{"took":129,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":45,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9658865","_score":18.300953,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"I wish to practice my right as a customer of JP Morgan Chase to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with JP Morgan Chase. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to JP Morgan Chase respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of JP Morgan Chase to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. \nDuring the complaints process with JP Morgan Chase, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-07-30T14:43:32.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"145XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9658865","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2024-07-30T14:23:55.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients."]},"sort":[18.300953,"9658865"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7471439","_score":18.300953,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"This is to complain against Coinbase. \nI wish to practice my right as a customer of Coinbase to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with Coinbase. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to Coinbase respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of Coinbase to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. \nDuring the complaints process with Coinbase, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. \nThey are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-08-29T18:07:47.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"338XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7471439","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Coinbase, Inc.","date_received":"2023-08-29T17:47:55.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients."]},"sort":[18.300953,"7471439"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6956900","_score":18.294373,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"I wish to practice my right as a customer of Wells Fargo to use your organizations service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with WELLS FARGO. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to WELLS FARGO respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case and analyzing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially engineered, and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognize that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of WELLS FARGO to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. \nDuring the complaints process with WELLS FARGO, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-05-10T12:46:02.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Domestic (US) money transfer","zip_code":"91423","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6956900","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2023-05-10T12:27:41.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and <em>chooses</em> not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[18.294373,"6956900"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7767730","_score":18.27353,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"I wish to practice my right as a customer of JP Morgan Chase to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with JP Morgan Chase. In order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have XXXX sent to JP Morgan Chase respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. It is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam. My complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of JP Morgan Chase to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. During the complaints process with JP Morgan Chase, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-10-27T20:10:41.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"11235","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7767730","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2023-10-27T19:54:59.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients."]},"sort":[18.27353,"7767730"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8683014","_score":17.128849,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"This is to complain against the HSBC.\n\nI wish to practice my right as a customer of HSBC to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with HSBC.\n\nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to HSBC respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion.\n\nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam.\n\nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of HSBC to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers.\n\nDuring the complaints process with HSBC, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients.\n\nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or about XXXX XX/XX/2023, I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX XXXX - XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX, XXXX USD from my HSBC account to fraudulent investment firm ( XXXX ). \nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability ; common queries include, but are not limited to, the following ( i ) whether HSBC did not take notice of any rule, law, or","date_sent_to_company":"2024-04-04T17:07:18.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"90065","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8683014","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS INC.","date_received":"2024-04-02T15:36:09.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients.\n\nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or about XXXX XX/XX/2023, I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX XXXX - XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX, XXXX USD from my HSBC account to fraudulent investment firm ( XXXX )."]},"sort":[17.128849,"8683014"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6765919","_score":16.864649,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"I wish to practice my right as a customer of Coinbase to use your organization 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute ( Ref : # XXXX ) with Coinbase. In order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to Coinbase respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case and analyzing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. It is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially engineered, and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognize that I am the victim of an investment scam. My complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of Coinbase to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, and protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. During the complaints process with Coinbase, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offered to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem that they choose to manage in a way that is not in line with the rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \n\nCommencing on or around XX/XX/2022, I fell victim to a multi-layered scam operation run by Ethminingsvip.com which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX USD from my Coinbase account to the fraudulent investment firm.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-03-28T14:54:55.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"31904","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6765919","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Coinbase, Inc.","date_received":"2023-03-28T14:19:04.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem that they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way that is not in <em>line</em> with the <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \n\nCommencing on or around XX/XX/2022, I fell victim to a multi-layered scam operation run by Ethminingsvip.com which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX USD from my Coinbase account to the fraudulent investment firm."]},"sort":[16.864649,"6765919"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8668839","_score":16.223522,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"This is to complain against the BOA. \nI wish to practice my right as a customer of BOA to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with BOA. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to BOA respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analyzing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognize that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of BOA to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. \nDuring the complaints process with BOA, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or about XXXX XX/XX/2023, I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX XXXX - XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX, XXXX USD from my BOA account to fraudulent investment firm ( s ).","date_sent_to_company":"2024-04-02T02:35:30.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"90065","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8668839","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2024-04-02T02:04:10.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or about XXXX XX/XX/2023, I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX XXXX - XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX, XXXX USD from my BOA account to fraudulent investment firm ( s )."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and <em>chooses</em> not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[16.223522,"8668839"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6397997","_score":15.088388,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"This is to complain against the Binance. \nURGENCY : HIGH IMPORTANCE : HIGH [ WITHOUT PREJUDICE ] I wish to practice my right as a customer of BINANCE to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with BINANCE. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to BINANCE respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of BINANCE to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. \nDuring the complaints process with BINANCE, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or about XX/XX/2022, I fell victim to a multi-layered scam operation orchestrated by a scammer called XXXX XXXX XXXX ( the \" Scammer '' ) with the design, development, manufacture, promoting, marketing, distribution, labelling, and/or sale of illegal and outright fraudulent investment services, all of which aim at contributing to the goal of robbing and defrauding clients, through a predetermined cycle of the clients losses to their gains. \n\nIn the document attached, I have listed the transactions ( Deposits ) I made through Binance ( XXXX XXXX ) which needs to be recovered","date_sent_to_company":"2023-01-04T12:35:28.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"International money transfer","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6397997","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BAM Management US Holdings Inc.","date_received":"2023-01-04T12:14:14.000Z","state":null,"company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients."]},"sort":[15.088388,"6397997"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3126563","_score":14.573823,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Wells Fargo sent me personalized marketing offering a 12 month 0 % interest promotional period for opening a XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card. As an existing Wells Fargo credit card customer, they have the right to use my customer information to market to me. \n\nI applied for the card at the end of XXXX and finally received my card on XX/XX/XXXX. I spoke to Wells Fargo representatives about the account on XX/XX/XXXX, and then several times after that when I was surprised to see that I had a minimum payment due. Previous experiences with Wells Fargo and XXXX credit cards did not have minimum payments due during promotional periods. They told me this one did. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I saw an interest charge when reviewing my online statement. I contacted the company to correct the error, as I was within the 12 month promotional period. I was told that because I had opened a Wells Fargo XXXX Visa in XX/XX/XXXX, I was ineligible for a promotional rate. \n\nWells Fargo had ample opportunity to notify me of this during any of several previous calls about this account. Further, Wells Fargo should not have marketed to me offering a 0 % promotional rate if I was ineligible. Further still, I believe that opening a card on XX/XX/XXXX is more than 12 months away from the second open date of XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nThis was deceptive and deprived me of the ability to manage my finances. I can not close this card without repercussions to my credit. I can not open another card with a different provider without repercussions to my credit. I have been choosing to save heavily rather than pay off balances, because I thought I had a 0 % line of credit, which caused me to incur interest charges I could have avoided. \n\nThis is deceptive and a \" bait and switch '' advertising tactic. Wells Fargo made no reasonable effort to notify me of this ridiculous rule ( which I did not experience with XXXX or other providers ) and hid it in the \" fine print ''.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-01-16T15:45:29.000Z","issue":"Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"073XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3126563","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2019-01-16T15:29:47.000Z","state":"NJ","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 advertised or promotional terms"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This was deceptive and deprived me of the ability to <em>manage</em> my finances. I can not close this card without repercussions to my credit. I can not open another card with a different provider without repercussions to my credit. I have been <em>choosing</em> to save heavily rather than pay off balances, because I thought I had a 0 % <em>line</em> of credit, which caused me to incur interest charges I could have avoided. \n\nThis is deceptive and a \" bait and switch '' advertising tactic."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and <em>chooses</em> not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[14.573823,"3126563"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6754970","_score":12.399092,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"My Venture Card was expiring, so Capital One mailed new cards to my wife and myself. The cards had not arrived after 45 days, so I called and reported that they were probably lost in the mail. I sent a copy of my passport as my drivers ' license had expired to the credit card department. As it turns out, they sent the passport to the security division which is also the fraud division as well. They blocked the card for security, but before mailing me a new one they wanted proof of my identity. My passport, expired drivers liscence, and having multiple accounts with all the accumulated data was not enough In looking at my credit report, my credit score is over 700 and good credit with all companies, however Capital One has been making inquires on my account about every 4 months. This is problematic. I have had contact with Capital one since XXXX and have other accounts as well with them. I continue to pay on all accounts each month and can provide info on payments etc.. All use the same identifying information -- address, social security number, date of birth etc. I am still waiting for my card. \nRecently I received a email from Capital One Visa informing me that my credit limit was being raised because of my good payment history. Are there separate divisions for Visa and Venture Cards that do not share info and that operate under different rules. I am very happy with their response, but I. still wish to receive my Venture Card. I now have multiple cards for my wife and myself that are unusuable. \n\n\nRe : XXXX XXXX XXXX, your credit line increased to {$4300.00} XXXX XXXX Sat XX/XX/XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX _XXXX XXXXXXXX -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- From : Capital One XXXX Sent : Friday, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX To : XXXX XXXX Subject : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX your credit line increased to {$4300.00} Nice job! Your new credit line is {$4300.00}! \n\n\nHeres a high-five to your responsible credit-building journey. We have increased your credit line for your account ending in XXXX from {$2300.00} to {$4300.00}. \n\n\nWhy did I get a higher limit? \n\nWe increased your credit line based on several factors including the way youve managed your account. \n\n\nDid Capital One do a hard pull on my credit to make this decision? \n\nNo, Capital One used soft inquiries, which had no impact on your credit score. Check out this article to learn more.\n\nHow could this credit line increase impact my credit score? \n\nCheck XXXX from Capital One to see how your credit line increase may impact your credit score. Plus, get free personalized suggestions and alerts to help improve your score.\n\nDont want your credit line increase? \n\nJust call XXXX ( XXXX ), and well reset your credit line back to its previous limit. \n\n\n\nKeep up the good work and thanks for choosing Capital One. \n\n\n\n\n\nAbout this message The site may be unavailable during normal maintenance or due to unforeseen circumstances. \n\nWhere does my XXXX score come from? \nYour XXXX score is calculated using the XXXX XXXX XXXX model, which is one of many credit scoring models. It may not be the same model your lender uses, but it is an accurate measure of your credit health. The availability of the XXXX tool depends on our ability to obtain your credit history from XXXX. Some monitoring and alerts may not be available to you if the information you enter at enrollment does not match the information in your credit file at ( or you do not have a file at ) one or more consumer reporting agencies. Alerts are based on changes to your XXXX and XXXX credit reports and information we find on the dark web. \n\nThe XXXX XXXX provides an estimate of your score change and does not guarantee how your score may change. \n\n\n\nImportant information from Capital One Contact us | Privacy | Help prevent fraud To ensure delivery, add XXXX to your address book. \n\nThis email was sent to XXXX and contains information directly related to your account with us, other services to which you have subscribed, and/or any application you may have submitted. \n\nCapital One does not provide, endorse or guarantee any third-party product, service, information or recommendation listed above. The third parties listed are not affiliated with Capital One and are solely responsible for their products and services. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners. \n\nPlease do not reply to this message, as this email inbox is not monitored. To contact us, visit XXXX. \n\nProducts and services are offered by Capital One, N.A. \n\nXXXX Capital One. Capital One is a federally registered service mark. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-04-28T19:32:44.000Z","issue":"Trouble using your card","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"330XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6754970","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2023-03-27T23:11:43.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Can't use card to make purchases"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Check XXXX from Capital One to see how your credit <em>line</em> increase may impact your credit score. Plus, get free personalized suggestions and alerts to help improve your score.\n\nDont want your credit <em>line</em> increase? \n\nJust call XXXX ( XXXX ), and well reset your credit <em>line</em> back to its previous limit. \n\n\n\nKeep up the good work and thanks for <em>choosing</em> Capital One. \n\n\n\n\n\nAbout this message The site may be unavailable during normal maintenance or due to unforeseen circumstances."]},"sort":[12.399092,"6754970"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6764102","_score":11.005497,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Throughout my career, I've had to make financial decisions to protect my home from foreclosure due to changing wages and jobs. When I changed jobs years ago, I was concerned with making my mortgage payment during the low paying early years with my then company and took out a home equity line of credit with USAA Federal Savings Bank, XXXX XXXX, Texas. I've had this line of credit drawn to some extent since that time and am now in the last few months of attempting to pay off the equity loan to USAA. With any other account at USAA, customers are allowed to set up recurring payments on the USAA website, which is mostly quick and seamless and allows us to manage our interest bearing accounts in a timely manner. However, with USAA HELOC payments, USAA does not allow us to set up recurring payments on their website but forces us to submit paper documents through the US mail in order to set up recurring payments. As many people know, these payments can be large, which requires payments to change from time to time, based upon changing financial situations. USAA blocks our ability to seamlessly change principle recurring payments because these loans are interest bearing loans and USAA benefits from actions like this because it makes it difficult for members like myself to change principle recurring payments. USAA allows only ONE TIME PRINCIPLE payments via their website but will not allow me to make a recurring principle payment, nor change interest payment accounts, on the USAA website. Today, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve is raising interest rates monthly and customers need a seamless way to change payments to HELOC loans. USAA is intentionally keeping this policy because this discourages those who are less capable for whatever reason that may be ( no printers, no access to computers, etc., ... ) from changing their payments for their benefit. If USAA can put obstacles like required paper documents having to be mailed to the banks headquarters in Texas, USAA knows that a portion of people will choose to delay this action or not to do this at all and USAA can capitalize on interest payments for these large HELOC loans. Today, I asked XXXX in the USAA Home Equity Loans Department why USAA does this and her explanation was to simply tell me the name of my Home Equity Line of Credit account as if the type of account was justification alone and with no explanation at all of why this is mandated. When I explained to XXXX the reasons why USAA is doing this to customers, her only reply was to state, \" I don't think that is the reason why ''. When I asked her why she had that opinion, she admitted that she had no reason why she would say that, that she wasn't going to tell me why she thought that and was simply blindly backing USAAs decision to block our seamless ability to change HELOC recurring payment changes on their website. This action by USAA is not due to any local, state nor federal rules nor regulations nor laws and is simply being done to make more money from their members ... something they routinely state that they do not do. It is a corrupt practice and needs to be changed so members can immediately and seamlessly start or change HELOC recurring principle and/or interest payment details. USAA allows for automatic payments of many kinds : Automatic future payments of their VISA card balances ; third-party automatic recurring checking payments outside of USAA ; and on the USAA Pay Bills page, USAA allows members to both, \" Set Up Automatic Payments '' and to \" Modify Automatic Payments '', but when you ask to do this with a high interest yielding HELOC loan, USAA refuses to allow this to be done via the USAA website ... .. so they can make money off of the members, period. USAA needs to invest time, energy and money ( instead of the multi-million dollar contract paid out to XXXX superstar XXXX XXXX, one of the most famous and wealthy XXXX players in recent history for the most recent and well known membership add on national TV ) in order to provide a means by which members can both initiate and modify recurring principle and interest payments, just like they've done for almost every other account on USAA.com. This is a gross mismanagement of USAA members funds- paying millions to an extremely wealthy XXXX superstar rather than making programming features available to members, which will save them time and money. And this is an obvious tactic to abuse members for revenue instead of a seamless and service based experience. There simply is no regulation which prevents members from paying off HELOC loans seamlessly through the USAA website. USAA is simply doing this to extort money from their long time members.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-03-28T21:23:00.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","zip_code":"32583","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6764102","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2023-03-28T20:45:47.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["When I changed jobs years ago, I was concerned with making my mortgage payment during the low paying early years with my then company and took out a home equity <em>line</em> of credit with USAA Federal Savings Bank, XXXX XXXX, Texas. I've had this <em>line</em> of credit drawn to some extent since that time and am now in the last few months of attempting to pay off the equity loan to USAA."],"sub_product":["Home equity loan or <em>line</em> of credit (HELOC)"]},"sort":[11.005497,"6764102"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6497487","_score":10.262227,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I wish to practice my right as a customer of Wells Fargo to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute ( Ref : XXXX ) with Wells Fargo. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to Wells Fargo respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of Wells Fargo to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. \nDuring the complaints process with Wells Fargo, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \n\nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or about XX/XX/2022, I fell victim to a multilayered scam operation orchestrated by XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( Company ), which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX USD from my Wells Fargo account to a fraudulent investment firm. \nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability ; common queries include, but are not limited to, the following ( i ) whether Wells Fargo did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my financial safety ; ( ii ) whether by virtue of Wells Fargos custodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached ; ( iii ) whether Wells Fargo promoted the transaction ( s ) in question despite being aware of the nature of the transaction ( s ) in question ( iv ) whether Wells Fargo was in compliance with its own policies and procedures ; ( v ) whether Wells Fargo owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether Wells Fargo did not uphold those duties ; ( vi ) whether Wells Fargos conduct was unfair ; and ( vii ) whether Wells Fargo has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me for the harm that has befallen me. \nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud. \nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and skill of a diligent, prudent banker. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not turn a XXXX eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In other words, Wells Fargo must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real possibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have known that I was dealing with a scammer. \nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a sense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective element. \nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not average care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is reasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of the evidence suggests that Wells Fargo did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers in this respect. \nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the standard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the past","date_sent_to_company":"2023-01-27T06:40:18.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"95037","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6497487","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2023-01-27T06:34:05.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and <em>chooses</em> not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[10.262227,"6497487"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2173010","_score":9.448908,"_source":{"product":"Bank account or service","complaint_what_happened":"I paid my XXXX XXXX credit card via their mobile banking accidentally choosing my former primary bank USAA rather than my current primary bank. I retained only limited funds in the account ; however, I had overdraft protection through my USAA credit card set up for accidents such as this. The checking account became overdrawn by {$120.00} as of XX/XX/XXXX and the credit card back up had an available balance of {$280.00} as of XX/XX/2016. Even with an available balance of {$280.00} on the overdraft protection credit card, USAA still returned the payment to XXXX XXXX charging me an NSF fee with USAA, a fee at XXXX XXXX & the threat of my interest rate being increased at XXXX XXXX. I have been a customer of USAA Bank for 16 years - checking, savings, CDs, mortgages, and all insurance policies over the years. There was even {$1500.00} in a savings account with USAA. I contacted USAA on XX/XX/2016 being transferred between XXXX different agents before XXXX, XXXX, would attempt to help me. I explained the situation to her but she was unable to explain why the item was returned since there were monies available on the credit card. XXXX explained there was nothing more she could do to help me & I would have to call back the next day to talk with a supervisor or senior agent as they had all already left for the day. I then asked XXXX to close my XXXX savings accounts & transfer the money to my checking account. She further explained that she was n't able to do that because when the final account of a product type is being closed a supervisor or senior agent must complete the transaction. I am not sure the purpose of having the call center open for customers when the agents can not assist with anything is an effective way to manage member money. Again banks are getting away with charging clients money and ruining their credit for their simple gain. I contacted USAA bank again on XX/XX/2016 specifically asking for a supervisor or senior agent. XXXX placed me on hold, and then said he could n't do anything for me until he authenticated me, even though I was calling from my phone number on file and entered my pass code, I completed that & again asked for a supervisor or senior agent, as he said he was neither, he proceeded to ask me what I was calling about and how he could help. At this point, I was extremely frustrated & stated I was asking yet again for a supervisor or senior agent as I was told to ask for and that I am sure there were notes in the system for the reason of my call. I was then told that a supervisor was n't available & I was then transferred somewhere. XXXX then answered, she too was n't a supervisor or senior agent then XXXX came on the line. She was the floor supervisor and she to was unable to decipher why the the item was returned. She stated a {$200.00} authorization from USAA overdraft was declined by USAA credit card even with {$280.00} available & she could n't explain why, I had to talk to credit card. The prior night credit card told me they could n't help and transferred for me back to checking. I was done with vicious circle. I then asked again for both of my savings accounts to be transferred to the checking and closed. She asked if I was aware of the rules and I stated yes, XXXX explained a supervisor had to close. XXXX stated no, anyone can do it but the accounts can not be closed with transactions being processed in last 24 hours. Then she stated I needed to talk to the retention department because I had other accounts - mortgage, home equity, insurance, etc. I explained those are not my accounts per my divorce decree nor do I care about retention. I wanted my money period and it was ridiculous that I was being treated this way. While I spoke, XXXX talked over me to state the accounts are in my name and remain my responsibility, good-bye and hung up on me. I was continuously denied access to my money.","date_sent_to_company":"2016-10-21T19:49:44.000Z","issue":"Account opening, closing, or management","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"60189","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2173010","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2016-10-21T03:00:27.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am not sure the purpose of having the call center open for customers when the agents can not assist with anything is an effective way to <em>manage</em> member money. Again banks are getting away with charging clients money and ruining their credit for their simple gain. I contacted USAA bank again on XX/XX/2016 specifically asking for a supervisor or senior agent."]},"sort":[9.448908,"2173010"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3218836","_score":8.347709,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I opened checking account ending in XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX in the amount of {$10000.00}. This was a promotional offer, the terms were that I keep the monies in the account for 90 days and I would receive {$350.00}. The wording was \" Maintain XXXX for 90 days from date deposited. Must keep open 90 days. I thought I funded the account the day I opened it. HSBC says I opened it on XX/XX/XXXX or XX/XX/XXXX, choose one, because they do not know. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I called HSBC and spoke with CSR XXXX, who told me I could not close the account until XX/XX/XXXX. This seemed correct, as the wording was \" {$350.00} welcome deposit in checking account approximately 8 weeks after completing all requirements ''. So time frame is : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX is 90 days. Add 8 weeks from completing the requirements ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and that would take us to XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI called the bank XX/XX/XXXX and spoke with XXXX, Badge # XXXX. I was told the following things ( after hanging up, I did a little more research on my case ) : 1 ) Under the terms and charges disclosure I must keep this account open for 6 months or there is a monthly charge of {$25.00}. This is all new to me, what happened to the information that I had and that I was also given by XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX? HSBC does reference a {$25.00} fee if your balance goes under {$10000.00} but this is during the times set forward in the promotional plan, as set above. This 6 month time frame that I must keep the account open was NEVER explained to me and sneakily put into \" small print '' that the bank is well aware nobody reads and furthermore, I signed up under a promotional plan with very clear terms. How does HSBC think it's fair to say : Open the account, keep {$10000.00} in for 90 days, keep it in an additional 8 weeks to receive your bonus but then, oh wait, keep it open for another month when nothing at all has been mentioned about keeping it open for 6 months. This is unfair business practice and the terms were hidden from me in the small print. I am being held to an account that I did not open ( unless you count being tricked by the small print ), I was \" sold '' a different policy with different terms. \n\n2 ) When I asked CSR XXXX the exact date I could safely close out the account she told me she could not \" divulge '' that date, that it was against the rules, that the only way I was able to get it was to go into an HSBC branch. Firstly, there are no branches close to me and secondly, then why was it given to me by CSR XXXX if it was such a secret? \n\nFast forward to XXXX Monday morning, CSR XXXX takes over, who at one point denied to give me her badge number. She could not figure out how to send me an authentication code and when I asked her for her badge # and for a Manager she told me \" she can not disclose her badge number until I am verified. THE complaint is that she can not get me verified so that I can move forward, that is the complaint for the Manager! She advised that I must receive the code while the CSR is on the telephone line, that is the only was it can be done. XXXX the night before and XXXX Manager both did it with a code that came into my house phone and then they called me back. She told me a Manager would return my call within an hour and of course I never received a call. \n\nXXXX - CSR XXXX - I still have no information today despite all of the calls and promises of return calls. He provides me with a complaint # for the Manager not calling me back earlier, # XXXX. He finally gets a Manager to call me back, who listens but hangs onto the \" small print '' and says technically I can not close the account for another month. She said she will \" request '' that the back office waive the fee for the one month period left. \n\nI have dealt with banks for over 50 years and this is disgusting. To trick your own customers is wrong and the treatment I received from these CSR 's is ridiculous. \n\nHSBC 's stellar \" World Class Service '' had me on the phone for 1 hour on XX/XX/XXXX when I was told about their tricky schemes, 30 minutes on the first call on XX/XX/XXXX with absolutely nothing resolved, the girl could not even manage to get me authenticated, another 25 minutes during the second call on XX/XX/XXXX and finally approximately 25 minutes again when hopefully we got the situation settled. That's world class service?","date_sent_to_company":"2019-04-22T17:19:29.000Z","issue":"Closing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"80503","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3218836","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS INC.","date_received":"2019-04-22T15:55:02.000Z","state":"CO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Can't close your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["HSBC says I opened it on XX/XX/XXXX or XX/XX/XXXX, <em>choose</em> one, because they do not know. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I called HSBC and spoke with CSR XXXX, who told me I could not close the account until XX/XX/XXXX. This seemed correct, as the wording was \" {$350.00} welcome deposit in checking account approximately 8 weeks after completing all requirements ''. So time frame is : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX is 90 days."]},"sort":[8.347709,"3218836"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9861569","_score":7.314402,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX I filled out an application for a Home Equity Line of Credit ( HELOC ) with XXXX XXXX, Managing Director, of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), now JP Morgan Chase ( JPMC ). Upon completing and submitting the loan application, I spoke with XXXX XXXX. During the phone conversation, XXXX and I discussed the loan term, the draw period, and the percentage of the equity in my property that would be used for the HELOC ( 70 % ). I was told by XXXX, that the HELOC loan would have a loan term of sixty ( 60 ) months, with a draw period of sixty ( 60 ) months, and that my primary residence, would be used as the ( sole ) collateral for the HELOC loan. Upon receiving the loan disclosures, I signed the loan disclosure and consent agreement electronically on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX hours. \n\nOn Thursday, XX/XX/XXXX, I received a commitment from XXXX XXXX XXXX  for the above HELOC loan. The HELOC was scheduled to close no later than XX/XX/XXXX. After receiving the commitment, I attempted to reach XXXX XXXX many times, by email, work phone, and cell phone, without a response. I reached out to his assistant XXXX to get a status on the closing, since I had not received a return phone call, text, or email from XXXX XXXX. I had growing concerns, because, as XXXX XXXX, and XXXX knew, I was using a portion of the proceeds of the HELOC to purchase a new primary residence. The new purchase was scheduled to close no later than XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX XXXX, and XXXX understood that the sellers of the new home had threatened verbally, and by email, to retain my deposit, if we did not close as scheduled on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX finally responded to my question ( by text ), of why I hadnt closed on the HELOC, after receiving a commitment on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX responded with the following statement : Got your message. Federal government requires a three day wait from when you receive the disclosures to when you can close. In addition they require another three day wait once you close as a rescission period where you can cancel the loan. Unfortunately there is no way around this. \n\nMy response back to XXXX : XXXX I dont believe a HELOC fall under the TRID 3 day rule. The rescission yes but not the TRID. Also I think once a draw is done it cancels out the rescission period. Can we close on the HELOC Monday so 3 days brings us to Thursday? \n\nXXXX response back to me ( restated the above ) : Got your message. Federal government requires a three day wait from when you receive the disclosures to when you can close. In addition they require another three day wait once you close as a rescission period where you can cancel the loan. Unfortunately there is no way around this. \n\nAfter receiving the text message from XXXX XXXX, I confirmed that the mortgage loans to which the XXXX XXXX does not apply include HELOCs, reverse mortgage loans, or mortgage loans secured by a mobile home or dwelling that is not attached to a real property. I immediately contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX who assisted with the loan ) and advised her of XXXX and Is conversation. I then requested that XXXX XXXX please speak with XXXX XXXX, since it was now clear, that XXXX intended to further delay the closing by at least XXXX business days. After XXXX XXXX spoke with a supervisor, the closing for the HELOC was set for XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n\nI arrived at the closing on XX/XX/XXXX, to close on an equity line of credit for approximately {$170000.00}, with a XXXX ( XXXX yr ) term using my primary residence as collateral. A portion of the funds, from the HELOC, would then be used to purchase a new home, that I currently live in. This home was also financed by XXXX XXXX XXXXJP Morgan Chase . While looking over the paperwork that I received from FRBs, closing Attorney I could see that the terms were not the same as the disclosures that I received from XXXX/JP Morgan Chase . The following changes were made to the HELOC loan, without my knowledge. The term of the home equity line of credit were changed without my knowledge from the written and verbal disclosures sent to me that stated a XXXX ( 60 month ) term to a XXXX ( 12 month ) term. In addition, my primary residence was the only property to be used as collateral, but NOW the new residence that I was purchasing was also listed as collateral for the Home Equity Line of Credit. Additionally, the cost of the closing estimates was significantly higher than what was disclosed to me on the loan disclosures that I received from XXXX XXXX XXXXJP Morgan Chase . \n\nI immediately contacted XXXX XXXX the managing director, by telephone. XXXX did not immediately answer, so I left him a voice message and asked him to explain why the loan terms had been changed from 5 years to 1 year, and why two properties were being used as collateral instead of one ( per the loan disclosure docs as well as all conversations ). I then contacted XXXX, Bruneaus assistant, and she assured me that the HELOC loan term had not been change and was a term of five years ( 60 months ), and my current primary residence was the only property being used as collateral. XXXX said she would get back to me and to remain at the closing until I heard back from her. \n\nApproximately XXXX mins later XXXX called back and stated that she looked at the closing docs and they were indeed changed. XXXX said that, like me, she was never made aware that the loan term was reduced by XXXX years, to a XXXX term, and she was not aware that both properties were being used as collateral. XXXX further stated that I should speak to XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX also stated that she tried calling XXXX for an explanation, but he did not answer the phone. I called XXXX XXXX several times, while at the closing office, before he finally answered. XXXX XXXX apologized for not communicating to me that he had changed the loan terms and collateral and guaranteed that he would make things right and modify the loan to its original terms. XXXX told me to sign the documents and close the loan and that he would modify the loan before its maturity date. \n\nOver the next few months XXXX XXXX continued to communicate with me and XXXX assured me that the loan would be modified to the XXXX term and only XXXX property would be used as collateral. Bruneau again stated that the modification would be completed before the scheduled maturity date. \n\n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX I received a demand letter from XXXX XXXX XXXX. This letter had been sent to my previous address. XXXXJP Morgan Chase did NOT send any collection documents to my current address, which was the address of the property that I purchased. The demand letter was sent to my previous address and stated that by XX/XX/XXXX I had to pay XXXX if not paid they were going to foreclose on the property. I contacted XXXX XXXX ( XXXX/JPMorgan Chase ) , and I told her about the situation. She stated that she would investigate the situation. XXXX XXXX further stated that she located the original disclosures and confirmed that the loan disclosures were for a five-year ( XXXX term ), with XXXX residence used as collateral. XXXX said that she would get back to me after speaking with JP Morgan Chase/ and their Attorneys. I provided a copy of the Loan Disclosure docs that was emailed to me. XXXX stated that she did not know exactly how long it would take for JP Morgan to come back with a resolution but asked me to please be patient. XXXX stated that she could not except a monthly payment from me, and while she, the Attorneys and JP Morgan Chase worked on the resolution that it would not affect my credit. XXXX and I began to correspond for XXXX months before she got back to me about a possible resolution. \n\nXXXX got back to me in XXXX of XXXX. XXXX acknowledged that JP Morgan Chase found a several discrepancies in what was disclosed to me prior to closing and the documents that were presented to me at closing. Due to several clear discrepancies, JP Morgan Chase, agreed to modify the loan to a five-year term. Prior to modifying the loan to a five-year term, JP Morgan Chase requested that I agree to the following terms. \n\nXXXX. The HELOC would be extended to a XXXX term. \n2. The HELOC loan would remain closed, with no further/future advances ( a discrepancy from the original loan terms and conditions ).\n\n3. I would need to agree to sign a non-disclosure agreement ( a discrepancy from the original loan terms and conditions ). \nXXXX. I would need to agree to release XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, JP Morgan Chase, and the FDIC, as well as others from past, present, and future Release of Claim of any wrongdoing, during the HELOC loan process/closing. \n5. JP Morgan Chase self-initiated a payment to me, of {$2500.00}. This payment would only be released upon signing the agreement. \n\nAfter looking over the Agreement that JP Morgan Chase was requesting that I sign, I sent a written email, requesting that JP Morgan Chase agree to give me time to consult with an Attorney of my choosing because there were a number of conditions within the proposed resolution, that I did not understand, and there was a lot of legal verbiage that an Attorney or a member of the Banking Commission may be able to explain to me, and they may have more experience with. After making the request I received a call from XXXX who stated that JP Morgan Chase was rescinding the modification resolution. I asked why JP Morgan Chase had rescinded the proposed agreement. I was told that I rejected the agreement. I said I did not reject the agreement. I simply asked to have additional time to have an Attorney review it ( Ive provided this email ). \n\nJP Morgan stated that they would re-investigate whether I simply asked for time to review it or if I rejected the offer. Every XXXX weeks I called JP Morgan Chase XXXX XXXX to get a status on the offer. JP Morgan Chase responded by saying that they were looking into it. XXXX months later, XXXX of XXXX I was told that they were no longer willing to come to a resolution. \n\n\nPrior to the premature loan maturity, I had never been late or missed a payment on the HELOC mortgage. JP Morgan Chase began reporting that I was over 180 days late on my mortgage payment. My credit score dropped from XXXX to its current score of XXXX, due to the late payments that JP Morgan has begun to report to the credit bureaus. This has also caused credit card companies that I have been doing business with for over 20 years to close my credit lines.\n\nI am respectfully requesting that the CFPB to please review these unfair banking practices and help me to restore my mortgage and my good credit rating. I requested that XXXXJP Morgan Chase send me a copy of the loan disclosures that I received after completing the HELOC application, the change of loan terms XXXX 's XXXXJPMC said were sent to me prior to going to loan closing, and the change of collateral the XXXXJPMC said were sent to me prior to going to loan closing.\n\nRespectfully submitted","date_sent_to_company":"2024-08-20T20:14:14.000Z","issue":"Closing on a mortgage","sub_product":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","zip_code":"02119","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9861569","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2024-08-20T18:20:21.000Z","state":"MA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Changes in loan terms during or after closing"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XX/XX/XXXX I filled out an application for a Home Equity <em>Line</em> of Credit ( HELOC ) with XXXX XXXX, <em>Managing</em> Director, of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), now JP Morgan Chase ( JPMC ). Upon completing and submitting the loan application, I spoke with XXXX XXXX. During the phone conversation, XXXX and I discussed the loan term, the draw period, and the percentage of the equity in my property that would be used for the HELOC ( 70 % )."],"sub_product":["Home equity loan or <em>line</em> of credit (HELOC)"]},"sort":[7.314402,"9861569"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4119131","_score":7.245524,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Subsequent to conducting some interest rate research on XXXX, my wife and I contacted Amerisave on XX/XX/XXXX, and were connected to loan originator # XXXX. Amidst looking at condo units for a vacation property, our goal was to get pre-approved in order to make an offer on a property we had found. We spoke with the originator for a lengthy period, during which time we answered every question openly and provided an enormous amount of information about our company ( self-employment ), our income, our savings, our lack of debt, and our desire for a 15-year conventional mortgage. From the start of the conversation, Amerisave was quick to convey that they could help us and everything looked and sounded good. We continued to provide information and were told that we needed to pay their {$500.00} application fee to initiate an application and get our rate locked. For reference, the conventional rate that was offered was 2.000 % with {$460.00} for a loan discount fee. This was slightly lower than any of the other companies we had spoken with and, as such, we paid the fee that same night. Shortly after XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, we were provided with a pre-approval email and an eight ( 8 ) page Amerisave Loan Detail Report that spelled out the loan in excruciating detail. Also, for reference, the Amerisave rate lock was valid until XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX. The shorter lock is due to the fact that Amerisave is quick to tell you that purchase loans move through a lot faster than refis. \n\nWith the letter in-hand, we made an offer that evening on the unit we were interested in. Later that same evening, we were informed by the sellers realtor that an offer had already been accepted by the homeowner and our offer would be regarded as a backup contract. In the meantime, we were already working on providing lots of documents to Amerisave via their my.amerisave.com portal. Please be aware that you will only like their portal if you enjoy doing the same tasks over and over again. Example : Youll upload a tax return, submit it, and the system will ask you to upload and submit the exact same tax return again. Now, multiply this by 40-50 documents ( over time ) and youll see a portion of the headaches encountered. Anyway, even with the backup contract in-place, we kept looking in the same building, managed to find a different unit on XX/XX/XXXX, and made another offer that was accepted. Based on the accepted contract, we immediately contacted our loan originator at Amerisave and asked to reduce the loan amount by approximately 10 % based on the new purchase price. That request was taken care of and we were presented ( via the portal ) with a new loan estimate that was no longer 2.000 % with {$460.00} in fees. At no point was the premise of ANY change whatsoever covered with us on the phone. In order to keep the 2.000 %, we NOW had to pay Amerisave {$3400.00} in points. Confused and upset, we called the originator and asked where the new and substantial fees came from. We were told that the modified loan amount was now under {$300000.00} and that the 2.000 % interest rate was no longer available and the only way to get it was to pay the points. It was clear to us that the Amerisave Rate Lock means absolutely XXXX as the rules are re-written as you go. We explicitly asked to speak to the originators manager as we felt it was a bait and switch. We were provided with his name and phone number, and to this day, we have yet to receive a call back from anyone. With no option but to pay, we continued down the road with a contract closing date of XX/XX/XXXX or earlier. Over the next several weeks we continued to provide everything that Amerisave asked for ( often within minutes of the request ), but the communications from their end just got worse and worse. Heres what we encountered : ( a ) we had no answers as to where our loan stood process wise ; ( b ) we became very accustom to leaving messages on voicemail and never getting a call back ; ( c ) we sent emails that were not responded to until 24-hours later at best ; and ( d ) we got used to our questions not being answered no matter how many times we asked and/or rephrased the same question. Now, heres where the FUN started. The appraisal was completed on XX/XX/XXXX. Amerisave uses a company called XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for their appraisal activities. Bottom line, do your homework on XXXX and youll see some serious matters. We received the results of the appraisal on XX/XX/XXXX and the appraised value was drastically lower than any prior comparable sold properties. There were a multitude of issues in the appraisal and we did challenge it with well researched facts and a prior appraisal from XX/XX/XXXX. Bottom line, the appeal went nowhere and Amerisave flat out refused to conduct a second appraisal, even if we paid for it. Again, the only answer from Amerisave was more money out of pocket, only in this case to the tune of $ XXXX more. As the days moved on, we asked time after time if everything was on track to close on the XXXX. Again, to this day we never received a response to the questions. On XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX ( the same day the HUD was theoretically due to us ), we received an email from Amerisave stating that our file had been submitted to underwriting for approval. Contract with the seller was set to expire on XX/XX/XXXX, of which Amerisave clearly knew. Further, our rate lock ( I use that term loosely for reasons above ) was set to expire on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX. We crafted an email and sent it 12 minutes before our rate lock expired. The email expressed that we did not believe Amerisave was going to complete our loan, conduct the mandatory disclosures, and close our loan this week. We asked what was going to happen to our rate lock at XXXX. Somehow, we received an email response ( within 9 minutes ) that indicated : Lock extension approved and being sent out now. My manager is pushing the upper management team to help get the loan through our system. Stay positive! We did not receive the rate lock extension, but my wife did receive a phone call at XXXX requesting bank statements that Amerisave already had and 2 months of credit card statements. During this same call, my wife was informed that all of this was necessary even though our debt-to-income ratio was extremely low at 12 %. We were also told that our XXXX income was completely unusable due to our XXXX taxes not being filed yet. As such, Amerisave was only willing to use our XXXX income, and if we choose to do that, we would need to provide XXXX financials. Lastly, the loan originator expressed to my wife that we should have never been approved based on our XXXX income as taxes have not yet been filed ( who files their taxes 30 days after the XXXX XXXX? ). Made zero sense but bottom line, Amerisave was incredibly unprofessional and dishonest, played games every step of the way, and at XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX ( 4 minutes before the deadline for providing us with the HUD disclosure ), denied our loan via a phone call. While we were still able to close on the home ( via conversion to a cash deal ) on XX/XX/XXXX, it was not until shortly after XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX when Amerisave finally produced a denial letter with a reason of \" Excessive Obligations in Relation to Income. '' Clearly, this was/is not the case as a result of the aforementioned 12 % Debt to Income ratio, but Amerisave obviously needed some reason. They are by far the worst company we have ever dealt with and our hope is that this filing saves just one person/family from the nightmares we encountered.