{"took":78,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":7,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2878532","_score":11.873977,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"In a phone call on XX/XX/XXXX inquiring about some recent activity on my credit report, I discovered that Equifax had listed XX/XX/XXXX as my date of birth ( DOB ) in their records. I informed Equifax that DOB was incorrect. Equifax refused to tell me the name, address and telephone number of the lender/creditor who furnished the incorrect DOB. Equifax instructed me to fax or mail a copy of my drivers license and birth certificate to get my DOB corrected in their records and to contact all my lender/creditors to determine who furnished the incorrect DOB. I have been reluctant to comply with Equifaxs instructions for several reasons : 1 ) Faxing or mailing my sensitive personal information in an environment ripe of hacking and fraudulent behavior, of which Equifax records were victim to only a short while ago, is unsafe. Equifax should already have that information in my records. \n\n2 ) Providing the requested material will get my DOB corrected in Equifaxs records but will not address and correct the more concerning problem that Equifax allowed a lender/creditor to submit an incorrect DOB for me, accepted it as accurate and true, and then changed my DOB in my records, without first contacting me for confirmation. Furthermore, this change in data was made while my credit was locked. A locked credit report should have no activity! Equifax was failing to protect my credit report by allowing any changes to be made to my records. I know that my DOB was correct in Equifaxs records prior to locking my credit on XX/XX/XXXX, as I was required to provide my DOB to access my credit records online, in order to lock my credit. In a response to my complaint on another portal, Equifax stated, we are unable to determine how long her date of birth has been reporting incorrectly. Equifax records all kinds of dates in my credit report ( dates when accounts are opened and closed, reporting dates, dates of payments ). How does Equifax not know when my DOB was changed? \n\n3 ) I have confirmed with the other two credit reporting companies, XXXX and XXXX, that my DOB is correct in their records. An XXXX representative told me that if XXXX had received information from a lender/creditor indicating a DOB that was different than what was in their records, XXXX would view that as suspicious and would contact me for confirmation before making any changes. Furthermore, XXXX records the names of lender/creditors with the information that they submit. That allows follow-up investigation of the lender/creditor providing the incorrect information. On my credit report provided by Equifax, the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of lender/creditors are listed for each of my accounts along with the dates the information is reported. In a response to my complaint on another portal, Equifax stated, We are unable to determinewho creditor is reporting the date of birth, even though Equifax credit report documents state that it is my right to requestthe business name, address and telephone number of the furnisher of the disputed information, ( see the attached document, page 2 ). If it is my right to request that information from Equifax, should not Equifax retain that information in order to provide it upon request? Equifax is violating my rights by not providing that information to me. \n\n4 ) In a response to my complaint on another portal, Equifax stated, We are unable to determinewhat the correct date of birth could be. How can Equifax not have record of my correct DOB which has been in my records for 30 years? Credit reporting agencies keep data for at least 10 years. Equifax still lists my previous home address ( which is over 10 years old ) on my credit report. If Equifax still has record of my former address, how can Equifax not have record of the former ( and correct ) DOB that was in my records as of XX/XX/XXXX? \n\nFor the reasons listed above, I have some major concerns about the security of my credit report that is in the hands of Equifax. First, it is apparent that Equifax is mishandling my records by not taking the precautions that are followed by XXXX  and by not keeping records of all data submissions. Secondly, Equifax is overlooking a very serious possibility that this change in my DOB is a part of identity fraud or a mixed-file case. How has Equifax ruled out those possibilities? I need to be able to contact the lender/creditor who submitted the incorrect DOB in order to determine why or how they have the wrong DOB. It is not as if the incorrect DOB is off by one digit. It is a completely different month, day and year. This is not a case of a simple typographical error and it must be thoroughly investigated. Since Equifax claims they are unable to determine who the lender/creditor is who reported the incorrect DOB, how can Equifax investigate this issue at all? Equifax has suggested that I contact all my lender/creditors to confirm they have my correct DOB. Why isnt Equifax contacting all my lender/creditors to investigate this problem? \n\nThe way that Equifax is mishandling my information and the fact that Equifax wants to dismiss this problem by simply requiring me to provide proof of DOB is unacceptable. I need the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to help me get this problem resolved properly. Equifax needs to : 1 ) Change the current incorrect DOB of XX/XX/XXXX back to my correct DOB, WHICH SHOULD BE IN EQUIFAXS RECORDS. My correct DOB was in Equifaxs records as of XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n2 ) Provide me the name, address and telephone number of the furnisher of the incorrect DOB. If Equifax is unable to determine the lender/creditor who reported the incorrect DOB, then EQUIFAX SHOULD CONTACT ALL MY LENDER/CREDITORS TO DETERMINE WHO IS THE FURNISHER OF THE INCORRECT DOB. That should be a part of Equifaxs investigation into Equifaxs incompetent handling of my records.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-04-17T18:39:59.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"641XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2878532","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2018-04-17T18:22:49.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Personal information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I have been reluctant to comply with Equifaxs instructions for several reasons : 1 ) Faxing or mailing my sensitive personal information in an <em>environment</em> ripe of hacking and fraudulent behavior, of <em>which</em> Equifax records were victim to only a short while ago, is unsafe."]},"sort":[11.873977,"2878532"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8611370","_score":8.571005,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"I have recently received correspondence from XXXX XXXX of American Express Customer Advocate Services Team regarding a recent complaint lodged with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). In the communication, XXXX asserted that American Express is incapable of retracting my application due to its submission status. However, it is imperative to clarify that this assertion is incorrect. The true reason for American Express 's inability to retract my application lies in the fact that it has already been transmitted in accordance with the Electronic Transfer Act, subsequently transformed into a receivable, and deposited, as explicitly detailed in my previous correspondence. Attached herewith is the transaction history from American Express, delineating the precise movement of funds. \n\nMoreover, it is concerning that American Express purports to be \" committed to treating all customers fairly '' and its representatives pledge to \" adhere to all laws and regulations '' while simultaneously engaging in actions that directly contravene this commitment. It is evident that American Express 's actions are in blatant violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1691 ) and a host of other statutory provisions. \n\nAllow me to elucidate the specific legal infractions perpetrated by American Express in denying my entitlement to unlimited consumer credit. It is imperative that these violations be addressed promptly and rectified to ensure compliance with the law and uphold the principles of fairness and equity. \n\nAmerican Express 's assertion regarding the initial denial of my application being attributed to a XXXX score is deeply concerning. Despite my explicit inquiry in a prior complaint regarding the factors considered by American Express 's underwriting department in determining this denial, my question remains unanswered. Specifically, I requested clarification on the criteria utilized by the Treasury Underwriting department of American Express to assess the application 's outcome. \n\nIt is disconcerting that American Express attributes the denial solely to a XXXX score, especially considering the utilization of a computerized system for processing applications. This system, as disclosed in your XXXX  XXXX filing dated XX/XX/XXXX, has been acknowledged by American Express itself as unreliable. Therefore, it is imperative that American Express provide transparent and accurate information regarding the comprehensive factors influencing application decisions, ensuring accountability and fairness in its processes. \n\nWe rely principally on the customers creditworthiness for repayment of loans or receivables and therefore often have no other recourse for collection. Our ability to assess creditworthiness may be impaired as a result of changes in our underwriting practices or if the criteria or models we use to manage our credit risk prove inaccurate in predicting future losses, which could have a negative impact on our results of operations. This may be exacerbated to the extent information we have historically relied upon to make credit decisions does not accurately portray a customers creditworthiness, including as a result of the current high rates of inflation and economic slowdown. ( XXXX Filing, dated XX/XX/XXXX, Pg XXXX ) Our use of artificial intelligence and machine learning is subject to various risks including the use of personal information, flaws in our models or datasets that may result in biased or inaccurate results, ethical considerations regarding artificial intelligence, and our ability to safely deploy and implement governance and controls for artificial intelligence systems. ( XXXX Filing, dated XX/XX/XXXX, Pg XXXX ) Once more, I must insist on clarity regarding the factors underlying the initial denial of my application. Given the acknowledgment of potential biases and inaccuracies within American Express 's computerized systems, it is imperative to understand the precise criteria influencing such decisions. The reliance on these systems, as previously noted in American Express 's own disclosures, raises concerns regarding discriminatory practices directed towards me as a consumer. This further substantiates my previous assertion regarding American Express 's violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1691 ). \n\nFurthermore, I find it necessary to address American Express 's request for my social security number during the application process. Despite the assertion of using it for identity verification, it is crucial to highlight that this request was made under false pretenses. The Social Security Administration 's clarification unequivocally states that the social security number is not intended as a personal identifier for verification purposes. Therefore, by providing my social security number and signature, I inadvertently engaged in a barter transaction. \n\nAmerican Express 's insistence on the necessity of providing my social security number under the guise of identity verification is not only misleading but also inaccurate. This practice warrants scrutiny and rectification to ensure compliance with applicable laws and to uphold the integrity of consumer rights. \n\nThe social security administration even states that The SSN is the single most widely used record identifier for both government and the private sector, exerting a broad influence on the lives of most Americans. However, by itself, it is not a personal identifier because it lacks systematic assignment to every person and the means to authenticate a person 's identity. You can see this for yourself by visiting their website, XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nUpon signing and submitting the application, I assumed the role of an investor in American Express. The application, also denoted as a note in accordance with the company 's prospectus, is slated for transfer by American Express Receivables Financing Corporation. Following this transfer, the funds will be deposited into the American Express Credit Account Master Trust, in accordance with the specifications outlined in the American Express Prospectus, dated XX/XX/XXXX, specifically on Page XXXX, Section Sale of Receivables. \n\nThe act of providing my social security number during the application process to American Express gave Power of Attorney and fiduciary status upon them.The duties of a fiduciary, as outlined in 29 U.S. Code 1104, mandate acting solely in the best interest of the beneficiary. It appears that American Express is not fulfilling this duty, and as a result, I will revoke your status as fiduciary and notify the appropriate authorities. \n\nThe inclusion of my social security number in the application effectively transformed the transaction into a barter exchange. By providing this information, I conferred something of monetary value to American Express. Subsequently, American Express will leverage this data to generate receivables, converting them into cash before transferring and depositing the funds into the American Express Credit Account Master Trust. This application, in essence, serves as a security. American Express has already transferred and continues to profit from its securitization, alongside card member loans and receivables, as disclosed in the 'Asset Securitization ' section of the American Express XXXX filing on page XXXX. \n\nThe occurrence of a barter transaction in the securitization process mandates American Express to complete an IRS 1099B form for this transaction. This action underscores American Express 's divergence from its publicly filed SEC filings, particularly the XXXX form, where American Express explicitly states \" We are subject to significant supervision and regulation, and an increasingly stringent enforcement environment, with respect to compliance with anti-money laundering ( AML ), countering the financing of terrorism ( CFT ), sanctions and anti-corruption laws and regulations. Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs and policies and procedures for AML/CFT , sanctions and anti-corruption compliance could have material financial, legal and reputational consequences Filing an IRS form 1099B for this barter transaction would not only be erroneous but could also be construed as facilitating tax evasion and engaging in money laundering practices. A legitimate barter transaction entails a fair exchange of goods or services. In this case, I provided American Express with a security, yet they have retained it without providing any reciprocal benefit. Instead, American Express continues to trade the security and retain the proceeds for their own gain. This behavior contradicts the principle of fair trade and can not be equated with a lawful exchange. Therefore, submitting a 1099B form would be misleading and potentially fraudulent. I am fully committed to informing the IRS of this discrepancy and ensuring that appropriate action is taken. \n\nI have also pulled American Express Charter report dated XX/XX/XXXX, and in this report it states The OCC has not identified that this institution or any affiliate whose loans have been considered as part of the institutions lending performance has engaged in discriminatory or other illegal credit practices that require consideration in this evaluation. Now with that being said the OCC also states that in the same charter report The OCC will consider any information that this institution engaged in discriminatory or other illegal credit practices, identified by or provided to the OCC before the end of the institutions next performance evaluation in that subsequent evaluation, even if the information concerns activities that occurred during the evaluation period addressed in this performance evaluation. I am fully prepared to report American Express to the Office Of the Comptroller.\n\nUnder FINRA regulations, American Express is engaging in securities fraud by retaining my security and withholding all proceeds and interest associated with it. This conduct directly contravenes the Securities Act of 1933, The Securities Exchange Act of 1934, The Trust Indenture Act of 1934, and numerous other statutes. It is imperative for American Express to comprehend that I am fully prepared to pursue legal recourse. I am poised to lodge formal complaints with regulatory bodies including the Office of the Comptroller of Currency, FINRA, SEC, IRS, Civil Penalty Complaint, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Reserve Board of Governors, among others, to ensure accountability for defrauding consumers. American Express must promptly either approve my consumer credit request or retract my application, bearing my original signature and containing non-public information that I do not authorize for sale or transfer to third parties. Failure to retract my application, containing sensitive information, will also breach the privacy act as per the FTC 's guidelines. \n\nBelow, I have provided a comprehensive list of laws and definitions for American Express to carefully review and consider in relation to the current situation. Please take the time to thoroughly assess these regulations and definitions. I must emphasize that this will be my final communication regarding this matter. Any outcome other than the immediate approval of my application or the retraction of my original application will necessitate further legal action. This complaint serves as formal notice of my intentions moving forward. \n___________________________ Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act TITLE X Subtitle A Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection ( c ) OVERALL ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY OF FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.Except to the extent that enforcement of the requirements imposed under this title is specifically committed to some other Government agency under any of paragraphs ( 1 ) through ( 8 ) of subsection ( a ), and subject to subtitle B of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, the Federal Trade Commission shall be authorized to enforce such requirements. For the purpose of the exercise by the Federal Trade Commission of its functions and powers under the Federal Trade Commission Act ( 15 U.S.C. 41 et seq. ), a violation of any requirement imposed under this subchapter shall be deemed a violation of a requirement imposed under that Act. All of the functions and powers of the Federal Trade Commission under the Federal Trade Commission Act are available to the Federal Trade Commission to enforce compliance by any person with the requirements imposed under this title, irrespective of whether that person is engaged in commerce or meets any other jurisdictional tests under the Federal Trade Commission Act, including the power to enforce any rule prescribed by the Bureau under this title in the same manner as if the violation had been a violation of a Federal Trade Commission trade regulation rule. ; and FAIR LENDING.The term fair lending means fair, equitable, and nondiscriminatory access to credit for consumers.\n\nH. R. 4173603 ( d ) ( 1 ) PENALTIES AND FINES. ( 1 ) ESTABLISHMENT OF VICTIMS RELIEF FUND.There is established in the Federal Reserve a separate fund, to be known as the Consumer Financial Civil Penalty Fund ( referred to in this section as the Civil Penalty Fund ). The Civil Penalty Fund shall be maintained and established at a Federal reserve bank, in accordance with such requirements as the Board of Governors may impose. If the Bureau obtains a civil penalty against any person in any judicial or administrative action under Federal consumer financial laws, the Bureau shall deposit into the Civil Penalty Fund, the amount of the penalty collected.\n\nH. R. 4173604 ( 2 ) PAYMENT TO VICTIMS.Amounts in the Civil Penalty Fund shall be available to the Bureau, without fiscal year limitation, for payments to the victims of activities for which civil penalties have been imposed under the Federal consumer financial laws.\n\nSubtitle BGeneral Powers of the Bureau H. R. 4173605 SEC. 1021. PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES, AND FUNCTIONS. ( a ) PURPOSE.The Bureau shall seek to implement and, where applicable, enforce Federal consumer financial law consistently for the purpose of ensuring that all consumers have access to markets for consumer financial products and services and that markets for consumer financial products and services are fair, transparent, and competitive. ( b ) OBJECTIVES.The Bureau is authorized to exercise its authorities under Federal consumer financial law for the purposes of ensuring that, with respect to consumer financial products and services ( 1 ) consumers are provided with timely and understandable information to make responsible decisions about financial transactions ; ( 2 ) consumers are protected from unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices and from discrimination ; ( 3 ) outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome regulations are regularly identified and addressed in order to reduce unwarranted regulatory burdens ; ( 4 ) Federal consumer financial law is enforced consistently, without regard to the status of a person as a depository institution, in order to promote fair competition; and ( 5 ) markets for consumer financial products and services operate transparently and efficiently to facilitate access and innovation. ( c ) FUNCTIONS.The primary functions of the Bureau are ( 1 ) conducting financial education programs ; ( 2 ) collecting, investigating, and responding to consumer complaints ; ( 3 ) collecting, researching, monitoring, and publishing information relevant to the functioning of markets for consumer financial products and services to identify risks to consumers and the proper functioning of such markets ; ( 4 ) subject to sections 1024 through 1026, supervising covered persons for compliance with Federal consumer financial law, and taking appropriate enforcement action to address violations of Federal consumer financial law ; ( 5 ) issuing rules, orders, and guidance implementing Federal consumer financial law ; and ( 6 ) performing such support activities as may be necessary or useful to facilitate the other functions of the Bureau.\n\nIN GENERAL.The Bureau may take any action authorized under subtitle E to prevent a covered person or service provider from committing or engaging in an unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice under Federal law in connection with any transaction with a consumer for a consumer financial product or service, or the offering of a consumer financial product or service.\n\nFTC Guidelines on Non Public Infomation The Privacy Rule protects a consumer 's \" nonpublic personal information '' ( NPI ). NPI is any \" personally identifiable financial information '' that a financial institution collects about an individual in connection with providing a financial product or service, unless that information is otherwise \" publicly available. '' NPI is : any information an individual gives you to get a financial product or service ( for example, name, address, income, Social Security number, or other information on an application ) ; any information you get about an individual from a transaction involving your financial product ( s ) or service ( s ) ( for example, the fact that an individual is your consumer or customer, account numbers, payment history, loan or deposit balances, and credit or debit card purchases ) ; or any information you get about an individual in connection with providing a financial product or service ( for example, information from court records or from a consumer report ).","date_sent_to_company":"2024-03-23T06:53:39.000Z","issue":"Getting a credit card","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"33407","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8611370","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2024-03-23T06:08:17.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Application denied"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Our ability to assess creditworthiness may be impaired as a result of <em>changes</em> in our underwriting practices or if the criteria or models we use to manage our credit risk prove inaccurate in predicting future losses, <em>which</em> could have a negative impact on our results of operations."]