confirmations, serve as evidence of the ongoing challenges I encountered throughout this process. I firmly believe that Chase Bank 's handling of my account, their lack of clear communication, and the repeated errors require immediate action for reinstating my account or providing a more appropriate resolution. Your assistance in resolving this matter swiftly would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time and consideration. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Attached is a copy of this letter AND the detailing of the events. Please review.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-08-02T14:38:48.000Z","issue":"Problem when making payments","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"03051","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7342540","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2023-08-02T14:28:35.000Z","state":"NH","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem during payment process"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["As a result, I am unable to pay my XXXX facing the <em>risk</em> of disenrollment, <em>loss</em> of the interest rate, increased fees and interest assessed to my account, and reported delinquencyall because of Chase 's mistake. \n\nRequest for Resolution I urgently request your prompt attention to this matter, as it has caused significant financial strain and inconvenience."]},"sort":[10.205966,"7342540"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7803385","_score":7.6004844,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Consumer Finance Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX To : Consumer Finance Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Dear Sir or Madam of CFPBs Complaint/Dispute Department , I would like to draw your attention to the complaint letter of XX/XX/XXXX - I sent it for your attention, in which I clearly stated how I was affected personally, psychologically, and financially by the scam in which XXXX failed to protect my funds. However, it is over 30 days and I have yet to receive a response regarding my claim. I wish I can do anything to get this complaint done or get a resolution as soon as possible, seeing as the issue at hand is a matter of urgency for me. My complaint is against XXXX which did not do its job properly ( could not prevent/foreseen fraud and could not conduct a proper investigation ) and not against the vulnerable customer who fell victim and lost all the savings due to the misconduct of XXXX XXXX and other banks do have a duty to protect customers against the risk of financial loss due to fraud and/or to undertake due diligence on large transactions to guard against the aforementioned fraud. Your prompt attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated! Kind regards, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Consumer Finance Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This is to complain against XXXXXXXX XXXX URGENCY : HIGH IMPORTANCE : HIGH [ WITHOUT PREJUDICE ] I wish to practice my right as a customer of XXXXXXXX XXXX  to use your organization 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with XXXX XXXX In order to clear up the letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to XXXX XXXX respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. It is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially engineered, and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognize that I am the victim of an investment scam. My complaint to the CFTC has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of XXXXXXXX XXXX to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, and protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. During the complaints process with XXXX XXXX, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offered to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem that they choose to manage in a way that is not in line with the rules and regulations of CFTC as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. General Obligation : Commencing on or around XX/XX/XXXX, I fell victim to a multi-layered scam operation run by XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX XXXX from my XXXXXXXX XXXX  account to the fraudulent investment firm. When determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability ; common queries include, but are not limited to, the following ( i ) whether XXXXXXXX XXXX  did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my financial safety ; ( ii ) whether by virtue of XXXX XXXX  custodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached ; ( iii ) whether XXXX XXXX  promoted the transactions in question despite being aware of the nature of the transactions in question ( iv ) whether XXXX XXXX was in compliance with its own policies and procedures ; ( v ) whether XXXX Bank owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether XXXXXXXX XXXX did not uphold those duties ; ( vi ) whether Chase Banks conduct Page 2 of 5 XXXX XX/XX/XXXX was unfair ; and ( vii ) whether XXXX XXXX has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me for the harm that has befallen me. Upon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud. In providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and skill of a diligent, prudent banker. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not turn a blind eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In other words, XXXX XXXX must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real possibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have known that I was dealing with a scammer. Granted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a sense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective element. However, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not average care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is reasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of the evidence suggests that XXXX XXXX did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers in this respect. Situations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the standard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learned from the errors of the past. XXXXXXXX XXXX Position : They choose to completely ignore the dispute letters and have never informed me nor have they done the investigation. I no longer have a choice but to turn to you for help and justice. Refuting XXXXXXXX XXXX arguments from a purely logical perspective : While I am appreciative of XXXX responses thus far, I have to admit that, to me, they do not seem nearly sufficient. A bank of XXXX caliber, in my opinion, should provide its clients with thorough responses to their complaints. XXXX XXXX  position is that the features of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to protect innocent and helpless victims ; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches are doomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only meaningful choice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the attention it deserves even though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint. In XXXX XXXX view, it is implied that we should not home in ( and consequently rely on ) unwritten laws, practicality, good judgment, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight when taking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense and are wildly irresponsible. Page 3 of 5 XXXX XXXX XXXX  Imagine a view according to which the one and only thing that can make XXXXXXXX XXXX morally obligated to do something is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if XXXX XXXX  encounters the suffering of totally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the degree required by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as XXXX XXXX I have reviewed the material hereto sent by XXXXXXXX XXXX carefully, and it, unfortunately, provides no response to my fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the resources at its disposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as myself had, to determine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and had a duty to intervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind. It is perfectly obvious that XXXX XXXX, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the key questions in a manner that neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other than its own interests. It is XXXX XXXX  here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to say, that XXXX XXXX  adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its extensive experience compared to mine. It is XXXX XXXX that claims that the damages which I have suffered in connection to this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable and that my proposed degree of care is not, and has not been, commensurate with XXXX XXXX capacity, experience, expertise, or scope of services in any way. To re-emphasize, XXXX XXXX indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to purely execute transactions in a blind and blank fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing those transactions and capitalizing on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby enhancing market integrity. Apropos of the fluidity of the concept of reasonableness, all XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX has done in this regard is set up a dichotomy of having or not having the legal obligation under consideration, however, that does not go one-inch toward explaining why various regulatory authorities, have maintained that financial institutions can, and should, protect consumers using their systems, advanced technologies, and rich experience. XXXX XXXX  is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that fraud may be being perpetuated. If you don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the customer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is : particularly vulnerable, or if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected. There are some recommendations to organizations for protecting customers from financial harm that might occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse ; and gives guidance on how to recognize customers who might be at risk, how to assess the potential risks to the individual and how to take the necessary actions to prevent or minimize financial harm. These recommendations are established as a general principle, the organization should deliver a service that : 1 ) Takes a proactive approach to minimizing risks, impact, and incidences of financial harm and it sets out systems and tools for the prevention and detection of fraud and financial abuse. As a general point, it says organizations should ensure that all systems are developed using technologies and methodologies that are effective in the prevention of fraud and financial abuse, through authorized and unauthorized payments, thereby minimizing the risk of financial harm to customers. Regarding the detection