2026 data Public-data reference. official source

there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date

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 there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date's complaint history from CFPB public records. 1 consumers have filed complaints since We h. 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
We h
Since

Total complaints

1

Filed since We h

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.

there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date complaint mix by product

Total complaints: 1

there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date 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). by the: 1 complaints (100.0%), resolution 0.0% by the 100.0%
  • by the 1 100.0% 0% relief

How there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date's 1 complaints split across CFPB product categories. Resolution rate badge = % closed with monetary or non-monetary relief.

Complaints by Product

Product Complaints
by the title company to also support the deception that occurred today. XXXX has been negligent. our original complaint concerning the XXXX representing lawyer 1

Top States

State Complaints
( copies provided ). Looking further in the near Chronolgically ordered evidence pack. There was another one 1

Top Issues

Issue Complaints
we pointed out in our conversation with XXXX and the prior filing the conflict of interest in having a lawyer for the bank also represent the builder. They approached a fix to this conflict by hiring a different lawyer and using the XXXX XXXX as a witness. This was beneficial to providing support for the scam/fraud/corruption claim. The testimony provided by the XXXX lawyer showed contradiction and deception under oaths This hearing was recorded. It was explained in detail the effort to post a notice of sale via affidavit. They XXXX XXXXXXXX explained that as well as having no recollection of a XXXX Notice being placed and the XXXX notice was the one that mattered anyways that would indicate only one notice. We had received two notices not one. One placed in XXXX 1

Source: CFPB Consumer Complaint Database CFPB Consumer Complaint Database

What the CFPB Record Shows About there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date

there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date 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 We h, and the most recent logged activity is We had our, giving this record a multi-year window of observable consumer sentiment.

Looking at response behavior, there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date reports a 0% timely-response rate and has closed 100% 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 "by the title company to also support the deception that occurred today. XXXX has been negligent. our original complaint concerning the XXXX representing lawyer", and the single most common underlying issue is "we pointed out in our conversation with XXXX and the prior filing the conflict of interest in having a lawyer for the bank also represent the builder. They approached a fix to this conflict by hiring a different lawyer and using the XXXX XXXX as a witness. This was beneficial to providing support for the scam/fraud/corruption claim. The testimony provided by the XXXX lawyer showed contradiction and deception under oaths This hearing was recorded. It was explained in detail the effort to post a notice of sale via affidavit. They XXXX XXXXXXXX explained that as well as having no recollection of a XXXX Notice being placed and the XXXX notice was the one that mattered anyways that would indicate only one notice. We had received two notices not one. One placed in XXXX".

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 there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date: 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 there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date have?

there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date has received 1 consumer complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Does there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date respond to complaints on time?

there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date has a 0% timely response rate to CFPB complaints.

What is the most common complaint about there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date?

The most common issue reported against there was one notice with the appropriate accompanied XXXX affidavit. But we had received two both dated the same date is "we pointed out in our conversation with XXXX and the prior filing the conflict of interest in having a lawyer for the bank also represent the builder. They approached a fix to this conflict by hiring a different lawyer and using the XXXX XXXX as a witness. This was beneficial to providing support for the scam/fraud/corruption claim. The testimony provided by the XXXX lawyer showed contradiction and deception under oaths This hearing was recorded. It was explained in detail the effort to post a notice of sale via affidavit. They XXXX XXXXXXXX explained that as well as having no recollection of a XXXX Notice being placed and the XXXX notice was the one that mattered anyways that would indicate only one notice. We had received two notices not one. One placed in XXXX" in the "by the title company to also support the deception that occurred today. XXXX has been negligent. our original complaint concerning the XXXX representing lawyer" product category.

Related