{"took":202,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":43,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10633635","_score":17.62101,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/year> I became a victim of identity fraud. My US Bank issued VISA debit card, ending in XXXX was used for an unauthorized transaction by an entity known XXXX XXXX XXXX  while I was on vacation in the XXXX XXXX. As soon as I discovered the unauthorized use, I reported it to US Bank. I continued to provide as much information as I could about the transaction to US Bank over the course of the last several months. ( See Exhibits A, B ). US Bank initially provided me with a credit for the amount of the fraudulent transaction for {$1100.00}. On XX/XX/year>, US Bank sent me a denial of my fraud claim, and ten days later reversed the credit of {$1100.00}. ( See Exhibit C ). \n\nUS Bank claims that they are unable to assist me with resolving my fraud dispute and retracted the initial credit. US Bank states that it made its determination based on the following information XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX provided terms and conditions that made the transaction nonrefundable XXXXXXXX XXXX  customers are required to provide all personal information and acknowledge that they accept all terms and conditions of the transaction When I requested US Bank send me the information it relied on in its findings listed above, it provided me with documentation from VISAs communication from the merchant. ( See Exhibit C ). No where in the documentation from the merchant can I find any mention of XXXX XXXX terms and conditions. Additionally, no where in the documentation allegedly relied on can I find any mention of the merchant using my name or referencing any personal information, with the exception of the last four digits of my US Bank debit card ( information that this person/entity would have gained from swiping my card or from the VISA dispute ). \n\nThe entire narrative presented by XXXX XXXX to US Bank, via Visa, is a fiction. As I have stated in every communication with US Bank from the moment I identified the unauthorized use, when I first called US Bank to dispute the charge at approximately XXXX3 XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/year> ( XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/year> EST ), I was the victim of fraud and unauthorized use. ( See Exhibit D ). I, along with XXXX friends, called an XXXX from a neighborhood in XXXX XXXX, attempting to get back to our XXXX in another neighborhood in XXXX XXXX. The driver who came to pick us up, identified himself as XXXX. He told us that he could not take us to the location we needed to go using the XXXX we had called, but that he would still take us there and we could pay outside of the XXXX app. I canceled the XXXX per XXXX instruction. Please see the XXXX cancellation receipt from XX/XX/year> at XXXX EST. ( Exhibit XXXX ). Once we got to our XXXX, XXXX advised me he would charge me XXXX XXXX XXXX. I agreed to that price and handed over my debit card. He swiped the card, and he advised me he could send me the receipt via XXXX. He gave me a phone number, which I only later realized was fake. As soon as XXXX gave me back my card I knew something wasnt right. He drove away and I immediately checked my banking app where I saw he had taken {$1100.00} from my US Bank Checking account. This was the first and only time I saw the name XXXX XXXX as that was the business identified as the one who took the {$1100.00} in my pending transactions. As soon as I could get a call through, I called US Bank to advise them of the unauthorized use and attempted to stop the payment, but I was advised I could not. \n\nI am extremely confused why US Bank has determined that XXXX XXXX narrative provides US Bank with a legitimate reason to dismiss my claims. In addition to being fiction XXXX XXXX XXXX response is riddled with clear inaccuracies. Again, I called US Bank to report the fraud at XXXX XXXX EST on XX/XX/year>, a time during which the XXXXXXXX XXXX narrative alleges I was on a night tour. It also claims that payment was made on XX/XX/year> after a round trip night tour per the receipt, yet that payment was made sometime between XXXX XXXX EST XX/XX/year> and XXXX XXXX EST XX/XX/year>, per my screenshot of the payment after I looked at my US Bank application. ( Exhibit F ). I am not sure what night tour that allegedly would be XXXX hours ( as it is XXXX hours one way from XXXX to XXXX ) ends at XXXX, especially in the XXXX XXXX XXXX I would be interested to know what is visible during these night tours or why one would be in need of a night tour round trip from these locations. \n\nThe merchants narrative response to the XXXX dispute also states that one of them agreed to pay with his cardand they would agree with each other later. The narrative attempts to show the merchant recalls the transaction, and yet I am a woman, and so I find it interesting that they claim a man made the payment. They also have not provided anything that has my personal information, so I am guessing the merchant lacks my name and information, so the merchant guessed it must have been a man who proffered payment. \n\nFinally, US Banks advice for me in light of its denial, is that I work with the merchant to resolve my claim. As mentioned above, I have no contact information for the merchant. Ive attempted to get XXXX to provide me with the contact information for XXXX, to no avail. I attempted to call XXXX on the fake number he provided me. I have also attempted to get US Bank and VISA to give me XXXXXXXX XXXX contact information, which they claim they can not do. ( Exhibit G ). US Bank is the only entity in this transaction with the power to resolve the issue. \n\nTo reiterate, in addition to being a made-up story, the alleged merchant provided no evidence of terms or conditions that I agreed to, nor any evidence that the merchant had my personal information or proof that I agreed to any terms and conditions. US Bank has therefore not provided any legitimate reason for denying my claim. \n\nBy denying my claim using the above stated reasoning, US Bank has acted in bad faith by refusing to reimburse me for fraudulent transactions despite me providing sufficient evidence and the merchant providing nothing legitimate, violated California consumer protection laws by not adequately addressing my complaint, and has engaged in unfair business practices by denying my claim without a reasonable basis. \n\nUS Bank has failed to protect me, a lifetime user of their banking services and a consumer, by allowing a merchant to take a significant sum from me in an unauthorized transaction, and then buy into the merchants fabricated narrative. I ask that US Bank reverse its denial, and I demand that US Bank re-issue the {$1100.00} to my checking account as soon as possible. \n\nI appreciate your prompt attention and consideration of this appeal and complaint.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-10-30T18:36:31.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"94550","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10633635","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"U.S. BANCORP","date_received":"2024-10-30T18:24:58.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The merchants <em>narrative</em> response to the XXXX dispute also states that one of <em>them</em> agreed to pay with his cardand they would agree with each other later. The <em>narrative</em> attempts to show the merchant recalls the transaction, and yet I am a woman, and so I find it interesting that they claim a man <em>made</em> the payment."],"product":["Checking or savings <em>account</em>"],"issue":["Problem with a lender or other company charging your <em>account</em>"],"sub_product":["Checking <em>account</em>"]},"sort":[17.62101,"10633635"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2234302","_score":16.197973,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Summary : An unauthorized charge for {$200.00} posted to my account on XXXX. I immediately disputed the charge via telephone and requested a security close on my account. After investigating, Citi reversed the temporary credit and said I was responsible for the charge. However, the charge copy provided by Citi clearly shows that the charge was not made by me, nor were the goods shipped to my address. \n\nDisputed charge details : XXXX/XXXX/2016 {$200.00} XXXX Detailed narrative : On or about XXXX, I noticed XXXX pending charges on my Costco Citi Visa account . The charges were for XXXX ( detailed above ) and also for \" XXXX XXXX ''. Neither I nor my wife ( the only other authorized cardholder ) recognized either merchant. \n\nSuspecting fraudulent activity, I called Citi at XXXX and requested a security close of my card. At that time, I also said I believed both charges were fraudulent. The CSR said it was not possible to remove the charges because they were pending and not yet posted. \nA day or so later, both charges were posted to my account. I called Citi again at the same number. The CSR said that the charges should have been flagged as fraudulent during my first call, but had not. She then said she had probably flagged them as fraudulent in the system. \n\nI received my replacement card with a new account number and activated it on XXXX. \nOn XXXX, I received an electronic notification from Citi with additional details about the XXXX charge. I called Citi to determine if I needed to send the letter in or not, and was transferred to the Security Department. I was told that the XXXX charge was not properly flagged in the system as fraudulent but the CSR was not sure if I needed to send the letter in or not. The CSR said she marked the charge as fraud. \n\nAbout an hour later Citi called me back and said I did need to send the letter in. I checked the box that indicated that I was disputing the charge as fraudulent, signed the form, and then mailed it to the address on the notice ( Citi Cards, XXXX, MO XXXX ). \n\nOn XXXX, I received a letter from Citi that said \" Based on the information available, we have closed our investigation and reversed our credit. If you did not make or authorize this charge ( s ), please sign the following statement ... '' I signed a copy of the letter and sent it to Citi using the same address as before. This letter was sent via Certified Mail. \n\nThe XXXX letter also included the charge copy for the disputed transaction. According to the charge copy, the purchaser 's name is XXXX ; last name redacted XXXX ; and the shipping and billing addresses are in XXXX Illinois. \n\nTo be very clear : I do not know XXXX ; redacted XXXX ;, nor is she an authorized cardholder. \nI do not know anyone in XXXX, IL. \nI have not ever done business with XXXX. \nUsing Citi 's own documentation, this charge was clearly not made by an authorized cardholder. \nNeither I nor anyone authorized by me made this charge. \n\nSupplemental Information : The Citi letter sent XXXX including the charge copy are included in this complaint.","date_sent_to_company":"2016-12-03T20:17:57.000Z","issue":"Identity theft / Fraud / Embezzlement","sub_product":null,"zip_code":"30097","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2234302","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CITIBANK, N.A.","date_received":"2016-12-03T20:17:56.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I <em>have</em> not ever done business with XXXX. \nUsing Citi 's own documentation, this <em>charge</em> was clearly not <em>made</em> by an authorized cardholder. \nNeither I nor anyone authorized by me <em>made</em> this <em>charge</em>. \n\nSupplemental Information : The Citi letter sent XXXX including the <em>charge</em> copy are included in this <em>complaint</em>."]},"sort":[16.197973,"2234302"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13382121","_score":15.557079,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"This is a separate issue from my prior complaint filed in XXXX, which was categorized as a card transaction dispute. Since then, XXXX has engaged in unauthorized charge attempts, deceptive billing practices, and third-party debt collection activity despite a pending FCC complaint. \n\nComplaint Narrative : I am submitting this complaint to report XXXX XXXX for deceptive billing practices, unauthorized charges, misrepresentation by customer service and executive representatives, and aggressive third-party collection activity despite a pending FCC complaint. These actions have resulted in financial harm, reputational damage, and emotional distress. \n\nBackground : On XX/XX/year>, I began the process of switching my wireless service from XXXX to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which reimburses customers for device balances after XXXX days of active service. Before switching, I contacted XXXX multiple times to ask whether I could wait for the XXXX reimbursement cards before paying off my final device balance. \n\nXXXX representatives assured meon multiple callsthat this would not be a problem, and that no charges would be auto-drafted before I had the opportunity to pay manually. I was told I could wait until the XXXX XXXX XXXX cards arrived and pay the balance directly. Relying on that assurance, I ported out my lines. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX {$1600.00} On XX/XX/year>, at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX auto-drafted {$1600.00} from my checking account, which included the full remaining balance for three devices. This happened after my account had been closed and without any warning or consent. \n\nCritically, I had no way to prevent this, because I was locked out of my XXXX account the moment my final line disconnected in XXXX. I was unable to access the portal or remove payment methods or cancel XXXX. \n\nThis unauthorized charge overdrafted my bank account by over {$500.00} and caused serious disruption : I had movers scheduled just hours later, and I was left without access to the funds I had set aside to pay them. \n\nFCC Complaint and Refund I immediately filed a formal complaint with the FCC ( Case # XXXX ). In response, I was contacted by a XXXX XXXX XXXX representative ( XXXX ), who acknowledged the charge and issued a full refund, which I received a few days later. During that call, XXXX also assured me that no further charges would be attempted and that XXXX had been removed. I was told this was resolved. \n\nHowever, XXXX refused to provide written confirmation of these statements, citing internal system limitations. I was told I could rely on the recorded call and that the notes had been placed on my account. \n\nSecond Charge Attempt XX/XX/year> On XX/XX/year>, at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX attempted to charge the exact same amount $ XXXX. This charge reached my bank and was flagged as fraud, triggering an automatic shutdown of my debit card. \n\nThis occurred despite XXXX claiming they had removed all payment methods from my account on XX/XX/XXXX. If this were true, this second billing attempt should have been impossible. Yet it happened. \n\nThis second incident caused even greater harm : My debit card was permanently disabled. \n\nI was left with no access to funds, now going on over a week Multiple bills, including rent, car payment, insurance, and personal loans, failed, risked default, and were delayed. \n\nNine of my recurring subscriptions were cancelled. \n\nMy 100 % on-time payment record is now at risk of default, and I may incur lasting credit damage. \n\nI will have to spend days manually updating all linked payment accounts after being issued a replacement debit card. \n\nCollection Activity Despite Open Regulatory Complaint While this issue was still active with the FCC, XXXX escalated the balance to third-party collections ( AFNI, XXXX ), contrary to what their XXXX Office had told me. \n\nAFNI began calling my fiance ( the original account holder ) around XX/XX/XXXX, and she verbally told them to stop calling. They then emailed me, under her name, despite : The fact that she told them to stop. \n\nThe fact that I was never listed as the primary account holder. \n\nThe fact that they used our old address, meaning any written validation they send may never reach us. \n\nI replied immediately to AFNI to formally dispute the debt and request validation, citing the open FCC complaint. I also sent them a follow-up with our updated address. No response has been received yet. \n\nXXXX 's XX/XX/XXXX Email Final Denial Without Hearing Me Out On XX/XX/year>, I received an email from XXXX Executive Relations stating that my request for resolution had been denied and that they considered the matter closed. This occurred : Without me ever speaking to the assigned representative Without any live follow-up or phone call Without any acknowledgement of the second charge attempt on XX/XX/XXXX Without a fair chance to present these facts Their letter cited their Customer Agreement to claim that verbal promises made by representatives are not binding, despite the fact that I was encouraged to rely on those promises. XXXX selectively used this clause to avoid accountability while allowing internal billing systems to violate what their own executive promised me. \n\nMy Complaint and Request for Action : Verizons conduct throughout this matter constitutes : Deceptive billing practices Unauthorized access to a financial instrument Failure to honor verbal commitments made by executive staff Collections activity during an unresolved regulatory dispute Financial injury and reputational harm I am prepared to provide all relevant documentation, call transcripts, emails, and banking statements upon request. \n\nThank you for your time and assistance in reviewing this complaint.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-08T01:27:15.000Z","issue":"False statements or representation","sub_product":"Telecommunications debt","zip_code":"80134","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13382121","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AFNI INC.","date_received":"2025-05-08T01:26:52.000Z","state":"CO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Attempted to collect wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> : I am submitting this <em>complaint</em> to report XXXX XXXX for deceptive billing practices, <em>unauthorized</em> <em>charges</em>, misrepresentation by customer service and executive representatives, and aggressive third-party collection activity despite a pending FCC <em>complaint</em>. These actions <em>have</em> resulted in financial harm, reputational damage, and emotional distress."]},"sort":[15.557079,"13382121"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17063022","_score":15.0306,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB Complaint Narrative Credit Reporting Dispute Since XX/XX/XXXX, inaccurate and unauthorized information has appeared on my credit reports, including fraudulent accounts, charge-offs, and multiple unauthorized credit inquiries. Over time, these errors have expanded, causing significant damage to my credit profile despite repeated efforts to correct them through the proper dispute process.\n\nThe inaccurate information includes charged-off and collection accounts reported by XXXX XXXX ( opened XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX ( opened XX/XX/XXXX ), multiple XXXX XXXX XXXX accounts ( XXXX and XXXX ), and XXXX ( opened XX/XX/XXXX ). Several of these were either closed years ago, settled, or never authorized in the first place. Despite this, they continue to be reported as charged off, derogatory, or in collections.\n\nIn addition, nine unauthorized hard inquiries were recorded between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, by companies such as XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX / XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX. These inquiries were made without my consent or any application for new credit.\n\nI have submitted multiple formal disputes with all three credit bureausExperian, Equifax, and\nTransUnionbetween XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, attaching an FTC Identity Theft Report, a police report, and valid identification. Despite these submissions, the bureaus have failed to permanently block or delete the fraudulent and unverifiable information as required by FCRA 605B ( identity theft blocking ) and FCRA 611 ( reinvestigation ).\n\nThe bureaus have also continued to list a bankruptcy record from XXXX, even though I have requested verification from the original court records and have not been provided any documentation bearing my authentic signature.\n\nNo bureau has produced verifiable documentation ( such as signed applications, IP logs, or authorization records ) to substantiate the accounts or inquiries in question. The continued reporting of these items constitutes inaccurate and unverifiable data under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ).\n\nI am requesting that the CFPB require the credit reporting agencies and furnishers involved to : Conduct a complete reinvestigation of all disputed items dating back to XXXX ; Delete or block all fraudulent, closed, or unverifiable accounts and inquiries ; and Provide written confirmation that my credit reports have been corrected across all three major bureaus.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-07T00:38:00.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"604XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17063022","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-07T00:37:35.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CFPB <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> Credit Reporting Dispute Since XX/XX/XXXX, inaccurate and <em>unauthorized</em> information has appeared on my credit reports, including fraudulent <em>accounts</em>, <em>charge</em>-offs, and multiple <em>unauthorized</em> credit inquiries. Over time, these errors <em>have</em> expanded, causing significant damage to my credit profile despite repeated efforts to correct <em>them</em> through the proper dispute process."]},"sort":[15.0306,"17063022"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17063807","_score":14.993293,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB Complaint Narrative Credit Reporting Dispute Since XX/XX/XXXX, inaccurate and unauthorized information has appeared on my credit reports, including fraudulent accounts, charge-offs, and multiple unauthorized credit inquiries. Over time, these errors have expanded, causing significant damage to my credit profile despite repeated efforts to correct them through the proper dispute process.\n\nThe inaccurate information includes charged-off and collection accounts reported by XXXX XXXX ( opened XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX ( opened XX/XX/XXXX ), multiple XXXX XXXX XXXX accounts ( XXXX and XXXX ), and XXXX ( opened XX/XX/XXXX ). Several of these were either closed years ago, settled, or never authorized in the first place. Despite this, they continue to be reported as charged off, derogatory, or in collections.\n\nIn addition, nine unauthorized hard inquiries were recorded between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, by companies such as XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX / XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX. These inquiries were made without my consent or any application for new credit.\n\nI have submitted multiple formal disputes with all three credit bureausExperian, Equifax, and\nTransUnionbetween XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, attaching an FTC Identity Theft Report, a police report, and valid identification. Despite these submissions, the bureaus have failed to permanently block or delete the fraudulent and unverifiable information as required by FCRA 605B ( identity theft blocking ) and FCRA 611 ( reinvestigation ).\n\nThe bureaus have also continued to list a bankruptcy record from XXXX, even though I have requested verification from the original court records and have not been provided any documentation bearing my authentic signature.\n\nNo bureau has produced verifiable documentation ( such as signed applications, IP logs, or authorization records ) to substantiate the accounts or inquiries in question. The continued reporting of these items constitutes inaccurate and unverifiable data under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ).\n\nI am requesting that the CFPB require the credit reporting agencies and furnishers involved to : Conduct a complete reinvestigation of all disputed items dating back to XXXX ; Delete or block all fraudulent, closed, or unverifiable accounts and inquiries ; and Provide written confirmation that my credit reports have been corrected across all three major bureaus.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-07T00:38:00.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"604XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17063807","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-07T00:24:28.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CFPB <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> Credit Reporting Dispute Since XX/XX/XXXX, inaccurate and <em>unauthorized</em> information has appeared on my credit reports, including fraudulent <em>accounts</em>, <em>charge</em>-offs, and multiple <em>unauthorized</em> credit inquiries. Over time, these errors <em>have</em> expanded, causing significant damage to my credit profile despite repeated efforts to correct <em>them</em> through the proper dispute process."]},"sort":[14.993293,"17063807"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17063021","_score":14.993293,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB Complaint Narrative Credit Reporting Dispute Since XX/XX/XXXX, inaccurate and unauthorized information has appeared on my credit reports, including fraudulent accounts, charge-offs, and multiple unauthorized credit inquiries. Over time, these errors have expanded, causing significant damage to my credit profile despite repeated efforts to correct them through the proper dispute process.\n\nThe inaccurate information includes charged-off and collection accounts reported by XXXX XXXX ( opened XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX ( opened XX/XX/XXXX ), multiple XXXX XXXX XXXX accounts ( XXXX and XXXX ), and XXXX ( opened XX/XX/XXXX ). Several of these were either closed years ago, settled, or never authorized in the first place. Despite this, they continue to be reported as charged off, derogatory, or in collections.\n\nIn addition, nine unauthorized hard inquiries were recorded between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, by companies such as XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX / XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX. These inquiries were made without my consent or any application for new credit.\n\nI have submitted multiple formal disputes with all three credit bureausExperian, Equifax, and\nTransUnionbetween XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, attaching an FTC Identity Theft Report, a police report, and valid identification. Despite these submissions, the bureaus have failed to permanently block or delete the fraudulent and unverifiable information as required by FCRA 605B ( identity theft blocking ) and FCRA 611 ( reinvestigation ).\n\nThe bureaus have also continued to list a bankruptcy record from XXXX, even though I have requested verification from the original court records and have not been provided any documentation bearing my authentic signature.\n\nNo bureau has produced verifiable documentation ( such as signed applications, IP logs, or authorization records ) to substantiate the accounts or inquiries in question. The continued reporting of these items constitutes inaccurate and unverifiable data under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ).\n\nI am requesting that the CFPB require the credit reporting agencies and furnishers involved to : Conduct a complete reinvestigation of all disputed items dating back to XXXX ; Delete or block all fraudulent, closed, or unverifiable accounts and inquiries ; and Provide written confirmation that my credit reports have been corrected across all three major bureaus.