Date Received: 2023-02-14
Issue: Identity theft protection or other monitoring services
Subissue: Problem with product or service terms changing
Consumer Complaint: My identity was stolen app 2 years ago and I froze all my accounts including credit agencies. I unfroze temporality while applying for credit and Synchrony Bank denied me twice. Reason being they couldn't verify my identity. They will not give me a answer over the phone, and I have written a letter to them XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Fl XXXX. XX/XX/2014 are the dates I need to know why this is happening. Credit bureaus can't help me but there is no problems with my credit, and I have over a 800 credit score. Thank You
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: NC
Zip: 283XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-02-14
Issue: Threatened to contact someone or share information improperly
Subissue: Talked to a third-party about your debt
Consumer Complaint: DearConsumer fFinance Protection Bureau, This letter is to inform you that Synchrony Bank has illegally and in bad faith submitted a form 1099-C to the Internal Revenue Service ( IRS ) despite being aware that the debt resulted from identity theft. This form 1099-C is an official form used by the IRS to report cancellation of debt and thus should only have been done by first addressing the issue at hand. I have documentation to prove that I became a victim of identity theft, which was the cause of the debt owed. I am making an official complaint and request that the IRS revoke this form 1099-C, which synchrony filed improperly. I request that Synchrony Bank take steps immediately to prevent this type of malicious behavior from occurring. Furthermore, I ask that Synchrony Bank be held accountable for the financial damage caused by the improper filing of this form. I would appreciate your consideration in this matter, and if there is anything I can provide to further my case, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your time and consideration. The Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act prohibits debt collectors from submitting false information to the IRS on a Form 1099-C. This protects the consumer by preventing an inaccurate representation of the consumer 's tax liability to the IRS. It also ensures that any action taken by the debt collector is done in a manner that is fair and honest to the consumer, as outlined in the act. In addition, the consumer can take action against the debt collector if any unlawful or deceptive practices were used by the debt collector during the process.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: TX
Zip: 79905
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-02-15
Issue: Improper use of your report
Subissue: Reporting company used your report improperly
Consumer Complaint: In accordance with the fair credit reporting act Synchrony Bank has violated my rights. 15 USC 1681 Sec 602 states I have a right to privacy. 15 USC 1681 Sec 604 A Sec 2 also states a consumer reporting agency can not furnish an account without my written instructions. 15 USC 1666 B states a creditor may not treat a payment on a credit card account under an open-end consumer credit plan as late for any purpose. Exclusions.-Except as provided in paragraph ( XXXX ), the term " consumer report '' does not include- ( A ) subject to section 1681s3 of this title, any- ( i ) report containing information solely as to transactions or experiences between the consumer and the person making the report ; Synchrony also claims that the company does not make these form of updates. They claim that it is due to integrity. Please investigate this matter as it's discriminatory and I know for sure these adjustments have been made for others and I would like the same under my personal right.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: AL
Zip: 357XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-15
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-02-14
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed
Subissue: Debt was paid
Consumer Complaint: BANKS CAN NOT LEND THEIR CREDIT The following are cases by the federal court ruling In the federal courts, it is well established that a national bank has no power to lend its credit to another by becoming surety, endorser, or guarantor for him. '' Farmers and Miners Bank v. Bluefield Nat'l Bank, 11 F 2d 83, 271 U.S.669. " A national bank has no power to lend its credit to any person or corporation ... Bowen v. Needles Nat. Bank, 94 F 925 36 CCA 553, certiorari denied in 20 s.ct 1024, 176 us 682, 44 LED 637. It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under federal Law being limited in its powers and capacity, can not lend its credit by guaranteeing the debts of another. All such contracts entered into by its officers are ultra vires ... '' Howard and Foster co. v. Citizens Nat'l Bank of Union, 133 SC 202, 130 SE 759 ( 1926 ) .and checks, drafts, money orders, and bank notes are not lawful money ( back by gold, silver ) of the United States ... '' State v. Neilon , 73 Pac 324, 43 Ore 168. The United States Code, Title 12, Section 24, Paragraph 7 confers upon a bank the power to lend its money, not its credit. In First National Bank of Tallapoosa vs. Monroe, 135 Ga 614 ; 69 S.E. 1123 ( 1911 ), the court, after citing the statue heretofore said, The provisions referred to do not give power to a national bank to guarantee the payment of the obligations of others solely for their benefit, nor is there any authority to issue them through such power incidental of the business of banking. A bank can lend its money, not its credit. '' In Howard & Foster Co. vs. Citizens National Bank of Union, 133 S.C. 202 ; 130 SE 758, ( 1927 ), it was stated, " It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under Federal law, being limited in its power and capacity, can not lend it's credit by guaranteeing the debt of another. All such contracts being entered into by its officers are ultra vires and not binding upon the corporation. '' An activity constitutes an incidental power if it is closely related to an express power and is useful