of fraud and financial abuse, it says the organization : A ) should have measures in place across all payment channels and products to detect suspicious transactions or activities that might indicate fraud or financial abuse. It then lists the following examples of suspicious activity on customer accounts : a. multiple chequebooks ; Page 4 of 5 XXXX XXXX XXXX b. sudden increased spending ; c. transfers to other accounts ; d. multiple password attempts ; e. logins from new devices, multiple geographical locations ; f. sudden changes to the operation of the account ; Unusual transactions are transactions whose amount, characteristics and frequency bear no relation to the economic activity of the customer, exceed normal market parameters or have no apparent legal justification. g. a withdrawal or payment for a large amount ; h. a payment or series of payments to a new payee ; i. financial activity that matches a known method of fraud or financial abuse. B ) organizations should have a process in place to ensure that staff makes contact with the customer to verify the financial activity, challenge its authenticity, explain the nature of the suspected or detected fraud, and discuss an appropriate plan of action. XXXXXXXX XXXX is yet to show, or otherwise provide me with, a compelling argument that their wide-ranging experience and wealth of specialist knowledge in detecting transactional anomalies were not sufficient to avert the fraud at issue. By contrast, I have provided a multitude of sound and powerful reasons by which requiring their involvement has not only been pressingly relevant but also eminently reasonable and well-justified. Rather than empathizing with and undertaking substantial efforts to convey their knowledge of the existence of such regulations abroad and thereafter use it to protect and proactively relieve the plight of consumers who have been cheated out of their money and whose role in society is properly fulfilled, positively contributing to local economic growth, development, and sustainability XXXX XXXX adopts a rather insouciant attitude toward my financial predicament portrayed herein. I am deeply convinced that the disastrous results that I have previously elaborated upon will continue to ensue if no responsibility is adopted by XXXX XXXX  in relation to this matter. I have also thoroughly detailed why they can not simply dismiss this problem by strictly adhering to legal technicalities which, after careful reflection, struck me as being nothing more than self-interest. Indeed, it seems to me utterly unfair to disregard fragile, sensitive, and vulnerable consumers who are afflicted by such allegedly malevolent acts, thereby keeping an unjust status quo that is corrupting our society at its core. Conclusion : Based on my analysis, and as confirmed by various authorities concerned with such matters, there is abundant evidence that forwardthinking financial institutions ought to take reasonable steps to forestall fraud, or at least mitigate its risk by using an effective risk management system, demonstrating their undisputed ability to responsibly and pre-emptively respond to questionable transactions in the digital arena. The use of such systems, largely based on newly adopted technologies aimed at effectively navigating the evolving threat landscape, is only one of a number of possible endeavours undertaken in this connection, alongside the application of past knowledge and experience related to popular fraudulent practices. Page 5 of 5 XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Astonishingly, I am pondering how it is that, despite being shown that XXXXXXXX XXXX business conduct was insufficient insofar as background checks are concerned, they keep refuting their indisputable role and responsibility in connection with the matter herein discussed. The points that I have hitherto made are too crucial to be taken lightly. XXXX XXXX non-observance of the fundamental principles of justice that is, to completely overlook and not even remotely try to mitigate the suffering of vulnerable consumers is inexcusable given the size of the establishment and the vast resources at its disposal as the direct result of the patronage of clients like myself. If it was, indeed, solely my responsibility, we must then believe at least one of the following clauses : a ) financial institutions have absolutely no role whatsoever in preventing and detecting fraud, b ) the fraud in question was not reasonably foreseeable, or c ) the transactions in question were not sufficiently alarming. It is extremely unfortunate that XXXX XXXX  pushes quite hard for me to believe all three of these thingsdespite evidence to the contrary. In summary, I respectfully ask your organization to consider my points, given your personal and companywide obligation to provide a fair and reasonable investigation into the complaint. I look forward to your input and would gladly cooperate to reach a fair and reasonable outcome. Thank you. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-11-17T18:41:46.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"06704","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7803385","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2023-11-04T10:25:08.000Z","state":"CT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Your prompt attention to this matter would be <em>greatly</em> appreciated!"]},"sort":[7.6004844,"7803385"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7364149","_score":5.9629674,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX From : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Reference : XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( The fraudulent company ) Reference : Wells Fargo Bank To : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau This is an Ombudsman letter addressed to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Dear Sir/Madam , I urgently need to draw your attention to a distressing issue concerning the financial company name Wells Fargo Bank XXXX Unfortunately, I have become a victim of a carefully planned scam orchestrated by an entity called XXXX XXXX XXXX. This fraudulent company has deceptively presented itself and has employed illegal and manipulative tactics, leading to a substantial financial loss. I am writing to seek your immediate assistance in resolving this critical situation. \nI regret to inform you that I have fallen victim to a fraudulent company called \" XXXX XXXX XXXX. '' They presented themselves as a legitimate business offering promotional and legal campaign services, but unfortunately, they did not deliver on their promises. I have not received any returns or services as expected. What's more, all the funds I deposited with them have not been refunded, causing significant financial distress. It is evident that their practices were illegal, manipulative, and a direct violation of the law and our contractual agreement. After obtaining my funds, the company disappeared without any explanation or notice, making it impossible to contact them or resolve the issue. Despite my persistent efforts to reach out to them and other parties involved, I have been unsuccessful in finding a resolution. \nI kindly request that you initiate a dispute against XXXX XXXX XXXX. and the relevant parties involved in order to seek resolution and recover the funds. The dispute is justified based on the following reasons : Goods or Services Not Provided 2 Not as Described or Defective Merchandise Questionable Merchant Activity Misrepresentation Fraudulent Action Money-Laundering Identity Theft Terror Affiliate ( Misappropriation of assets or funds ) Authorized Push-Payment Scam On XX/XX/XXXX, I took the necessary steps to initiate the dispute process with my bank, Wells Fargo Bank, in hopes of recovering the funds. I attached copies of the letters I submitted to my bank, along with the relevant evidence highlighting the fraudulent nature of the situation. However, it is with deep disappointment that I inform you that I didnt receive a response from my bank. They seem to not care about the incident that I have encountered. By not responding to it, it leaves me with the disheartening feeling that I was a victim of deception, falsehood, and manipulation. It is disheartening that they failed to acknowledge and understand the gravity of the scam I fell victim to. \n3 Scam Story and Context In pursuit of my dream to represent the people as a senator in the U.S. Senate, I sought to engage the services of a reputable promotion company named XXXX XXXX XXXX. With great hope and anticipation, I signed a contract with them on XX/XX/XXXX, with the agreement spanning until the XX/XX/XXXX, election date. \nRegrettably, what started as a promising collaboration soon turned into a nightmare of fraudulent practices that not only caused financial harm but also left me disheartened by the violation of ethical and legal standards. \nFrom the outset, XXXX XXXX XXXX made grandiose promises, claiming to possess the expertise and capabilities needed to effectively promote my campaign and connect me with potential supporters. They assured me of their dedication to our shared vision and the success of my senatorial bid. However, as the days turned into weeks and weeks into months, their assurances proved to be nothing more than empty words. \nDespite their assurances, there was no plan or action in progress to promote my campaign. Vital opportunities to reach a wider audience were lost as they failed to deliver on their marketing strategies, leaving me unable to effectively communicate my vision and objectives to potential voters. \nWhat added to my frustration was their lack of responsiveness. Attempting to get in touch with the company became an exercise in futility. Countless emails and phone calls went unanswered, and each time I managed to establish contact, they provided a litany of excuses. Among these, the COVID-19 pandemic was cited as the culprit for their inability to fulfill their contractual obligations. \nThough the pandemic was an unprecedented global challenge, it should not have served as a convenient shield for fraudulent practices. While I empathize with the difficulties faced by businesses during those times, it can not excuse the betrayal of trust and the financial harm they caused me. \n4 Despite my continued efforts to reason with them, XXXX XXXX XXXX remained unmoved. They refused to provide a satisfactory explanation for their failures or offer any recourse to remedy the situation. Requests for a refund were met with further evasions, leaving me in a vulnerable financial position after investing substantial resources into their deceptive services. \nThe impact of their deceptive actions reverberated far beyond financial loss. The breach of trust has cast a shadow over my campaign, tarnishing the image I sought to project as a trustworthy and transparent candidate. The damage to my reputation and the lost opportunities to connect with voters have left me deeply disillusioned and questioning the fairness of the electoral process. \nAs I reflect on this experience, it becomes clear that the path to public service is fraught with challenges. The ordeal with XXXX XXXX XXXX serves as a stark reminder of the importance of due diligence when engaging with external entities. It also highlights the need for increased scrutiny of companies offering promotional services to political candidates. \nMy hope is that this account will shed light on the dangers of fraudulent practices in the electoral landscape, prompting lawmakers and regulatory bodies to take the necessary steps to protect aspiring candidates from unscrupulous actors. As I navigate the aftermath of this betrayal, I vow to continue my pursuit of serving the people with integrity and dedication, regardless of the obstacles that may lie ahead. \nDesired Outcome I am reaching out to discuss several critical matters concerning the fraudulent activity that has occurred on my Wells Fargo bank account. \n1. I expect Wells Fargo Bank to acknowledge their involvement in the recent fraudulent activity on my bank account and accept full responsibility for the transactions.