2026 data Public-data reference. official source

317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action

1 consumer complaints recorded in the CFPB Consumer Complaint Database, with breakdowns by product, state, and complaint year.

1 consumer complaints filed with the CFPB

This profile shows 317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action's complaint history from CFPB public records. 1 consumers have filed complaints since The . The company has a 0% timely response rate and has provided relief in 0% of cases.

1
Total Complaints
0%
Timely Response
0%
Disputed
0%
Relief Provided
1
States Active
The
Since

Total complaints

1

Filed since The

Timely response

0%

CFPB-tracked response window

Relief rate

0%

Closed with monetary or non-monetary relief

Timely response rate 0.0%
Federal benchmark

CFPB benchmark: response within 15 calendar days of filing.

Relief rate 0.0%
Industry median

Share closed with monetary or non-monetary relief.

317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action complaint mix by product

Total complaints: 1

317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action complaint mix by product Horizontal strip chart. Width of each segment is proportional to that category's share of the 1 total complaints. Trend arrow shows rolling 12-month direction. Inline badge shows resolution rate (% closed with relief). has been: 1 complaints (100.0%), resolution 0.0% has been 100.0%
  • has been 1 100.0% 0% relief

How 317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action's 1 complaints split across CFPB product categories. Resolution rate badge = % closed with monetary or non-monetary relief.

Complaints by Product

Product Complaints
has been provided to supply evidence to the claim : The Plaintiff was being defrauded and sent contradicting documents that confirmed a conspiracy to commit fraud. The transactions which clouded the Plaintiffs Title to her property were deliberate and made by XXXX XXXX. The documents that XXXX XXXX presented to HUD/FHA were Nullified. No valid Deed or Deed of Trust was established between XXXX XXXX and the Plaintiff. It is well established that courts may hear a common law action to quiet title in order to prove title 1

Top States

State Complaints
the plaintiff asks the court to declare that he or she has good title to the property in question and compels any adverse claimant to prove a competing ownership claim or forever be barred from asserting it. 65 Am. Jur. 2d Quieting Title 1. In these actions 1

Top Issues

Issue Complaints
or to remove obstacles which hinder its enjoyment. Jessup v. Progressive Funding 1

Source: CFPB Consumer Complaint Database CFPB Consumer Complaint Database

What the CFPB Record Shows About 317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action

317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action has accumulated 1 consumer complaint in the CFPB public database, with filings active across 1 U.S. state. Of those submissions, 1 includes a consumer narrative — the verbatim description of the reported problem that the CFPB collects alongside each filing. The earliest complaint on file dates back to The , and the most recent logged activity is The docume, giving this record a multi-year window of observable consumer sentiment.

Looking at response behavior, 317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action reports a 0% timely-response rate and has closed 0% of cases with a written explanation to the consumer. 0% of complaints were closed with monetary or non-monetary relief — an outcome signal that tracks how often consumers walked away with some form of remediation. A further 0% of responses were formally disputed by the consumer after the company replied, a useful marker of resolution quality independent of sheer volume. The most-reported product category for this record is "has been provided to supply evidence to the claim : The Plaintiff was being defrauded and sent contradicting documents that confirmed a conspiracy to commit fraud. The transactions which clouded the Plaintiffs Title to her property were deliberate and made by XXXX XXXX. The documents that XXXX XXXX presented to HUD/FHA were Nullified. No valid Deed or Deed of Trust was established between XXXX XXXX and the Plaintiff. It is well established that courts may hear a common law action to quiet title in order to prove title", and the single most common underlying issue is "or to remove obstacles which hinder its enjoyment. Jessup v. Progressive Funding".

Complaint volume is heavily influenced by company size, customer base, and market footprint — larger financial institutions routinely carry more filings purely because they serve more consumers. A complaint is a consumer-reported allegation, not proven wrongdoing, and a timely or relief-flagged closure does not by itself confirm fault. Use this page as one input among many when evaluating 317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action: cross-check against the CFPB Consumer Complaint Database directly, review your own contract terms, and consult a licensed professional for financial, legal, or regulatory advice. This page is informational only.

Disclaimer: This data is from CFPB public records. PlainComplaint does not provide financial advice. A complaint does not indicate that a company has violated any law or regulation. Complaint volumes are influenced by company size, customer base, and market presence. Use this data as one of many inputs when evaluating a company.

Frequently Asked Questions

How many CFPB complaints does 317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action have?

317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action has received 1 consumer complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Does 317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action respond to complaints on time?

317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action has a 0% timely response rate to CFPB complaints.

What is the most common complaint about 317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action?

The most common issue reported against 317 ( D.C.1985 ) ). In a quiet title action is "or to remove obstacles which hinder its enjoyment. Jessup v. Progressive Funding" in the "has been provided to supply evidence to the claim : The Plaintiff was being defrauded and sent contradicting documents that confirmed a conspiracy to commit fraud. The transactions which clouded the Plaintiffs Title to her property were deliberate and made by XXXX XXXX. The documents that XXXX XXXX presented to HUD/FHA were Nullified. No valid Deed or Deed of Trust was established between XXXX XXXX and the Plaintiff. It is well established that courts may hear a common law action to quiet title in order to prove title" product category.

Related