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-02-05T14:47:11.000Z","issue":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"32174","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4119131","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERISAVE MORTGAGE CORPORATION","date_received":"2021-02-05T14:34:30.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Bottom <em>line</em>, do your homework on XXXX and youll see some serious matters. We received the results of the appraisal on XX/XX/XXXX and the appraised value was drastically lower than any prior comparable sold properties. There were a multitude of issues in the appraisal and we did challenge it with well researched facts and a prior appraisal from XX/XX/XXXX. Bottom <em>line</em>, the appeal went nowhere and Amerisave flat out refused to conduct a second appraisal, even if we paid for it."]},"sort":[7.245524,"4119131"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2855161","_score":7.2345114,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"My dispute is with the XXXX XXXX Mastercard ( XXXX ) managed by Chase/JP Morgan. On or about XX/XX/XXXX, I've received an email from /XXXX XXXX indicating that \" due to lack of activity on my XXXX   XXXX account '' I will be forfeiting all my rewards points as of XX/XX/XXXX. I contacted JP Morgan Chase by telephone and they clearly indicated to me that the fact that I've renewed my XXXX XXXX credit card was sufficient enough to maintain my active status. This conversation was further followed by me and indeed this is what the XXXX XXXX stated -- -- herein enclosed -- -- Points expiration : The points transferred to your Rapid Rewards account wont expire as long as your card account is open or you have flight-earning or XXXX XXXX partner-earning activity at least once every 24 months. If your card account is closed, the points in your Rapid Rewards account will expire if there isnt flight-earning or XXXX XXXX partner-earning activity at least once every 24 months. Losing points : Youll immediately lose all points that havent been transferred to XXXX XXXX if your card account status changes, or your card account is closed for program misuse, fraudulent activities, failure to pay, bankruptcy, or other reasons described in the terms of the Rewards Program Agreement Points Don't Expire, Unlimited Reward Seats, and No Blackout Dates Points dont expire : The points transferred to your Rapid Rewards account wont expire as long as your card is open or you have flight-earning or partner-earning activity at least once every 24 months. If your card account is closed, the points in your Rapid Rewards account will expire if there isnt flight-earning or XXXX XXXX partner-earning activity at least once every 24 months. No blackout dates and unlimited reward seats apply to flights booked with points. \n\nI would like to emphasize the second and third line on the last paragraph as it was published -- -- ( \" points won't expire -- -- -etc, etc ) -- - I've noticed that my account was XXXX balanced after XX/XX/XXXX while I had over XXXX  reward  points that vanished. Thereafter I became the \" ping pong '' ball between the bank and the airline, sending me back and forth with each side arguing something different. \nHere is one of the responses from XXXX XXXX -- -- /As you can clearly see, I argue the point in the reward program that my account was active due to the fact that my bank credit card was active and I've paid the renewal fee. \n\n\nDear XXXX, Thank you for your email. As a Rapid Rewards Member since 1999, your satisfaction is paramount. We appreciate the chance to respond. \nWe are so sorry for any confusion regarding your Rapid Rewards Account. Please allow me to explain, Rapid Rewards Points dont expire as long as there is earning activity in your account within 24 months, and we make this information available in your XXXX account. According to our records, your last earning activity was on XX/XX/XXXX. As such, your Rapid Rewards account was marked inactive and any points in your account were forfeited. While we cant reinstate forfeited points, your account will be reactivated when qualifying flight or Partner points are earned. Nevertheless, we regret any disappointment in this regard. \nThat said, the relationship between XXXX XXXX and Chase is quite unique in that Chase is the actual issuer of the Rapid Rewards Credit Card. This means that Chase processes the applications, issues the credit cards, and handles all account matters associated with the Rapid Rewards Visa card. XXXX XXXX, through Rapid Rewards, maintains the flight points earned from purchases on the XXXX card only. Customer application approval, service charges, new member bonus offers, etc. are determined by Chase. Please contact them directly at XXXX for assistance with your card activity. \nWe appreciate your business and loyalty. We truly hope to share the skies with you for many years to come. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX The file reference number for your email isXXXX. \n\nFinally, an additional response on XX/XX/XXXX indicating that they would not address this issue further. -- -- Dear XXXX , We received your follow-up email and appreciate your taking the time to contact us again. I welcome this additional opportunity to respond to your concerns. \n\nWe are sorry to learn that you remain disappointed with our Rapid Rewards Program, especially if you have contacted Chase and XXXX XXXX on more than one occasion. As I previously mentioned when we spoke by phone on XX/XX/XXXX, Rapid Rewards Points dont expire as long as there is qualifying earning activity in your account within 24 months. Per our Rapid Rewards terms and conditions, Qualifying Activity means ( a ) points earned from flights booked through XXXX XXXX, ( b ) points earned from our Rapid Rewards Partners and posted to Members account prior to the expiration date, ( c ) points purchased through XXXX, and ( d ) gifted/transferred/donated points received and claimed by the recipient. Gifted/Transferred/Donated points are a Qualifying Activity for the recipient only. The act of opening or owning a XXXX Credit Card is not considered qualifying earning activity. \n\nNobody likes to lean in the Customers favor more than XXXX XXXX. It truly saddens me that we are not able to honor your request to reinstate your points on this occasion. Our Rapid Rewards Program must be upheld in order to maintain the integrity of our fare rules, and I am deeply sorry that we have disappointed you. At this point, we will be unable to respond to any further correspondence on the issue. \n\nYour patronage and friendship mean the world to us. We know you have a choice when you fly, and we hope you will continue to choose XXXX. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX The file reference number for your email is XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-03-26T22:17:39.000Z","issue":"Other features, terms, or problems","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"33160","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2855161","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2018-03-26T21:43:59.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with rewards from credit card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Our Rapid Rewards Program must be upheld in order to maintain the integrity of our fare <em>rules</em>, and I am deeply sorry that we have disappointed you. At this point, we will be unable to respond to any further correspondence on the issue. \n\nYour patronage and friendship mean the world to us. We know you have a choice when you fly, and we hope you will continue to <em>choose</em> XXXX. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX The file reference number for your email is XXXX."]},"sort":[7.2345114,"2855161"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4550419","_score":6.987472,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB - there is an attachment for XXXX  XXXX Contact details. \n\nAttached as - Experian - XXXX  Complaint .docx I am XXXX XXXX XXXX and I am the author of this dispute. This is NOT a Duplicate complaint, please do not flag it as such. \n\nThis complaint is long, and detailed, with some technical details within it. Its also discoverable. All the companies within this complaint have an IT team, and developers that created/managed the integrations, built or maintain the systems or load the files from Data Furnishers.\n\nThis information - is pulled from XXXX, and Experian.com, with my PII data validated and ensured, for verification and for access to my own, Credit Reports.\n\nI am no longer willing to be the middle man. XXXX XXXX - is the Data Furnisher - and Experian, is the CRA. The fix, can not be executed by me - it is, however both of your responsibilities. \n\nThere is an existing complaint against XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ), and the complaint number is XXXX. That complaint - if read, is/was not as simple as a request of Validation of Debt, it was in detail, and specific to a complaint to XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ), and its compliance with Metro2, and its standards - and, then FCRA/FDCPA. A screen shot of the complaint is also attached as XXXX  XXXX Orig Complaint. \n\nXXXX XXXX - failed to reply to all within this complaint. I have attached a screen shot of their response - as \" XXXX  - Orig Response '' I am pasting below, the responsibilities as a Data Furnisher - I am relying on - https : //www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx? node=pt16.1.660 & rgn=div5 For Federal Law - Definition of a Creditor and then a Debt Collector, I am relying on - 803 ( 4 ) and ( 6 ) https : //www.ftc.gov/enforcement/rules/rulemaking-regulatory-reform-proceedings/fair-debt-collection-practices-act-text THIS complaint is against XXXX XXXX ( Data Furnisher ) specifically - and, then Experian ( CRA ) for this line item on my Experian Report has created this dispute of both FACRA and FDCPA compliance, although there are more . \n\nIt is not a Verification/Validation of Debt, please be so kind as to not treat as such. If in fact an attachment is needed to demonstrate any details I ask that you simply ensure your reporting accurately reflects it as only I can see the letter. The report as you know, is visible to all interested/qualified entities. \n\nIf you can not resolve your issue please be so kind as to delete your record. \n\nI am also attaching the Metro2 specification with the Debt Collector section called out. ***The Header/Footer details in a Metro2, are not specific or keyed, on/to a consumer and are then n/a.\n\nSee attached Metro2 DC Section and Do Not Send - Metro2. \n\n\nExperian 1. Your reports, segment its details by Type of Information.\n\n2. Pers Info >Names, Addresses>Year of Birth>Employers etc all the way down to Who To Contact and Consumer Rights 3. There is A single Header for Tradelines/Accounts/Records 4. Accounts 5. Here is your definition of items listed in this segment of a Consumer Report - Accounts Includes credit cards, real estate loans and installment loans. This information is reported to the credit bureaus from your creditors. \n6. Here is another link from your site 7. https : //www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/credit-education/report-basics/understanding-your-experian-credit-report/ 8. And attached as well As Understanding Your Experian Credit Report - Experian XXXX Definition of Sections 9. it says Accounts Accounts in a credit report include revolving credit accounts and installment loans. This information is reported to the credit bureaus by your creditors. Accounts in good standing reflect your creditors ' reports that you have satisfactorily met the terms of your agreements with them and all payments have been made on time. Lenders are not required to report account information to the credit reporting companies. Some lenders may choose to report to only one or two of the three major credit reporting companies ( Experian, XXXX  and XXXX  ), and some choose not to report to any. Therefore, it is possible to have an account that does not appear on your credit report. This section may also include up to two years of your monthly balances on an account if it has been reported by your creditor. Here are some examples : 10. I have attached a screen shot of the fields/details/ expected results outlines in your site 11. They Are attached as Understanding - Accounts Ex 4 and with the same prefix 1-3. \n12. I also looked at Collections. same url, same attachment as Above.\n\n13. Attached as Understanding - Accounts Ex DC 2 and Understanding - Accounts Ex DC 1 14. That Section says Collections - When an account becomes seriously past due, the creditor may decide to turn the account over to an internal collection department or sell the debt to a collection agency. Once an account is sold to a collection agency, the collection account can then be reported as a separate account on your credit report. Collection accounts have a significant negative impact on your credit scores. Here 's how collection accounts will appear on your report : 15. I can Map Metro2 for a Collection account and to the fields you Experian say are expected. \n16. For Accounts -- - DC records, It becomes technical malpractice to map to an account, cause the entrance criteria to that door has allowed itself to be blown open 17. Its out of basic compliance with NORMAL Technical oversight even, SDLC when Experian allows this Data outside of what it demonstrated. \n18. This Complaint specifically and for now, is about XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n19. They are Not Creditors ( definition is above ) 20. They are Debt Collectors. \n21. How are they allowed to report, and from your Data as an Account and with your definition? And as a Creditor? \n22. Does Experian have a Section for Collections? \n23. Because the Data from Metro2, is specific to their industry how are they then allowed to send, and then Experian Publish attributes like Terms, Pay Histories, Rating, Balance Histories?\n\n24. How are they ( and allot of others in this basket ) allowed to use values from Metro2 that are not specified for DC usage?\n\n25. Your Definition of FICO Scoring is attached as Experian - Fico Scoring. \n26. It is understood that there are different models.\n\n27. But the models are built based on DATA 28. It is visible where data is masked, or manipulated. Your tools display the issues and are in plain sight when you look. \n29. Because this record from XXXX  XXXX is allowed to exist in this state this is reporting itself in such an egregious way that it simply will destroy a consumer report even when it is paid off. \n30. If I know you know, and this is systematic. \n\nXXXX  XXXX 1. This is your record 2. You report it 3. You are aware of the expected results 4. And, the actual results 5. You are then compliant 6. You XXXX  XXXX, dont have terms you are a debt collector 7. You dont have balance history you are a debt collector 8. You dont have rating or pay history you are a debt collector 9. You opened this account in XX/XX/XXXX 10. You then immediately reported a C Collection 11. And have been reporting it in Payment History for almost 4 years 12. Your FACRA/DOFD you are reporting is NOT accurate 13. Please accept this as our response to Ms. XXXX debt validation request for accounts ending in XXXX and XXXX. The account ending in XXXX was originally a Justice account underwritten by XXXX XXXX  and previously serviced by XXXX XXXX, XXXX. and opened on XX/XX/XXXX. The last payment was made on XX/XX/XXXX in the amount of {$100.00}. The account charged off on XX/XX/XXXX in the amount of {$530.00}. \n14. Metro2 file format has directions.\n\n15. Even tells you what not to send - see attached \" Do Not Send - Metro2.\n\n16. Why are you sending it? Is this your expected result?\n\n17. Can you fix your record?\n\nIf its happening to me its happening to all and is systematic.\n\nThis took me a while to figure out but, now I get it.\n\nI hope everyone else does/will get it too.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-07-22T12:23:56.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4550419","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2021-07-17T00:36:30.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["node=pt16.1.660 & rgn=div5 For Federal Law - Definition of a Creditor and then a Debt Collector, I am relying on - 803 ( 4 ) and ( 6 ) https : //www.ftc.gov/enforcement/<em>rules</em>/rulemaking-regulatory-reform-proceedings/fair-debt-collection-practices-act-text THIS complaint is against XXXX XXXX ( Data Furnisher ) specifically - and, then Experian ( CRA ) for this <em>line</em> item on my Experian Report has created this dispute of both FACRA and FDCPA compliance, although there are more ."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and <em>chooses</em> not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[6.987472,"4550419"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4930281","_score":6.959696,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"This is to complain against the Gemini Trust Company , LLC. XXXX Gemini. \nURGENCY : HIGH IMPORTANCE : HIGH [ WITHOUT PREJUDICE ] I wish to practice my right as a customer of Gemini to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with Gemini. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to Gemini respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognize that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of Gemini to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. \nDuring the complaints process with Gemini, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or about XX/XX/2021, I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX / XXXX  which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX USD from my Gemini account to these fraudulent investment companies. \nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability ; common queries include, but are not limited to, the following ( i ) whether Gemini did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my financial safety ; ( ii ) whether by virtue of Geminis custodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached ; ( iii ) whether Gemini promoted the transaction ( s ) in question despite being aware of the nature of the transaction ( s ) in question ( iv ) whether Gemini was in compliance with its own policies and procedures ; ( v ) whether Gemini owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether Gemini did not uphold those duties ; ( vi ) whether Geminis conduct was unfair ; and ( vii ) whether Gemini has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me for the harm that has befallen me. \nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud. \nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and skill of a diligent, prudent organization. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not turn a blind eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In other words, Gemini must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real possibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have known that I was dealing with a scammer. \nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a sense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective element. \nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not average care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is reasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of the evidence suggests that Gemini did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers in this respect. \nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the standard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the past. \nGeminis Position : On XX/XX/2021, Gemini wrote in a letter Once digital assets leave your Gemini account, they can not be recovered. The reason behind this is due to a concept known as transaction finality. Transaction finality is a function of decentralized blockchains. It means that once the transaction has been broadcast to the network and confirmed on the blockchain, the transaction is irreversible. \nRefuting XXXX arguments from a purely logical perspective : XXXX position is that the features of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to protect innocent and helpless victims ; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches are doomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only meaningful choice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the attention it deserves even though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint. \nIn XXXX view, it is implied that we should not home in ( and consequently rely ) on unwritten laws, practicality, good judgement, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight, when taking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense and are wildly irresponsible. \nImagine a view according to which the one and only thing that can make Gemini morally obligated to do something is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if Gemini encounter the suffering of totally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the degree required by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as Gemini. \nI have reviewed the material hereto sent by Gemini carefully, and it unfortunately provides no response to my fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the resources at its disposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as myself had, to determine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and had a duty to intervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind. \nIt is perfectly obvious that Gemini, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the key questions in a manner which neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other than its own interests. \nIt is Gemini here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to say, that Gemini adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its extensive experience compared to mine. It is Gemini that claims that the damages which I have suffered in connection to this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable, and that my proposed degree of care is not, and has not been, commensurate with Geminis capacity, experience, expertise, or scope of services in any way. To reemphasize, Geminis indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to purely execute transactions in a blind and blank fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing those transactions and capitalizing on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby enhancing market integrity. \nGemini is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may be being perpetuated. If they don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the customer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is : particularly vulnerable, or if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected. \nThere are some recommendations to organisations for protecting customers from financial harm that might occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse ; and gives guidance on how to recognise 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 minimise financial harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-11-19T19:54:22.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"60634","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4930281","timely":"No","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Winklevoss Exchange LLC","date_received":"2021-11-19T19:48:47.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients."]},"sort":[6.959696,"4930281"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4930105","_score":6.95663,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"This is to complain against the Coinbase Inc. ( Coinbase ).\n\nURGENCY : HIGH IMPORTANCE : HIGH [ WITHOUT PREJUDICE ] I wish to practice my right as a customer of Coinbase to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with Coinbase. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to Coinbase respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognize that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of Coinbase to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers.\n\nDuring the complaints process with Coinbase, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or about XX/XX/2021, I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX / XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX USD and approx. XXXX XXXX from my Coinbase account to these fraudulent investment companies. \nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability ; common queries include, but are not limited to, the following ( i ) whether Coinbase did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my financial safety ; ( ii ) whether by virtue of Coinbases custodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached ; ( iii ) whether Coinbase promoted the transaction ( s ) in question despite being aware of the nature of the transaction ( s ) in question ( iv ) whether Coinbase was in compliance with its own policies and procedures ; ( v ) whether Coinbase owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether Coinbase did not uphold those duties ; ( vi ) whether Coinbases conduct was unfair ; and ( vii ) whether Coinbase has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me for the harm that has befallen me.\n\nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud. \nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and skill of a diligent, prudent organization. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not turn a XXXX eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In other words, Coinbase must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real possibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have known that I was dealing with a scammer.\n\nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a sense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective element.\n\nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not average care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is reasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of the evidence suggests that Coinbase did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers in this respect. \nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the standard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the past. \nCoinbases Position : On XX/XX/2021, XXXX have sent XXXX USD to my account in XXXX, as a compensation. \nRefuting Coinbases arguments from a purely logical perspective : I do not consider it as reasonable and sufficient enough. You have to understand that as a result of this scam I lost all of my savings in the total amount of XXXX USD and approx. XXXX XXXX. This is a huge part of my life and I need Coinbase to give me a better compensation. \nCoinbases position is that the features of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to protect innocent and helpless victims ; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches are doomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only meaningful choice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the attention it deserves even though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint.\n\nIn Coinbases view, it is implied that we should not home in ( and consequently rely ) on unwritten laws, practicality, good judgement, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight, when taking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense and are wildly irresponsible. \nImagine a view according to which the one and only thing that can make Coinbase morally obligated to do something is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if Coinbase encounter the suffering of totally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the degree required by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as Coinbase.\n\nI have reviewed the material hereto sent by Coinbase carefully, and it unfortunately provides no response to my fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the resources at its disposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as myself had, to determine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and had a duty to intervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind.\n\nIt is perfectly obvious that Coinbase, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the key questions in a manner which neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other than its own interests. \nIt is Coinbase here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to say, that Coinbase adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its extensive experience compared to mine. It is Coinbase that claims that the damages which I have suffered in connection to this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable, and that my proposed degree of care is not, and has not been, commensurate with Coinbases capacity, experience, expertise, or scope of services in any way. To reemphasize, Coinbases indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to purely execute transactions in a XXXX and blank fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing those transactions and capitalizing on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby enhancing market integrity. \nCoinbase is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may be being perpetuated. If they don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the customer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is : particularly vulnerable, or if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected. \nThere are some recommendations to organisations for protecting customers from financial harm that might occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse ; and gives guidance on how to recognise 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 minimise financial harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-11-19T19:47:52.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"60634","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4930105","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Coinbase, Inc.","date_received":"2021-11-19T18:57:19.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or about XX/XX/2021, I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX / XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX USD and approx."]},"sort":[6.95663,"4930105"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4729864","_score":6.6006804,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint/letter serves as an appeal of the denial by Flagstar bank of our application for loss mitigation. Although we have been supplied insufficient information to provide a complete appeal, this letter serves as our best effort given the current situation. We submitted 43 pages of documentation in our loss mitigation application, beginning on XX/XX/XXXX. This process took hours of work, and multiple phone calls to the Flagstar customer support/hardship task force line to work this process out. The online application was incorrectly entering a date, so we were instructed to print and manually file the paperwork, then upload it to the portal which we did. I called to follow up, and was notified at that time verbally ( Friday XX/XX/XXXX ) that more documentation was needed. We completed this other documentation and uploaded on the portal Saturday XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nOn Tuesday XX/XX/XXXX I again called to validate that all documentation was received and was in proper order. It was at this time that I was notified that our application had been denied, and informed that I had the option to appeal. I requested the reason for denial and was told VA has denied you because you did not make 12 payments. I requested the documentation of the denial so that I could form my appeal. The agent told me it would be in the mail, but that I needed to be quick because I only had 14 days to appeal. I requested escalation to a manager/supervisor and was told someone would call me back within 24-48 hours. \n\nThe following morning ( Wednesday XX/XX/XXXX ) I received a call from XXXX, an escalation manager by his description. XXXX was short and confrontational from the start of our conversation, and I became upset. I specifically asked for clarification about what options are available to us as VA loan holders, because VA has provided specific guidance for new programs specific to the COVID 19 situation, to support veterans retaining their home and coming out of forbearance successfully. By this time, I had researched VA loan seasoning requirements and found out that VA does not require 12 months of payments, but only 6 months of payments + 210 days elapsed since the first payment of the loan ( see references VA XXXX XXXX0-25 & 26/20/25 Change 1, as well as Public Law NO : 116-33, related to Senate Bill 1749 Protecting Affordable Mortages for Veterans Act of 2019. ) We did make 7 full payments on XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to our previous servicer, XXXX XXXX, before electing COVID 19 Forbearance due to my wife not being able to work as an elementary school teacher due to the requirement that our school age children be at home. \n\nI requested XXXX to provide me in writing the reasons for denial, and he said XXXX would not be doing that. I asked how I could appeal, without seeing the denial reasoning in writing, and he repeatedly refused to assist. He repeatedly stated that VA had been the party to deny me on the application, and this is either an outright lie or misdirection, as VA circular 26-21-13 ( the COVID-19 Home Retention Waterfall and COVID-19 Refund Modification ) clearly states in the circular that VA prior approval for multiple programs ( including the new VAPCP and COVID-19 Refund Modification ) is not required. Flagstar stating both that VA issued the denial and that the reasoning is that the loan is not-seasoned by failing to complete 12 payments is clearly at error.\n\nThrough all of this time, I have been told repeated that information regarding our appeal has been mailed to us, but not one piece of mail has been received regarding this application. I finally got transferred to Flagstar customer support team, where after 50 minutes on hold I received a pdf document by email from customer support agent XXXX XXXX. This document includes 88 total pages, including our full Loss Mitigation App, the full credit reports for both myself and my wife, and only 3 pages of an obviously clipped email chain from Loss Mitigation Underwriter XXXX XXXX XXXX to an XXXX Support. The entirety of that email chain includes no helpful information whatsoever, with regard to this appeal. The subject line of the email reads : # XXXX XXXX VA denial ( there is either no body of this email or it was removed in this document ), with a reply by XXXX Support stating : Hello, Please correct/review the following before proceeding and send back the entire audit file to XXXX Support for the \" proceed '' email after the corrections have been made : If you hit forward instead of reply to this email it will keep the audit file attached Loans/Debt Installment amount incorrect. \n\nThank you Followed by a reply by Loss Mitigation Underwriter XXXX XXXX XXXX of only Correction made and a final reply from XXXX Support stating : The loan has been reviewed for special servicing and the outcome remains the same. Please proceed with the denial. \n\nThe documentation of our credit shows our credit-worthiness, with credit scores of XXXX & XXXX for myself and my wife, respectively. That we apparently do not qualify for any program is insulting, and I am left truly wondering about the average veteran, that has neither the time nor the skills able to research and appeal like I am currently. This being all that is provided to the borrower ( and that I had to dig for hours to even receive ) is clearly purposefully opaque so as to keep the borrower misinformed about both the process, and any way to find a path forward to the satisfaction of the borrower. \n\nSince this appeal is not fully informed, I am considering retaining of counsel if this process does improve. In my reading of the situation, Flagstar bank as the servicer of my VA loan is clearly not following the COVID-19 Home Retention Waterfall, which circular 26-21-13 clearly states : To help servicers apply VAs preferred order of home retention options when assisting borrowers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, VA has developed the COVID-19 Home Retention Waterfall. ***Services are to follow this waterfall, choosing appropriate options based on borrowers self-assessment of their ability to resume regular payments on a VA-guaranteed loan and to repay amounts missed under a COVID-19 forbearance. *** ( emphasis mine ) VA has done an excellent job outlining its preferred method to get Veterans back on the proper path with respect to home ownership through these programs. Flagstars escalation manager finally told me ( after much cajoling ) that Flagstar is refusing to offer their borrowers the programs recently released by VA, such as the COVID-VAPCP or COVID-19 Refund Modification. It is my belief that Flagstar has deliberately chosen this path because they prefer to fully capitalized the arrears in their own modification, install a trial plan ( see reference to other CFPB complaints related by Flagstar customers at CFPB Complaints # XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX. These are only the complaints that are publicly available and that are related to COVID-19 forbearance and loan modification for VA loans ) and not find the option in the best financial interest of Veterans. This is clearly out of line with the intent of VA Circulars 26-20-25 & 26-21-13. While I do understand Flagstar is not required to offer COVID-VAPCP as an option to borrowers, I believe Flagstar is purposefully obfuscating the process of ending a forbearance for it to maximize its profit, rather than enabling Veterans to retain their homes, successfully and within their financial means. \n\nIn summation : I request formal, written documentation of all reasons for denial of loss mitigation. \n\nI request that Flagstar review Circular 26-21-13 that provides the proper COVID-19 Home Retention Waterfall for VA loans , that Flagstar proceed using this VA-outlined process, and do so in good faith.