\n\n2. The bank should immediately initiate a thorough investigation into the fraudulent transactions to determine how their security measures failed, leading to the successful execution of the fraud.\n\n5 3. It is imperative that I emphasize the involvement of Wells Fargo Bank in these fraudulent transactions. They were the ones who authorized and executed these transactions, making them directly responsible for the fraudulent activity. The Financial Ombudsman Service ( FOS ) has explicitly stated that banks and financial institutions must consider the evolving and sophisticated nature of fraud and should no longer refuse refunds in such circumstances. \n4. In line with the Financial Ombudsman Service 's guidelines, Wells Fargo Bank should refrain from labeling me as \" grossly negligent '' and recognize that I, as a victim, should not bear the burden of the fraudulent activity. \n5. I find it both criminal and unjustifiable that Wells Fargo Bank is evading their responsibility and placing the blame on me, their client, who has placed complete trust in their financial institution to safeguard my life savings. Their actions demonstrate a lack of professionalism, disregard for regulations, and a substandard approach to customer protection. Such behavior contradicts the very purpose for which financial institutions were established.\n\n6. I am utterly perplexed by the resistance shown by Wells Fargo Bank to providing me with a refund for the funds that were wrongfully taken by these scammers. When I authorized the payments, I had no knowledge of the fraudulent nature of the companies involved, and it was only after the fact that I uncovered the truth. I strongly urge Wells Fargo Bank to take full responsibility for the situation and take proactive steps to recover my stolen funds. It is crucial to consider that the fraudulent company not only failed to provide any services but also intentionally misrepresented themselves to deceive me. \n7. I urge the bank to prioritize customer protection and demonstrate professionalism in handling such cases to prevent innocent and inexperienced clients from falling victim to similar fraudulent schemes in the future. \n6 8. The bank should communicate clearly and transparently with me throughout the resolution process, providing updates on the investigation and refund status. \nI request the recovery of my funds under code fraud or code misrepresentation According to XXXX and XXXX XXXX Rules No. XXXX XXXX, it is mandatory to conduct a physical inspection of the listed premises of a business before allowing them to accept payments. It is imperative that both banks adhere to this rule and acknowledge their role in the fraudulent transactions. \nUnbeknownst transfer of funds : The funds were transferred to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. company that deceitfully presented itself as a legitimate entity offering social promotional and legal campaign services. They falsely claimed to generate profits for their clients, but in reality, they never provided any such services. Their objective was to unlawfully extract money from unsuspecting individuals. \nFake documentation : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The company went to great lengths to create fabricated documents that portrayed them as legitimate. These documents were used to deceive me and others into believing in their credibility and entrusting them with our funds. In truth, they had no intention of providing any services and solely aimed to defraud people and seize their money. \nLack of received services : Despite depositing funds with the expectation of receiving the promised service, this company abruptly gave a lot of different unjustified reasons, blocked my account, and vanished without providing any of the services they claimed to offer. This left me in a state of shock and financial distress, as the funds I entrusted to them were never returned. \nDeception : I was deceived into depositing funds under the false pretense that they would generate substantial profits. However, the promises made by the scammers turned out to be empty lies. Not only were the profits never realized, 7 but my money was also misappropriated, and I have not received any form of reimbursement as they had claimed. \nIn summary, I did not receive any of the promised services from XXXX XXXX XXXX. On the contrary, their actions exacerbated my situation, leading to further financial losses and significant harm to my overall financial well-being. \nDescription of Services Actually Received The XXXX XXXX XXXX company deliberately misrepresented themselves by falsely advertising their services in campaigns and services. They assured me that I would receive services by following their instructions and engaging in various transactions. However, these promises were nothing more than deceptive tactics employed to deceive and extract money from me. In reality, the services they claimed to provide were nonexistent. The scammers lacked the competence and ability to fulfill their promises of quality and expertise. It is evident that their intentions were to intentionally mislead me and exploit my trust for their own financial gain. \nI would like to bring to your attention the disappointing reaction to Wells Fargo Bank for not responding to this case that XXXX XXXX XXXX was a fraudulent and illegitimate company. I tried to reach out to them many times, but Their failure to address the issue and take steps to resolve it suggests potential complicity in the crime. \nI strongly believe that this situation presents an opportunity for Wells Fargo Bank to assist Not only me as their customer but also other individuals who may become victims of fraudulent companies like XXXX XXXX XXXX. It is imperative for a bank to fulfill their duty of protecting their customers and promptly rectifying such situations. I urge them to take this matter seriously and provide the necessary support to resolve the issue effectively. \nConfirmation of Fraud : I kindly ask Wells Fargo Bank to acknowledge that I have indeed fallen victim to fraud perpetrated by the scammers known as XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nImmediate Recovery : As my bank, I expect Wells Fargo Bank to initiate an immediate investigation into my case. I request that the bank thoroughly XXXX examine all companies and banks involved in the fraudulent activity. I urge them to make every effort to recover the full amount of {$73000.00} that was wrongfully taken from me. \nReimbursement : If it is not feasible to retrieve the funds, I expect Wells Fargo Bank to provide reimbursement for the reasons mentioned. As my bank, I believe it is their responsibility to act in my best interest and rectify the financial losses I have suffered due to their involvement in the fraudulent transaction Database Update : I strongly urge Wells Fargo Bank to update their databases and implement stronger measures to prevent similar fraudulent cases from occurring in the future. This step is crucial to safeguarding other innocent customers from falling victim to scams and ensuring the security of their life savings. \nI urge the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to seek assistance from my Wells Fargo Bank to fully comprehend the seriousness of this situation, placing utmost importance on the well-being and protection of its customers. I implore the bank to take immediate action to rectify the injustice I have experienced. In light of the significant financial loss I have suffered due to the fraudulent activities of \" XXXX XXXX XXXX, '' I kindly request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau keep me thoroughly informed of the progress made in this matter. I expect regular updates on the efforts being undertaken to recover the wrongfully stolen amount of {$30000.00} USD. Your prompt attention to this critical matter is crucial. I sincerely hope that the Consumer Protection Bureau recognizes the urgency and takes swift action to investigate the fraudulent activities, identify the responsible parties, and work diligently towards a satisfactory resolution. \nPlease be assured that I am eagerly awaiting your timely response and an effective resolution to this distressing situation. Thank you for your immediate attention and cooperation in resolving this matter. \nYours sincerely, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX This is a copy of the letters I addressed to Wells Fargo Bank. \nXXXX XX/XX/XXXX From : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Reference : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX company To : Wells Fargo Bank This is a formal refund letters to Wells Fargo Bank Dear Sir/Madam , I am writing this formal letter to bring to your attention a serious matter involving fraudulent activities that I have encountered. As a licensed and registered financial entity, I expect that Wells Fargo adheres to the regulations, rules, and directives, and I believe it is crucial for you to be informed about the misconduct that has transpired under your platform 's umbrella. I hope this letter finds you well. I am writing to bring to your attention a matter of utmost importance that requires immediate investigation and your utmost attention. I have recently become a victim of fraudulent activities facilitated through your banking platform, which has resulted in significant financial loss and severe distress. \nIntroduction and Overview I am an individual who applied for a senatorial position in the U.S. Senate of the United States of America. In order to promote my campaign and reach a wider audience, I engaged the services of a promotion company named XXXX XXXX XXXX, with a contract signed on XX/XX/XXXX, until the XX/XX/XXXX, election date. Regrettably, this company has engaged in fraudulent practices that have not only caused financial harm but also violated ethical and legal standards. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX made various false promises and misrepresented their services during our engagement. They assured me of their capability to 10 effectively promote my campaign and connect me with potential supporters. However, despite their claims, the company has continuously made excuses, including citing the COVID-19 pandemic, for their lack of progress and non-responsiveness. \nXXXX XXXX Since I engaged XXXX XXXX XXXX from XX/XX/XXXX, until the XX/XX/XXXX, election date, I have neither witnessed any progress in promoting my campaign nor received any response from the company. This inconsiderate behavior and breach of trust have left me in a vulnerable position, unable to effectively communicate my vision to potential voters and fulfill my campaign objectives. \nAs a licensed and registered financial entity, I hold Wells Fargo to the highest standards of integrity, security, and accountability. It is deeply troubling to discover that fraudulent activities have taken place within your banking platform, enabling unscrupulous entities like XXXX XXXX XXXX to exploit unsuspecting individuals. \nI kindly request that Wells Fargo conduct a thorough investigation into this matter to identify the extent of the fraudulent activities facilitated through your platform. I urge you to take immediate action to rectify the situation, recover the funds that were unlawfully obtained, and prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future. \nFurthermore, I request that you keep me informed about the progress of your investigation and the steps taken to address this issue. I trust that Wells Fargo will demonstrate its commitment to customer security and satisfaction by promptly addressing this matter and providing appropriate compensation for the financial losses incurred. \nPlease treat this matter with the urgency and seriousness it deserves. I anticipate a swift resolution and the restoration of justice. Should you require any additional information or documentation from me, please do not hesitate to contact me at the provided phone number or email address. \nI kindly request that you keep me well informed of the progress made in the investigation and recovery efforts. Transparent and regular communication will not only provide me with peace of mind but also demonstrate your dedication to resolving this matter effectively. \nXXXX XXXX Due to the law I expect Wells Fargo Bank, my trusted financial institution, to assist me in recovering my funds from the fraudulent company, XXXX XXXX XXXX. This company has failed to provide any service and has taken advantage of the situation. \nFraud : The XXXX XXXX XXXX. a company engaging in deceptive practices, making false representations, or intentionally misleading individuals for personal or financial gain may constitute fraud. Laws regarding fraud can vary depending on the jurisdiction. \nMisrepresentation : XXXX XXXX XXXX made false promises, misrepresented their services, or provided misleading information to induce you into engaging their services, they may have violated laws related to misrepresentation or false advertising. \nBreach of Contract : There was a written agreement between with XXXX XXXX XXXX that outlined the services they would provide, their failure to fulfill those obligations is considered a breach of contract. \nUnfair Competition : XXXX XXXX XXXX engaged in unfair business practices that gave them an unfair advantage over competitors or harmed other individuals or businesses, they violated laws related to unfair competition. \nGoods or Services Not Provided : I as the cardholder participated in the transaction, but I did not receive the goods or services because the merchant XXXX  was unwilling or unable to provide the goods or services. As stated by the card companies regulations, the client has not received the services paid for from the company. \nCase summary and allegations : Fraudulent companies have been hired to manage campaigns and provide services as campaign personnel. However, these companies did not provide any services and instead engaged in fraudulent activities that led to financial XXXX and XXXX damage. These include the following allegations that this fraudulent company and practice criminal activities : 1. The Company did not give the risk disclosure prior to my deposits.\n\n2. The Company intentionally committed fraudulent misrepresentation and falsified its agent names, credentials, competencies, qualifications, and location. \nXXXX. The Company offered good services/advice was not presented. \nXXXX. The company was directly involved with my identity theft. Instead, the Companys staff and its accomplices pocketed the money for personal use. \nXXXX. To add insult to injury, various unethical techniques were used and aimed at influencing the clients ( mine included ) system of values, principles, beliefs, emotions, motives, reasoning, and behavior. These include inter alia, passive aggression ( e.g., they made me feel XXXX unjustifiably guilty for my losses ), intimidation, demoralization, diversion, evasion, and mistruths, all of which were used to con me into obeying them, thus losing more money. Deliberately brushing me off by actively ignoring my requests, calls, and e-mails right after they realized they could no longer embezzle my funds. \nI eagerly await your response and the actions you will take to address this distressing situation. I expect an acknowledgment of my complaint and a response within 10 business days from Wells Fargo bank in accordance with the appropriate time frame as mentioned in your Complaint Policy. If you require any additional transaction details or documentation to process my claim, please inform me promptly so that I can provide them to you. Your prompt attention and cooperation in this matter are greatly appreciated. \nThank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your prompt response and resolution of this dispute. \nXXXX Sincerely, XXXX Please see all attached documents below attachments","date_sent_to_company":"2023-08-07T19:11:11.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"92395","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7364149","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2023-08-07T18:42:57.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In light of the significant financial <em>loss</em> I have suffered due to the fraudulent activities of \" XXXX XXXX XXXX, '' I kindly request that the <em>Consumer</em> Financial Protection Bureau keep me thoroughly informed of the progress made in this matter. I expect regular updates on the efforts being undertaken to recover the wrongfully stolen amount of {$30000.00} USD. Your prompt attention to this critical matter is crucial."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the <em>consumer</em> and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[5.9629674,"7364149"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12460574","_score":4.998687,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"Introduction, see page 2 Grounds for Punitive Damages, see page 8 A Recap, see page 9 Loan Estimate and Closing Disclosure per TILA, see page XXXX  Key Issues, see page XXXX  Financial Impact, see page 13 Requested Legal Remedies, see last page, 13 SUBJECT : Legal Representation Request for TILA Violation and Predatory Lending Case involving M & T Bank and its underwriters. PREDATORY LOAN MADE TO XXXX COUPLE. \n\nDear licensed XXXX  attorney with experience in predatory lending : We, aged XXXX, are seeking the legal expertise of a licensed XXXX  attorney experienced in predatory lending, as this case is a clear-cut violation of established TILA laws. M & T Bank issued a predatory loan to a XXXX couple, fully aware that the loan would inevitably implode within XXXX years after consummation, when the couple transitioned from full-time employment to relying solely on their combined Social Security income. The bank made no consideration for the couples financial well-being, despite knowing their income would drastically decrease upon retirement, expected within XXXX years after the loan was finalized. Furthermore, the bank failed to adhere to the TILA \" ability to repay '' requirements under 15 U.S.C. 1639c ( a ), which mandates lenders to ensure that borrowers have the ability to repay the loan. Additionally, the bank ignored the couples staggering debt-to-income ratio of 125 % at the time of loan approval, far exceeding the 41 % debt-to-income ratio cap established under the TILA regulations, specifically 12 C.F.R. 1026.43 ( e ), which sets limits on acceptable debt-to-income ratios for loans. \nOur case involves M & T Bank and its underwriters, operating its headquarters in XXXX, XXXX, and we need a Maryland-licensed attorney to represent us in a legal action against their underwriters. \nWHO DO WE WANT TO SUE? The finance company XXXX M & T Bank, and its underwriters, which are headquartered as stated per Plaintiffs loan contract : Assignment : This [ Retail Installment ] Contract and Security Agreement is assigned to M & T Bank, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, phone XXXX. XXXX : XXXX M & T bank in all XXXX states? It operates XXXX branches in XXXX states and XXXX XXXX XXXX the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXs XXXX from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Until XX/XX/XXXX, the bank 's holding company was named XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX M & T Bank has been profitable in every quarter since XXXX. \n\nINTRODUCTION : In XX/XX/XXXX, the Plaintiffs, a married couple aged XXXX, purchased a XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  for {$85000.00} with the intention of using it as their primary residence. This XXXX loan, with a monthly payment they could not sustain long-term, was approved despite the Plaintiffs financial vulnerabilities. Despite having excellent credit and a 10 % down payment, the Plaintiffs were preparing for retirement in XXXX or XXXX, and their income was set to drop dramatically from approximately {$20000.00} per month to just {$3400.00} per month, before taxes, from their combined Social Security. They had no assets nor reserves. \n\nPrior to securing the {$85000.00} loan, the XXXX had an alarming debt-to-income ratio of 125 %, far exceeding the 41 % cap set by the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ). According to TILA, lenders must assess a borrowers ability to repay the loan before approval ( 12 C.F.R. 1026.43 ). TILA mandates that lenders verify income, evaluate a borrowers debt obligations, and ensure that the borrower can reasonably meet the terms of the loan without undue hardship ( 12 C.F.R. 1026.43 ( c ) ( 2 ) ). The Plaintiffs had every intention of paying off their existing debts before retiring, yet their financial situation took a drastic turn for the worse when the male Plaintiff lost his sole source of income just XXXX months after the loan was consummated in XX/XX/XXXX. Without reserves, assets, or any other income to rely