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-07T00:38:00.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"604XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17063021","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-11-07T00:37:35.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CFPB <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> Credit Reporting Dispute Since XX/XX/XXXX, inaccurate and <em>unauthorized</em> information has appeared on my credit reports, including fraudulent <em>accounts</em>, <em>charge</em>-offs, and multiple <em>unauthorized</em> credit inquiries. Over time, these errors <em>have</em> expanded, causing significant damage to my credit profile despite repeated efforts to correct <em>them</em> through the proper dispute process."]},"sort":[14.993293,"17063021"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14260916","_score":13.619335,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint Summary : Chime denied my fraud dispute ( Claim ID : XXXX ) for two unauthorized XXXX XXXX transactions totaling {$2400.00} that occurred on XX/XX/year>. I reported the incident to Chime the same day it happened, but their support team told me I had to wait until the transactions cleared to file a dispute. I filed the official dispute on XX/XX/year>. \nI also filed a police report with the XXXX Police Department, which I shared with Chime as part of my dispute. \n\nThe police report narrative I filled says the following : \" I received a text message about a fraudulent charge made to my Chime banking account of {$440.00} at a XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL on Tuesday, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX. Then I received a text on XX/XX/year> at XXXX from XXXX about a fraudulent charge made in Idaho for {$390.00}. I saw no proof of those transactions on my account. I woke up this morning, XX/XX/year> and had received a message from XXXX stating there was an attempt to make a XXXX transfer to XXXX XXXX for {$960.00}. Then the XXXX number called me and I answered. The caller told me my entire account had been compromised because an unknown person had access to my account and claimed to be Chime support. They were telling me to use the \" Pay Anyone '' feature to an email they created called \" XXXX ''. The last four digits of that email are part of my social security that I did not provide them with, and had not created this account myself. Chime blocked this transaction, but the caller had me try it again with a new email \" XXXX ''. This transaction also did not go through. The caller told me they would call me back when the system was internally reset by the Chime security team. Then the caller calls me back at XXXX on a new number XXXX which is the number listed on Chime 's website as customer support. I ignored the first two calls and answered the third. We proceeded with the transaction by adding all of the funds in my checking and savings account to a \" XXXX '' virtual card. The caller then instructed me to add the virtual card to my XXXX XXXX on my phone. They told me I could go to a Chime affiliated ATM and use my Chime debit card to withdraw all of the money from my account in cash. I tried to do this twice and it did not work. I now have two pending transactions of {$1400.00} and {$960.00} to the \" XXXX '' virtual card, which I do not have any virtual or physical access to. I have contacted the Chime support team to report the fraud. \n\n\n\nChime claimed the transactions were authorized using vague login or device data, but they provided no actual proof that I initiated or approved these transactions. I do not have access to the XXXX virtual card or the XXXX XXXX involved. \nThis violates : 12 CFR 1005.6 Limiting my liability 12 CFR 1005.11 Requiring provisional credit Chimes Terms of Service, which guarantee zero liability if fraud is reported promptly","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-25T00:00:10.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"741XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14260916","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2025-06-24T23:49:00.000Z","state":"OK","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The police report <em>narrative</em> I filled says the following : \" I received a text message about a fraudulent <em>charge</em> <em>made</em> to my Chime banking <em>account</em> of {$440.00} at a XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL on Tuesday, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX. Then I received a text on XX/XX/year> at XXXX from XXXX about a fraudulent <em>charge</em> <em>made</em> in Idaho for {$390.00}. I saw no proof of those transactions on my <em>account</em>."],"product":["Checking or savings <em>account</em>"],"issue":["Managing an <em>account</em>"],"sub_product":["Checking <em>account</em>"]},"sort":[13.619335,"14260916"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14300784","_score":13.567108,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Here is a strong, detailed complaint written specifically to fit into the CFPB online form text box. Its assertive, precise, and professionally worded to maximize pressure while staying within the platforms guidelines : Complaint Summary for CFPB Submission : I have been an American Express cardholder in good standing for over 6 years, with consistent, high-volume usage ( up to $ XXXX annually ) on a card with a {$3100.00} limit. I am filing this complaint due to : ( 1 ) the mishandling of a linked bank account I repeatedly requested be removed ; ( 2 ) the abrupt and retaliatory closure of my account after raising concerns ; ( 3 ) a misrepresented fraud dispute ; and ( 4 ) internal inconsistencies in Amexs explanations for their actions. \n\nDespite repeated calls and emails, American Express continued to debit payments from a bank account I had clearly requested be removed from my profile. This account was no longer used, unfunded, and extremely difficult to transfer money into. As a result, payments were returned through no fault of my own. I later received confirmation from XXXX ( my current bank ) on a recorded call that no payments were ever declined on their end and that funds were available at the time Amex attempted withdrawals. This points to a processing issue at Amex, not a customer default. \n\nOn the day my card was shut down, I had emailed Amex Executive Offices asking for help resolving this unauthorized debiting issue. My email was firm, but not disrespectful. Within hours, my account was closed. When I called ( recorded ), the representative falsely stated that I had requested the closure. I never did. She then said Risk Management shut it down. When I spoke with the Financial Review team, they then claimed they were the ones who closed itdespite the fact that I had just submitted documentation for a review and passed without issue. The contradictory explanations raise serious concerns about internal transparency and retaliation. \n\nAdditionally, I filed a fraud dispute against a merchant with whom I am in active legal conflict. The merchant faxed defamatory documents to Amex, and the dispute was denied without the merchant providing any proof of authorization. Amex told me the burden was on me to prove it was fraudwhich directly contradicts federal chargeback policy. The cardholder should not have to disprove a charge that has no proof of consent. I believe I was targeted and dismissed unfairly, and that Amex allowed third-party interference to influence their internal handling. \n\nMy financial review materials were fully submitted and demonstrated clearly that my ability to pay has never been in question. Ive made every effort to communicate, document, and cooperate in good faith. I am now being penalized due to Amexs administrative errors and shifting narratives. I am attaching the email that prompted them to close my account which appears to be in retaliation for me advocating for my financial rights.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-26T05:13:19.000Z","issue":"Closing your account","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"60540","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14300784","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2025-06-26T05:05:59.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Company closed your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am now being penalized due to Amexs administrative errors and shifting <em>narratives</em>. I am attaching the email that prompted <em>them</em> to close my <em>account</em> which appears to be in retaliation for me advocating for my financial rights."],"issue":["Closing your <em>account</em>"],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"],"sub_issue":["Company closed your <em>account</em>"]},"sort":[13.567108,"14300784"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15009647","_score":12.910877,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against Equifax for reporting multiple inaccurate and unauthorized items on my credit report, which are causing significant and ongoing harm to my financial profile. I have previously attempted to dispute these items directly with the credit bureau, but they continue to appear without proper investigation or verification. These errors violate several sections of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and have resulted in damage to my creditworthiness and personal stress. \n\nFirst, XXXX ( Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX, Balance : {$17000.00} ) * * is showing a late payment that is entirely incorrect. I had auto-pay set up on this account and at no time was I notified of a payment failure. Upon reviewing my banking records and payment history, I found no evidence of a late or missed payment. Despite raising a dispute, Equifax failed to provide any supporting documents such as billing statements or transaction logs to verify the accuracy of this negative mark. This is a violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), which requires credit reporting agencies to maintain maximum possible accuracy, and 15 U.S.C. 1681i, which mandates proper reinvestigation procedures for disputed information. \n\nSecond, XXXX XXXX ( Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX, Balance : {$6800.00} ) * * is also inaccurately marked with a late payment. This is another account I consistently managed responsibly. No proper notice of delinquency was ever sent to me, and again, no verification has been provided. This repeated pattern of unverifiable derogatory marks reflects a systemic failure to comply with FCRA standards. The presence of these errors is misleading to lenders and unjustly reduces my credit score, further preventing me from obtaining credit on fair terms. \n\nAnother serious concern involves XXXX  ( Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX, Balance : {$0.00} ) * *, which is reported as a charge-off despite showing a XXXX balance. This is highly contradictory. If the account was charged off, a balance should remain. If the balance is paid or resolved, the charge-off notation should not be present. The reporting of both at once creates a misleading narrative about my payment history. I requested clarification or documentation from both XXXX and Equifax, but no information was provided. Reporting conflicting information violates the standard of accuracy required under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). \n\nAdditionally, there are multiple unauthorized hard inquiries that appear on my credit report, all dated XX/XX/XXXX. These inquiries come from : XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ( which appears twice ), XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX. I did not authorize or initiate any credit applications with these entities on or near that date. I have no relationship with some of them and did not consent to have my credit pulled. According to 15 U.S.C. 1681b, a credit report may only be accessed for a permissible purpose and with the consumers knowledge or consent. These hard inquiries were made without any signed application, authorization, or legitimate financial interaction. My disputes requesting proof of permissible purpose were ignored or dismissed, and the inquiries remain on my file, causing an unjustified reduction in my credit score. \n\nIt is unacceptable that Equifax continues to report these items without ensuring compliance with FCRA requirements. I have made every effort to correct these issues directly, yet they persist with no valid documentation, no permissible purpose, and no meaningful investigation. The result is significant damage to my credit profile and financial opportunities. \n\nRequested Resolution : I am requesting that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) require Equifax to : Delete the inaccurate late payment notations from XXXX and XXXX XXXX unless they can be fully verified with original billing statements. \n\nRemove the charge-off notation from the XXXX  account if no balance exists or provide clear documentation if the reporting is valid. \n\nDelete all unauthorized inquiries dated XX/XX/XXXX, from XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ( both entries ), XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX  unless a signed application or legal authorization can be produced. \n\nThese items are not only harming my score but also reflecting a pattern of non-compliance and neglect of consumer rights. I respectfully ask for the CFPB 's intervention in ensuring the accuracy, fairness, and legality of the data Equifax continues to publish on my credit report. \n\nThank you.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-31T22:41:28.