Date Received: 2022-02-17
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Subissue: Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone
Consumer Complaint: I am unable to submit a dispute for a hard inquiry with XXXX. A hard inquiry was performed by Navy Federal Credit Union ( the lender ) without proper disclosure. I was given guidance from the lender that they could not have the hard inquiry removed and that the best course of action would be to dispute it with the credit bureau. However, there is no process for disputing an inquiry through XXXX. This has negatively impacted me financially by reflecting incorrect information on my credit report and impacting my score.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 92026
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2022-02-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2022-02-17
Issue: Trouble using your card
Subissue: Credit card company won't increase or decrease your credit limit
Consumer Complaint: NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION has denied me an extension of credit
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: AZ
Zip: 85016
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2022-02-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2022-02-17
Issue: Improper use of your report
Subissue: Reporting company used your report improperly
Consumer Complaint: Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, This memo is being written in hopes the Hard Inquires in questioned on our credit reports will be removed as soon as possible. In XXXX of 2021, myself and my Registered Domestic Partner applied for a loan from Navy Federal Credit Union. We are both members and felt this entity would give us the best rates. We paid for a credit report and found out later ( about a month ), the credit report was done twice XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. The loan agent that we were dealing with via email never responded to our questions regarding the second hard inquiry placed on our credit report, nor were we getting any responses from the loan officer regarding the status of the loan. In late XXXX of 2021, we went to a nearby branch and complained that we had not heard from the loan officer and had concerns regarding the hard inquires placed on our credit reports. The Manager at the XXXX XXXX branch informed us that Navy Federal Credit Union no longer had Mortgage lenders inside of the branches, and she would take our complaints to the loan officer 's Supervisor, and someone would contact us as soon as possible. It was two weeks before we received a call from ( XXXX XXXX ) Supervisor ( XXXX XXXX ). XXXX XXXX apologized and stated they were super busy, and that the second inquiry was a mistake and she would have the entry masked. " The entry has not been masked ''. Although, they both started requiring more information from us, we never spoke with either one of them over the phone, all of our correspondences were via email only. The first extra entry dated XXXX XXXX remained and I started calling and emailing with no response until I contacted XXXX and started disputing the entries. There are now four extra entries dated XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX. We only authorized the XXXX XXXX inquiry. The others were done without authorization, and they never explained why they were doing these extra inquires without explanation or approval. Once, I started calling XXXX and disputing the hard inquires the Manager ( XXXX XXXX ) started emailing me and denying that the inquiries were made by her or the loan officer. When disputed through XXXX the company simply stated the inquiries are a factual record of file access and will remain on the XXXX credit file for two years from the reported date of inquiry. Please help us to resolve this matter. They were not given authorization to make more than one inquiry into our credit profiles. Thank you so much for your time and patience. XXXX & XXXX.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 91763
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2022-02-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2022-02-17
Issue: Closing on a mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Dear CFPB, The following details describe how a {$60000.00} charge was added to our refinance the day before the application expired, despite written assurances, including the Loan Estimate ( LE ), that the lender would waive this cost. We started a refinance application process with our current lender, Navy Federal Credit Union ( NFCU ), on or about XX/XX/XXXX. Our current mortgage balance was approximately {$730000.00}. And we had previously been on Covid forbearance, which deferred about {$60000.00} in additional payments. Our lender first issued a LE in approximately early XXXX of XXXX for a loan of approximately {$810000.00}, which included the principal, deferred payments, and closing costs. However, we expressed that may not be interested in the loan at those rates and closing costs if we were forced to refinance the deferred Covid payments in addition to the principal and we had planned to look elsewhere for better terms. At this point, our Loan Officer ( LO ) from NFCU stated that he would run this up the ladder to see if we could be given a better deal and stick with NFCU. After approximately another month, our LO indicated he had consulted with management and they decided that if we were to refinance with them, they would waive the {$60000.00} in deferred Covid payments. This email exchange is included here. On XX/XX/XXXX, NFCU issued us a new LE for approximately {$750000.00} ( $ XXXX principal plus closing costs ) and we agreed to proceed. That LE is provided here. Throughout the rest of XXXX and XXXX we continued to ask about the status of our loan. We had promptly submitted all requested documentation but we did not hear from MFCU for some time. In XXXX, they contacted us and told us things were delayed because they had an excess of mortgages applications to process compared to their usual level. Our application was set to expire on XX/XX/XXXX. On approximately XX/XX/XXXX, we were contacted by NFCU saying they reversed their decision about waiving the covid deferment payments that and we would have to come up with {$60000.00} by the next business day. They reissued their original loan estimate for {$810000.00}. We have been trying to work out a solution with NFCU but they appear unwilling to budge. We have explained the facts of the situation, which they do not appear to dispute. They just say they changed their mind. However we are a severe disadvantage now in shopping around because interest rates have gone up substantially since XXXX. We offered a compromise that wed refinance the whole amount if they give us a slight reduction in interest rate and waive closing costs. They followed up our offer with another email stating that we needed to come up with {$60000.00} cash, effectively declining our offer. NFCU is our current mortgage lender and knew full well our balance. There was no change in circumstance in XXXX of XXXX that would justify their adding {$60000.00} to their XXXX LE. What did change is that now we are in no position to bargain or look elsewhere. Receiving a surprise {$60000.00} charge with one business day notice is a textbook example of why consumer lending laws exist. Thank you for your help in resolving this.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: CA
Zip: 95118
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2022-02-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2022-02-17
Issue: Trouble during payment process