on, they were left in a position where they could not meet the obligations of the {$85000.00} loan or manage their existing debts. \n\nFrom the outset, this loan was predatory. The Plaintiffs were already financially overextended when they agreed to this loan at the ages of XXXX, and M & T Banks underwriters knew it. The loan was structured to fail, with no feasible plan to repay such a substantial debt given the Plaintiffs ' imminent reliance on Social Security income. This lack of foresight, combined with the banks disregard for the Plaintiffs financial well-being, demonstrates the predatory nature of this loan. M & T Bank 's actions were deliberate, and they knowingly set the Plaintiffs up for failure. \n\nThis case is a clear example of financial exploitation, and it presents an opportunity to hold M & T Bank accountable for its actions. The Plaintiffs financial devastation is not just a consequence of misfortune, but the result of a predatory loan designed to trap them in an untenable position. We urge you to consider taking this case on, as it highlights a blatant disregard for the Plaintiffs ' financial security, as well as a clear violation of TILAs ability-to-repay requirements ( 12 C.F.R. 1026.43 ). M & T Bank 's actions violate responsible lending practices and demand legal action. \n\nWe, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, a married couple aged XXXX at the time of loan consummation in XX/XX/XXXX, are seeking a licensed XXXX  attorney. We have been subjected to predatory lending practices that involve clear violations of the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), causing significant financial hardship. \n\nThis case involves a {$85000.00}, XXXX loan for a XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX which was misclassified by M & T Banks underwriters as a `XXXX vehicle loan, '' despite its residential nature and our explicit intent to use it as our primary residence. This misclassification allowed M & T Banks underwriters to bypass crucial TILA protections, particularly the ability to repay requirements outlined in 12 CFR 1026.43.\n\nUnder TILA, lenders are required to assess the borrowers ability to repay the loan before extending credit. This includes verifying income, future income, assets, reserves, calculating the debt-to-income ratio, and evaluating the borrowers ability to manage debt responsibly. \n\nTHIS ATTORNEY SHOULD NOTE that while the Plaintiffs intended to retire in XXXX or XXXX with their debts fully paid off, their financial situation drastically changed shortly after the consummation of the {$85000.00}, XXXX loan in XX/XX/XXXX, when they were both XXXX XXXX XXXX. Less than XXXX months after the loan was finalized, the male Plaintiff, who had been working as a contractor, lost his ability to continue working. This unexpected loss of income left the Plaintiffs with a mounting pile of debt and no financial reserves or assets to fall back on. They found themselves in a dire financial position, unable to meet their obligations, and with no means to recover. \n\nWhat is even more troubling is that M & T Banks underwriters were fully aware that the Plaintiffs had no reserves or assets to fall back on in case of financial hardship. Despite this, they approved the loan, fully aware that any significant change in the Plaintiffs ' incomesuch as the male Plaintiffs loss of workwould leave them unable to manage the substantial debt burden. This demonstrates a complete disregard for the Plaintiffs ' financial stability and future, contributing to a rapidly deteriorating financial situation shortly after the loan was consummated.\n\nWhile the Plaintiffs have not yet defaulted on the loan, they have been forced to make late payments, which have negatively impacted their FICO scores. Additionally, while the Plaintiffs have not yet fully transitioned to living solely on Social Security income, they will begin receiving their Social Security benefits in XXXX and plan to retire at that time and will have no ability to keep making this {$85000.00} XXXX loan payment. This impending reduction in income further underscores the unsustainable nature of the loan, which was clearly unaffordable even before the significant changes in the Plaintiffs ' financial situation. \n\nSince the Plaintiff was forced to cease working as a XXXX just XXXX months after the loan was consummated, his income has significantly decreased to {$1000.00} per week. Both he and his wife, now XXXX, have managed to secure low-paying jobs ; however, their combined earnings are insufficient to cover their mounting financial obligations. As a result, they find themselves in a constant struggle to meet their obligations, often having to \" XXXX XXXX to pay XXXX. '' This has led to late payments on the loan and a substantial deterioration in their credit, further compounding their financial distress. \n\nDespite these significant financial realities, M & T Banks underwriters approved a {$85000.00}, XXXX loan for an XXXX, which carried a monthly payment of {$800.00}, not including the additional {$150.00} per month for XXXX insurance and {$900.00} per month for parking ( excluding utilities ). This loan added an additional {$1800.00} in fixed monthly expenses for the Plaintiffs, without accounting for their already overwhelming debts. \n\nAt the time the loan was consummated, the XXXX Plaintiffs were already in a precarious financial situation. The male Plaintiff was burdened with a {$1200.00} monthly truck payment for the next XXXX years, {$350.00} in monthly truck and car insurance premiums, and credit card debt approaching {$10000.00}. Additionally, he was paying off a {$7000.00} loan for a work trailer, which would take another XXXX years to fully settle. These significant existing obligations, combined with the new XXXX  loan, put the Plaintiffs in an extremely vulnerable financial position. Their monthly rent at the time of the {$85000.00} XXXX loan consummation was $ XXXX. \n\nWhat makes this situation even more alarming is the male Plaintiffs debt-to-income ( DTI ) ratio *prior to* the consummation of the {$85000.00} XXXX loan, which stood at an unsustainable 125 % far exceeding TILAs 41 % cap for loan approval. In addition to personal debts, the male XXXX had substantial business expenses, including weekly employee payroll, workmans compensation insurance, liability insurance premiums, and state and federal tax obligations. With such a high DTI ratio, the Plaintiffs were clearly financially overextended. Yet, M & T Banks underwriters failed to properly evaluate this critical factor. Approving a loan of this size, when the Plaintiffs were already overwhelmed by existing debt, was not just irresponsible ; it was a clear violation of prudent lending practices. The {$85000.00} loan should never have been approved, and M & T Banks failure to assess the Plaintiffs ' ability to repay the debt only worsened their already fragile financial situation. \n\nBefore the loan was consummated in XX/XX/XXXX, the Plaintiffs were already financially struggling. The weight of their existing debt should have been a significant red flag, making the approval of this loan by M & T Banks underwriters even more irresponsible. They were fully aware that the Plaintiffs were already carrying a heavy financial burden and would be unable to take on additional obligations, especially given their impending retirement and drastic reduction in income in the next XXXX years. Yet, M & T Bank proceeded with the loan approval, which knowingly placed the XXXX in a position where they were set up for failure when they retired in XXXX or XXXX. \n\nM & T Banks underwriters knew this. They understood that, with such a drastic reduction in income just around the corner, the Plaintiffs would not be able to sustain this XXXX loan for {$85000.00}. Yet, despite the obvious financial distress they were facing, the loan was approved without any meaningful assessment of their ability to repay. The banks underwriters were fully aware that the XXXX would likely default on this loan within a few years, and the outcome would ultimately be repossession of the XXXX  a vehicle the bank intended to reclaim once the Plaintiffs could no longer afford the payments. \n\nThis loan was not just unaffordable ; it was deliberately designed to fail. M & T Banks underwriters, fully aware of the XXXX financial situation, chose to ignore the clear red flags, approving the loan in favor of securing a 10 % down payment, knowing that default was inevitable. This was not a mistake or oversight ; this was a predatory loan, structured with the intent to repossess the RV in the near future once the Plaintiffs could no longer meet the terms. \n\nThis case is not just about violations of XXXX. It is about holding M & T Bank accountable for knowingly placing the XXXX in a situation where they could not succeed. This is a clear case of predatory lending, and there is an urgent need for legal recourse to address the harm done to this couple. \nDespite the XXXX clear intent to use the XXXX  as their home, M & T Banks underwriters misclassified the loan as a \" vehicle loan, '' intentionally bypassing essential protections under the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), 15 U.S.C. 1639h, and its implementing regulation 12 CFR 1026.43. These protections would have required M & T Bank to assess the Plaintiffs ' ability to repay the loan, per TILA, a step that could have easily revealed the loans unaffordability. \n\nThis is a textbook example of a predatory loan. The misclassification of the loan, combined with M & T Banks failure to properly assess the XXXX ' financial situation, demonstrates a complete disregard for their well-being. The Plaintiffs, who were on the cusp of retirement and about to rely on a fixed income, should never have been extended such a loanone that would leave them XXXX XXXX XXXX by the time the final payment was due, having lived solely on their combined Social Security income for XXXX of those XXXX  years. \n\nGROUNDS FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES This misclassification, failure to assess the Plaintiffs ability to repay, and deceptive closing process represent not just a breach of legal obligations, but a clear injustice that has severely impacted the Plaintiffs ' financial stability and future. The loan, granted under unaffordable terms despite the Plaintiffs ' excellent credit and clear intentions to secure a home, has left them facing significant financial hardship. The Plaintiffs have lost all creditworthiness and given their age and reliance on Social Security income ; it is unlikely they will ever qualify for another loan. \nThe failure to adhere to the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) protections has effectively trapped the Plaintiffs in a situation with no viable financial options as they approach retirement. The loan, designed to fail from the outset, has not only stripped them of their financial security but has robbed them of the peace of mind and financial stability