},"sort":[8.571005,"8611370"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8663764","_score":8.548239,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"I have recently received correspondence from American Express Customer Advocate Services Team regarding a recent complaint lodged with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). In the communication, it was asserted that American Express is incapable of retracting my application due to its submission status. However, it is imperative to clarify that this assertion is incorrect. The true reason for American Express 's inability to retract my application lies in the fact that it has already been transmitted in accordance with the Electronic Transfer Act, subsequently transformed into a receivable, and deposited, as explicitly detailed in my previous correspondence. Attached herewith is the transaction history from American Express, delineating the precise movement of funds. Moreover, it is concerning that American Express purports to be \" committed to treating all customers fairly '' and its representatives pledge to \" adhere to all laws and regulations '' while simultaneously engaging in actions that directly contravene this commitment. It is evident that American Express 's actions are in blatant violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1691 ) and a host of other statutory provisions. Allow me to elucidate the specific legal infractions perpetrated by American Express in denying my entitlement to unlimited consumer credit. It is imperative that these violations be addressed promptly and rectified to ensure compliance with the law and uphold the principles of fairness and equity. American Express 's assertion regarding the initial denial of my application being attributed to a XXXX  score is deeply concerning. Despite my explicit inquiry in a prior complaint regarding the factors considered by American Express 's underwriting department in determining this denial, my question remains unanswered. Specifically, I requested clarification on the criteria utilized by the Treasury Underwriting department of American Express to assess the application 's outcome. It is disconcerting that American Express attributes the denial solely to a XXXX score, especially considering the utilization of a computerized system for processing applications. This system, as disclosed in your SEC XXXX filing dated XX/XX/XXXX, has been acknowledged by American Express itself as unreliable. Therefore, it is imperative that American Express provide transparent and accurate information regarding the comprehensive factors influencing application decisions, ensuring accountability and fairness in its processes. We rely principally on the customers creditworthiness for repayment of loans or receivables and therefore often have no other recourse for collection. Our ability to assess creditworthiness may be impaired as a result of changes in our underwriting practices or if the criteria or models we use to manage our credit risk prove inaccurate in predicting future losses, which could have a negative impact on our results of operations. This may be exacerbated to the extent information we have historically relied upon to make credit decisions does not accurately portray a customers creditworthiness, including as a result of the current high rates of inflation and economic slowdown. ( XXXX Filing, dated XX/XX/XXXX, Pg 34 ) Our use of artificial intelligence and machine learning is subject to various risks including the use of personal information, flaws in our models or datasets that may result in biased or inaccurate results, ethical considerations regarding artificial intelligence, and our ability to safely deploy and implement governance and controls for artificial intelligence systems. ( XXXX Filing, dated XX/XX/XXXX, Pg 27 ) Once more, I must insist on clarity regarding the factors underlying the initial denial of my application. Given the acknowledgment of potential biases and inaccuracies within American Express 's computerized systems, it is imperative to understand the precise criteria influencing such decisions. The reliance on these systems, as previously noted in American Express 's own disclosures, raises concerns regarding discriminatory practices directed towards me as a consumer. This further substantiates my previous assertion regarding American Express 's violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1691 ). Furthermore, I find it necessary to address American Express 's request for my social security number during the application process. Despite the assertion of using it for identity verification, it is crucial to highlight that this request was made under false pretenses. The Social Security Administration 's clarification unequivocally states that the social security number is not intended as a personal identifier for verification purposes. Therefore, by providing my social security number and signature, I inadvertently engaged in a barter transaction. American Express 's insistence on the necessity of providing my social security number under the guise of identity verification is not only misleading but also inaccurate. This practice warrants scrutiny and rectification to ensure compliance with applicable laws and to uphold the integrity of consumer rights. The social security administration even states that The SSN is the single most widely used record identifier for both government and the private sector, exerting a broad influence on the lives of most Americans. However, by itself, it is not a personal identifier because it lacks systematic assignment to every person and the means to authenticate a person 's identity. You can see this for yourself by visiting their website, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Upon signing and submitting the application, I assumed the role of an investor in American Express. The application, also denoted as a note in accordance with the company 's prospectus, is slated for transfer by American Express Receivables Financing Corporation. Following this transfer, the funds will be deposited into the American Express Credit Account XXXX XXXX, in accordance with the specifications outlined in the American Express Prospectus, dated XX/XX/XXXX, specifically on Page 104, Section Sale of Receivables. The act of providing my social security number during the application process to American Express gave Power of Attorney and fiduciary status upon them.The duties of a fiduciary, as outlined in 29 U.S. Code 1104, mandate acting solely in the best interest of the beneficiary. It appears that American Express is not fulfilling this duty, and as a result, I will revoke your status as fiduciary and notify the appropriate authorities. The inclusion of my social security number in the application effectively transformed the transaction into a barter exchange. By providing this information, I conferred something of monetary value to American Express. Subsequently, American Express will leverage this data to generate receivables, converting them into cash before transferring and depositing the funds into the American Express Credit Account XXXX XXXX. This application, in essence, serves as a security. American Express has already transferred and continues to profit from its securitization, alongside card member loans and receivables, as disclosed in the 'Asset Securitization ' section of the American Express XXXX filing on page 118. The occurrence of a barter transaction in the securitization process mandates American Express to complete an IRS 1099B form for this transaction. This action underscores American Express 's divergence from its publicly filed SEC filings, particularly the XXXX form, where American Express explicitly states \" We are subject to significant supervision and regulation, and an increasingly stringent enforcement environment, with respect to compliance with anti-money laundering ( AML ), countering the financing of terrorism ( CFT ), sanctions and anti-corruption laws and regulations. Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs and policies and procedures for AML/CFT , sanctions and anti-corruption compliance could have material financial, legal and reputational consequences Filing an IRS form 1099B for this barter transaction would not only be erroneous but could also be construed as facilitating tax evasion and engaging in money laundering practices. A legitimate barter transaction entails a fair exchange of goods or services. In this case, I provided American Express with a security, yet they have retained it without providing any reciprocal benefit. Instead, American Express continues to trade the security and retain the proceeds for their own gain. This behavior contradicts the principle of fair trade and can not be equated with a lawful exchange. Therefore, submitting a 1099B form would be misleading and potentially fraudulent. I am fully committed to informing the IRS of this discrepancy and ensuring that appropriate action is taken. I have also pulled American Express Charter report dated XX/XX/XXXX, and in this report it states The OCC has not identified that this institution or any affiliate whose loans have been considered as part of the institutions lending performance has engaged in discriminatory or other illegal credit practices that require consideration in this evaluation. Now with that being said the OCC also states that in the same charter report The OCC will consider any information that this institution engaged in discriminatory or other illegal credit practices, identified by or provided to the OCC before the end of the institutions next performance evaluation in that subsequent evaluation, even if the information concerns activities that occurred during the evaluation period addressed in this performance evaluation. I am fully prepared to report American Express to the Office Of the Comptroller. Under FINRA regulations, American Express is engaging in securities fraud by retaining my security and withholding all proceeds and interest associated with it. This conduct directly contravenes the Securities Act of 1933, The Securities Exchange Act of 1934, The Trust Indenture Act of 1934, and numerous other statutes. It is imperative for American Express to comprehend that I am fully prepared to pursue legal recourse. I am poised to lodge formal complaints with regulatory bodies including the Office of the Comptroller of Currency, FINRA, SEC, IRS, Civil Penalty Complaint, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Reserve Board of Governors, among others, to ensure accountability for defrauding consumers. American Express must promptly either approve my consumer credit request or retract my application, bearing my original signature and containing non-public information that I do not authorize for sale or transfer to third parties. Failure to retract my application, containing sensitive information, will also breach the privacy act as per the FTC 's guidelines. Below, I have provided a comprehensive list of laws and definitions for American Express to carefully review and consider in relation to the current situation. Please take the time to thoroughly assess these regulations and definitions. I must emphasize that this will be my final communication regarding this matter. Any outcome other than the immediate approval of my application or the retraction of my original application will necessitate further legal action. This complaint serves as formal notice of my intentions moving forward. ___________________________ Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act TITLE X Subtitle A Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection ( c ) OVERALL ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY OF FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.Except to the extent that enforcement of the requirements imposed under this title is specifically committed to some other Government agency under any of paragraphs ( 1 ) through ( 8 ) of subsection ( a ), and subject to subtitle B of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, the Federal Trade Commission shall be authorized to enforce such requirements. For the purpose of the exercise by the Federal Trade Commission of its functions and powers under the Federal Trade Commission Act ( 15 U.S.C. 41 et seq. ), a violation of any requirement imposed under this subchapter shall be deemed a violation of a requirement imposed under that Act. All of the functions and powers of the Federal Trade Commission under the Federal Trade Commission Act are available to the Federal Trade Commission to enforce compliance by any person with the requirements imposed under this title, irrespective of whether that person is engaged in commerce or meets any other jurisdictional tests under the Federal Trade Commission Act, including the power to enforce any rule prescribed by the Bureau under this title in the same manner as if the violation had been a violation of a Federal Trade Commission trade regulation rule. ; and FAIR LENDING.The term fair lending means fair, equitable, and nondiscriminatory access to credit for consumers. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( d ) ( XXXX ) PENALTIES AND FINES. ( XXXX ) ESTABLISHMENT OF VICTIMS RELIEF FUND.There is established in the Federal Reserve a separate fund, to be known as the Consumer Financial Civil Penalty Fund ( referred to in this section as the Civil Penalty Fund ). The Civil Penalty Fund shall be maintained and established at a Federal reserve bank, in accordance with such requirements as the Board of Governors may impose. If the Bureau obtains a civil penalty against any person in any judicial or administrative action under Federal consumer financial laws, the Bureau shall deposit into the Civil Penalty Fund, the amount of the penalty collected. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) PAYMENT TO VICTIMS.Amounts in the Civil Penalty Fund shall be available to the Bureau, without fiscal year limitation, for payments to the victims of activities for which civil penalties have been imposed under the Federal consumer financial laws. Subtitle BGeneral Powers of the Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX SEC. XXXX. PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES, AND FUNCTIONS. ( a ) PURPOSE.The Bureau shall seek to implement and, where applicable, enforce Federal consumer financial law consistently for the purpose of ensuring that all consumers have access to markets for consumer financial products and services and that markets for consumer financial products and services are fair, transparent, and competitive. ( b ) OBJECTIVES.The Bureau is authorized to exercise its authorities under Federal consumer financial law for the purposes of ensuring that, with respect to consumer financial products and services ( 1 ) consumers are provided with timely and understandable information to make responsible decisions about financial transactions ; ( 2 ) consumers are protected from unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices and from discrimination ; ( 3 ) outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome regulations are regularly identified and addressed in order to reduce unwarranted regulatory burdens ; ( 4 ) Federal consumer financial law is enforced consistently, without regard to the status of a person as a depository institution, in order to promote fair competition; and ( 5 ) markets for consumer financial products and services operate transparently and efficiently to facilitate access and innovation. ( c ) FUNCTIONS.The primary functions of the Bureau are ( 1 ) conducting financial education programs ; ( 2 ) collecting, investigating, and responding to consumer complaints ; ( 3 ) collecting, researching, monitoring, and publishing information relevant to the functioning of markets for consumer financial products and services to identify risks to consumers and the proper functioning of such markets ; ( 4 ) subject to sections XXXX through XXXX, supervising covered persons for compliance with Federal consumer financial law, and taking appropriate enforcement action to address violations of Federal consumer financial law ; ( 5 ) issuing rules, orders, and guidance implementing Federal consumer financial law ; and ( 6 ) performing such support activities as may be necessary or useful to facilitate the other functions of the Bureau. IN GENERAL.The Bureau may take any action authorized under subtitle E to prevent a covered person or service provider from committing or engaging in an unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice under Federal law in connection with any transaction with a consumer for a consumer financial product or service, or the offering of a consumer financial product or service. FTC Guidelines on Non Public Infomation The Privacy Rule protects a consumer 's \" nonpublic personal information '' ( NPI ). NPI is any \" personally identifiable financial information '' that a financial institution collects about an individual in connection with providing a financial product or service, unless that information is otherwise \" publicly available. '' NPI is : any information an individual gives you to get a financial product or service ( for example, name, address, income, Social Security number, or other information on an application ) ; any information you get about an individual from a transaction involving your financial product ( s ) or service ( s ) ( for example, the fact that an individual is your consumer or customer, account numbers, payment history, loan or deposit balances, and credit or debit card purchases ) ; or any information you get about an individual in connection with providing a financial product or service ( for example, information from court records or from a consumer report ).","date_sent_to_company":"2024-04-01T03:14:54.000Z","issue":"Other features, terms, or problems","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"33407","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8663764","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2024-04-01T02:46:41.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Other problem"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Our ability to assess creditworthiness may be impaired as a result of <em>changes</em> in our underwriting practices or if the criteria or models we use to manage our credit risk prove inaccurate in predicting future losses, <em>which</em> could have a negative impact on our results of operations."]},"sort":[8.548239,"8663764"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3773302","_score":6.7748675,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX Collection Account Number XXXX I talked to XXXX XXXX at ID Data XX/XX/XXXX about the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX which was {$1800.00} but, I am now told it is now {$2200.00}. She instructed me to send this dispute email to XXXX since this collection is not accurate and I demand this collection gets removed from my credit reports right away. I sent my first email with the below message XX/XX/XXXX and RECEIVED NO RESPONSE.\n\nI sent a 2nd email XX/XX/XXXX which they finally said the acted on by sharing the email with XXXX XXXX XXXX  and that they would get back to me within 30 days and still NOTHING. Absolutely no response. It is now XX/XX/XXXX and I haven't received any responses from IQ data or the apartment. I demand the gov't step in and help me resolve this issue as this debt is not valid. \n\n\nEMAIL 1 Summary of my issue : I moved into XXXX XXXX around XX/XX/XXXX. I had so many issues with the property starting on day one that caused me a lot of very expensive health issues. If we can't get this resolved you will force me to hire an Atty and I will not only sue for the property being inhabitable and you guys destroying my credit but, I will sue to have the management company cover all of my medical bills incurred during my time living in the apartment. So I feel strongly this is in your best interest to resolve this immediately. \n\nThe apartment smelled of pet urine, cigarette smoke, and possibly had mold. I notified the apartment management in person right away. I also made them aware that I am XXXX XXXX, and have XXXX  and that the smells triggered both of these health issues for me. Additionally, I had a water leak issue from my washer machine that took months to get the management company to fix. The apartment did absolutely nothing to remedy the environmental issues after several attempts. Then, I started having XXXX. This was new and my doctors were sure it was due to my unhealthy living situation and told me I needed to remove myself from the environment right away. This has been fully documented in my medical records. \n\n\nI was forced to move out on XX/XX/XXXX and I kept in contact with the management company through the whole process. It was my understanding I was given the approval to move out so you can imagine my surprise and frustration when I saw this bill show up as a collection on my credit reports. \n\nI look forward to hearing back that this collection was removed from my credit and it was resolved. \n\nBest regards, XXXX XXXX Dtaed XX/XX/XXXX Tenant 's Right to Break a Rental Lease in Nevada  Many tenants who sign a lease for their apartment or rental unit plan to stay for the full amount of time required in the lease, such as one year. But despite your best intentions, you may want ( or need ) to leave before your lease is upfor example, if youre a student at XXXX and only want to stay in your apartment for the period of time that school is in session. Or perhaps youre moving in with your boyfriend or girlfriend. Sometimes, you may need to move in order to be closer to your new job or an elderly parent who needs your help. \n\n\nLeaving before a fixed-term lease expires without paying the remainder of the rent due under the lease is called breaking the lease. Heres a brief review of tenant rights in Nevada  to break a lease without further liability for the rent. \nTenant Rights and Responsibilities When Signing a Lease in Nevada  A lease obligates both you and your landlord for a set period of time, usually a year. Under a typical lease, a landlord cant raise the rent or change other terms, until the lease runs out ( unless the lease itself provides for a change, such as a rent increase mid-lease ). A landlord cant force you to move out before the lease ends, unless you fail to pay the rent or violate another significant term, such as repeatedly throwing large and noisy parties. In these cases, landlords in Nevada  must follow specific procedures to end the tenancy. For example, your landlord must give you five days notice to pay the rent or leave ( Nevada Rev. Stat. Ann. 40.251 ) before filing an eviction lawsuit. If you have caused substantial damage to the property, your landlord may give you an unconditional quit notice, giving you three days to move out. ( Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. 40.2514 ). \nTenants are legally bound to pay rent for the full lease term, typically one year, whether or not you continue to live in the rental unitwith some exceptions, as follows. \nWhen Breaking a Lease Is Justified in Nevada  There are some important exceptions to the blanket rule that a tenant who breaks a lease owes the rent for the entire lease term. You may be able to legally move out before the lease term ends in the following situations. \nYou Are Starting Active Military Duty If you enter active military service after signing a lease, you have a right to break the lease under federal law. ( War and National Defense Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, 50 App. U.S.C.A. 501 and following. ) You must be part of the uniformed services, which includes the armed forces, commissioned corps of the national Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ( NOAA ),  commissioned corps of the Public Health Service, and the activated National Guard. You must give your landlord written notice of your intent to terminate your tenancy for military reasons. Once the notice is mailed or delivered, your tenancy will terminate 30 days after the date that rent is next due, even if that date is several months before your lease expires. \nYou Are 60 Years of Age or Older and Need to Move Because of Physical or Mental  Disability Under state law ( Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. 118A.340 ) older ( 60 years of age plus ) tenants who must move  because a physical or mental disability may break a lease if they need care or treatment that can not be provided in the rental unit, provided that specified conditions are met ( such as giving proper written notice to the landlord ). \n\nIf your landlord does not provide habitable housing under local and state housing codes, a court would probably conclude that you have been constructively evicted ; this means that the landlord, by supplying unlivable housing, has for all practical purposes evicted you, so you have no further responsibility for the rent. Nevada law ( Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. 