Browse Companies

Explore all 145.5K companies with CFPB consumer complaints

Company Complaints
aged XXXX-XXXX 1
agencies 4
Agencies 3
agencies can not furnish an account without my written instructions. 15 USC 1681n 1
agencies must promptly reinvestigate disputed information and correct inaccuracies. Unauthorized hard inquiries are prohibited under FCRA XXXX ( a ) and must be removed immediately to prevent further damage to my credit score. 1
agency 5
Agency of Credit Control 71
agency records which contain individually identifiable information the disclosure of which is prohibited by this section or by rules or regulations established thereunder 1
agent 3
Agent by proxy 1
Agent ID XXXX 1
agent IDs 2
agent informed that Lakeview had closed the ticket due to not correct info but never informed me 1
agent of Beyond Finance 1
Agent stated that the actions taken by the Salesman ( XXXX XXXX was illegal and said that the Resolution Dept. Of Capital One Finance company will launch an investigation of the matter 1
agent XXXX indicated they could not review recorded calls. I was on the phone for 1 hour and 17 minutes. A review of this call for training purposes would confirm this information. 1
AGENTS 2
agents 2
agents and attorney engaged in contract and securities fraud. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 1
agents and attorney engaged in contract and securities fraud. 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 used misleading and deceptive language and XXXX XXXX elicit a signature for an alleged purchase money loan 1
agents scheduling payments to be put in late - and despite numerous complaints being filed on my behalf- it just continues to accumulate fees and interest and more financial benefit to Discover. The agent said earlier today that he could see I would have been eligible for assistance but was confused as to why it was not offered to me when it could have helped me stay current. I called back later today to document with discover that I was clearly told that I would have XXXX assistance in any way until XXXX of XXXX and the agent I spoke with said shed file a complaint on my behalf. She put me on hold to ask a supervisor if there was any assistance for me at this time and came back to report what I had heard before- the only options were those that ignore my prior complaints and maximize the amount that Discover is repaid - the same as if I stopped paying in XXXX and decided today I needed to call versus the last 6 months of complaints and requests for help.,,DISCOVER BANK,TN,37912,,Consent provided,Web,2023-01-30,Closed with non-monetary relief,Yes,N/A,6505645 1
agents suggested I apply for an in-house loan modification. I was denied again due to my house being uninhabitable from the fire. Furthermore 1
aggravated identity theft 3
aggravating issue that seems to have no end.,,CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES 1
aggravation 1
aggravation and hopelessness. 1024.40 Continuity of contact - Servicers are required to maintain reasonable policies and procedures with respect to providing delinquent borrowers with access to personnel to assist them with loss mitigation options ''. Why were n't we assigned a single point of contact to assist me in saving my home? 1
aggressive and inappropriate collection actions from XXXX 1
AGN Auto Gallery Inc 1
agony 1
AGORA NOTUS, LLC 3
agree San Diego County Credit Union have a duty 1
AGREE that there is a clear error on BoA based on their own records because a credit WAS NEVER granted 1
agreed and to handle it with no problem. 1
AGREED IN GOOD FAITH AND AUTHORIZED THIS MORTGAGE SETTLEMENT {$400000.00}. 1
agreed that the actions of the merchant/vendor was/were unethical/fraudulent. However 1
agreed to credit my account with {$60.00} for the last two months ' fees 1
agreed to look over the car. He said he was about XXXX weeks behind on cars but would look at the car and get back to me. On XX/XX/XXXX I called the reinstatement department advising the car had been damaged. They lady that answered transferred me to the claims voicemail where I left a voicemail and never heard back. On XX/XX/XXXX I called global lending again and was advised to email XXXX XXXX in complaints and was provided her email address. I made contact with XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX I had received a call from mechanic 1
agreed to put the top braces back on my child 's teeth to close the gap again 2
agreed with me and had congressional staff contact me for additional information. That information was the center of an extended dialogue with the VA. All efforts at reason failed! 1
agreed with me that it did not make sense to her either. 1
agreed. Despite my compliance and good faith 2
agreeing that she would purchase the house from me. She paid me half the equity and was given a time frame to refinance the property. In doing so 1
agreeing to pay the next monthly payment after the extension period ends 1
agreeing to refund a late charge and retract the delinquent report to the credit bureaus 1
agreeing to remove this listing from my credit reports and any other entity that reported this information to. Any other action or in-action on your part and this will proceed in court until I have successfully proven to a judge that this false information must be removed from my credit file. I will also be aggressively pursuing the full judgment that I get against this company for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act 1
agreeing to the loan modification 1
agreeme 1
agreement 4
Agreement ) toBorrower ; to wit : I 1
agreement that bears the signature of the alleged debtor wherein he/she agreed to pay the original creditor 2

What this index shows

This is the master index of every company that appears in the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Consumer Complaint Database, mirrored on PlainComplaint and grouped by institution so a single company page rolls up every complaint filed against that company across every product, state, and year since 2011. The CFPB began collecting consumer complaints when it was established under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 and has published them as a public dataset to give consumers, researchers, and journalists a window into how U.S. financial-services firms respond to customer concerns.

The default view is alphabetical by company name and paginated 50 companies per page. Use the sort controls to re-order by total complaint volume (highest first), timely-response percentage (best response track record first), or most recent complaint activity (companies with the freshest reports). Each row links to a dedicated company page showing year-over-year complaint trends, the top complaint products, complaint issues, top states by volume, and a year-by-year breakdown of complaint counts and response timeliness.

How to compare companies fairly

Raw complaint volume is a function of two things: how many customers the company serves, and how it handles those customers. A nationwide bank with tens of millions of accounts can show six-figure complaint counts simply because of its scale; a smaller regional lender with a few hundred complaints may actually have a higher per-customer complaint rate. The "Timely Response %" column shows the share of complaints the company answered within the CFPB's deadline — a stronger comparable metric across firms of different sizes. Pair it with the volume column to form a fuller picture, and dig into the company page for the breakdown by product so you can see whether issues are concentrated in a single line of business (for example, credit reporting) or spread across the entire firm.

Complaint records are consumer-submitted narratives. The CFPB does not adjudicate or verify the facts in each report before publishing; companies are given the opportunity to respond, dispute, or resolve. Many complaints are resolved with monetary or non-monetary relief. The strength of the dataset is in its scale — millions of records spanning every major U.S. consumer financial category — and its neutrality: it reports what consumers said, regardless of the company's perspective. Treat individual records accordingly, and lean on aggregate patterns (top issues, year-over-year trends, state distribution) when drawing conclusions.

What the dataset covers

The CFPB Consumer Complaint Database covers complaints against banks, credit-card issuers, mortgage servicers, debt collectors, payday lenders, student-loan servicers, money-transfer companies, prepaid-card issuers, credit bureaus, auto-finance lenders, and other financial products and services regulated by the agency. Complaints are categorized by product (the broad financial-services category) and sub-product, and again by issue (the specific consumer concern, e.g. "incorrect information on your report") and sub-issue. Year-by-year coverage runs from 2011 to present, with monthly refreshes published by the CFPB.

PlainComplaint refreshes from the agency's public release on a regular cadence and re-derives all aggregate counts, rankings, and trend lines on each refresh, so the page you're reading reflects the latest snapshot of the public database. See the methodology page for the full data pipeline, dedup rules, and the refresh schedule, or browse by other dimensions: issues, products, or states.