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"29488","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15009647","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-31T22:37:58.000Z","state":"SC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Another serious concern involves XXXX  ( <em>Account</em> Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX, Balance : {$0.00} ) * *, which is reported as a <em>charge</em>-off despite showing a XXXX balance. This is highly contradictory. If the <em>account</em> was charged off, a balance should remain. If the balance is paid or resolved, the <em>charge</em>-off notation should not be present. The reporting of both at once creates a misleading <em>narrative</em> about my payment history."]},"sort":[12.910877,"15009647"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15397997","_score":12.862255,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I am submitting this complaint to formally dispute multiple inaccuracies on my credit report that have caused substantial financial harm and undue stress. Despite my repeated attempts to resolve these issues directly with the creditors and credit reporting agencies, these errors persist, violating my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq. \nADDRESSES INACCURATELY REPORTED XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Issue : Wrong Address Law : FCRA 1681i requires consumer reporting agencies to investigate disputed information and promptly correct or delete it. \nStory : I have never lived at this address, nor have I ever conducted any personal or financial business from this location. Including this as part of my history falsely projects instability in my residency pattern. When lenders and landlords review my report, they assume I move frequently, which signals financial irresponsibility and risk. This reporting mistake has already delayed an apartment approval I applied for in XXXX, as the landlord confronted me about an address I have no knowledge of. This shows the immediate harm caused. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Issue : Wrong Address Law : FCRA 1681e ( b ) requires agencies to assure maximum possible accuracy in all information they maintain on a consumer.\n\nStory : This address is completely unrelated to me, yet its listing suggests I maintained multiple residencies. Such misinformation causes doubt about my financial stability, and more importantly, raises unnecessary fraud alerts when my credit is pulled. Because of this false address, I faced questioning from a bank representative while applying for a checking account. I had to re-verify my ID and utility bills, causing embarrassment and wasted time. This misinformation diminishes my credibility and violates my right to accurate reporting. \n\nACCOUNTS REPORTED WITH INACCURATE STATUS XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX | High Balance : {$290.00} | Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Late Payment Law : FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) requires accuracy in late payment reporting, and unverifiable entries must be corrected or deleted.\n\nStory : The so-called late payment is entirely misrepresented. I consistently made my payments, though one particular billing cycle payment was processed through an electronic transfer that experienced delays beyond my control. The creditor was aware of this and waived the fee, yet my credit file reflects a late mark. This is misleading and does not provide the full context. Because of this unfair late mark, my loan application for a credit consolidation plan in XXXX was denied, costing me financial opportunities and forcing me to pay higher interest on other obligations. This demonstrates direct harm caused by wrongful reporting. \n\nXXXX XXXXXXXX | High Balance : {$240.00} | Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Charge Off Law : FDCPA 807 strictly prohibits furnishing false status on consumer obligations.\n\nStory : This account is incorrectly reported as a charge-off. I had set up an agreement with the lender to modify the repayment schedule. Instead of reflecting this arrangement, the creditor chose to report it as a charge-off, undermining my credit health. False reporting of a charge-off reflects extreme delinquency, creating a narrative that is completely untrue about my financial reliability. Because of this misreporting, I was denied access to a secured loan which could have improved my financial situation. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX | High Balance : {$480.00} | Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Charge Off Law : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) forbids knowingly providing inaccurate info to a bureau.\n\nStory : This account incorrectly duplicates my prior XXXX XXXX account with a charge-off notation. This duplicated account is both misleading and unlawful. I have faced repeated declines for credit limit increases simply because it appears as if I have XXXX separate XXXX XXXX charge-offs on my profile when in reality, this data is wrong and duplicate. \n\nXXXX XXXX | High Balance : {$720.00} | Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Late Payment Law : FCRA 611 requires reinvestigation when late payment disputes are raised.\n\nStory : The late notations tied to this account stemmed from billing errors acknowledged by the company. I made payments in good faith and promptly communicated with them, yet my credit report still reflects derogatory marks. These derogatories not only lower my score but mischaracterize me as financially negligent when in fact I acted responsibly and within the periods granted. \n\nLegal Basis for Complaint : FCRA 1681i ( a ) : Requires credit reporting agencies to investigate and correct inaccurate information.\n\nFCRA 604 ( a ) : Unauthorized inquiries are prohibited.\n\nFDCPA 1692e & 1692f : Prohibits false or misleading representations by debt collectors.\n\nFDCPA 1692c ( b ) : Prohibits disclosure of consumer information to unauthorized third parties.\n\nRequested Action : 1. Correct all inaccurate addresses on my credit report.\n\n2. Investigate and remove all false late payments, charge-offs, and collections.\n\n3. Remove all unauthorized hard inquiries.\n\n4. Provide written confirmation of corrections to me and all major credit bureaus.\n\nI urge the CFPB to intervene to ensure compliance with federal law and the protection of my rights. If these violations continue unaddressed, I am prepared to pursue further legal remedies under FCRA and FDCPA, including filing complaints with the FTC. \nThank you for your immediate attention to this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-21T00:15:05.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"281XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15397997","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-08-21T00:10:33.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Story : This <em>account</em> incorrectly duplicates my prior XXXX XXXX <em>account</em> with a <em>charge</em>-off notation. This duplicated <em>account</em> is both misleading and unlawful. I <em>have</em> faced repeated declines for credit limit increases simply because it appears as if I <em>have</em> XXXX separate XXXX XXXX <em>charge</em>-offs on my profile when in reality, this data is wrong and duplicate."]},"sort":[12.862255,"15397997"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17404555","_score":12.644251,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint because several derogatory accounts and an unauthorized credit inquiry are appearing on my credit report that do not belong to me. I have disputed these items multiple times with the individual furnishers as well as with the major credit bureaus. I have also filed previous CFPB complaints, but some itemsespecially the accounts connected to XXXX XXXX left unresolved. Because the previous complaint was closed without providing actual validation or documentation, I am opening a new case and requesting full intervention from the CFPB. \n\nI have also filed an FTC Identity Theft Report and I will be attaching those documents along with supporting evidence. These accounts do not belong to me, and I have not received true validation from any of the companies reporting these items. \n\nThis dispute involves several derogatory accounts : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX these accounts is being reported either as a collection, charge-off, or negative tradeline. I dispute all of them because I did not open these accounts, I did not authorize these accounts, I did not sign for these accounts, and I did not receive any benefit from them. The companies reporting them have not provided me with original documentation to validate the debt or prove the accounts belong to me. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX account XXXX XXXX reported with a charge-off status. I did not open this account and have never authorized any credit or retail line with XXXX XXXX or with XXXX. I have never received a contract, application file, billing statement, or itemized account activity proving that I created this account. \n\nDespite multiple disputes and requests, no company has provided validation in the form of : A signed original contract Identity verification logs Statements or billing cycles IP address or device information Application submission records The reporting remains unsupported by actual evidence. Therefore, I dispute this account entirely. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX First Derogatory Account I am also disputing the first Tower Loan account reporting as a charge-off. XXXX XXXX claims that I originated this account, but they have not provided any original contract, payment history, ledger, disclosures, or verification of any kind. The information they provided in past letters was insufficient, and no proper validation documents were ever presented. \n\nXXXX XXXX did send a response through the CFPB in a prior case, but it was essentially a narrative statement claiming that I opened the account. They referenced their internal records and claimed the signature matched, but did not provide the actual signed contract for me to review. They also did not provide any original documentation, any identity verification, or any evidence of the application I supposedly submitted. \n\nTheir written responses also contained comments that were unprofessional and dismissive of my dispute. Despite this, XXXX XXXX did not provide validation required under FCRA for them to continue reporting this debt. This is why I am opening a new CFPB case. The matter remains unresolved. \n\nI am submitting my FTC Identity Theft Report to support this new CFPB claim. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX Second Derogatory Account ( Loan at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX also claims that a second account was opened under a Loan at Home check. Again, the company has not provided actual documentation, including : A signed contract Proof I received or cashed any check Disbursement or deposit information Application files Truth-in-Lending disclosures In their prior CFPB response, XXXX  XXXX again relied only XXXX internal assertions and general statements rather than providing real proof. They claimed the signature matched, but I was never provided the signature they claim matches mine. They claimed these accounts belonged to me, but they did not show the underlying documents. \n\nThey also claimed that payments were supposedly made with a debit card in my name, but did not provide transaction receipts, card information, bank statements, or any documentation showing the origin of the alleged payments. Without such documentation, these claims can not be considered valid. \n\nBecause XXXX XXXX did not address any inconsistencies in reporting dates, status codes, charge-off dates, or payment historiesand did not provide validation in the previous caseI am reopening the matter with a new CFPB complaint. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Account There is also a collection account from XXXX XXXX  being reported. I have no knowledge of the original creditor and have not been provided with any contract, statements, itemization, or account information linking this alleged debt to me. \n\nXXXXXXXX XXXX has not provided : The name of the original creditor A signed agreement Proof of authorization Billing statements Any validation required under federal law Without an original contract or proof of the debt, I dispute the XXXX Collect account as inaccurate and not mine. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account The next derogatory account is from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This company is reporting a collection debt on my credit file. I did not open any credit account that could have been sold or transferred to this agency. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX has not provided any proof of : The original creditor Contract documents Application files Itemized charges or fees Account history Proof that I ever created or approved this debt Without validation, this collection account remains unverified, inaccurate, and disputed. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Hard Inquiry Unauthorized Finally, there is a hard inquiry from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that I did not authorize. I did not apply for membership or credit with XXXX XXXX at the time the inquiry was made. I did not give permission for my credit report to be pulled. \n\nI am requesting that XXXX XXXX : Provide proof I authorized the inquiry Provide documentation showing my consent, such as a signed membership form or loan application If they can not provide this proof, I request that the inquiry be removed as fraudulent. \n\nActions I Have Already Taken To support this dispute : I have already filed an FTC Identity Theft Report and will attach those documents. \n\nI have reported these issues to the credit bureaus. \n\nI have contacted the furnishers and requested validation. \n\nA prior CFPB complaint was filed, but XXXX XXXX did not provide actual documentation or resolve the matter. \n\nBecause the previous complaint was closed without resolution, I am filing a new CFPB case to continue the investigation. \n\nWhy I Am Requesting CFPB Intervention These derogatory accounts are damaging my credit, and none of the companies involved have provided legal validation or documentation showing the alleged debts are mine. Under FCRA, companies must maintain and provide original records. They can not simply claim that an account belongs to me without showing the evidence. \n\nXXXX XXXX, in particular, submitted XXXX letters to the CFPB stating that they believe the accounts belong to me but failed to attach the required documents that would prove it. They referenced internal summaries, not actual contracts or disclosures. Their letters do not meet the validation standard required when a debt is disputed. \n\nXXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX also have not provided any proof linking me to their claims. \n\nXXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) has not produced any signed contract or itemized statements. \n\nXXXX XXXX has not shown any documentation that I authorized the credit inquiry. \n\nBecause no valid documentation has been provided, I dispute all these accounts and inquiries as fraudulent, inaccurately reported, or unverified. \n\nWhat I Am Requesting I am requesting that the CFPB require the companies reporting these accounts to provide : Original signed contracts Billing statements Itemized payment histories Truth-in-Lending disclosures Identity verification logs IP addresses Application metadata Proof of disbursement Proof of credit usage Documentation showing I authorized the XXXX XXXX XXXX If XXXX companies can not provide this documentation, I request that the accounts and the inquiry be removed as inaccurate and unverifiable. \n\nConclusion I did not open these accounts, I did not authorize them, and I did not sign for them. These derogatory accounts and the unauthorized inquiry continue to damage my credit. I have filed an FTC Identity Theft Report and am reopening this dispute because the previous case was not resolved. I am requesting a full investigation and verification or removal of all disputed items.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-21T00:29:58.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"75126","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17404555","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-21T00:07:47.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am filing this <em>complaint</em> because several derogatory <em>accounts</em> and an <em>unauthorized</em> credit inquiry are appearing on my credit report that do not belong to me. I <em>have</em> disputed these items multiple times with the individual furnishers as well as with the major credit bureaus. I <em>have</em> also filed previous CFPB <em>complaints</em>, but some itemsespecially the <em>accounts</em> connected to XXXX XXXX left unresolved."]},"sort":[12.644251,"17404555"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17404557","_score":12.620854,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint because several derogatory accounts and an unauthorized credit inquiry are appearing on my credit report that do not belong to me. I have disputed these items multiple times with the individual furnishers as well as with the major credit bureaus. I have also filed previous CFPB complaints, but some itemsespecially the accounts connected to XXXX XXXX left unresolved. Because the previous complaint was closed without providing actual validation or documentation, I am opening a new case and requesting full intervention from the CFPB. \n\nI have also filed an FTC Identity Theft Report and I will be attaching those documents along with supporting evidence. These accounts do not belong to me, and I have not received true validation from any of the companies reporting these items. \n\nThis dispute involves several derogatory accounts : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX these accounts is being reported either as a collection, charge-off, or negative tradeline. I dispute all of them because I did not open these accounts, I did not authorize these accounts, I did not sign for these accounts, and I did not receive any benefit from them. The companies reporting them have not provided me with original documentation to validate the debt or prove the accounts belong to me. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX account XXXX XXXX reported with a charge-off status. I did not open this account and have never authorized any credit or retail line with XXXX XXXX or with XXXX. I have never received a contract, application file, billing statement, or itemized account activity proving that I created this account. \n\nDespite multiple disputes and requests, no company has provided validation in the form of : A signed original contract Identity verification logs Statements or billing cycles IP address or device information Application submission records The reporting remains unsupported by actual evidence. Therefore, I dispute this account entirely. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX First Derogatory Account I am also disputing the first Tower Loan account reporting as a charge-off. XXXX XXXX claims that I originated this account, but they have not provided any original contract, payment history, ledger, disclosures, or verification of any kind. The information they provided in past letters was insufficient, and no proper validation documents were ever presented. \n\nXXXX XXXX did send a response through the CFPB in a prior case, but it was essentially a narrative statement claiming that I opened the account. They referenced their internal records and claimed the signature matched, but did not provide the actual signed contract for me to review. They also did not provide any original documentation, any identity verification, or any evidence of the application I supposedly submitted. \n\nTheir written responses also contained comments that were unprofessional and dismissive of my dispute. Despite this, XXXX XXXX did not provide validation required under FCRA for them to continue reporting this debt. This is why I am opening a new CFPB case. The matter remains unresolved. \n\nI am submitting my FTC Identity Theft Report to support this new CFPB claim. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX Second Derogatory Account ( Loan at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX also claims that a second account was opened under a Loan at Home check. Again, the company has not provided actual documentation, including : A signed contract Proof I received or cashed any check Disbursement or deposit information Application files Truth-in-Lending disclosures In their prior CFPB response, XXXX  XXXX again relied only XXXX internal assertions and general statements rather than providing real proof. They claimed the signature matched, but I was never provided the signature they claim matches mine. They claimed these accounts belonged to me, but they did not show the underlying documents. \n\nThey also claimed that payments were supposedly made with a debit card in my name, but did not provide transaction receipts, card information, bank statements, or any documentation showing the origin of the alleged payments. Without such documentation, these claims can not be considered valid. \n\nBecause XXXX XXXX did not address any inconsistencies in reporting dates, status codes, charge-off dates, or payment historiesand did not provide validation in the previous caseI am reopening the matter with a new CFPB complaint. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Account There is also a collection account from XXXX XXXX  being reported. I have no knowledge of the original creditor and have not been provided with any contract, statements, itemization, or account information linking this alleged debt to me. \n\nXXXXXXXX XXXX has not provided : The name of the original creditor A signed agreement Proof of authorization Billing statements Any validation required under federal law Without an original contract or proof of the debt, I dispute the XXXX Collect account as inaccurate and not mine. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account The next derogatory account is from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This company is reporting a collection debt on my credit file. I did not open any credit account that could have been sold or transferred to this agency. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX has not provided any proof of : The original creditor Contract documents Application files Itemized charges or fees Account history Proof that I ever created or approved this debt Without validation, this collection account remains unverified, inaccurate, and disputed. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Hard Inquiry Unauthorized Finally, there is a hard inquiry from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that I did not authorize. I did not apply for membership or credit with XXXX XXXX at the time the inquiry was made. I did not give permission for my credit report to be pulled. \n\nI am requesting that XXXX XXXX : Provide proof I authorized the inquiry Provide documentation showing my consent, such as a signed membership form or loan application If they can not provide this proof, I request that the inquiry be removed as fraudulent. \n\nActions I Have Already Taken To support this dispute : I have already filed an FTC Identity Theft Report and will attach those documents. \n\nI have reported these issues to the credit bureaus. \n\nI have contacted the furnishers and requested validation. \n\nA prior CFPB complaint was filed, but XXXX XXXX did not provide actual documentation or resolve the matter. \n\nBecause the previous complaint was closed without resolution, I am filing a new CFPB case to continue the investigation. \n\nWhy I Am Requesting CFPB Intervention These derogatory accounts are damaging my credit, and none of the companies involved have provided legal validation or documentation showing the alleged debts are mine. Under FCRA, companies must maintain and provide original records. They can not simply claim that an account belongs to me without showing the evidence. \n\nXXXX XXXX, in particular, submitted XXXX letters to the CFPB stating that they believe the accounts belong to me but failed to attach the required documents that would prove it. They referenced internal summaries, not actual contracts or disclosures. Their letters do not meet the validation standard required when a debt is disputed. \n\nXXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX also have not provided any proof linking me to their claims. \n\nXXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) has not produced any signed contract or itemized statements. \n\nXXXX XXXX has not shown any documentation that I authorized the credit inquiry. \n\nBecause no valid documentation has been provided, I dispute all these accounts and inquiries as fraudulent, inaccurately reported, or unverified. \n\nWhat I Am Requesting I am requesting that the CFPB require the companies reporting these accounts to provide : Original signed contracts Billing statements Itemized payment histories Truth-in-Lending disclosures Identity verification logs IP addresses Application metadata Proof of disbursement Proof of credit usage Documentation showing I authorized the XXXX XXXX XXXX If XXXX companies can not provide this documentation, I request that the accounts and the inquiry be removed as inaccurate and unverifiable. \n\nConclusion I did not open these accounts, I did not authorize them, and I did not sign for them. These derogatory accounts and the unauthorized inquiry continue to damage my credit. I have filed an FTC Identity Theft Report and am reopening this dispute because the previous case was not resolved. I am requesting a full investigation and verification or removal of all disputed items.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-21T00:29:57.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"75126","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17404557","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-11-21T00:29:33.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am filing this <em>complaint</em> because several derogatory <em>accounts</em> and an <em>unauthorized</em> credit inquiry are appearing on my credit report that do not belong to me. I <em>have</em> disputed these items multiple times with the individual furnishers as well as with the major credit bureaus. I <em>have</em> also filed previous CFPB <em>complaints</em>, but some itemsespecially the <em>accounts</em> connected to XXXX XXXX left unresolved."]