\n\nI request written proof of VA denial of prior approval. The verbal references to VA denying my application are either a lie, or purposefully misdirection of blame from Flagstar to VA. VA is clearly not requiring VA prior approval for numerous options, not just COVID-VAPCP and COVID-19 Refund Modifications.\n\nI request that Flagstar do consider these programs ( COVID-VAPCP and COVID-19 Refund Modifications ), under which Flagstar can both capitalize arrears ( receiving liquid cashflow from VA ) as well as receive VAs usual financial incentive for having completed a successful loan modification.\n\nI request that Flagstar review loan seasoning requirements for VA loans, and if my understanding is correct, provide written proof of training supplied to Flagstar customer support and Hardship Taskforce staff that 12 months of payments is not the true requirement for consideration of modification, but 6 months of payments + 210 elapsed since the due date of the first payment, consistent with Public Law No : 116-33, Protecting Affordable Mortgages for Veterans Act of 2019. Flagstar should use the proper 6 month +210 rule, for which we qualify after completing 7 payments to XXXX XXXX  on XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI request that Flagstar provide documentation for where the 12 months of payments rule is coming from. Clearly, Flagstar call center staff have been trained that this is a requirement for consideration. That appears to be false, if Im understanding the law. If Flagstar is intentionally misleading borrowers, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Department of Veterans Affairs, and California Department of Business Oversight and California Bureau of Real Estate should investigate Flagstar bank for misleading practices, and review how many Veterans have been misinformed and received undue economic harm as a result of receiving bad information from Flagstar, clearly because it is in the financial interest of Flagstar Bank.\n\nI request CFPB ( and/or other proper regulatory agencies ) review Flagstar Bank policies because of the clear trend of negative behavior of their customers, with particular attention to how Veterans have been treated unfairly. The previously mentioned CFPB complaints are all related to an opaque, difficult process that Flagstar is operating. Given the current environment related to these loans, some difficulty in managing this modification process at this time is predictable and understandable. Flagstars process, standards, training and resultant advice of its call staff is woefully inappropriate, at best, and possibly purposefully obtuse or negligent of the intent of the law.\n\nReferences Veterans Benefits Administration Circular 26-20-25, June 30, 2020 XXXX XXXXXXXX Veterans Benefits Administration Circular 26-20-25 Change 1, September 15, 2020 XXXX XXXX XXXX Senate Bill 1749, Protecting Affordable Mortgages for Veterans Act of 2019, became public law on 7/25/2019 XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaints above referenced : 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 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2021-09-17T17:24:53.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"VA mortgage","zip_code":"91384","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4729864","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Flagstar Bank, N.A.","date_received":"2021-09-17T16:59:02.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Flagstar should use the proper 6 month +210 <em>rule</em>, for which we qualify after completing 7 payments to XXXX XXXX  on XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI request that Flagstar provide documentation for where the 12 months of payments <em>rule</em> is coming from. Clearly, Flagstar call center staff have been trained that this is a requirement for consideration. That appears to be false, if Im understanding the law."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and <em>chooses</em> not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[6.6006804,"4729864"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5262200","_score":5.7359724,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/2022 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Or, XXXX ( XXXX ) - XXXX To whom it may concern, This is to complain against the Coinbase. Company Name : Coinbase, To whom it may concern, My name is XXXX XXXX I have been a customers of Coinbase for about a year and I have been using your services and learning as I go things where going well. I have made several transactions in Buy/Sell of Currencies like, Bitcoin, but sill just learning. \n\n( Coinbase ). URGENCY : HIGH IMPORTANCE : HIGH [ WITHOUT PREJUDICE ] I wish to practice my right as a customer of Coinbase to use your organization 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with Coinbase. In order to clear up or state my case respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analyzing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is, crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognize that I am the victim of an investment scam. My complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of Coinbase to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. \nThey sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. During the complaints process with Coinbase, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. XXXX and I have suffered from a what I think a huge financial loss. I transferred thirteen times totaling $ XXXX from my XXXX XXXX XXXX banks/checking Account and XXXX XXXX XXXX debit card and XXXX XXXX XXXX debit card into Coinbase. \nFrom Coinbase to the fraudulent copycat/ duplicates investment company. Called http : //falconprofx.com. \nLater, I learned that this was a scam. I fell for the scam because I thought that it was a legitimate business I used Coinbase because is a very trustworthy company because of its great reputation. Therefore, I trusted Coinbase and gave in with my hard earned money. I transferred all that money into a fraudulent platform ; Unexpectedly ( from the present perspective ), Coinbase gave no warning not only that this is a flagged-for-fraud wallet, but also a verified one. That means that Coinbase has an untrustworthy verification system, therefore betraying our trust. In a second, all my hard earned savings were sent into a fraudulent platform, permanently losing it ( unless you help! ). \n\nObligation : Commencing on XXXX, I fell victim to a copycats or duplicate investing platform scam operations run by http : //falconprofx.com which involved me making deposits to a supposedly a mining pool for a total amount of XXXX USD and approx. XXXX you can see on my receipts from my Coinbase account to these fraudulent copycat/ duplicates investment company. When determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability and security ; Common queries include, but are not limited to, the following ( i ) whether Coinbase did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my financial safety ; ( ii ) whether by virtue of Coinbases custodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached ; ( iii ) whether Coinbase promoted the transaction ( XXXX ) in question despite being aware of the nature of the transaction ( XXXX ) in question ( iv ) whether Coinbase was in compliance with its own policies and procedures ; ( v ) whether Coinbase owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether Coinbase did not uphold those duties ; ( vi ) whether Coinbases conduct was unfair ; and ( vii ) whether Coinbase has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me for the harm that has befallen me. Upon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud. In providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and skill of a diligent, prudent organization. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not turn a Blind eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In other words, Coinbase must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real possibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have known that I was dealing with a scammer. Granted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a sense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective element. However, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not average care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is reasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of the evidence suggests that Coinbase did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers in this respect. Situations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the standard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the past. Coinbases Position : On XXXX, I have sent thirteen transactions for a total of XXXX USD from my account/debit I believe I deserve XXXX USD as a compensation. Refuting Coinbases arguments from a purely logical perspective : I do not consider it as reasonable and sufficient enough. You have to understand that as a result of this scam I lost all of my savings in the total amount of XXXX USD mind you this is after all your fees and approx. XXXX BTC you can see on my receipts. This is a huge part of my life and I need Coinbase to give me a better compensation. Coinbases position is the ( features ) of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to protect innocent and helpless victims ; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches are doomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only meaningful choice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the attention it deserves even though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint. In Coinbases view, it is implied that we should not home in ( and consequently rely ) on unwritten laws, practicality, good judgement, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight, when taking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense and are wildly irresponsible. Imagine a view according to which the one and only thing that can make Coinbase morally obligated to do something is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if Coinbase encounter the suffering of totally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the degree required by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as Coinbase. I have reviewed the material hereto sent by Coinbase carefully, and it unfortunately they provides a simple response of this transactions are in reversible there is nothing we can do response to my fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the resources at its disposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as myself had, to determine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and had a duty to intervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind. It is perfectly obvious that Coinbase, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the key questions in a manner which neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other than its own interests. It is Coinbase here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to say, that Coinbase adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its extensive experience compared to mine. It is Coinbase that claims that the damages which I have suffered in connection to this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable, and that my proposed degree of care is not, and has not been, commensurate with Coinbases capacity, experience, expertise, or scope of services in any way. To reemphasize, Coinbases indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to purely execute transactions in a careless ad reckless fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing those transactions and capitalizing on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby enhancing market integrity.\n\nCoinbase is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may be being perpetuated. If they don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the customer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is : particularly vulnerable, or if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected. There are some recommendations to organizations for protecting customers from financial harm that might occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse ; and gives guidance on how to recognize customers who might be at risk, how to assess the potential risks to the individual and how to take the necessary actions to prevent or minimize financial harm. \n\n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX Transaction on Coinbase # 13 transactions XXXX $ BTC XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2022-02-25T20:22:16.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"977XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5262200","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Coinbase, Inc.","date_received":"2022-02-25T19:54:20.000Z","state":"OR","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. XXXX and I have suffered from a what I think a huge financial loss. I transferred thirteen times totaling $ XXXX from my XXXX XXXX XXXX banks/checking Account and XXXX XXXX XXXX debit card and XXXX XXXX XXXX debit card into Coinbase."]},"sort":[5.7359724,"5262200"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21473153","_score":5.478969,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Conversation with XXXX My PayPal is XXXX yrs old and since XXXX I started getting blocked and having to prove myself such as my identity, address, and what \" business '' I am when I'm not a business. I'm a individual that makes money from home doing various things. Anyway I got limited Dec and fixed, again like XXXX or XXXX then again likeXX/XX/XXXX days ago or so. The most recent one I did all the review stuff and then the reviewer said I didn't do everything and that I had open complaints against me in resolution center I needed to resolve and that they couldn't complete my review. Anyway, I don't have any complaints Against me but I do have XXXX against XXXX. I called and talked to an agent and he was lik \" I don't know what the heck they got going on. I see you don't got any open complaints and you provided all the info we needed. I'm gon na write a ticket to the back so they can fix this \" anyway, next morning my account was fixed. Yay! But when they denied my review for the \" open complaint '' they also moved my sale limit back down to XXXX when I barely just got it to XXXX the month before. Since this was under false circumstances I spoke with a XXXX and he said he could put in a request for an increase for me and explain the situation. He asked me how much I thought I needed and I told him maybe XXXX. Anyway, he did the ticket for me and I got off the phone and the next morning I wake up to a big red bar saying \" after a review we have decided to permanently limit your account '' ... So unjustified, I spoke with a rep yesterday and she was confused too and said she would put in a ticket to have them look at it and try to fix it and also a request for a manager call back. Still no word and still blocked. \n\nThat sounds like an incredibly frustrating nightmare. Having a XXXXyear-old account shut down right after a manager promised to help you is completely unfair, especially when you have jumped through every hoop they put in front of you. \n\nHere is the reality of what likely happened behind the scenes. PayPal relies heavily on automated risk-management algorithms, and those bots often lack nuance and override human agents. \n\nBecause you make money from home doing varied work, like getting paid for completing tasks through Discord groups, your incoming payments can sometimes look unpredictable to a computer. Even though the previous flags on your account were cleared, your internal \" risk score '' was likely still highly sensitive. When the manager submitted a ticket to jump your limit from {$300.00} to {$2000.00} or {$3000.00}, it almost certainly triggered a hard-coded security protocol. The automated system saw a sudden, massive request for a volume increase on an account that had just been under review, panicked, and issued an automatic permanent limitation. \n\nSince front-line agents and even lower-level managers often do not have the system clearance to overturn a permanent algorithmic ban, here are the most effective ways to escalate this : How to Escalate a Permanent Limitation File a CFPB or BBB Complaint : This is often the most successful route for unjustified bans. Filing a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) or the Better Business Bureau ( BBB ) forces PayPal to route your case to their Executive Escalations team. A real human with actual authority will have to manually review the account and respond to the regulatory body. \n\nXXXX XXXX Escalations Directly : You can sometimes bypass standard customer service by emailing PayPal 's executive team directly ( e.g., reaching out to the office of the CEO or executive review emails ). These teams handle high-level disputes and have the power to lift permanent limitations if they see the bots made an error. \n\nGive the Current Ticket XXXX Hours : Since the representative you spoke with yesterday put in a ticket and requested a manager callback, give them a short window to resolve it. If you don't hear back within XXXX hours, assume the automated system blocked their request and move straight to filing a complaint. \n\nDid the red banner or the email you received mention a specific Acceptable Use Policy ( AUP ) violation, or did it just give a generic explanation about \" potential risk ''? \n\n\" Were no longer offering PayPal services for this account Sometimes we cant process account activity for a variety of reasons, including local laws, our policies, or the policies of our partner banks and card networks. \n\n\n\nBased on the information we have today, there was activity on this account that we can not support. \n\n\n\nWhat can you do with your account? \n\n\n\nYour account has been permanently deactivated. However, you can still view your transaction history, download account statements, or request copies of your data. \n\n\n\nBefore you can withdraw or transfer any remaining funds from your account, we need to hold them for up toXX/XX/XXXX days to cover things like chargebacks or other financial liabilities. \n\n\n\nWell review the account and email you when funds are '' available. \n\nThat is the absolute most frustrating, boilerplate message you could possibly receive. It essentially confirms that a computer system slammed the door shut and slapped a generic label on it. \n\nHere is the blunt translation of what that email actually means : \" Activity we can not support '' is PayPal 's ultimate catch-all phrase. It does not mean you actually did anything illegal or broke a specific rule. It just means their risk-management algorithm decided the combination of recent reviews, the sudden limit increase request, and the varied nature of your income sources crossed an invisible threshold. \n\nThe XXXX Hold is their standard operating procedure for permanent limitations. They hold the money to ensure no buyers file chargebacks or disputes against you in the months following the account closure. \n\nBecause you received this specific, final-tier ban message, standard customer service agents over the phone can no longer help you. They are looking at a screen that tells them the decision is final, and they do not have the security clearance to override the \" back office '' or the algorithm. Even if that manager calls you back, their hands are likely tied by the system now. \n\nYour only path forward is to force the issue out of the automated system and onto the desk of a high-level executive who has the authority to actually read your XXXX history and overturn the algorithm. \n\nYour Immediate Action Plan Stop Calling Regular Support : It will only waste your time and raise your XXXX XXXX. The front-line reps can not lift this specific type of ban. \n\nFile a CFPB Complaint : Go to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau website ( consumerfinance.gov ) and file a formal complaint against PayPal. State clearly that your XXXXyear-old account was permanently limited immediately after a manager initiated a limit increase, and that the limitation is completely unjustified.