in carrying out the business of banking. See First Nat. Bank of Eastern Arkansas v. Taylor, 907 F.2d 775. But even with this latitude no hint of lending credit is provided in 12 U.S.C. 24 that would give rise to an incidental power to lend credit. The exercise of powers not expressly granted to national banks is prohibited : First National Bank v. National Exchange Bank 29 U.S. 122, 128 Capital Synchrony Bank is breaking federal law! In the federal courts, it is well established that a national bank has no power to lend its credit to another by becoming surety, endorser, or guarantor for him. '' Farmers and Miners Bank v. Bluefield Nat'l Bank, 11 F 2d 83, 271 U.S.669. " A national bank has no power to lend its credit to any person or corporation ... Bowen v. Needles Nat. Bank, 94 F 925 36 CCA 553, certiorari denied in 20 s.ct 1024, 176 us 682, 44 LED 637. " It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under federal Law being limited in its powers and capacity, can not lend its credit by guaranteeing the debts of another. All such contracts entered into by its officers are ultra vires ... '' Howard and Foster co. v. Citizens Nat'l Bank of Union, 133 SC 202, 130 SE 759 ( 1926 ). ... checks, drafts, money orders, and bank notes are not lawful money of the United States ... '' State v. Neilon, 73 Pac 324, 43 Ore 168. " Banking Associations from the very nature of their business are prohibited from lending credit. '' ( St. Louis Savings Bank vs. Parmalee 95 U. S. 557 ) " Banking corporations can not lend credit. '' ( First National Bank of Amarillo vs. Slaton Independent School District, Tex Civ App 1933, 58 SW 2d 870 ) " Nowhere is the express authority granted to the corporation to lend its credit. '' ( Gardilner Trust vs. Augusta Trust, 134 Me 191 ; 291 US 245 ) " A national bank has no authority to lend its credit. '' ( Johnston vs. Charlottesville National Bank, C.C. Va. 1879, Fed Cas. 7425 ) It is not within those statutory powers for a national bank, even though solvent, to lend its credit to another in any of the various ways in which that might be done. '' Federal Intermediate Credit Bank v. L " Herrison, 33 F 2d 841, 842 ( 1929 ). There is no doubt but what the law is that national bank can not lend its credit or become an accommodation endorser. '' National Bank of Commerce v. Atkinson, 55 E471. All such contracts entered into by its officers are ultra vires ... '' Howard and Foster co. v. Citizens Nat'l Bank of Union, 133 SC 202, 130 SE 759 ( 1926 ) ... .checks, drafts, money orders, and bank notes are not lawful money of the United States ... '' State v. Neilon , 73 Pac 324, 43 Ore 168. By doctrine of ultra vires, a contract made by a corporation beyond the scope of its corporate powers is unlawful. '' ( Community Fed S & L vs. Fields, 128 F 2nd 705 ) '' A holder who does not give value can not quali6J as a holder in due course. '' ( Uniform Commercial Code 53-303.1 ) Synchrony Bank XXXX XXXX breaking the laws under federal law, court cases which is stated in this complaint. Synchrony Bank has breache its authority by entering into an agreement that it knows it is not allowed by law to execute, is it moral to allow that party to enforce the agreement? Is it moral to force a person to pay on a loan when that person did not know that the bank did not have the legal authority to issue credit or to become surety. Synchrony bank has no right to place a negative mark on your credit report, when they did not have the authority to enter into the agreement in the first place, and that any deficit in payment or if your late or you can not make a payment. I am stating federal court decision. Synchrony Bank is in violations of the law. 18 USC 1961 RACKETEERING ACTIVITIES. 18 USC 1344 BANK FRAUD 18 USC 1001 FRAUD 18 USC 1341,1342 MAIL FRUAD 18 USC 1951 INTERFERENCE WITH COMMERCE 18 USC 514 FICTITIOUS OBLIGATION PROHIBITED 18 USC 2113 BANK ROBBERY OF A COMMERCIAL OR PRIVATE PROPERTY Synchrony to national banks going beyond their express powers in that they are exposing depositor 's money to loss in contradiction to the bank 's primary duty. Therefore, the issue that can be raised is the argument of ultra-virus and not only is the contract void, but even if the borrower did receive a benefit, the borrower was not unjustly enriched. If the contract is now void, then both parties walk away as if there never was a contract. The judge is then asked to declare a XXXX balance and deem it as paid as agreed. Since the borrower provided the value for the source of funds, the borrower is also entitled to a judgment in the amount of the highest credit limit issued or loan amount. Also, since the banks acts demonstrate that the bank took unfair advantage of the borrower, this results in the bank needing to be penalized. Typically, the borrower is entitled to ask for a financial award against the bank in the amount of the debt forgiven. Since fraud is committed, the borrower is entitled to all sums paid on the contract including interest, plus treble ( triple ) damages, attorney fees expended and court and other costs in addition. The borrower can also demand a XXXX balance on this debt, and a voidance of the loan agreement, and a financial judgment in favor of the borrower due to the bad judgement of the lender. Synchrony Bank will deny or does not recognize the laws in this complaint and they will only address the complaint by company policy and company policy are not laws and they are going to protect them self by claiming they are not breaking the law. Synchrony Banking is committing fraud. I am not trying to vex or harm any body but exercising ones right under the law. This according to the truth and lending Act and equally protection Act and Due Processing Act.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: AZ
Zip: XXXXX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-02-14
Issue: Fees or interest
Subissue: Problem with fees