118A.360, 118A.380 and 118A.490 ) sets specific requirements for the procedures you must follow before moving out because of a major repair problem. The problem must be truly serious, such as the lack of heat or other essential service.The Rental Unit Is Unsafe or Violates Nevada  Health or Safety Codes Your Landlord Harasses You or Violates Your Privacy Rights Under state law in Nevada, your landlord must give you 24 hours notice to enter rental property ( Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. 118A.330 ). If your landlord repeatedly violates your  rights to privacy, or does things like removing windows or doors, turning off your utilities, or changing the locks, you would be considered constructively evicted, as described above ; this would usually justify you breaking the lease without further rent obligation. \nYou Are a Victim of Domestic Violence State law ( Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. 118A.345, 118A.347, 118A.510 ) provides early termination rights for tenants who are victims of domestic violence, provided that specified conditions are met ( such as the tenant securing a valid protection order ). \nLandlords Duty to Find a New Tenant in Nevada If you dont have a legal justification to break your lease, the good news is that you may still be off the hook for paying all the rent due for the remaining lease term. This is because under Nevada law ( Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. 118.175 ), your landlord must make reasonable efforts to re-rent your unitno matter what your reason for leavingrather than charge you for the total remaining rent due under the lease. So you may not have to pay much, if any additional rent, if you break your lease. You need pay only the amount of rent the landlord loses because you moved out early. This is because Nevada requires landlords to take reasonable steps to keep their losses to a minimumor to mitigate damages in legal terms. \nSo, if you break your lease and move out without legal justification, your landlord usually cant just sit back and wait until the end of the lease, and then sue you for the total amount of lost rent. Your landlord must try to rerent the property reasonably quickly and subtract the rent received from new tenants from the amount you owe. The landlord does not need to relax standards for acceptable tenantsfor example, to accept someone with a poor credit history. Also, the landlord is not required to rent the unit for less than fair market value, or to immediately turn his or her attention to renting your unit disregarding other business. Also, the landlord can add legitimate expenses to your billfor example, the costs of advertising the property.\n\nIf your landlord rerents the property quickly ( more likely in college towns and similar markets ), all youll be responsible for is the ( hopefully brief ) amount of time the unit was vacant. \nThe bad news is that if the landlord tries to rerent your unit, and cant find an acceptable tenant, you will be liable for paying rent for the remainder of your lease term. This could be a substantial amount of money if you leave several months before your lease ends. Your landlord will probably first use your security deposit to cover the amount you owe. But if your deposit is not sufficient, your landlord may sue you, probably in small claims court where the limit is {$10000.00}  in Nevada. \nMore Information on Tenant Rights to Break a Lease Every Tenants Legal Guide, by XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) provides extensive legal and practical advice that every tenant needs, from move in to move out, including how to get your landlord to cancel your lease, plus dozens of forms and sample letters.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-07-31T18:01:07.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"89130","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3773302","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"I.Q. DATA INTERNATIONAL, INC.","date_received":"2020-07-31T17:44:59.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Your landlord will probably first use your <em>security</em> deposit to cover the amount you owe. But if your deposit is not sufficient, your landlord may sue you, probably in small claims court where the limit is {$10000.00}  in Nevada."]},"sort":[6.7748675,"3773302"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6482545","_score":5.832549,"_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":["A bank has transaction monitoring <em>rules</em> designed to detect specific types of investment fraud. Investment fraud subject matter experts help set these <em>rules</em>."]},"sort":[5.832549,"6482545"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18434104","_score":5.241623,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX  and XXXX XXXX in Mortgage Tax Servicing : The CoreLogic-BAC Nexus Executive Summary : Strategic Context and Definitive Findings The structural transformation of the United States mortgage servicing landscape over the past XXXX decades is epitomized by the strategic nexus formed between XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ) and CoreLogic. This relationship, fundamentally cemented through a landmark asset divestiture in XX/XX/XXXX, represents a profound shift in the operational philosophy of systemically important financial institutions ( SIFIs ). The identification of \" XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX '' unequivocally points to a former operational unit of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, whose common shares trade under the XXXX symbol \" BAC ''. This corporate linkage is the cornerstone for understanding a transactional framework that moved from internal bank management to a highly specialized, scaled third-party processing ( TPP ) model. \nThe relationship is not competitive or transactional on a spot-market basis, but rather an established, long-term outsourcing arrangement born from necessity. This arrangement was formalized when XXXX acquired XXXX property tax processing and flood zone determination assets, along with their corresponding operating platforms. Post-acquisition, XXXX rebranded as Cotality in XXXXassumed the primary responsibility as the operational payer to more than XXXX municipal tax authorities. In this capacity, XXXX functions as a specialized TPP, executing the fiduciary property tax obligations retained by XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX for its massive residential loan portfolio. \nThe transaction data reflects the execution of mortgage servicing obligations through XXXX primary capital flows. The most visible flow consists of large, bundled disbursements directed toward specific taxing jurisdictions, such as county treasurers, derived from accumulated homeowner escrow funds. The second, less visible flow involves the internal transfer of fiduciary capital and contractual servicing fees from XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX to XXXX under the specific XXXX services agreement established during the XXXX asset purchase. This strategic outsourcing decision was fundamentally driven by the need to streamline operations, reduce inherent litigation exposure associated with high-volume tasks, and optimize regulatory capital utilization under the XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nCorporate Identity Disambiguation and the XXXX XXXX XXXX The precise nature of the CoreLogic and BAC relationship is anchored in a definitive strategic transaction that occurred in XXXX. To analyze this relationship, it is first necessary to disambiguate the corporate entities involved. The nomenclature \" XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX '' strongly correlates with XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, as \" BAC '' is the definitive organizational identifier used on the XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX. This massive financial services unit must be distinguished from smaller, unrelated entities like \" XXXX XXXX XXXX, '' which specializes in individual tax returns. \nThe transactional relationship began with a major strategic divestiture. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX publicly announced the acquisition of flood zone determination and property tax processing services assets from XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. This deal, which closed on XX/XX/XXXX, was funded by cash on hand and accompanied by a long-term services agreement. \nTable XXXX : XXXX Acquisition of XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) | Asset/Function | Seller ( BAC Operational Unit ) | Acquirer ( CoreLogic ) | Resultant Payer Status | | -- -| -- -| -- -| -- -| | Tax Processing Platforms | Internal Servicing Infrastructure | Services Segment Operations | CoreLogic became operational payer to municipalities | | Flood Zone Determination | Internal Compliance Unit | Specialized CoreLogic Unit | CoreLogic became contracted provider for compliance | | Servicing Obligation | Remains with XXXX ( MSRs retained ) | Operational Execution Outsourced | XXXX is the funder ; CoreLogic is the executor | | | Fiduciary Duty | Retained by XXXX | Managed via Agreement | The strategic rationale for Bank of Americas divestiture was rooted in the post-XXXX economic crisis environment. By XXXX, XXXX XXXX  XXXX was grappling with intense regulatory scrutiny concerning its past origination and servicing activities, including extensive litigation related to foreclosure documentation. Divesting complex, high-risk operational business lines was a key component of XXXX 's XXXX to reduce its involvement in non-core functions and mitigate the massive legal fees associated with managing a distressed loan portfolio. \nFor XXXX, the acquisition was a move to achieve scale and expand profitability. XXXX XXXX, then XXXX and XXXX of XXXX, stated the deal aligned with the companys imperative of driving scale and operating leverage in its mortgage origination services segment. The integration of XXXX 's operations was expected to create significant revenue growth and margin expansion, effectively making XXXX the \" utility '' for XXXX 's tax compliance. \nThe Macroeconomic and Regulatory Catalyst : XXXX XXXX and De-Risking The broader strategic implication of this payer relationship serves as a primary case study of the structural changes within the XXXX XXXX services sector following the XXXX crisis. The decision to outsource was not merely operational ; it was a response to the punitive regulatory capital requirements introduced by the XXXX XXXX framework. \nXXXX XXXX and MSR Risk Weighting XXXX XXXX, as implemented by XXXX federal regulators, placed restrictive limits on the amount of Mortgage Servicing Rights ( MSRs ) that could be held by federally regulated financial institutions. Under pre-crisis rules, bank MSR investments were limited to XXXX  % of the common equity component of tier XXXX capital. XXXX XXXX reduced this cap to XXXX %. Furthermore, the implementation significantly increased the risk-weighting of MSRs from XXXX % to XXXX %. \nThis regulatory environment transformed MSRs into an exceptionally costly asset class. The \" gold plating '' of XXXX risk weights in the XXXX added XXXX percentage points across the board, further incentivizing banks to sell MSRs or, at the very least, outsource the operational mechanics to reduce the overhead and potential for regulatory failure. By transferring the property tax processing function to a non-bank entity like XXXX, Bank XXXX XXXX effectively shifted the operational and compliance burden, paying XXXX to manage the risk while optimizing its own balance sheet. \nXXXX XXXX and Structural Simplification Simultaneously, Title I of the Dodd-Frank Act required large financial institutions to develop resolution plans, or \" living wills ''. These plans are intended to ensure that a large bank can be resolved in a rapid and orderly fashion without a taxpayer bailout. Part of this process involves rationalizing and simplifying the company 's legal entity structure by eliminating non-essential internal units. Divesting the tax servicing operations into a contractual XXXX relationship with XXXX supported XXXX 's goal of \" Responsible Growth '' by reducing internal complexity and aligning with their risk framework. \nOperational Framework of Mortgage Escrow and Third-Party Processing To interpret the transactional data between BAC and CoreLogic, one must understand the technical mechanism of property tax escrow, commonly known as XXXX ( Principal, Interest, Taxes, and Insurance ). For most residential mortgages, the servicerXXXX XXXX XXXXcollects a portion of the annual property taxes and insurance premiums each month, holding them in a segregated, fiduciary escrow account. \nThe Mechanism of Property Tax Escrow The mortgage servicer accepts a fiduciary duty to accurately collect, hold, and disburse these funds to governmental tax authorities and insurance carriers. This duty involves three key components : * Duty of Loyalty : Managing assets solely in the interests of the beneficiaries ( the homeowners and investors ).