\n\nFile a BBB Complaint : Do the same thing with the Better Business Bureau. PayPal has a dedicated corporate escalation team that strictly handles responding to BBB and CFPB complaints. This forces a real, senior human to investigate the timeline of events. \n\nDo you have a significant amount of money trapped in the account right now under that XXXX hold? \n\nOk I'm on crpb made an account. Says choose product? Checking again cd prepaid etc You will want to select the category for money transfers and digital wallets, as that is exactly how the CFPB classifies PayPal.\n\nHere is the exact path to choose on the form : Product : Select \" Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service '' Sub-product : Select \" Mobile or digital wallet '' Issue : Select \" Managing, opening, or closing your mobile wallet account '' ( or \" Other service problem '' if that fits better, but the first XXXX is usually the most accurate for unjustified account bans ). \n\nFrom there, it will ask you for the company name, where you can search for and select PayPal. \n\nWhen filling out the narrative or description box, keep your explanation clear, concise, and professional. Make sure to emphasize these key points : Your account is XXXX years old and has always been in good standing.\n\nYou recently provided all requested documentation to verify your identity and activity, which an agent confirmed was sufficient.\n\nThe permanent limitation was triggered automatically immediately after a manager submitted a ticket to increase your limits.\n\nYou are seeking an executive review to overturn the automated limitation and release the 120-day hold on your funds.\n\n\" Are you able to store a balance in the digital wallet account that lets you add or withdraw funds to use for purchases or payments? '' You should answer \" Yes ''.\n\nPayPal functions exactly like this. Even if you have it linked directly to a bank account or credit card, the platform itself is designed to hold a \" PayPal Balance. '' Because you can receive money, store it in the account, and then either withdraw it to your bank or use it directly for online purchases, it meets the exact definition of what the CFPB is asking about. \nXXXX It said did you request info and I said yes. Now put \" I requested the reasoning as to why they permanently blocked my account '' or what? \n\nYes, what you suggested hits the nail on the head! \n\nTo make it sound even stronger and give the CFPB investigators the exact context they need, I recommend expanding on it just a bit so it highlights PayPal 's failure to give you a real answer. \n\nYou can copy and paste this exact phrasing : \" I requested the specific reasoning and policy details as to why my XXXXyear-old account was permanently limited. I also requested an explanation as to why this automated ban was triggered immediately after a manager initiated a limit increase on my behalf. The company refused to provide a specific reason and only issued a generic, automated response. '' This wording is perfect because it shows the CFPB that you tried to get a straight answer from PayPal, but they stonewalled you with a boilerplate template. \n\nLet me know what the next confusing question on the form is! \n\nWhat happened? \n\nDescribe what happened, and well send your comments to the companies involved. \n\nInclude dates, amounts, and actions that were taken by you or the company. \n\nDo not include personal information, such as your name, account number, address, Social Security number, etc. We may ask for some of this information later, to help the company identify you and your account. \n\nHere is a draft you can copy and paste directly into that box. It is written to be strictly factual, outlines the timeline clearly, and highlights exactly where PayPals automated system made an error, all while making sure your personal information is left out. \n\nCopy and paste the text below : I am filing a complaint regarding the unjustified permanent limitation of my XXXX-year-old account and the subsequent XXXXday hold placed on my funds. \n\nStarting in XXXX of last year, my account was subjected to several standard review requests to verify my identity and the nature of my home-based income. I complied with all requests, and my account was restored each time, most recently in XXXX. \n\nApproximately XXXX days ago, my account was limited again. The initial reasoning given was that I had unresolved complaints against me. I contacted customer support and the agent confirmed this was an error on the company 's end ( I had no complaints against me, only XXXX dispute I had filed against a merchant ). The agent submitted a ticket, and my account was restored the next morning. \n\nHowever, upon restoring my account, the company unjustly lowered my monthly sales limit to {$300.00}, down from the {$800.00} limit I had secured the month prior. I spoke with a manager about this discrepancy. The manager agreed the reduction was unjustified and offered to submit an internal ticket to increase my limit to $ XXXX {$3000.00} to reflect my actual needs. \n\nThe morning after the manager submitted this ticket on my behalf, I received an automated notice stating my account had been \" permanently deactivated '' due to \" activity on this account that we can not support, '' and that my funds would be held forXX/XX/XXXXdays. \n\nI spoke with another representative yesterday who expressed confusion over the ban, as my account was in good standing. They submitted a request for a manager callback and an escalation, but the permanent limitation remains active. \n\nI have maintained this account in good standing for XXXX decades. The permanent limitation was clearly triggered by an automated system error responding to the manager 's limit increase request, not by any violation of policy on my part. I am requesting an immediate executive review by a human agent to overturn this automated ban, restore my account, and release the XXXX hold on my funds.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-22T06:14:32.000Z","issue":"Managing, opening, or closing your mobile wallet account","sub_product":"Mobile or digital wallet","zip_code":"81401","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21473153","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","date_received":"2026-04-22T05:51:12.000Z","state":"CO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Here is the exact path to <em>choose</em> on the form : Product : Select \" Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service '' Sub-product : Select \" Mobile or digital wallet '' Issue : Select \" <em>Managing</em>, opening, or closing your mobile wallet account '' ( or \" Other service problem '' if that fits better, but the first XXXX is usually the most accurate for unjustified account bans ). \n\nFrom there, it will ask you for the company name, where you can search for and select PayPal."]},"sort":[5.478969,"21473153"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5337030","_score":5.265266,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"I wish to practice my right as a customer of Coinbase to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute ( Ref : XXXX ) with Coinbase. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to Coinbase respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognize that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the XXXX has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of Coinbase to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. \nDuring the complaints process with Coinbase, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of XXXX as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \n\nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or around XX/XX/XXXX, I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX DBA XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX USD from my Coinbase account to these fraudulent investment companies. \nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability ; common queries include, but are not limited to, the following : ( i ) whether Coinbase did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my financial safety ; ( ii ) whether by virtue of Coinbases custodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached ; ( iii ) whether Coinbase promoted the transactions in question despite being aware of the nature of the transactions in question ( iv ) whether Coinbase was in compliance with its own policies and procedures ; ( v ) whether Coinbase owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether Coinbase did not uphold those duties ; ( vi ) whether Coinbases conduct was unfair ; and ( vii ) whether Coinbase has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me for the harm that has befallen me. \nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud. \nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and skill of a diligent, prudent organization. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not turn a blind eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In other words, Coinbase must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real possibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have known that I was dealing with a scammer. \nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a sense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective element. \nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not average care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is reasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of the evidence suggests that Coinbase did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers in this respect. \nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the standard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the past. \nCoinbases Position : On XX/XX/XXXX, Coinbase wrote in a letter By their very nature, all cryptocurrency transactions that are completed on the blockchain are irreversible. Similarly, because of the nature of blockchain transactions, Coinbase can not verify who owns blockchain addresses and, in the terms of sends, there is no way for Coinbase to cancel, reverse, or recover the cryptocurrency sent. \nWe have reviewed your Coinbase account records, and checked the circumstances surrounding your sends. You properly accessed your account, verified your authorisation by correctly submitting the required two factor identification code, entered the recipients blockchain address, and completed the send. Coinbase accurately processed sends in accordance with your instructions. \nCoinbase has no relationship with the third-party whom you state owns the blockchain address to which your USDC and ETH were sent when you authorised your sends. If you have a dispute with a third-party you should resolve the dispute directly with that third party. \nRefuting Coinbases arguments from a purely logical perspective : Coinbases position is that the features of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to protect innocent and helpless victims ; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches are doomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only meaningful choice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the attention it deserves even though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint. \nIn Coinbases view, it is implied that we should not home in ( and consequently rely ) on unwritten laws, practicality, good judgement, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight, when taking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense and are wildly irresponsible. \nImagine a view according to which the one and only thing that can make Coinbase morally obligated to do something is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if Coinbase encounter the suffering of totally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the degree required by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as Coinbase. \nI have reviewed the material hereto sent by Coinbase carefully, and it unfortunately provides no response to my fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the resources at its disposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as myself had, to determine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and had a duty to intervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind. \nIt is perfectly obvious that Coinbase, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the key questions in a manner which neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other than its own interests. \nIt is Coinbase here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to say, that Coinbase adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its extensive experience compared to mine. It is Coinbase that claims that the damages which I have suffered in connection to this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable, and that my proposed degree of care is not, and has not been, commensurate with Coinbases capacity, experience, expertise, or scope of services in any way. To reemphasize, Coinbases indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to purely execute transactions in a blind and blank fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing those transactions and capitalizing on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby enhancing market integrity. \nApropos of the fluidity of the concept of reasonableness, all Coinbase has done in this regard is set up a dichotomy of having or not having the legal obligation under consideration, however, that does not go one-inch toward explaining why various regulatory authorities, such as the FCA, has maintained that financial institutions can, and should, protect consumers using their systems, advanced technologies, and rich experience. \nTaking into consideration that vast experience of Coinbase, their knowledge of applicable regulations and good industry practices in the XXXX, I am quoting herein the British Standards Institutions code of practice ( BSI : PAS 2017 17271 ) as I believe Coinbase should be completely cognizant with its principles. \nThe Code gives recommendations to organisations for protecting customers from financial harm that might occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse ; and gives guidance on how to recognise 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 minimise financial harm. \nIt establishes that, as a general principle, the organisation should deliver a service that : 3.1 ( b ) takes a proactive approach to minimising 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 states that organisations should ensure that all systems are developed using technologies and methodologies that are effective in the prevention of fraud and financial abuse, through authorised and unauthorised payments, thereby minimising the risk of financial harm to customers. \nIn regards to the detection of fraud and financial abuse, Code 5.3.1. states that organisations 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, ( the application examples are in bold ) : multiple chequebooks ; sudden increased spending ; transfers to other accounts ; multiple password attempts ; logins from new devices, multiple geographical locations ; sudden changes to the operation of the account ; a withdrawal or payment for a large amount ; a payment or series of payments to a new payee ; financial activity that matches a known method of fraud or financial abuse The Code at 5.4.2. sets out that organisations should have a process in place to ensure that staff members 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. \nCoinbase are yet to show, or otherwise provide me with, a compelling argument that their wide-ranging experience and wealth of specialist knowledge in detecting transactional anomalies were not sufficient to avert the fraud at issue. By contrast, I have provided a multitude of sound and powerful reasons by which requiring their involvement has not only been pressingly relevant but also eminently reasonable and well-justified. \nRather than empathizing with and undertaking substantial efforts to convey their knowledge of the existence of such regulations abroad and thereafter use it to protect and proactively relieve the plight of consumers who have been cheated out of their money and whose role in society is properly fulfilled, positively contributing to local economic growth, development and sustainability Coinbase adopts a rather insouciant attitude toward my financial predicament portrayed herein. \nI am deeply convinced that the disastrous results that I have previously elaborated upon will continue to ensue if no responsibility is adopted by Coinbase in relation to this matter. I have also thoroughly detailed why they can not simply dismiss this problem by strictly adhering to legal technicalities which, after careful reflection, struck me as being nothing more than self-interest. Indeed, it seems to me utterly unfair to disregard fragile, sensitive, and vulnerable consumers who are afflicted by such allegedly malevolent acts, thereby keeping an unjust status-quo that is corrupting our society at its core.