they had worked so hard to secure over their lifetimes. \n\nAs retirees with limited income sources, they now face a future devoid of meaningful financial opportunity. They will never be able to recoup the loss of their good credit, and the damage done by this predatory loan is immeasurable. This is why the Plaintiffs are seeking punitive damages not just to hold M & T Bank accountable for its predatory and exploitative practices but to begin to make amends for the future that was stolen from them. The banks actions have destroyed their ability to move forward in life with the financial security they had rightfully earned, and punitive damages would serve as both a financial remedy and a necessary deterrent to prevent M & T Bank from engaging in such harmful practices in the future. \n\nThis case is not merely about compensating for the immediate financial losses suffered by the Plaintiffs ; it is about restoring the dignity and future security that M & T Bank knowingly took away. The Plaintiffs deserve justice for the irreversible harm caused by this predatory loan, and punitive damages will play a crucial role in acknowledging the banks willful misconduct and ensuring that they are made whole. \n\nA RECAP : This case presents a glaring opportunity to correct a clear injustice. The Plaintiffs, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, were misled and subjected to predatory lending practices that jeopardized their financial security and future. This is not simply a technical violation of the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) ; its an egregious example of financial exploitation. The Plaintiffs ' ability to maintain good credit were put at risk for the sake of M & T Banks profits. It is imperative that this wrongdoing be addressed, and justice be served. \n\nTaking on this case offers the opportunity to secure justice for the Plaintiffs and challenge M & T Banks predatory practices. This loan was designed to fail from the start, with the bank knowingly setting the Plaintiffs up for default and repossession of the XXXX. The potential for legal recourse is significant, and this case is an urgent call for accountability. \n\nTILA mandates that lenders assess a borrowers ability to repay loans concerning a primary residence, which includes XXXX  used as a primary residence. This involves verifying income, future income, assets, reserves, calculating debt-to-income ratios, and evaluating the borrowers capacity to manage debt responsibly. M & T Bank and its underwriters failed to conduct this necessary assessment, which would have revealed the loans unaffordability, particularly given the Plaintiffs impending reliance on only Social Security income within XXXX years of the XXXX loan. Plaintiffs have no assets or reserves. \n\nAt the time of the loans consummation in XX/XX/XXXX, the Plaintiffs, both XXXX XXXX XXXX, were preparing for retirement and were about to become solely dependent on their combined Social Security income starting in XXXX or XXXX. Despite this clear financial reality, M & T Banks underwriters failed to assess the Plaintiffs ' ability to repay the loan over the next XXXX  years, which would have exposed the unsustainable nature of such a large debt after their retirement. Prior to the loans consummation, the Plaintiffs were already struggling with a debt-to-income ratio of 125 %, and the banks predatory lending practices only worsened their financial vulnerability. \n\nM & T Banks underwriters knowingly approved a loan that was unaffordable and set the Plaintiffs up for failure. Their primary concern appeared to be securing the 10 % down payment, without regard for the couples ability to repay the {$85000.00} XXXX loan beginning at their ages of XXXX. This was not an oversight but a deliberate choice to exploit the XXXX for profit, knowing that they would eventually default, and that repossession of the XXXX  was inevitable. \n\nThe loan was designed to fail. The underwriters disregarded basic lending principles and chose to exploit the Plaintiffs ' impending retirement, setting them up for default and eventual repossession of the XXXX. This predatory behavior exposes the banks priorities to secure a down payment and profit from an inevitable default, rather than ensuring the Plaintiffs financial well-being.\n\nThe closing process was equally questionable. The finance manager responsible for handling the closing distracted the Plaintiffs with irrelevant conversations, preventing them from fully reviewing and understanding the terms of the documents they were signing. The Plaintiffs were rushed through the paperwork, signing documents without any meaningful opportunity to review or understand what they were agreeing to. XXXX such document stated, You agree NOT to use the property as a dwelling, which directly contradicted the XXXX ' intention of using the RV as their primary home. \n\nLoan Estimate and Closing Disclosure per TILA To make matters worse, the XXXX were never provided a Loan Estimate XXXX  days after loan approval or before submitting their 10 % down payment. Additionally, they were never given a Closing Disclosure three days prior to consummating the loan, as required by TILA law. This failure allowed the inclusion of an absurd and misleading clause in the final documents You agree NOT to use the Property as a dwelling. \n\nM & T Banks misclassification of the loan, failure to assess the Plaintiffs ability to repay, and deceptive closing process have caused severe and lasting harm to these retirees. Despite excellent credit and clear intentions to secure a home, the Plaintiffs were granted a loan under unaffordable terms, leaving them in significant financial distress. The failure to follow TILA protections trapped them in a situation where they can not recover, especially as they approach retirement and rely solely on Social Security. \n\nThe loan, designed to fail from the outset, has destroyed their financial stability and peace of mind. With limited income and no ability to repay, the XXXXaintiffs will never be able to rebuild their credit, and their financial future is compromised. M & T Banks actions have robbed them of the financial security they had worked so hard for. \n\nThis case is not only about compensating for immediate harm but also about holding M & T Bank accountable for predatory practices that have permanently affected the Plaintiffs lives. The failure to adhere to basic lending standards, including ignoring their critical financial situation and the Plaintiffs ' debt-to-income ratio, underscores the banks misconduct. \n\nPlaintiffs seek punitive damages not only to address the immediate harm but to rectify the unjust future M & T Bank has stolen from them. This is a clear case of financial exploitation, and its essential that M & T Bank be held accountable for the irreparable harm caused by this predatory loan. \n\nKey Issues : 1. Misclassification of Loan : Despite the XXXX being intended as a primary residence, M & T Banks underwriters misclassified the loan as a \" vehicle loan, '' thereby bypassing TILAs requirements for primary residence loans and denying the Borrowers essential protections and disclosures. \n\n2. Failure to Assess Ability to Repay : M & T Banks underwriters failed to properly evaluate the Borrowers ' financial situation, despite their impending reliance solely on Social Security benefits. The loan 's terms were clearly unaffordable, and their debt-to-income ratio far exceeded TILAs acceptable limits. \n\n3. Fraudulent Conduct : M & T Bank misrepresented the loan contract by including an unauthorized clause that stated, You agree not to use the Property as a dwelling. This misrepresentation misled the Borrowers about the terms and the intended use of the XXXX. \n\n4. TILA Disclosure Violations : M & T Bank failed to provide the Borrowers with a timely Loan Estimate ( LE ) or Closing Disclosure ( CD ). The LE was provided over a year after loan consummation, and the critical term regarding the XXXX  restriction as a dwelling was never disclosed to the Plaintiffs until more than a year after closing.\n\n5. Predatory Lending Practices : M & T Bank knowingly approved an unaffordable loan, aware that the Borrowers would likely default. This conduct exemplifies deliberate financial exploitation, with the loan structured to fail. \n\nFinancial Impact : As a result of these actions, the Borrowers ' credit has suffered, and they are at risk of defaulting once they rely solely on Social Security income in XXXX and XXXX. The threat of repossession looms, leaving them homeless and with no viable financial options. \nThe loan, designed to fail from the outset, has destroyed their financial stability and peace of mind. With limited income and no ability to repay, the Plaintiffs will never be able to rebuild their credit, and their financial future is compromised. M & T Banks actions have robbed them of the financial security they had worked so hard for. \n\nRequested Legal Remedies : The Borrowers are seeking the cancellation of the loan, along with the return of all funds paid, including their 10 % down payment. Additionally, they seek legal recourse for the emotional distress, financial harm, and breach of fiduciary duty caused by these predatory actions. \nThis case represents a clear violation of consumer protection laws, and we believe it offers the potential for significant legal redress for the Borrowers. \nWe would greatly appreciate your consideration of this matter. Please let us know if you would be open to discussing it further and taking on the case. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  residents XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-13T08:49:25.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay your loan","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"33584","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12460574","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"M&T BANK CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-03-13T08:32:00.000Z","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 after you declared or threatened to declare bankruptcy"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This case represents a clear violation of <em>consumer</em> protection laws, and we believe it offers the potential for significant legal redress for the Borrowers. \nWe would <em>greatly</em> appreciate your consideration of this matter. Please let us know if you would be open to discussing it further and taking on the case. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  residents XXXX"],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the <em>consumer</em> and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[4.998687,"12460574"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2550545","_score":3.7501776,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I have added the complaint /demand that I sent Equifax , which will give you all of the details pertaining to their part in this mess. I was going to do two complaints however, your system will NOT allow me to file one against XXXX XXXX XXXX because they have NOT signed up to get complaints from your system. Which is NOT surprising considering they are trying to avoid paying taxes on the cash payments they get and they try to avoid doing the right thing in general. The brother owns the car lot and then XXXX XXXX owns the Finance company and then I think they BOTH own the insurance company. I was told it was to avoid any requirements of being the car lot owner and the finance company. I was told by a former employee that they did it that was because something about it may be illegal to own both, or something to that effect! All I know is if you look into XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX  you will find some shady stuff for sure!!\n<P/>\nSo this complaint is about Equifax and XXXX into one because I cant do XXXX  with out Equifax. If you need any additional info to get both of these complaints filed PLEASE do NOT hesitate to let me know.\n<P/>\nMy complaint issue is two fold, for this one I will submit the information pertaining to the defaming and damaging information a Furnisher placed on my report, admitted it was there mistake and sent me an apology and confirmed they would have it removed and updated with in the following 30 days. That was in Mid to late XX/XX/XXXX. SInce then I have gone back and forth with the company numerous times requesting they do as they said and agreed in writing, which was to have it removed from Equifax, which would then have Equifax correct my report and scores. It is now XX/XX/XXXX and Equifax did finally remove the inaccurate statement on my report, however they have NOT corrected my scores, paid the restitution to me, nor have they reported the corrections to ALL of the lenders that viewed pulled my report since it was Incorrectly placed. Additionally they have NOT removed the codes and numbers that remove the Repo status from my reporting. SO they have only done a small part of the correction. I disputed it with Equifax on 4 separate occasion, as well as the Furnisher. The CFO has sent me a few emails which I will attach to prove they have accepted responsibility of the DAMAGING information being their NEGLIGENCE AND MISTAKE. Which has cost my family and I several hundreds of thousands of dollars in Interest on CC, loan denials, car financing denials, being called a fraud, in front of my small children which caused my character to be harshly defamed, which also cost me numerous financing abilities of all kinds including but not limited to getting financed for cars, approved for houses, and loans that we needed to help our family get a safe and habitable home. We were forced due to the GROSS negligence of the Furnisher placing an INVOLUNTARY REPOSSESSION on my credit report since XXXX, which I was NOT made aware of this until Mid to late XX/XX/XXXX, WHen I was informed of it, I was completely and utterly embarrassed by the information and how I was told. I was at a large car dealership, where there was a longtime friend of the families who worked there and offered me the BEST price on a brand new car, along with their promotion of 0.9 % financing. When I arrived at the dealership, I showed them that I had a XXXX  credit score, they were very happy bc that score provided them with the ability to grant me financing at the 0.9 % and to give me the car I wanted at FAMILY PRICING, which took off an instant XXXX from the sticker price. They also had massive incentives from the dealerships which would have allowed me to have a BRAND NEW FULLY WARRANTIED car with all the trim, bells and whistles I needed and wanted to secure a safe car from my children, as opposed to the current one that I had purchased in XXXX from the Furnisher XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, who is one in the same of the furnisher that placed the DAMAGING HARMFUL DEFAMING, INACCURATE INFORMATION on my credit report, which now I was told of when they denied me credit, financing of any kind at the dealership when they pulled my auto credit. This was the first I had heard of a Repo of any kind on my report. When I instantly contacted the furnisher it took them a few days to get back to me and when they did, they informed me that the were able to confirm it was absolutely a FULL MISTAKE ON THEIR END and that they were sure to correct it ASAP! they gave me the apology letter to use to try to prove it was their mistake and I was worthy of financing. When it had NOT been corrected in XX/XX/XXXX, I again spoke to the CFO XXXX XXXX who again assured me they had submitted the request for removal to Equifax directly and due to their backlog it may take up to 90 days to be fully removed. At that time I was NEVER aware of the FCRA, FACT ACT OR THE CFPB ACT that protected me, and would have helped me then. It was NOT until XX/XX/XXXX when I went to get a new car once again at a large dealership that was offering HUGE rebates and interest of 1.9 % to qualified buyers. Well even with the Repo at that time my credit was still in the mid XXXX 's I do n't want to say an exact # because I do n't have that exact # in front of me. So I do know for sure it was in the XXXX- XXXX range at that time. Which had the Repo NOT been on I would have gotten the 1.9 %, they again had it all set until they pulled the car credit and the REPO was still showing, NOT only was it still showing, IT HAD JUST BEEN RE REPORTED AS CURRENT BY THE FURNISHER as of that month! Which means NOT only did they NOT correct it, they actually kept reporting it as a current issue. I again contacted XXXX, who then APOLOGIZED and admitted it was HIS human error that has caused it to NOT be removed and to be currently reporting, I also showed him that he had placed late and Missed payments on my report that were ABSOLUTELY NOT correct. THe missed and Lates were adding up due to the way they had my account all mixed up. The account that was listed as an INVOLUNTARY REPO was showing numerous late and missed pays when it was NOT it had been paid in full and it never had a balance due after it was paid off in XXXX. Additionally this when I was sent to another car dealership who felt that their strong relationship with a bank would allow them to use the apology letter to show it was an ERROR on the part of XXXX XXXX XXXX and that I was never late and all of my accounts are in GOOD STANDINGS with XXXX XXXX XXXX. WHen the finance MGR of the dealership sent the letter the lady from the bank came back while I was there with my two boys and stated, that I WAS A FRAUD AS WAS MY LETTER because there is NO way any finance company would admit this amount of guilt in writing, and put Equifax in the SAME guilty seat as them. Now they had caused my Character to be fully defamed and to not allow me to have any chance to get financing, and if anyone in the auto industry tried to finance me and she heard of it, she would inform them of my letter being a fraud. I even tried to explain that she could contact them directly to prove it was NOT a FRAUD. She said she would NOT waste her time. SO this was when numerous INQ were placed on my reports due to me HOPING and PRAYING that someone would help me. THe car I was currently driving was very messed up and VERY UNSAFE and it was From XXXX. They had me trade that car in and get two cars, one for me and one for my husband which they said that bc they had messed up so badly they would allow me to keep these cars until the credit report was cleared and then they would buy them back no problem. SO now let 's fast forward to XX/XX/XXXX, and I had done a great deal of research and found out about the FCRA, FACT ACT and CFPB act of protection. I sent them several emails with options to resolve my financial, emotional, physical, mental personal and professional damages. THe owner XXXX XXXX, got involved and stated her WOULD NOT NOT ONLY PAY ME ANY FINANCIAL RESTITUTION, BUT NOW HE WOULD NOT LET HIS AGENTS OR ANYONE IN HIS COMPANY CORRECT MY REPORT EVEN THOUGH IT WAS WRONG AND WRONG FROM THEM WITH THEIR FULL ADMITTANCE OF THEIR MISTAKE! I have that in an email which I will also attach. I tried with everything I could to get them to work with me, they then refused to do as they said and buy back the cars I was stuck with from them, and I was still paying their extortion rates of over 19 % interest rather than the 0.9 or 1.9 % I deserved and would have had if their company was not negligent in their FALSE, DAMAGING, HARMFUL, AND MORE WITH THEIR RECKLESS REPORTING to EQUIFAX. Each time I disputed the error with Equifax, they would come back and say that XXXX  CONFIRMED THE INFORMATION TO BE ACCURATE AND IT WOULD STAND! MEANING they FORCED IT TO STAY ON EVEN AFTER ADMITTING IT WAS INACCURATE AND THEIR COMPANY 'S FULL MISTAKE, AND THAT MY ACCOUNTS WITH THEM WERE IN PERFECT AND GREAT STANDINGS AND THAT I HAVE FULFILLED ALL OF MY FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS WITH THEM. Each time this happened, I would reach out to XXXX who would either IGNORE ME AND MY EMAIL REQUEST FOR THEIR HELP, OR THEY WOULD TELL ME VIA THEIR SALES MGR THAT EQUIFAX NEVER CONTACTED THEM AND THEY NEVER REAFFIRMED THE REPORTING SHOULD STAND. I finally sent a demand letter to Equifax stating that I will take them to Federal court if they did NOT fix my report, it was then and ONLY then that they paid attention to me and called me to discuss my issues. Most attorneys did NOT want to take my case because they know that BUY HERE PAY HERE LOTS are SCAM ARTISTS And they do n't show a lot of money on the books so it is hard to get any money out of them. However I was able to find an attorney that would take the case and make it a co case of XXXX and EQUIFAX. They said they have had to sue EQUIFAX on a daily basis because this is their normal business practice. It has been admitted that Equifax and the other XXXX of the big XXXX, feel that it is easier to pay off the few hundred consumers per year that take it this far, rather than hiring and employing the proper staff to do the claims investigations the correct way, which as you know all too well, is what they have agreed to do in order to stay in business. They have been sued so many times they mainly settled out of court now because they know they take the risk of a judge and Jury awarding 3 to 5 times the amount that a consumer will accept in a settlement without a lengthy court battle. In addition they are aware that the Federal courts ARE TIRED OF THEM CONTINUING THEIR ILLEGAL BEHAVIORS AND DISREGARD FOR THE CONSUMERS. Well XXXX HAS stated to me that no matter what they will NOT remove the inaccurate info, because they DO N'T WANT TO OR HAVE TO! OnXX/XX/XXXX I sent the written demand to Equifax explaining that I want FINANCIAL compensation from them and if not I will proceed to federal court. Well, on XX/XX/XXXX I got a call from 2 separate people in the Equifax corporate office, looking to help get the item/s removed from my report. They said that without taking them to court they would NOT pay any kind of restitution. That is also whet