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: The bank is anxious to shift to electronic statement delivery. We have made it clear in our preferences that we expect paper delivery of all statements. Up until now that bank has respected this arrangement and honored the preferences we set. However this year the 1098 did not arrive. I called the bank this morning and was informed that despite our clearly established preference for no electronic delivery - the bank unilaterally delivered all 1098s electronically. After expressing my dissatisfaction with this, I asked where in the online account portal I can retrieve my 1098 for XXXX. The representative directed me to where the document should be and it was not there. She then told me that perhaps it was only available from my wife 's account, and suggested I log-into my wife 's account to look for it. I did not do this. I demanded a paper copy be put in the mail immediately. I then asked how to ensure that my preference for paper statements is respected for all statements going forward- the representative told me that there was NO WAY to do that. I implored her, we have so many accounts with tax implications- if it were up to us to chase down all of our 1098s and 1099s we would surely forget several. It is completely unacceptable to ignore our request for paper delivery, assert that it is available online only, and then FAIL to make it available! I am writing for relief - this bank does not think they are under any obligation to respect my wishes with regard to my 1098 and, apparently, any other significant correspondence.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: VA
Zip: 22310
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2022-02-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2022-02-17
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Subissue: Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Consumer Complaint: Balance was paid off in XXXX of XXXX, dispute was filed immediately after, with no changes coming from the dispute. In XXXX, the balance is still being reported with a {$0.00} balance shown as 120 days late. They are falsifying information.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: NY
Zip: 12309
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2022-02-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2022-02-17
Issue: Getting a credit card
Subissue: Card opened as result of identity theft or fraud
Consumer Complaint: Below are the following accounts appear to be a charge-off account with a specific balances. The information itself is already an error because a charge-off account should have NO balance. Another thing is that the account was reported twice in one of the Bureaus. As per FCRA, the bureaus and the furnisher are to provide 100 % accuracy and they are required to give responses and supply documents to confirm the account. NAVY FEDERAL CR UNION XXXX Balance {$3100.00} NAVY FEDERAL CR UNION XXXX Balance {$25000.00}
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: MI
Zip: 483XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2022-02-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2022-02-17
Issue: Closing on a mortgage
Subissue:
Consumer Complaint: Statement of Denial letter dated XX/XX/2022 list Principal Reason For Denial as " XXXX does not XXXX credit on the terms requested ''. When I call and ask what terms did I request that XXXX does not XXXX, I am told there were no requested terms outside of the bounds of what XXXX does. I am told by XXXX, that I was refused the loan because of a Mortgage Foreclosure with XXXX, which has nothing to do with the requested terms. When I asked XXXX to plainly state that I was refused due to the Mortgage Foreclosure, XXXX refused to do so. The Mortgage Foreclosure first missed payment is XXXX or XXXX XXXX XXXX & does not appear on my credit report. Our credit scores are XXXX XXXX to low XXXX. I feel that the denial letter should plainly state the reason for denial, instead of being false.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 30180
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2022-02-17
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2022-02-16
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Subissue: Account status incorrect
Consumer Complaint: My consumer rights are being violated. My credit report is reflecting late payment of XX/XX/2021 for Navy Federal Account XXXX. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. code 1666b ( a ) Time to make payments A creditor may not treat a payment on a credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan as late for any purpose, unless the creditor has adopted reasonable procedures designed to ensure that each periodic statement including the information required by section 1637 ( b ) of this title is mailed or delivered to the consumer not later than 21 days before the payment due date. Please remove inaccurate information from my consumer credit profile with XXXX, XXXX and XXXX
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: FL
Zip: 33311
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2022-02-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2022-02-16
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Subissue: Debt was paid
Consumer Complaint: I, XXXX XXXX, a federally protected consumer, beneficiary, debtor, and holder in due course pursuant to UCC 3-306 is aware that the unlawful use of a credit card such as a Social Security Card under 15 U.S. Code 1602 ( l ) by an organization or person other than the cardholder who does not have actual, implied, or apparent authority for such use and from which the cardholder receives no benefit constitutes unauthorized use pursuant to 15 U.S. Code 1602 ( p ). I understand that the fraudulent use of a credit card, by NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, is defined as whoever uses, attempts or conspires to use a card to obtain money, goods or services shall be fined for {$10000.00} or imprisoned for 10 years or both. This ePromissory Note, as shown in EXHIBIT ( A ), is a consumer credit contract and as described in 16 CFR 433.1 ( i ) an instrument, and under UCC 3-104 ( a ) an instrument is a negotiable instrument and an unconditional promise to pay, no different than a dollar. I have reason to believe and do so believe this instrument constitutes payment under the negotiable instruments act and has fully paid for this transaction on the date of consummation. I entered into a consumer credit transaction with NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION where a credit sale took place and a finance charge was imposed, where NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION holds a security interest. Pursuant to 15 U.S. Code 1605 ( a ), the finance charge is the sum of all charges. NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION did not clearly and conspicuously disclose the right to rescind this consumer credit contract, nor did I receive any clear or conspicuous verbal, written or video explanation on my right to rescind. This is my notice of Rescission of this consumer credit transaction due to fraud on behalf of NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION. NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION has been committing theft by deception and using unlawful extortionate means by furnishing false and deceptive forms. I am invoking my right of rescission in accordance with 15 U.S.Code 1635 and UCC 3- 306 to rescind any power of attorney which may have been used in connection with this transaction which includes any derivative, hypothecation, trades, transfers of possession, whether voluntary or involuntary involving any and every instrument which may have occurred unbeknownst to me. I was not given full disclosure of any such power of attorney until the discovery of its potential existence and demand a full revocation of such document ( XXXX ) ; nunc pro tunc.
Company Response: Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law
State: GA
Zip: 30281
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2022-02-16
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A