Credit card -- Getting a credit card -- Complaint #18398122

Complaint Overview

Complaint ID: 18398122

Company: U.S. Bancorp

Product: Credit card

Sub-Product: General-purpose credit card or charge card

Issue: Getting a credit card

Sub-Issue: Application denied

State: Texas

ZIP Code: 77066

Date Received: 2025-12-31T12:00:00-05:00

Date Sent to Company: 2025-12-31T12:00:00-05:00

Company Response: Closed with non-monetary relief

Timely Response: Yes

Consumer Disputed: N/A

Submitted Via: Web

Consumer Narrative

b'Company name: U.S. Bank XXXX XXXX\nCompany address (from notice): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nReference / account / application number: XXXX\nDate of adverse action: XXXX XXXX XXXX\nDate I mailed dispute to company (certified): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Mail #XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; delivered XXXX XXXX XXXX)\nMy name and contact: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nI applied for a U.S. Bank XXXX Card. On XXXX XXXX XXXX U.S. Bank sent an adverseaction notice denying my application (Ref: XXXX). The notice states the decision was based in whole or in part on information from XXXX and lists a credit score (XXXX XXXX Score XXXX XXXX dated XXXX. The notice, however, is noncompliant and internally inconsistent:\n\nThe front of the notice lists three reasons for denial; the back lists five key factors that impacted my credit score. The lists are inconsistent and include boilerplate, generic phrasing (e.g., ratio of balances to credit limits on revolving accounts is too high) without accountspecific detail.\n\nThe notice includes an ECOA paragraph but does not clearly inform me of my right to request a written statement of the specific principal reasons for the adverse action within XXXX days nor does it provide clear instructions or a contact for making that request as required by Regulation B (12 C.F.R. 1002.9).\n\nThe creditscore disclosure lists more than a concise set of meaningful key factors and provides inconsistent factor lists, contrary to FCRA/Regulation V requirements and CFPB guidance that keyfactor disclosures be accurate, meaningful, and not misleading.\n\nI mailed a certified demand for correction and compliant disclosures to U.S. Bank on XXXX XXXX XXXX (tracking and delivery proof attached). U.S. Bank has not provided a corrected adverseaction notice or the written statement of specific reasons tied to my file.\n\nWhy this is a problem (legal basis, short)\nECOA / Regulation B (12 C.F.R. 1002.9): Creditors must provide an adverseaction notice and must inform applicants of the right to request a written statement of the specific principal reasons for the adverse action (and provide that statement upon proper request). The notice I received fails to give clear procedural language about requesting specific reasons and the bank has not provided a compliant statement.\n\nFCRA / Regulation V (15 U.S.C. 1681m and implementing rules): When a consumer report or credit score is used, the user must disclose the CRA, the score/date/provider, and meaningful key factors that adversely affected the score. The notices inconsistent and overbroad lists of factors and boilerplate phrasing frustrate the purpose of the disclosure and are contrary to the statute and CFPB guidance.\n\nCFPB supervisory guidance: CFPB guidance requires that reasons be specific and meaningful even when complex models are used; boilerplate checklists and inconsistent factor lists are contrary to supervisory expectations.'

Frequently Asked Questions

Disclaimer

This analysis is AI-generated based on publicly available CFPB complaint data. It does not constitute financial or legal advice.

Related Pages

• U.S. Bancorp Company Profile
• Credit card Complaints
• Getting a credit card Complaints
• Texas Complaints
• Company Rankings
• Company Directory
• Search Complaints