XXXX Said, XXXX said that if I take them to court they are protected and I will get NOTHING and have to pay their court cost. WHich from what I have researched is FAR from the TRUTH! I have all the written proof that they are NEGLIGENT and with their continued admitted refusal it shows their WILLFUL INTENT TO CAUSE HARM TO ME AND MY FAMILY. Which again from myresearch and speaking to attorneys and research on you the FCRA, FACT ACT and the Consumer FInancial protection act THEY ARE WRONG! And I am entitled to damages they have caused my family since they placed the INACCURATE info and were notified of it. They agreed to remove it and did not and then stated they WONT remove it and do n't are what I do or say, or what happened to me and my small children! On XX/XX/XXXX The representative from Equifax contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX with me on the phone, The secretary stated that XXXX, who is the ONLY one that can authorize the removal of the inaccurate HARMING, DAMAGING, CHARACTER DEFAMING ETC, INFO. SHe said he was in a meeting and she would NOT disturb him. She said that she will have him contact Equifax Rep, when he got out. It may be that day or the next, he will do it at his earliest convenience. SO XXXX XXXX, the Equifax agent, told me that when she hears back from XXXX she will conferenced me in. Well she contacted me the next day XX/XX/XXXX without XXXX on the phone. She stated that he did agree to allow her to remove the WORDS INVOLUNTARY REPO FROM MY REPORT, BUT HE WOULD NOT ALLOW HER TO REMOVE THE LATE PAYMENTS AND MISSED PAYMENTS EVEN THOUGH HE AGREED THAT THEY WERE WRONG AND INACCURATE! So again, EQUIFAX removed just the wording of INVOLUNTARY REPO, but that is ALL they did and that is ALL that XXXX would allow them to do. Even though they knew that it was causing me DETRIMENTAL DAMAGE, and causing me to pay EXCESSIVELY HIGH FEES on anything with interest. THe Equifax rep told me that XXXX REFUSED to speak to her with me on the line because they wanted NOTHING to do with me, and if I was going to sue them then they will not help me in any way. Equifax proved at that point that they had NEVER actually contacted XXXX as they said they had, and if they did and XXXX refused it to be removed, they should have required proof. I had sent EQUIFAX the letters of apology from XXXX and they still chose their side. XXXX claims in an email that he removed it via their internal systems, WHICH WAS ANOTHER LIE from them, which continued the damage and Harm to my family.\nWhen we sat down and calculated our losses in a very conservative way and we have concluded that due to their intentional willful intent to cause and do HARM to my family and I financially, emotionally Physically, Personally, Professionally, I WAS UNABLE TO GET A JOB WITH THE REPO AND I LOST MY JOB MAKING {$75000.00} per year because of the excessive stress and physical damage they caused me, I was no longer able to perform my job duties. I explained all of this to them, and they did NOT CARE AND TOLD ME NOT THEIR ISSUE and they STILL WOULD NOT HAVE IT REMOVED. I then became unemployable because my job requires me to work with MONEY and very private and sensitive information of the company that I work for. I am NOT able to do that with a REPO on my report. It makes me look like I am IRRESPONSIBLE and NO company wants someone controlling their accounts that is FINANCIALLY IRRESPONSIBLE! The job I lost I had been working with since XXXX, so they did NOT pull my credit after the REPO was placed.\nAll and ALL, we are requesting a restitution FInancial Payment be made Immediately to me, of {$350000.00}. WE are willing to accept a reasonable counter offer if they also agree to remove every negative item they have EVER placed on mine and my husbands report, Including the repo they placed on him due to their lies of taking back the hunk of junks they told us to buy and they would buy them back as part of their apology. Additionally they allowed My niece and Nephew to take over payments on the van that I had NOTHING but issues with. My nephews father is a mechanic and he was able to finally fix it the right way after XXXX charged us more than {$500.00} in repair bills added with interest that they continued to incorrectly fix. They did this with the XXXX that was in my husbands name as well, which we let them take back because they should have done it when they said, and had they fixed my credit in XXXX as they said they would, we would have never had to get their piece of JUNK cars to start with, SO all of it is on them. I also want the Van that has been MORE than paid for, TO be paid in full with a clear title given to my niece and Nephew!\nAlso I can more than prove it was the REPO holding me back from getting financed, because the car I currently have is at 9 % instead of the 0 % it should have been at, but the ONLY way XXXX even gave me that deal was I showed them the APOLOGY LETTERS FROM XXXX, ALONG WITH THE LETTER FROM THE OWNER XXXX XXXX STATING THEY WILL NOT REMOVE IT EVEN THOUGH IT WAS THEIR MISTAKE! SO that is PROOF POSITIVE that it has BEEN ALL OF THEIR WRONG DOING ALL ALONG. OH and I also had to send that same info to XXXX to get my credit card. However instead of getting a {$5000.00} limit I was given a XXXX limit and instead of getting 0 % for the 2 years I only got the 0 % for 9 months. SO now because I have come to the end of being able to handle the enormous financial burden their negligence has and continues to cause me and my family, WE are in a spot that our payments are late for the first time EVER, and that we are unable to pay our bills because we have been paying the ENORMOUS RATES FOR SO LONG WE JUST HAVE FUN OUT OF MONEY TO KEEP DOING IT!! I HAVE TRIED SO MANY WAYS AND TIMES TO GET THEM TO SETTLE AND THEY CONTINUE TO REFUSE TO DO THE RIGHT THING! I pray for the safety, health and well being of my children you will be able to get them to make us whole again, after waiting for right at the 2 year mark. I do have an attorney looking into the case for Equifax, however, I will also file a complaint against them and share the info with you regarding their part more in detail as well as XXXX 's being a co conspirator with their negligence just as Equifax is a co conspirator with XXXX. If you are able to use this as the info is the same, and the documentation is the same for the most part, and file this against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and EQUIFAX CREDIT AGENCY I WOULD SO APPRECIATE THAT. If NOT I just want to say, I appreciate you help getting this matter resolve once and for all!\nSo to recap, We want Restitution in the form of {$350000.00}. and or If they agree to absolutely remove every negatively reported item on Mine and my husband XXXX XXXX XXXX 's reports that they have sent to the credit reporting agencies, along with Providing a CLEAN AND CLEAR PAID IN FULL TITLE to the Van Under my niece XXXX XXXX, then we will entertain a lower offer.\nPlease make sure it is clear that they have HARD COST me, {$15000.00} in 2 years of work, due to the stress, they have factually hard cost me to pay 9 % higher on a XXXX car, due to had this been corrected I would have received 0 % interest, and I would have had that rate 2 years ago, and never had to pay them the EXTORTION RATES OF 19 % on the 2 piece of XXXX cars I had no choice but to take from them, because their negligence and willful intentional intent to cause harm left me with no other options of buying cars from them, One could argue that they do this to everyone so they are FORCED TO RELY ON THEM FOR CARS, AND GET TO KEEP CHARGING THE EXCESSIVE RATES OF 19+ PERCENT ON TOP OF THE EXTREMELY OVER PRICED CRAP CARS THEY SELL! I am sure that has a legal name, and whatever it is, I would think it is a punishable act, and if so I would like that to be imposed should they refuse to settle my claim promptly!\nI appreciate your prompt attention in this matter, and your assistance in getting this resolved is GREATLY appreciated.\nWE know that if there is ever an agency that TRULY FIGHTS for consumer rights it is YOU GUYS and we ca n't express how much we appreciate you!!\n<P/>\nTHANKFUL, XXXX and XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2017-06-09T04:31:24.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"32825","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2550545","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2017-06-09T03:42:30.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["They have been sued so many times they mainly settled out of court now because they know they take the <em>risk</em> of a judge and Jury awarding 3 to 5 times the amount that a <em>consumer</em> will accept in a settlement without a lengthy court battle. In addition they are aware that the Federal courts ARE TIRED OF THEM CONTINUING THEIR ILLEGAL BEHAVIORS AND DISREGARD FOR THE <em>CONSUMERS</em>."],"product":["Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal <em>consumer</em> reports"]},"sort":[3.7501776,"2550545"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":8,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":8}]}},"product":{"doc_count":8,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"International money transfer","doc_count":1},{"key":"Virtual currency","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"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":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":8,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Credit card protection / Debt protection","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem caused by your funds being low","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Overdrafts and overdraft fees","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem when making payments","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem during payment process","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay your loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem after you declared or threatened to declare bankruptcy","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":8,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":8}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":8,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":8}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":8,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":8}]}},"company":{"doc_count":8,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Block, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"M&T BANK CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":8,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"FL","doc_count":2},{"key":"AZ","doc_count":1},{"key":"CA","doc_count":1},{"key":"CT","doc_count":1},{"key":"MD","doc_count":1},{"key":"NH","doc_count":1},{"key":"TN","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":8,"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":3}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":8,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{}}}