\n\n* Duty of Care : Exercising a high degree of skill to ensure timely and accurate payments. \n* Duty of Disclosure : Providing complete and accurate information about escrow balances and transactions.\n\nBecause property taxes are managed by thousands of highly fragmented local jurisdictions, the process of disbursement is exceptionally complex and prone to error. CoreLogic fills this gap as a specialized TPP, providing a centralized data infrastructure that tracks jurisdictional tax rates, payment dates, and parcel-level property data.\n\nOperational Payer Hierarchy in the Outsourced Model In this outsourced model, the operational hierarchy dictates the nature of the observed payments. Each year, typically around XXXX, the servicer ( BofA ) provides CoreLogic with a list of properties for which taxes are due. The servicer then remits the accumulated escrow capital to CoreLogic. CoreLogic then assumes the role of the physical disburser, sending bulk payments to municipal tax authorities. \nA local government office, such as the XXXX XXXX XXXX, receives the tax payment from CoreLogic, not directly from XXXX XXXX XXXX This transfer of operational liability ensures continuity of service for the bank while achieving risk isolation. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX retains the regulatory oversight of the service contract but offloads the manual, error-prone task of tracking thousands of individual tax bills. \nDetailed Analysis of Transactional Flow and Payer Dynamics The payment history data reflects a sophisticated two-way flow of capital governed by the XXXX services agreement. Dissecting this flow clarifies the distinct financial responsibilities of XXXX and XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX. \nObserved Payments ( CoreLogic as Payer ) When CoreLogic is the originating Payer, the transaction represents a XXXX XXXX XXXX aimed at satisfying local government obligations. These are the final payments in the escrow cycle. CoreLogic aggregates funds for thousands of properties and sends consolidated payments to taxing jurisdictions. The timing of these disbursements is critical, aligning with local due dates and \" Economic Loss Dates '' ( ELDs ). CoreLogics proprietary data systems track these localized variances to ensure accuracy. \nUnseen Transactional Flow ( BAC as Payer ) While CoreLogic is the visible payer to the municipality, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX acts as the payer in the internal XXXX transactions necessary to fund the operation. This flow has XXXX components : * Escrow Fund Remittance : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX transfers the accumulated homeowner escrow capital ( the XXXX & I portion of XXXX ) to CoreLogic. This is a transfer of trust funds, where XXXX takes temporary custody of the funds needed for the tax bill. \n* Servicing Fee Payments : XXXX XXXX  XXXX pays contractual service fees to CoreLogic. This payment stream is CoreLogics compensation for operational administration, compliance management, and platform usage. This component generates the actual revenue and margin expansion anticipated during the XXXX acquisition. \nXXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX The asset transfer introduced considerable accounting complexity, particularly in managing fiduciary capital. For CoreLogic, the acquisition necessitated adjustments to its cash flow reporting, as its operating activities became linked to managing high-volume escrow accounts. While escrow funds are not revenue, their management requires meticulous reconciliation. \nA key financial mechanism in this model is optimizing the \" velocity of money '' or \" float ''. Escrow accounts represent a massive, short-term pool of liquid capital. If CoreLogic receives funds from XXXX XXXX XXXX well in advance of the municipal due dates, it gains control over significant working capital for the intervening period. CoreLogics ability to achieve \" margin expansion '' is tied to managing this float efficiently, ensuring capital is deployed advantageously before final disbursement.\n\nTechnology and Integration : The Digital Tax Portal The relationships sustainability is driven by CoreLogics significant investment in compliance technology. Traditionally, property tax processing relied on manual data handling and XXXX databases. CoreLogic transformed this process by building a Digital Tax Portal delivered to local municipalities.\n\nFeatures of the Digital Tax Portal The portal centralizes loan and property tax data, providing real-time visibility into tax deadlines and payment status. It allows for : * Near Real-time Agency Connections : Access to data from XXXX agencies, including collector details and payment instructions. \n* Delinquency Risk Tracking : Tracking cut-off dates and collections to ensure correct payments.\n\n* Self-Serve Features : Allowing servicers to update contracts, tax IDs, and legal documents in a few clicks.\n\n* Automated Verification : Tools like Digital tax Connect provide instant access to property tax data through APIs, reducing manual processes and improving customer satisfaction. \nBy XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX % of client decisions were being performed through the portal rather than traditional methods. This digital transformation provides a layer of operational assurance and risk mitigation that XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX could not achieve with its fragmented legacy internal systems. \nTable 2 : Digital Tax Portal Capabilities and Impact | Feature | Functionality | Strategic Benefit | | -- -| -- -| -- -| | Collector Portal | Electronic viewing and download of payment packages | Transparency and speed of reconciliation | | Tru-Pay Certification | Identifies shortages, overages, and duplicate payments | Mitigation of refund requests and errors | | API Integration | Seamless connection to servicer websites and apps | Reduced call center volume and cost | | Delinquency Monitoring | Real-time tracking of unpaid taxes and tax sales | Protection of the bank 's first-lien position | Operational and Consumer Impact of the Servicing Transition The corporate restructuring between CoreLogic and XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX had tangible operational consequences, particularly during the transition period of XXXX. Moving massive volumes of data from legacy XXXX systems to XXXX platforms introduced friction points in data fidelity. \nImpact on Escrow Analysis Mortgage servicers are legally required to conduct an annual escrow analysis to ensure sufficient funds are collected. Discrepancies arising from data migrationsuch as inaccurate tracking of local property valuations or delayed recognition of tax increasescan lead directly to flawed analyses. \nConsequences for Homeowners ( XXXX ) A common consequence of operational friction during a servicing overhaul is the occurrence of an escrow shortage. A shortage occurs when the amount collected in the homeowners account is insufficient to cover the actual tax bill paid by CoreLogic. In XXXX and XXXX, former XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX customers reported significant increases in their monthly payments as the servicer attempted to \" catch up '' on these shortages. \nIn some cases, homeowners discovered that funds intended for escrow were being incorrectly applied to the mortgage principal, creating a shortage in the tax account. These issues highlight the critical need for high-accuracy processing and the forensic accounting oversight that specialized entities like CoreLogic provide.\n\nRisk and Litigation Context : The Post-Crisis Clean-Up The divestiture of tax servicing was part of a larger effort by Bank of XXXX to resolve the legal overhang of the financial crisis. In XXXX, the bank agreed to a record {$16.00} billion settlement with the Department of Justice to resolve claims related to the packaging and sale of residential mortgage-backed securities ( RMBS ). \nLitigation Pressures and Regulatory Settlements XXXX XXXX XXXX faced numerous lawsuits from state attorneys general and federal agencies like the XXXX. These settlements addressed systemic failures in mortgage origination and servicing, including misrepresentations made to investors and government entities like XXXX XXXX  and XXXX XXXX. \nBy outsourcing tax servicing to CoreLogic, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX reduced its exposure to future litigation related to property tax errors, which had become a significant source of liability for the bank. This shift allowed XXXX to focus on its \" Responsible Growth '' tenets, growing within its risk framework and driving operational excellence. \nTable 3 : Major XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Regulatory Settlements ( XXXX ) | Date | Settlement Entity | Amount | Focus Area | | -- -| -- -| -- -| -- -| | XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX$11.00} XXXX XXXX Repurchase and servicing claims | | XX/XX/XXXX | XXXX | {$6.00} XXXX | XXXX litigation and contract claims | | XX/XX/XXXX | DOJ / SEC | {$16.00} XXXX | XXXX fraud and disclosure failures | | XX/XX/XXXX | CFPB | {$720.00} XXXX | Deceptive marketing of add-on products | The Rebranding of CoreLogic to Cotality ( XXXX ) The evolution of the relationship reached a new stage in XX/XX/XXXX when CoreLogic announced its global rebrand to Cotality. This transformation reflects the companys progression from a financial services support provider to a leader in property information and data-enabled solutions. \nStrategic Reasons for the Rebrand The transition from CoreLogic to Cotality was described by XXXX XXXX XXXX as a \" transformation with purpose ''. The new name embodies XXXX pillars : * Collaboration and Connectivity : Uniting property professionals and fostering industry relationships. \n* Totality : Delivering comprehensive data and technology across the entire property ecosystem. \n* Vitality : Human-centric innovation and a focus on helping people thrive. \nFor mortgage lenders, the rebrand signifies a partner focused on delivering enhanced, AI-driven insights to make home lending as efficient and effective as possible. \nXXXX XXXX for Mortgage XXXX XXXX vision for the future of mortgage servicing involves utilizing billions of real-time data signals to unearth hidden risks and opportunities. This includes : * XXXX XXXX Platforms : Helping institutions consolidate multiple vendor services into a single provider to cut costs and streamline workflows. \n* AI and Automation : Leveraging \" CoreAI '' to evolve with the property ecosystem and drive smarter lending decisions.\n\n* End-to-End Solutions : Providing predictive knowledge throughout the loan journey, from marketing and origination to servicing and monitoring. \nAs of XXXX, Cotality manages property tax payments for XXXX % of XXXX homes with first liens and serves XXXX of the top XXXX mortgage servicers. Its stable financial outlook is supported by XXXX growth, cost savings, and interest income on cash deposits held in its tax business. \nXXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX of Cotality Despite the challenges of high interest rates, Cotality has maintained a stable financial trajectory. In the XXXX months ended XX/XX/XXXX, the company reported revenue of {$980.00} XXXX, a modest year-over-year increase. Its revenue and XXXX growth are driven by market share gains and improving efficiency through cost-cutting, including a XXXX % reduction in global office space over the past XXXX years. \nXXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX Cotality faces significant debt maturities in XXXX and will likely need to refinance its {$5.00} XXXX of debt in early XXXX. XXXX & XXXX XXXX economists forecast that mortgage rates will improve in XXXX and XXXX, which would provide a favorable environment for this refinancing. The companys liquidity remains ample, and it expects to use future cash flow to repay its revolver. \nTable XXXX : Cotality XXXX XXXX and Projections | Indicator | XXXX XXXX Actual | XXXX XXXX Actual | XXXX Projection | | -- -| -- -| -- -| -- -| | Revenue | {$980.00} XXXX | {$980.00} XXXX | Growth via non-mortgage biz | | Debt to XXXX | N/A | XXXX | XXXX ( Improving ) | | Free Operating Cash Flow | Negative | Improving | Positive | | Mortgage Origination Volume | Baseline | XXXX % ( Expected ) | XXXX % ( XXXX XXXX Unknown","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-03T00:05:49.