2026 data Public-data reference. official source

her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator

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 her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator's complaint history from CFPB public records. 1 consumers have filed complaints since Afte. 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
Afte
Since

Total complaints

1

Filed since Afte

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.

her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator complaint mix by product

Total complaints: 1

her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator 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). we submitted: 1 complaints (100.0%), resolution 0.0% we submitted 100.0%
  • we submitted 1 100.0% 0% relief

How her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator's 1 complaints split across CFPB product categories. Resolution rate badge = % closed with monetary or non-monetary relief.

Complaints by Product

Product Complaints
we submitted the following information to Citi 's benefits department : XXXX warranty terms 1

Top States

State Complaints
which is NOT our model of refrigerator. A third call from me ( 24 minutes ) did not provide any additional information or assistance into the incorrect decision from the adjuster. In order to have the adjuster ( XXXX ) review the claim again 1

Top Issues

Issue Complaints
the XXXX service tech 's diagnosis 1

Source: CFPB Consumer Complaint Database CFPB Consumer Complaint Database

What the CFPB Record Shows About her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator

her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator 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 Afte, and the most recent logged activity is After this, giving this record a multi-year window of observable consumer sentiment.

Looking at response behavior, her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator 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 "we submitted the following information to Citi 's benefits department : XXXX warranty terms", and the single most common underlying issue is "the XXXX service tech 's diagnosis".

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 her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator: 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 her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator have?

her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator has received 1 consumer complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Does her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator respond to complaints on time?

her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator has a 0% timely response rate to CFPB complaints.

What is the most common complaint about her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator?

The most common issue reported against her second call ( 17 minute phone call ) determined that the reason for the denial was that the adjuster claimed that the refrigerator was still under the XXXX warranty. This is FALSE - the adjuster did not read the warranty document clearly and used the warranty duration for a XXXX Profile refrigerator is "the XXXX service tech 's diagnosis" in the "we submitted the following information to Citi 's benefits department : XXXX warranty terms" product category.

Related