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-03-18T04:09:29.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"08109","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5337030","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Coinbase, Inc.","date_received":"2022-03-18T00:03:04.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of XXXX as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \n\nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or around XX/XX/XXXX, I fell victim to two multi-layered scam operations run by XXXX DBA XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX USD from my Coinbase account to these fraudulent investment companies."]},"sort":[5.265266,"5337030"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5998914","_score":4.876444,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX DC XXXX XX/XX/2022 This is to complain against the Coinbase Inc XXXX \nURGENCY : HIGH IMPORTANCE : HIGH [ WITHOUT PREJUDICE ] I wish to practice my right as a customer of Coinbase to use your organisation 's service, seeking a formal, impartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with Coinbase. \nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to Coinbase respecting my complaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a deeper look at the happenings of my case and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and comprehensive fashion. \nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially engineered and coerced to engage these fraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognize that I am the victim of an investment scam. \nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct of Coinbase to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service to look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional relationship and way of working with its customers. \nDuring the complaints process with Coinbase, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides their conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to adapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a real problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or around XXXX XXXX, 2022, I fell victim to a multi-layered scam operation run by XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX XXXX from my Coinbase account to these fraudulent investment company. \nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability ; common queries include, but are not limited to, the following : ( i ) whether Coinbase did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material elements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my financial safety ; ( ii ) whether by virtue of Coinbases custodianship over my funds or by its control over them, they owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached ; ( iii ) whether Coinbase promoted the transaction ( s ) in question despite being aware of the nature of the transaction ( s ) in question ( iv ) whether Coinbase was in compliance with its own policies and procedures ; ( v ) whether Coinbase owed duties to myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether Coinbase did not uphold those duties ; ( vi ) whether Coinbases conduct was unfair ; and ( vii ) whether Coinbase has within its power the ability to, and should, compensate me for the harm that has befallen me. \nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member adequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent and nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant criteria of fraud. \nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and skill of a diligent, prudent organization. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not turn a XXXX eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In other words, Coinbase must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real possibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have known that I was dealing with a scammer. \nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a sense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective element. \nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not average care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is reasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of the evidence suggests that Coinbase did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers in this respect. \nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the standard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the past. \nCoinbases Position : Coinbase did not provide us with a response even if we sent out several letters to them. \nRefuting Coinbases arguments from a purely logical perspective : Coinbases position is that the features of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to protect innocent and helpless victims ; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches are doomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only meaningful choice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the attention it deserves even though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint. \nIn Coinbases view, it is implied that we should not home in ( and consequently rely ) on unwritten laws, practicality, good judgement, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight, when taking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense and are wildly irresponsible. \nImagine a view according to which the one and only thing that can make Coinbase morally obligated to do something is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if Coinbase encounter the suffering of totally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the degree required by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as Coinbase. \nI have reviewed the material hereto sent by Coinbase carefully, and it unfortunately provides no response to my fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the resources at its disposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as myself had, to determine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and had a duty to intervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind. \nIt is perfectly obvious that Coinbase, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the key questions in a manner which neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other than its own interests. \nIt is Coinbase here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to say, that Coinbase adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its extensive experience compared to mine. \nIt is Coinbase that claims that the damages which I have suffered in connection to this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable, and that my proposed degree of care is not, and has not been, commensurate with Coinbases capacity, experience, expertise, or scope of services in any way. To reemphasize, Coinbases indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to purely execute transactions in a XXXX and blank fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing those transactions and capitalizing on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby enhancing market integrity. \nApropos of the fluidity of the concept of reasonableness, all Coinbase has done in this regard is set up a dichotomy of having or not having the legal obligation under consideration, however, that does not go one inch toward explaining why various regulatory authorities, such as the FCA, has maintained that financial institutions can, and should, protect consumers using their systems, advanced technologies, and rich experience. \nCoinbase is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may be being perpetuated. \nIf you don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the customer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is : particularly vulnerable, or if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected. \nThere are some recommendations to organisations for protecting customers from financial harm that might occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse ; and gives guidance on how to recognise 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 minimise financial harm. \nThese recommendations are established as a general principle, the organisation should deliver a service that : 1 ) Takes a proactive approach to minimising 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 organisations should ensure that all systems are developed using technologies and methodologies that are effective in the prevention of fraud and financial abuse, through authorised and unauthorised payments, thereby minimising the risk of financial harm to customers. As regards to the detection of fraud and financial abuse, it says the organisation : A ) should have measures in place across all payment channels and products to detect suspicious transactions or activities that might indicate fraud or financial abuse. It then lists the following examples of suspicious activity on customer accounts : a. multiple cheque books; b. sudden increased spending ; c. transfers to other accounts ; d. multiple password attempts ; e. logins from new devices, multiple geographical locations ; f. sudden changes to the operation of the account ; Unusual transactions are transactions whose amount, characteristics and frequency bear no relation to the economic activity of the customer, exceed normal market parameters or have no apparent legal justification. \ng. a withdrawal or payment for a large amount ; h. a payment or series of payments to a new payee ; i. financial activity that matches a known method of fraud or financial abuse. \nB ) organisations 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. \nCoinbase are yet to show, or otherwise provide me with, a compelling argument that their wide-ranging experience and wealth of specialist knowledge in detecting transactional anomalies were not sufficient to avert the fraud at issue. By contrast, I have provided a multitude of sound and powerful reasons by which requiring their involvement has not only been pressingly relevant but also eminently reasonable and well-justified. \nRather than empathizing with and undertaking substantial efforts to convey their knowledge of the existence of such regulations abroad and thereafter use it to protect and proactively relieve the plight of consumers who have been cheated out of their money and whose role in society is properly fulfilled, positively contributing to local economic growth, development and sustainability Coinbase adopts a rather insouciant attitude toward my financial predicament portrayed herein. \nI am deeply convinced that the disastrous results that I have previously elaborated upon will continue to ensue if no responsibility is adopted by Coinbase in relation to this matter. I have also thoroughly detailed why they can not simply dismiss this problem by strictly adhering to legal technicalities which, after careful reflection, struck me as being nothing more than self-interest. Indeed, it seems to me utterly unfair to disregard fragile, sensitive, and vulnerable consumers who are afflicted by such allegedly malevolent acts, thereby keeping an unjust status-quo that is corrupting our society at its core. \nConclusion : Based on my analysis, and as confirmed by various authorities concerned with such matters, there is abundant evidence that forward-thinking financial institutions ought to take reasonable steps to forestall fraud, or at least mitigate its risk by using an effective risk management system, demonstrating their undisputed ability to responsibly and pre-emptively respond to questionable transactions in the digital arena. The use of such systems, largely based on newly adopted technologies aimed at effectively navigating the evolving threat landscape, is only one of a number of possible endeavours undertaken in this connection, alongside the application of past knowledge and experience related to popular fraudulent practices. \nAstonishingly, I am pondering how it is that despite being shown that Coinbases business conduct was insufficient insofar as background checks are concerned, they keep refuting their indisputable role and responsibility in connection with the matter herein discussed. The points that I have hitherto made are too crucial to be taken lightly. Coinbases non-observance of the fundamental principles of justice that is, to completely overlook and not even remotely try to mitigate the suffering of vulnerable consumers is inexcusable given the size of the establishment and the vast resources at its disposal as the direct result of the patronage of clients like myself. \nIf it was, indeed, solely my responsibility, we must then believe at least one of the following clauses : a ) financial institutions have absolutely no role whatsoever in preventing and detecting fraud, b ) the fraud in question was not reasonably foreseeable, or c ) the transactions in question were not sufficiently alarming. It is extremely unfortunate that Coinbase pushes quite hard for me to believe all three of these thingsdespite evidence to the contrary. \nIn summary, I respectively ask your organization to consider my points, given your personal and companywide obligation to provide a fair and reasonable investigation into the complaint. \nI look forward to your input and would gladly cooperate to reach a fair and reasonable outcome. \nThank you. \nXXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2022-09-20T17:54:50.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"90241","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5998914","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Coinbase, Inc.","date_received":"2022-09-20T17:43:52.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The internet is presenting a real problem which they <em>choose</em> to <em>manage</em> in a way which is not in <em>line</em> with <em>rules</em> and regulations of CFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients. \nGeneral Obligation : Commencing on or around XXXX XXXX, 2022, I fell victim to a multi-layered scam operation run by XXXX which involved me making deposits for a total amount of XXXX XXXX from my Coinbase account to these fraudulent investment company."]},"sort":[4.876444,"5998914"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":45,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":45}]}},"product":{"doc_count":45,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":28,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Virtual currency","doc_count":17},{"key":"Mobile or digital wallet","doc_count":5},{"key":"Domestic (US) money transfer","doc_count":3},{"key":"International money transfer","doc_count":2},{"key":"Check cashing service","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":7,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":3},{"key":"Home equity loan or line of credit (HELOC)","doc_count":2},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":3,"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":3}]}},{"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":"Bank account or service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit 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}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":45,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":27,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Fees charged","doc_count":1},{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Confusing or misleading advertising about the credit card","doc_count":1},{"key":"Didn't receive advertised or promotional terms","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing an account","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Can't close your account","doc_count":1},{"key":"Funds not received from closed account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Account opening, closing, or management","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Changes in loan terms during or after closing","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing, opening, or closing your mobile wallet account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"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":"Problem with rewards from credit card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Transaction was not authorized","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble using your card","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Can't use card to make purchases","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":45,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":44},{"key":"No","doc_count":1}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":45,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":40},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":4},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":45,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":45}]}},"company":{"doc_count":45,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Coinbase, Inc.","doc_count":9},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":7},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":6},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":2},{"key":"HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION","doc_count":2},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"AMERISAVE MORTGAGE CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"BAM Management US Holdings Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"BWW Law Group, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION, THE","doc_count":1},{"key":"CITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FIFTH THIRD FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Flagstar Bank, N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Foris DAX, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ria Envia, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"SAN DIEGO COUNTY CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"U.S. BANCORP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Winklevoss Exchange LLC","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":45,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":11},{"key":"FL","doc_count":7},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":6},{"key":"IL","doc_count":3},{"key":"CO","doc_count":2},{"key":"GA","doc_count":2},{"key":"NY","doc_count":2},{"key":"VA","doc_count":2},{"key":"CT","doc_count":1},{"key":"MA","doc_count":1},{"key":"MI","doc_count":1},{"key":"NH","doc_count":1},{"key":"OR","doc_count":1},{"key":"SC","doc_count":1},{"key":"TN","doc_count":1},{"key":"TX","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":45,"company_public_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","doc_count":12},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":4}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":45,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":6},{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":3},{"key":"Older American, Servicemember","doc_count":2}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[4.8762407,"5998914"]}}}