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Mortgage debt","zip_code":"30331","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18434104","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CORELOGIC INC","date_received":"2026-01-02T23:32:55.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX & XXXX XXXX economists forecast that mortgage rates will improve in XXXX and XXXX, <em>which</em> would provide a favorable <em>environment</em> for this refinancing. The companys liquidity remains ample, and it expects to use future cash flow to repay its revolver."]},"sort":[5.241623,"18434104"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3156484","_score":4.433885,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"After many phone calls to XXXX XXXX they refuse to answer the phone on a Charge that i never sign or had any dealings with! From a Merchant with no consent nor was any card swipe or used!!!!  THIS MERCHANT STOLE FUNDS MY ACCOUNT CALLED XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, NY Transportation Edit - $ XXXX-Under the FCBA, your liability for unauthorized use of your credit card tops out at {$50.00}. However, if you report the loss before your credit card is used, the FCBA says you are not responsible for any charges you didnt authorize. If your credit card number is stolen, but not the card, you are not liable for unauthorized use.If your credit, ATM, or debit card is lost or stolen, federal law limits your liability for unauthorized charges. The XXXX XXXX place a fake charge on the account. But Why??? Credit Card Loss or Fraudulent Charges Under the FCBA, your liability for unauthorized use of your credit card tops out at {$50.00}. However, if you report the loss before your credit card is used, the FCBA says you are not responsible for any charges you didnt authorize. If your credit card number is stolen, but not the card, you are not liable for unauthorized use.If you report an ATM or debit card missing before someone uses it, the EFTA says you are not responsible for any unauthorized transactions. If someone uses your ATM or debit card before you  report it lost or stolen, your liability depends on how quickly you report it : The liable for those transactions are XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, NY not so superior! \nPlease Note : Most fraud prevention features are designed for card-present environments. Visa, for example, has deployed a number of anti-fraud measures designed to make card reproduction extremely difficult, including holograms and embossed security characters on the face of the card. Moreover, the signature and magnetic strip on the back of the card are designed to ensure that the person using the card is the actual cardholder. Merchants are not liable for fraud when card-present transactions are properly authenticated. \nOnline platforms, however, typically facilitate card-not-present transactions ( card payments made without physically swiping a card ). On a website, buyers enter credit card data into a form they do not hand their card to a cashier. Unfortunately, card-not-present transactions are highly susceptible to fraud and abuse, for which merchants and payment facilitators are held liable. \nChargebacks. \nWhen a cardholder disputes a charge with their bank ( the issuing bank ), the bank may reverse the payment and refund the cardholder, after an investigation. This is called a chargeback. \nCardholders are protected from the financial liability of unauthorized credit card transactions by Regulation Z of the Truth in Lending Act and unauthorized debit card transactions by Regulation E of  the Electronic Fund Transfer Act. Card Associations have even broader rules with further added protections. When fraudulent transactions do occur, a well-defined chain of liability determines who is ultimately responsible for making restitution to the cardholder. Payment facilitators must recover chargebacks from merchants who generate them, or else write off the full amount of the chargeback as a loss. \nFor chargebacks resulting from card-not-present transactions, the issuing bank recovers the funds from the merchants bank ( the acquiring bank ), and the acquiring bank recovers the funds from the merchant. \nSince most chargebacks are received weeks or months after the original payment, it is sometimes difficult to recover the funds from the merchant. This is why acquirers are so conservative in their underwriting : an acquirer will typically research the financial stability, creditworthiness, and underlying riskiness of a business ; it will implement special funding policies ( such as reserves or holdbacks ) to  mitigate loss ; and it will require personal guarantees from business owners, whom it will hold personally liable for the businesss financial obligations. \nConsumer Protections Available Regulation Z The Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), as implemented by Regulation Z, provides a billing error dispute process for open-end credit, such as credit cards. In order to take advantage of the protections offered by Regulation Z, you must notify the lender of any billing errors by : providing the notice in writing, enabling the lender to identify your name and account number, stating why you believe there is a billing error, including the type, date, and amount of the error, and sending the notice in a timely manner so that the lender receives it, at the address specified for billing inquiries, no later than 60 days after the lender sent the first billing statement reflecting the error. \nOnce you properly notify the lender about an error on your statement, it must acknowledge that it received this notification within 30 days, unless the problem has been resolved. The lender must investigate and resolve the issue within two complete billing cycles ( but in no event later than 90 days ) after receiving the billing error notice.\n\nWhile the lender conducts its investigation into the billing error : You may withhold payment of the disputed amount and related charges ( but any part of the bill not in question, including finance charges on undisputed amounts must be paid in accordance with account terms ).\n\nThe lender may not take legal or collection action on the disputed amount.\n\nThe lender may not report your account as delinquent, accelerate your debt, restrict your account, or close your account.\n\nIf the lender confirms there is a billing error on your account, it must send you a written explanation of the corrections made to your account. In addition to crediting your account for the disputed amount, the lender must also remove all finance charges, late fees, or other charges related to the error. If the investigation reveals no error occurred, it must send you a written explanation of the amount you owe, and you are responsible for paying the disputed amount, plus any finance charges that accumulated during the investigation. \nYou may request copies of relevant documents used in the lenders investigation. If you disagree with the results of the investigation, you may write to the lender within 10 days after receiving the explanation, and you may indicate that you refuse to pay the disputed amount. The lender may begin collection procedures and may report your account as delinquent to credit reporting agencies, but it must also note that you disagree with the amount owed.\n\nIn addition to the consumer protections associated with billing errors, Regulation Z also contains special credit card provisions that limit your liability for unauthorized use of a credit card. A credit card holders liability is limited to {$50.00} for unauthorized use before the cardholder notifies the card issuer. Notification may be given in person, by telephone, or in writing.\n\nRegulation E The Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ), as implemented by Regulation E, provides basic protections for consumers with electronic direct deposits or who use debit cards to access their deposit account held directly or indirectly at a bank. These protections include timeframes by which a bank must investigate and determine whether an error occurred when you notify your bank of an error and, in some cases, requirements to provide provisional credit while the investigation is performed. \nFor example, if you notify your bank of a potential account error, Regulation E requires a bank to investigate and determine whether an error occurred within 10 business days of receiving your notice ( or 20 business days for new accounts ). If a bank is unable to complete its investigation within the appropriate timeframe, it may take up to 45 days to determine whether an error occurred. But in these cases, banks must generally provide consumers with a provisional credit to their account within 10 days of the bank receiving the error notice. Also, banks must notify consumers about the provisional credit within two days of providing the credit.\n\nSome banks may require you to submit an error notice in writing after you provide notice orally. If the bank does not receive written confirmation within 10 business days of receiving the initial notice of an error, the bank is not required to provide provisional credit. The time period for the investigation may be extended to 90 days if the error involved an electronic transfer initiated outside of the United States, a point-of-sale debit card transaction, or a transaction involving a new account within 30 days of being opened.\n\nIf the bank determines there is an error on your account, it must correct the error within one business day after confirming it and report the results to you within three business days after completing its investigation ( including, if applicable, notice that a provisional credit has been made final ).\n\nIf a bank determines that no error occurred or that an error occurred in a manner or amount different from that described in your notice, the bank must send a written explanation of its findings and note your right to request the documents the bank relied on for its investigation. When the bank debits the funds provisionally credited to your account during the investigation, it must provide you with the date and amount debited. In addition, the bank must inform you that it will honor checks, drafts, or similar instruments payable to third parties and preauthorized transfers from your account ( without charge as a result of an overdraft ) for five business days after the notification.\n\nDisputing a Credit Card Billing Error Many credit card issuers have policies against sellers charging a credit card account before shipment. If you think a seller charged your account too soon, report it to the credit card issuer. Otherwise, the issuer has no way to know the seller isnt following its policies.\n\nTo dispute the billing error with your credit card issuer, you must : write to the credit card issuer at the address given for billing inquiries, not the address for sending your payments, and include your name, address, account number, and a description of the billing error. Use our sample letter.\n\nsend your letter so that it reaches the credit card issuer within 60 days after the first bill with the error was mailed to you. Its a good idea to send your letter by certified mail ; ask for a return receipt so you have proof of what the credit card issuer received. Include copies ( not originals ) of sales slips or other documents that support your position. Keep a copy of your dispute letter.\n\nThe credit card issuer must acknowledge your complaint, in writing, within 30 days after receiving it, unless the problem has been resolved. The issuer must resolve the dispute within two billing cycles ( but not more than 90 days ) after getting your letter.\n\nYou may withhold payment on the disputed amount ( and related charges ) during the investigation. You must pay any part of the bill not in question, including finance charges on the undisputed amount.