Consumer Complaint: Contacted care credit to have XXXX fees waived, since I would like to pay the balance in full before the promotional time expires. CareCredit only provide me a {$41.00} credit out of {$130.00} in late fees. As a single mother, going to financial hardship, I saved up to pay the balance in full and I can not afford to pay for additional fees. $ XXXX {$35.00} and I am being charged $ XXXX {$49.00} a late fee. I am a full-time student who didnt have consistent income at the time, but still made payments and now Im in a position to pay the balance in full. I just can not afford to pay any higher than what I owe minus the fees.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: NY
Zip: 10027
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-02-14
Issue: Closing your account
Subissue: Company closed your account
Consumer Complaint: I received an email that my Care Credit account was closed. The account had a XXXX balance and has been in good standing for over 3 years ( always paid early & never missed or was late on a payment ). While 5rying to dispute, company hung up on me and threatened to close my other Syncrony accounts that are also in good standing.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: NY
Zip: 125XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-02-14
Issue: Other features, terms, or problems
Subissue: Other problem
Consumer Complaint: I called Synchrony in XXXX to work on paying a charge off account. I was told that I could set up a payment plan, and while I was making payments that my account would not be sold to collections. I chose this option over the settlement payment because I felt that although I could have paid the settlement amount at the time, paying the full amount, even if over time, would look better on my credit report. I set up payments for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX for {$75.00} each, and both payments were drafted from my bank account without issue. I called today ( XX/XX/XXXX ) to schedule further payments and was informed that my account had been transferred to XXXX XXXX, XXXX and that I would no longer be able to make payments through Synchrony as it had been turned over to collections. The lady I spoke with today apologized, and told me that Synchony was going to attempt to cancel or reverse the transfer to the collection agency. I'm trying to buy a house in the next few months and a rogue account going to collections when I had been told that it would be not be is the last thing I need.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: TX
Zip: 77535
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-02-14
Issue: Fees or interest
Subissue: Problem with fees
Consumer Complaint: Signed up for a care credit card in XX/XX/XXXX and was deceptively enrolled in " card security '' without my permission or knowledge. Could not view my account up until two months ago. Was charged an additional $ 73+/- per month for the subsequent 15 months without my knowledge. Called card security upon review of my statements who then advised me they will only refund 12 months of fees. Claiming they can not refund first 3 months of fees - XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX claiming that I did not cancel within the first 90 days. I did not sign up or have knowledge of this enrollment so would not know to cancel. Also have been charged interest on the fees by synchrony bank, who additionally keeps closing or lowering my credit limit on every account I have with them despite the fact I have continued to make on-time payments. This has severely impacted my credit score and put me much further into debt while allowing them to raise my interest rates on all of my cards.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: AZ
Zip: 856XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-02-14
Issue: Problem when making payments
Subissue: Problem during payment process
Consumer Complaint: I have a XXXX XXXX by Synchrony Bank that I have recently been using for business expenses. This month XXXX 2023, I made payments of {$120.00}, and {$500.00} towards my account, before my scheduled due date. The Creditor applied the {$120.00} payment to my balance and allocated it to my available limit, the {$500.00} payment they received from my bank on XX/XX/XXXX, said they applied it to my balance but refuse to update my credit limit accordingly, stating they are " holding the payment '' until the XXXX of this month. My argument is I was not paying late, I was trying to pay my payment early when I received the funds for the goods I purchased and subsequently retailed. There is no grounds to hold the payment towards my limit, their argument was that because I was new customer they can hold payments arbitrarily due to bank holds, but the payment of {$120.00} was made in the exact same manner and with same bank account. Their next argument was that it was because it was a large payment, no where in their account paperwork does it state that they would hold account payment due to the size of the payment made, nor is it laid out that any payments made within the first 6 months are subject to be held. This is a very predatory practice to withhold paid funds from a credit account for any arbitrary reason, it is having a major effect on the cashflow of my business and causing me undue harm for paying WELL more than my required payment and them holding it for more than 2 weeks. The everyday consumer is paying the price for their " Anti-theft System '' that is not laid out in their agreement or application. Broad strokes their paperwork they send you after you apply say they can " hold Payments for any reason '', funny how the consumer doesn't have these same protections.
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: MI
Zip: 481XX
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A
Date Received: 2023-02-14
Issue: Improper use of your report
Subissue: Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize
Consumer Complaint: I have a lot of hard inquiries on my credit report which I didnt authorize or give permission for my credits being ran. I would just like them deleted asap. I havent applied for credit since 2020
Company Response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
State: MO
Zip: 64130
Submitted Via: Web
Date Sent: 2023-02-14
Company Response to Consumer: Closed with explanation
Timely Response: Yes
Consumer Disputed: N/A