\n\nThe credit card issuer may not take any legal or other action to collect the disputed amount and related charges ( including finance charges ) during the investigation. While your account cant be closed or restricted, the disputed amount can be applied against your credit limit.\n\nBut what if You placed an order with a catalog company and they charged your credit card immediately. The catalog company contacts you two weeks later and says the shipment will be delayed 60 days. You agree to the delay. The 60 days have passed, and you may be outside of the time to dispute the charges. Can you still dispute the charge?\n\nMaybe. When a shipment is delayed, credit card issuers often are more generous when they calculate the time for allowing disputes, and may extend the 60-day period. To take advantage of this flexibility, include the following information in your dispute letter.\n\nTell the credit card issuer if you didnt expect to be charged for the merchandise before it was shipped. Some credit card issuers make an exception to the general industry rule against sellers charging before shipping if the seller tells you about its practice at the time of sale. If youre sure the seller said nothing or wasnt clear about its charge practice, the credit card issuer is more likely to allow the dispute.\n\nTell the credit card issuer when delivery was expected. Some issuers use the expected date of delivery rather than the charge date as the start time for you to dispute charges. If you dispute the charge within a reasonable time after the expected delivery date passes, chances are good that the card issuer will honor the dispute. When you order or when a seller notifies you of delayed shipment, its important to keep a record of the promised shipment or delivery date. Include a copy of any documentation of the shipment or delivery date when disputing the charge with your card issuer.\n\nDisputing a Debit Card Charge The consumer protections for a debit card differ from protections for a credit card. You may not be able to dispute a debit and get a refund for non-delivery or late delivery. Still, some debit card issuers may voluntarily offer protections and solutions to problems like not getting merchandise you bought with a debit card. See our sample letter, and contact your debit card issuer for more information.\n\nYour Rights When Shopping by Phone, Mail or Online The Mail, Internet, or Telephone Order Merchandise Rule applies to most goods you order by mail, phone, fax, or online. It requires sellers to have a reasonable basis for claiming they can ship an order within a certain time and details what sellers should do if there is a delay.\n\nShip Dates By law, a seller should ship your order within the time stated in its ads or over the phone. If the seller doesnt promise a time, you can expect it to ship your order within 30 days.\n\nThe shipment clock begins when the seller receives a properly completed order. That includes your name, address and payment ( check, money order or authorization to charge an existing credit account whether the account is charged at that time or not ).\n\nIf the seller doesnt promise a shipping time, and you are applying for credit to pay for your purchase, the seller has an additional 20 days ( 50 days total ) to establish the account and ship the merchandise.\n\nDelays If the seller is unable to ship within the promised time, it must notify you, give a revised shipping date and give you the chance to cancel for a full refund or accept the new shipping date. The seller also must give you some way to exercise the cancellation option for free for example, by supplying a prepaid reply card or staffing a toll-free telephone number.\n\nIf you dont respond and the delay is 30 days or less its assumed that you accept the delay and are willing to wait for the merchandise.\n\nIf you dont respond and the delay is more than 30 days the order must be canceled by the 30th day of the delay period and a full refund issued promptly.\n\nIf the seller cant meet the revised shipping date, it must notify you again by mail, email or telephone and give you a new shipping date or cancel your order and give you a refund.\n\nThe order should be canceled and a refund issued promptly unless you indicate by the revised shipping date that you are willing to wait.\n\nIf you dont respond to the second notice, the seller should assume that you are not willing to wait issue a full refund promptly.\n\nRefunds If you pay by cash, check or money order, or a non-seller credit card, the seller must give you a refund within seven working days after the order is canceled.\n\nIf you pay by credit card where the seller is the card issuer, the seller must credit your account within one billing cycle after the order is canceled.\n\nShopping Tips Follow these tips for hassle-free shopping.\n\nConsider your experience with the company or its general reputation before you order. If youve never heard of the seller, enter its name in a search engine with words like complaint or scam, and read about other peoples experiences with the company. In addition, contact your state Attorney General, and local consumer protection agency to see if any complaints are on file.\n\nCheck out the companys refund and return policies, the items availability, and the total cost of your purchase before you place your order.\n\nGet a shipment date.\n\nKeep records of your order, like the website, ad or catalog from which you ordered ; the companys name, address and phone number ; any promises the company made about shipping and when they were made ; the date of your order ; and a copy of the order form you sent to the company. If youre ordering by phone, keep a list of the items, their stock codes, and the order confirmation code ; your canceled check or the charge or debit statement showing the charge for your order ; and any communications to or from the company.\n\nTrack your purchases. When you order online, keep printouts of the web pages with the details of the transaction, including the sellers return policies, in case youre not satisfied.Complaints help the FTC and other law enforcement agencies bring scam artists to justice and put an end to unfair and misleading business practices. If you have a complaint, file it online or call XXXX. \nCredit Cards, Personal Finance At XXXX, we adhere to strict standards of editorial integrity to help you make decisions with confidence. Many or all of the products featured here are from our partners. Heres how we make money. \n\nIf you see a purchase on your credit card statement that you didnt make, be sure to correct the mistake right away. It could be a simple mistake like a double swipe of your card, for example or it could be someone trying to make a little extra money off of a restaurant bill. Heres how to fix a mistake on your statement, and to make sure youre safe. \n1. Talk to the merchant Before you get yourself involved in a lengthy formal dispute, speak with the merchant. Bring your receipt and credit card statement, and take the time to explain the discrepancy. The merchant may clear up the mistake without having to involve the credit card company. If not, take your complaint to the next level. \n2. Prepare your paperwork While the error on your statement might seem obvious to you, you still need to make a strong case. Keep a record of the receipts, credit card statement and anything else that can add to the paper trail. Errors to look out for include : Returns that didnt lead to a credit on your statement.\n\nErroneous dates.\n\nBills sent to the wrong address ( so long as youve notified your creditor of your address change within 20 days ).\n\nMathematical errors. \nAnd, of course, charges for purchases you didnt make. \n\nGather any relevant receipts and documents supporting your claims and make copies. Keep the originals for your records, and gather the copies for your creditor. \n\nRemember : Never give your account information to someone you dont know, and avoid emailing sensitive data like your account number or Social Security number. Also, never give your information when a caller claims to represent your bank or card issuer. Instead, say youll call back, then call the customer service number listed on the banks website or the back of your card. Dont fall victim to a scam! \nWrite to your creditor Within 60 days of receiving the bill in question, send a letter outlining your objection and copies of your proof in an envelope addressed to your creditors department for billing inquiries. To be on the safe side, send the letter by certified mail, so you receive a receipt when it arrives at your creditors headquarters. Save the receipt proving they received your dispute with the other documents youre using to make your case. \n\nYou can also choose to dispute electronically, if the creditors website allows for that. Save any emails you get in return saying your dispute was received. \nFinal stretch : waiting for a response You creditor is required to respond within 30 days of your complaint, and the dispute must be resolved within 90 days, or two billing cycles.\n\nIn the meantime, you dont have to pay for the purchase in question, you must only pay for everything else on your statement. However, keep in mind that if your creditor finds your evidence insufficient, youll have to pay for the purchase in question, plus any interest that has accrued since. \n\nIf your creditor accepts your claim, all charges related to the error will be removed from your statement. If it does not accept your claim, it has to explain to you in writing exactly why the mistake is in fact a not a mistake, and youll have 10 days to challenge that conclusion.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-02-20T07:42:14.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","sub_product":"General-purpose prepaid card","zip_code":"14228","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3156484","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2019-02-20T02:03:12.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Please Note : Most fraud prevention features are designed for card-present <em>environments</em>. Visa, for example, has deployed a number of anti-fraud measures designed to make card reproduction extremely difficult, including holograms and embossed <em>security</em> characters on the face of the card. Moreover, the signature and magnetic strip on the back of the card are designed to ensure that the person using the card is the actual cardholder."]},"sort":[4.433885,"3156484"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":7,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":7}]}},"product":{"doc_count":7,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":2,"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":2}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose prepaid 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":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"International money transfer","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":7,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Getting a credit card","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Application denied","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Personal information incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Other features, terms, or problems","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other problem","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase or transfer","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase or transfer","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":7,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":7}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":7,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":7}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":7,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":7}]}},"company":{"doc_count":7,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":3},{"key":"CORELOGIC INC","doc_count":1},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"I.Q. DATA INTERNATIONAL, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":7,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"FL","doc_count":2},{"key":"GA","doc_count":1},{"key":"MD","doc_count":1},{"key":"MO","doc_count":1},{"key":"NV","doc_count":1},{"key":"NY","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":7,"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":2},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":7,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{}}}