},"sort":[12.620854,"17404557"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6237885","_score":12.117453,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"To whom it may concern ; This statement is regarding internal reference number : XXXX My wallet was stolen from my local gym, this past summer. In my wallet was my drivers license, SS Card, a XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX credit card, both a XXXX XXXX XXXX credit and debit card and my Discover Credit card. I called Discover notifying them that my wallet was missing and there was already a summation of {$1700.00} worth of unauthorized transactions. I asked for the card to be locked and the transactions were disputed. I explained to Discover that no one else had authority to use my card. The transactions consisted of out of state purchases and unauthorized online transactions. As of XX/XX/XXXX Discover is holding me responsible for all out of state and online purchases. I have contacted the merchants regarding some of these transactions and have received details. From the information I have gathered, it appears that these transactions are made from email addresses that DO NOT belong to me. The email addresses are ; XXXX, XXXX, & XXXX. Both the billing and shipping address always have my name misspelled or some strange variation of my name. These transactions are also being authorized by a phone that DOES NOT belong to me. I have also been made aware that my Discover portal has documented conversations within the messaging center that did not come from me. There are messages coming from my portal on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX asking why the card is declined and why the card is blocked, respectively. \n\nMy Discover was used to make unauthorized purchases from XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. The law states that : \" Under a XXXX Federal rule called Regulation E, banks are required to make clients whole if their money is stolen from a consumer account through an electronic payment initiated by another person. Since Reg E was written well before payment apps existed, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has issued guidelines saying that the law covers all person-to-person online payments. The bureau clarified that all unauthorized online money transfers- meaning any payment initiated by someone other than the customer and done without the customer 's permission- were the bank 's liability. But despite the updated guidance, banks in many cases are refusing to refund customers who claim - often with supporting documentation. \n\nIve included in past statements, however it renders mentioning again, that my license and SS card were in my wallet when it was stolen. This information was documented in the original police report I filed shortly after my wallet went missing. It would explain why my address may be on some, if not all, of the purchases. I was also made aware that fraudulent credit card applications were being made in my name, with my SS number. The charges on my Discover card NEVER should have been approved. There are so many blatant inconsistencies with incorrect spelling, strange email addresses, and different phone numbers that it should have been a red flag for Discover, yet theyre the ones that permitted over {$1700.00} in fraudulent transactions. Furthermore, at least half of these purchases are made in South Carolina ; I live in Georgia and I have not been to SC at all this entire year. I have never received a request to approve or deny these transactions. I notified Discover that my card was missing when I filed the police report and from there responsibility and negligence fell on Discover, not me. \n\nIn regards to Discovers first decision for a fraud claim with the account ending in XXXX. Both XXXX XXXX and Discovers customer advocacy department have relayed statements regarding your original decision. With that I have drawn up demurs for said statements : -My assertion does not dictate that my wallet was stolen on XX/XX/XXXX and the statement given to the police confirms. My gym was closed on XXXX, making it physically impossible for said wallet to be stolen on that day. What was said was that it was taken the WEEK OF XXXX. The police report was filed on XX/XX/XXXX. The assertion given, on XX/XX/XXXX, to your financial institution was that I had received the card, but did not use it prior to being taken. When I called your institution and agents advised that the card would be canceled and a new card would be sent out in the mail. Yet, Discover failed to cancel the card and, conveniently, no new card was EVER sent out until XX/XX/XXXX!! \n-I was locked out of my Discover account center access after I called in XXXX. I was denied access. AGAIN, I called into your financial institution and I was told that this was standard procedure after filing a claim and that it would remain locked until the investigation was completed. Yet, no other action from your financial institution was taken, other than locking my online account. My card was not canceled and no new card was sent out. Therefore, it would be the physically impossible for me to approve charges via my online account because I WAS LOCKED OUT. The only verification request I received, from my valid email address was a charge on XX/XX/XXXX from XXXX for {$240.00}. I selected no and I was sent confirmation that the charge was declined. I am providing documentation as proof. \n-only XXXX email alert was sent, regarding charges. It was on XX/XX/XXXX from XXXX for {$240.00}. I did not verify the charge and was told that it was declined and Discover would be notified. \n-From XXXX I received an email from Discover regarding my dispute FOUR different times. These emails all stated the same thing : that I could still access my online account and that I would receive a new card in 3-9 business days. When, in fact, I could not access my online account and no new card was ever sent. \n-Discover has failed to yield ANY evidence from merchants. I, however, have contacted ALL online merchants. I have also crossed referenced this information with the evidence provided from XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX ( XXXX other credit cards that were also in my wallet and taken at the same time ). The email addresses used in these online transactions are : XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX. ABSOLUTELY NONE OF THESE EMAIL ADDRESSES HAVE BEEN VALIDATED. Transactions from XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX do not match my IP address. Discover refuses to produce IP addresses, however since the same email addresses were used, more than likely the same IP address was used and said IP address DOES NOT belong to me. I have provided my correct IP address as documented proof. Furthermore ; my name & phone number are misspelled and incorrect on ALL shipping addresses COUNTLESS times. And I have made MULTIPLE statements that NO MERCHANDISE has been received at this shipping address. \n-In the evidence provided by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX all purchases were made from an XXXX XXXX. DISCOVER REFUSES TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. However, I HAVE NOT OWNED AN XXXX XXXX SINCE XXXX. This can be confirmed with my cell phone XXXX. I have provided documented proof with the XXXX phones I have owned in XXXX ; am XXXX XXXX and an XXXX XXXX. The ONLINE TRANSACTIONS MADE WITH MY DISCOVER, XXXX, & XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CARD WERE ALL MADE WITH AN XXXX XXXX WHICH I DO NOT OWN. \n-Discover has falsified records stating that purchases were made with an XXXX XXXX and is refusing to provide evidence proving that. The penalties for the unlawful or accidental removal, defacing, alteration, or destruction of XXXX records or the attempt to do so, include a fine, imprisonment, or both ( 18 U.S.C. 641 and 2071 ) -Discover is stating that ALL in-person transactions were made in my local area. My wallet was stolen from my LOCAL gym. However, I have called and verified charges because Discover REFUSES to do so. On XXXX a transaction was made to XXXX XXXXXXXX for {$64.00} XXXX XXXX, SC. On XX/XX/XXXX transaction to XXXX {$150.00} XXXX XXXX, SC. On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX {$12.00} XXXX XXXX, SC. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX is blatantly lying. He is failing to research and he is failing to provide evidence because it would contradict his statements. He is providing false statements to support his narrative. I have spoken to him on the phone and he has accused other financial institutions of not doing their research when he himself has done ABSOLUTELY NO RESEARCH. I have provided him with names and numbers to my points of contact at XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX who worked tirelessly to conclude the CORRECT DETERMINATION. \n\nIt is obvious that Discover has refused to review the facts I have provided. There is a preponderance of sufficient evidence to declare that my Discover, XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX card were all take at the same time and used by the same individual to make BOTH online and in-person unauthorized transactions. Therefore ; I the cardholder should not be held accountable for any charges ranging from XXXX. According to a XXXX Federal rule called Regulation E, banks are required to make clients whole if their money is stolen from a consumer account through an electronic payment initiated by another person. Since Reg E was written well before payment apps existed, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau last year issued guidelines saying that the law covered all person-to-person online payments. The bureau clarified that all unauthorized online money transfers- meaning any payment initiated by someone other than the customer and done without the customer 's permission- were the bank 's liability. \n\nNeither XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX nor XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX hastily rushed into this decision. There were XXXX other claims, besides Discover, filed with XXXX different financial institutions. They all took time in conducting their own investigation, yet all XXXX of the investigations came back to the same conclusion : the card was in fact stolen and all transactions were fraudulent. Therefore ; my claims were awarded in full. The claims varied in amount : XXXX Debit- {$3400.00}, BofA- {$2700.00}, XXXX by XXXX XXXX {$1600.00}. I have personal names and numbers of individuals that worked on the cases. For XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX. For XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX. I will continue to file complaints and reassert charges until Discover resolves this matter correctly. \n\nThese charges were made without my knowledge and without my permission, which is the very definition of fraudulent transactions. I ask to please not hold me responsible for these unauthorized charges. It would be reasonable, in light of Discover card being stolen, that said transactions from XXXX be resolved in the cardholders favor and credited back to my account in the amount of {$1700.00}. Please see attached for documents solidifying that my Discover was in fact stolen at the time of these unauthorized in-person and online purchases. I have also included claims from XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX that were awarded in my favor, in full. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2022-11-23T21:20:08.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"30680","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6237885","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"DISCOVER BANK","date_received":"2022-11-23T21:09:58.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I <em>have</em> personal names and numbers of individuals that worked on the cases. For XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX. For XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX. I will continue to file <em>complaints</em> and reassert <em>charges</em> until Discover resolves this matter correctly. \n\nThese <em>charges</em> were <em>made</em> without my knowledge and without my permission, which is the very definition of fraudulent transactions."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[12.117453,"6237885"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15399597","_score":12.088725,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I am submitting this complaint to formally dispute multiple inaccuracies on my credit report that have caused substantial financial harm and undue stress. Despite my repeated attempts to resolve these issues directly with the creditors and credit reporting agencies, these errors persist, violating my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq. \nADDRESSES INACCURATELY REPORTED XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Issue : Wrong Address Law : FCRA 1681i requires consumer reporting agencies to investigate disputed information and promptly correct or delete it. \nStory : I have never lived at this address, nor have I ever conducted any personal or financial business from this location. Including this as part of my history falsely projects instability in my residency pattern. When lenders and landlords review my report, they assume I move frequently, which signals financial irresponsibility and risk. This reporting mistake has already delayed an apartment approval I applied for in XXXX, as the landlord confronted me about an address I have no knowledge of. This shows the immediate harm caused. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX Issue : Wrong Address Law : FCRA 1681c forbids consumer reporting agencies from maintaining false identifying data.\n\nStory : This address appears to be completely fabricated, even listing an unusual zip code. Such errors can easily be indicators of identity theft or clerical data mix-ups. Including such fabricated detail in my file could mislead anyone reviewing my credit report into believing that I have suspicious or fraudulent ties. This inaccurate reporting puts me at risk not only for credit denials but also for wrongful fraud investigations. \n\nACCOUNTS REPORTED WITH INACCURATE STATUS XXXX  XXXX XXXX | High Balance : {$290.00} | Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Late Payment Law : FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) requires accuracy in late payment reporting, and unverifiable entries must be corrected or deleted. \nStory : The so-called late payment is entirely misrepresented. I consistently made my payments, though XXXX particular billing cycle payment was processed through an electronic transfer that experienced delays beyond my control. The creditor was aware of this and waived the fee, yet my credit file reflects a late mark. This is misleading and does not provide the full context. Because of this unfair late mark, my loan application for a credit consolidation plan in XXXX was denied, costing me financial opportunities and forcing me to pay higher interest on other obligations. This demonstrates direct harm caused by wrongful reporting. \n\nXXXX XXXX | High Balance : {$240.00} | Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Charge Off Law : FDCPA 807 strictly prohibits furnishing false status on consumer obligations. \nStory : This account is incorrectly reported as a charge-off. I had set up an agreement with the lender to modify the repayment schedule. Instead of reflecting this arrangement, the creditor chose to report it as a charge-off, undermining my credit health. False reporting of a charge-off reflects extreme delinquency, creating a narrative that is completely untrue about my financial reliability. Because of this misreporting, I was denied access to a secured loan which could have improved my financial situation. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX | High Balance : {$480.00} | Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Charge Off Law : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) forbids knowingly providing inaccurate info to a bureau. \nStory : This account incorrectly duplicates my prior XXXX XXXX account with a charge-off notation. This duplicated account is both misleading and unlawful. I have faced repeated declines for credit limit increases simply because it appears as if I have XXXX separate XXXX XXXX charge-offs on my profile when in reality, this data is wrong and duplicate. \n\nXXXX XXXX | High Balance : {$720.00} | Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Late Payment Law : FCRA 611 requires reinvestigation when late payment disputes are raised.\n\nStory : The late notations tied to this account stemmed from billing errors acknowledged by the company. I made payments in good faith and promptly communicated with them, yet my credit report still reflects derogatory marks. These derogatories not only lower my score but mischaracterize me as financially negligent when in fact I acted responsibly and within the periods granted. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX | High Balance : {$8800.00} | Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Charge Off Law : FDCPA 807 & FCRA 623 ( b ) prohibit continued reporting of inaccurate data after a dispute.\n\nStory : This account reflects a repossession dispute. Instead of properly investigating and adjusting their data, the company labeled my account as charged off, burying the true circumstances. By reporting a charge-off here, they unjustly extend the punishment of a repossession into another negative category, effectively double-counting harm against my financial profile. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX | High Balance : {$560.00} | Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Collection Law : FDCPA 809 ( b ) requires that debts in collection be validated when requested. \nStory : This collection account was never validated. I requested documentation and proof of the original contract multiple times but was ignored. Despite this, the reporting continues, marking my profile with yet another derogatory that discourages lenders from offering me fair terms. Continuing to report a collection without validation is not only unfair but unlawful. \n\nLegal Basis for Complaint : FCRA 1681i ( a ) : Requires credit reporting agencies to investigate and correct inaccurate information.\n\nFCRA 604 ( a ) : Unauthorized inquiries are prohibited.\n\nFDCPA 1692e & 1692f : Prohibits false or misleading representations by debt collectors.\n\nFDCPA 1692c ( b ) : Prohibits disclosure of consumer information to unauthorized third parties. \nRequested Action : XXXX. Correct all inaccurate addresses on my credit report. \nXXXX. Investigate and remove all false late payments, charge-offs, and collections. \nXXXX. Remove all unauthorized hard inquiries. \nXXXX. Provide written confirmation of corrections to me and all major credit bureaus. \nI urge the CFPB to intervene to ensure compliance with federal law and the protection of my rights. If these violations continue unaddressed, I am prepared to pursue further legal remedies under FCRA and FDCPA, including filing complaints with the FTC. \nThank you for your immediate attention to this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-21T00:18:16.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"281XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15399597","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-08-21T00:15:09.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Story : This <em>account</em> incorrectly duplicates my prior XXXX XXXX <em>account</em> with a <em>charge</em>-off notation. This duplicated <em>account</em> is both misleading and unlawful. I <em>have</em> faced repeated declines for credit limit increases simply because it appears as if I <em>have</em> XXXX separate XXXX XXXX <em>charge</em>-offs on my profile when in reality, this data is wrong and duplicate."]},"sort":[12.088725,"15399597"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10631047","_score":11.993596,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is directly linked to complaint XXXX and is about Wells Fargo XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and disputed financial responsibility. I am limiting this complaint to just one thing. \nSubject : After the disputed transactions, my Wells Fargo XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX had to be cancelled and a new one issued. \nSources of Information : Wells Fargo Online Website, Communication with Wells Fargo and notes thereof, my account statements, my phone logs which I got from XXXX, a page printed from the Wells Fargo branch in XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX  : I was victim of imposter scam and had my family threatened if I didn't do what was told. I made no calls to Wells Fargo. I did not cancel or close my card. \nXXXX : I went into the Wells Fargo XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX And spoke with XXXX XXXX, Senior XXXX XXXXr, Sr. Assist. VP. After XXXXXXXX XXXX. I told him the whole story, stating I needed to cancel both my debit card and my XXXX XXXX XXXX card and get new ones. He looked into a screen and said the transactions had not been received and therefore I owed no money. He canceled my cards and ordered new ones. I made no calls to Wells Fargo. On my phone logs are 2 calls made to Wells Fargo at XXXX to ensure my cards were cancelled and there were no Pending charges. The acct balance was XXXX. This was at XXXXXXXX XXXX anXXXX XXXX XXXX Talked with 2 people. These are the only telephone calls I made regarding canceling my credit card and requesting replacement. \nI know the date and time of canceling the cards and issuing replacements is vital when you have been billed Because if a card was cancelled before the company receives the charges, the company is not required to pay them. And I wouldn't have to be going through all of this. \nThe first indication I had anything was wrong was a letter I received from Wells Fargo dated XX/XX/2024, XXXX. XXXX. From Claims and Recovery Credit Card Fraud Claims, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, NC XXXX. It states that they are researching unauthorized transactions I reported. So to protect my account. They closed it and opened a new one. They did not close it. I did at the branch bank as described above. I was deep into dealing with another provider. I didn't reply or correct them as I thought everything was sorted. \nTime passed. The charges showed up for {$700.00}. \nAfter talking to different people, I realized I was hearing different dates from different people. I couldn't get any information that matched mine. So was escalated to XXXX, XXXX, in the Consumer Advocacy unit. Really an escalated specialist acting on behalf of Wells Fargo, not me. She reopened my case. On XX/XX/2024, XXXX called me to let me know that the next level up would be making their decision and contacting me. As we were going through facts, I mentioned that I was hearing different information from different people including when and how the acct was closed, and how I had gone into the branch to do it although I kept hearing I called and then there's the letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX was honestly shocked. You went into the branch? Yes. The one you said is on XXXX? Yes. Her screen said I called it in. She wouldn't give me any more information, saying she would pass that on and for me to expect a letter, which resolved in Wells Fargo favor. \nThis complaint is about the day and time the account was closed. \nThis week I decided to strike out and find out for myself so I started by going to Wells Fargo branch on XXXX XXXX to speak with XXXX XXXX as XXXX was sure he would confirm my story. \nHe was busy. I sat down with XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX, to wait for him and talk to her, thinking that she could confirm me coming into the branch on XX/XX/XXXX closing my accts and requesting new ones. Her screen only told her about the debit card and didn't mention my credit card at all. She printed out a copy of that transaction and told me that that could be proof. But I didn't think so. I made an appt with XXXX XXXX for noon and came back then to talk. He remembered me perfectly, saying that he had closed both cards and made the call to cancel them. He then looked at his screen and looked unhappy. I asked what was going on. I needed the time. He said he couldn't give it to me or even let me know what it was saying. He did tell me that the screen was showing I cancelled it on the XXXX, the day of disaster by phone. He was very flustered. My phone logs show I made no call to them on the XXXX. He said he could show me and printed out a copy of my last statement. \nWhen I had received it at home, there was a line for XX/XX/2024 that said adjustments/purchases {$700.00}. This was under credits. I assumed this was Wells Fargo XXXX that I didn't owe the money. Wrong. \nXXXX XXXX got the copy of my last statement, pointed to the line that said XXXX. He said that when he sees that he knows there is something going on especially as he could see Wells Fargo was saying I cancelled the card on that day with a telephone call. I asked him if he would be willing to notate on the statement that I didn't call Wells Fargo on the XXXX and that I had come to his office and did that. He refused, saying he was sure he would get fired for that. Then I asked him if he would make a statement on a blank piece of paper and again, said no, he would get fired. So no luck there except establishing that I was in the office to close my cards. Now the most important thing was the time. I needed to relate the time I cancelled the card to the time the transactions processed. Next step, XXXX, XX/XX/2024 speaking with either XXXX or XXXX or both. What's important is what I learned. \nThe card was closed and canceled on XX/XX/2024 by me in person. Her screen did not show the time. But it did show that they didn't do any work, like actually closing it, until XX/XX/2024. \nThere is no other notation on her screen. When asking about my calls I made the afternoon of XX/XX/XXXX, she said the calls are logged but there is no notation as to what they were about. She was not willing to try to to find the time, adding that she doesn't even have access to those records. \nSo my complaint is : I think Wells Fargo created a narrative that suited their purposes. Both the letter dated XXXX saying they closed it on my behalf, and XXXX and other representatives saying I did not go into the branch on the XXXX and it was not closed then -- fact checked. False. \nSo this complaint is about the day and time my card was in reality closed. I have the days now. I closed it on XX/XX/2024 at the branch office, Wells Fargo did not close it until XX/XX/2024. I still don't know what time.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-04T20:22:39.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"32955","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10631047","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2024-10-30T19:56:00.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["When asking about my calls I <em>made</em> the afternoon of XX/XX/XXXX, she said the calls are logged but there is no notation as to what they were about. She was not willing to try to to find the time, adding that she doesn't even <em>have</em> access to those records. \nSo my <em>complaint</em> is : I think Wells Fargo created a <em>narrative</em> that suited their purposes."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[11.993596,"10631047"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15958364","_score":11.963701,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is being filed under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1692 ). I am disputing the following accounts and inquiries that are being reported inaccurately, unlawfully, and without proper validation. These entries are harming my credit standing, financial reputation, and overall stability. \nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, TX XXXX Wrong Address This is not my residence and has been incorrectly added to my credit report. Reporting this address without proper verification is a violation of FCRA 607 ( b ) which requires maximum possible accuracy. The presence of this false address creates identity confusion and raises the risk of fraud against me. Because of this false entry, I was questioned by a lender about whether I lived there, which caused embarrassment and made me appear dishonest even though I have never lived at this address. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, TX XXXX Wrong Address This is not my residence. Maintaining false addresses is a reckless violation of my rights and creates a false narrative that I have resided in places where I never lived. This compromises my financial stability and could be considered negligent under FCRA 623. Due to this false listing, I was flagged for a fraud alert during a car loan application, which delayed approval and left me humiliated in front of the dealership. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  High Balance : {$1000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment This account is reporting late payments that are not accurate. Creditors are required under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) to report only complete and accurate information. These alleged late payments are harming my creditworthiness and I dispute them as unverifiable. I demand deletion unless proper validation can be provided. Because of these false late payments, I was denied a credit card that could have helped me rebuild my credit and improve my financial situation. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  High Balance : {$1900.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Charge Off This charge off is being reported inaccurately. Under FCRA and FDCPA, no debt may be reported as valid without clear validation and verification of the amount, ownership, and accuracy. This account is creating serious harm to my financial stability, and I dispute the legality of its reporting. Due to this false charge off, I was turned away from a personal loan application, which made it impossible for me to cover urgent expenses and left me feeling helpless. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX High Balance : {$430.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Charge Off This charge off account is not validated. Utility accounts should not be reported as charge offs without accurate documentation. Reporting this without proof is deceptive and violates FCRA accuracy standards. This account is disputed in full and must be deleted immediately. Because of this account, I was forced to pay higher deposits for utilities when moving to a new home, which caused unnecessary financial hardship on me and my family. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX High Balance : {$18000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment This account is showing late payments that are not accurate. I have not received proper documentation proving these late entries. Under FCRA 609 and 611, I demand full validation of these alleged late payments or immediate deletion. This inaccurate reporting is obstructing my ability to secure housing and financial opportunities. Because of these false late marks, I was denied financing for a vehicle I desperately needed for work, which affected my income and stability. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX High Balance : {$880.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Collection This account is reporting as a collection, but I have never received proper validation or proof that this debt is mine. Under FDCPA 809 and FCRA 623, furnishers are required to verify debt ownership and accuracy before reporting. Because of this false reporting, I was denied a store credit card and accused of being delinquent on accounts that I never authorized. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  High Balance : {$770.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Collection This account is being reported without validation. I have not received any notice of debt as required under FDCPA 809 ( a ). Reporting this without giving me an opportunity to dispute violates my consumer rights. Because of this false account, I was treated unfairly by a landlord who viewed me as financially irresponsible and denied me housing.\n\nStory and Harm Caused : These false collections and unauthorized inquiries are not just technical violations ; they have real-life consequences. Because of these inaccurate reports, I have been denied credit, charged higher interest, blocked from housing opportunities, and forced to pay more for basic financial services. These violations are causing severe emotional XXXX, embarrassment, and financial damage.\n\nDemand for Relief : I respectfully demand that the CFPB investigate these violations and require the deletion of all unverifiable collections and unauthorized inquiries from my credit report. These accounts and inquiries must be permanently removed as they violate both the FCRA and FDCPA. If corrective action is not taken, I will be forced to pursue additional remedies, including legal action un\nder FCRA 616 and 617 for damages.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-15T20:17:53.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77477","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15958364","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-09-15T20:14:58.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This <em>account</em> is creating serious harm to my financial stability, and I dispute the legality of its reporting. Due to this false <em>charge</em> off, I was turned away from a personal loan application, which <em>made</em> it impossible for me to cover urgent expenses and left me feeling helpless. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX High Balance : {$430.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX <em>Charge</em> Off This <em>charge</em> off <em>account</em> is not validated."]},"sort":[11.963701,"15958364"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15436031","_score":11.930733,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am filing this formal complaint against TransUnion LLC for repeatedly and willfully reporting false, inaccurate, and misleading information on my credit report. Despite my previous disputes, TransUnion continues to allow accounts, addresses, and inquiries that are unverifiable, contradictory, and harmful to remain on my file. This is a direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), and my consumer rights. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Late Payment Issue : Showing late payments even though balance is {$0.00}. \nLaw : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) forbids reporting information that is knowingly inaccurate. \nStory : It is unfair and misleading to mark this account as late when there is no outstanding balance. This creates a false image that I failed to pay when the account was in fact at XXXX. Because of this, lenders view me as a high-risk borrower. I have been denied opportunities and treated like I do not honor my obligations, which is humiliating. It causes unnecessary stress every time I try to apply for something as simple as a small credit line or rental housing. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Charge Off Issue : Reported as a charge off but balance is {$0.00}. \nLaw : FCRA 607 ( b ) requires maximum possible accuracy in reporting. \nStory : Reporting an account as charged off while also showing no balance is contradictory and deceptive. It portrays me as someone who defaulted on an obligation that does not even exist anymore. This has harmed me by lowering my credit score, making employers who check my credit view me as irresponsible, and preventing me from moving forward financially. This kind of misreporting is not just an error it is a stain on my reputation, making me look like someone who walks away from debts, which is completely untrue. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Charge Off Issue : Reporting both charge off and {$0.00} balance. \nLaw : FCRA 602 ( A ) demands fairness and accuracy in credit reporting. \nStory : This contradiction is creating a false narrative about me. A charge off is one of the most damaging statuses that can appear on a credit report, yet here it is being falsely applied even when no debt exists. This is deeply unfair because lenders see charge off and immediately assume I am a financial risk. It has created anxiety and despair for me every time I am turned down for credit. I am being judged for something that is not real, and this wrongful reporting is devastating. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Charge Off Issue : Another false charge off with a XXXX balance. \nLaw : FCRA 623 ( b ) obligates furnishers to correct and delete inaccurate information once disputed. \nStory : This account is also misreported, and it is worsening my credit profile. Having multiple false charge offs listed makes me look like I am financially reckless when I am not. This has resulted in denials for basic credit products, higher interest rates, and overall financial hardship. I have lost opportunities and suffered emotionally because of the shame and stress of being unfairly labeled as someone who defaults. \nXXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Issue : Multiple unauthorized inquiries from the same source. \nLaw : FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) limits inquiries to authorized purposes only. \nStory : These three entries suggest that I made multiple credit applications, which is false. They create the illusion of excessive credit-seeking behavior. This kind of reporting damages my reputation, lowers my score, and creates unnecessary barriers when I try to improve my financial standing. It also makes me worry that my information is being misused or accessed without proper safeguards. \nXXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Issue : Unauthorized hard pulls lowering my score. \nLaw : FCRA 604 and FDCPA 807 ( 8 ) prohibit misrepresenting consumer credit activity. \nStory : These three unauthorized inquiries damage my score and portray me as financially unstable. Each entry adds to the false image of desperation for credit. This has caused denials for auto loans, credit cards, and even apartment rentals. These false inquiries are making me look unreliable when the truth is I did not authorize them. \nXXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Issue : Unauthorized multiple inquiries. \nLaw : FCRA 604 and 616 hold furnishers and CRAs liable for unauthorized access. \nStory : I never consented to these hard pulls. Having multiple XXXX inquiries creates a damaging picture that I am shopping around for risky loans. This has led to lenders questioning my stability and rejecting my applications. It also makes me fear that my personal data is being misused by third parties without my knowledge. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Issue : Unauthorized mortgage-related inquiries. \nLaw : FCRA 604 only allows permissible purposes with consumer consent. \nStory : I was not applying for a mortgage on this date. These inquiries create the false image that I was seeking a mortgage, which lowers my score and makes me look financially unstable. Landlords and creditors may wrongly assume I am overextended or dishonest. This is extremely stressful and unfair. \nXXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Issue : Inquiries with no permissible purpose. \nLaw : FCRA 604 and 607 ( b ) prohibit inaccurate and unauthorized reporting. \nStory : These inquiries were not initiated by me, yet they remain on my file. They create a harmful pattern of false credit-seeking behavior that hurts my score and makes me appear desperate for credit. This results in higher interest rates and constant denials, which is a direct injury to my financial life and peace of mind. \nSummary of Harm : TransUnions ongoing allowance of these inaccuracies has caused me repeated denials for credit cards, auto loans, and even rental applications. I have been embarrassed, stressed, and humiliated by having to explain false information that should never have been reported. These errors lower my credit score, damage my reputation, and limit my access to fair credit opportunities. \nRequested Relief : 1. Immediate deletion of all wrong addresses, false accounts, and unauthorized inquiries listed above. \n2. Written confirmation of deletions and corrections. \n3. Enforcement action against TransUnion for repeated violations of the FCRA and FDCPA. \n4. Compensation for damages caused by this false reporting, including financial losses and emotional distress. \nI request that the CFPB investigate this matter immediately and hold TransUnion accountable for their repeated negligence and willful non-compliance with federal law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-21T19:31:54.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"37931","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15436031","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-08-21T19:26:22.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I <em>have</em> been embarrassed, stressed, and humiliated by <em>having</em> to explain false information that should never <em>have</em> been reported. These errors lower my credit score, damage my reputation, and limit my access to fair credit opportunities. \nRequested Relief : 1. Immediate deletion of all wrong addresses, false <em>accounts</em>, and <em>unauthorized</em> inquiries listed above. \n2. Written confirmation of deletions and corrections. \n3."]},"sort":[11.930733,"15436031"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15434103","_score":11.866707,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am filing this formal complaint against Experian for repeatedly and willfully reporting false, inaccurate, and misleading information on my credit report. Despite my previous disputes, Experian continues to allow accounts, addresses, and inquiries that are unverifiable, contradictory, and harmful to remain on my file. This is a direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), and my consumer rights. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, TN XXXX Wrong Address Issue : This is not my address and has no connection with me. \nLaw : FCRA 602 ( A ) and 607 ( b ) require CRAs to report only accurate consumer information.\n\nStory : This false address has made my credit profile look unstable and fraudulent. I have never lived here, never received mail here, and have no relationship to this location. Because of this false reporting, I have been treated suspiciously by lenders who question why multiple unrelated addresses appear on my credit file. It makes me appear like someone with a hidden or deceptive background, when the truth is that this entry is entirely false. Wrong addresses can also expose me to identity theft because it links me to locations I have never lived in. This has caused embarrassment, rejection on applications, and fear for my personal identity safety. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Late Payment Issue : Showing late payments even though balance is {$0.00}. \nLaw : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) forbids reporting information that is knowingly inaccurate. \nStory : It is unfair and misleading to mark this account as late when there is no outstanding balance. This creates a false image that I failed to pay when the account was in fact at XXXX. Because of this, lenders view me as a high-risk borrower. I have been denied opportunities and treated like I do not honor my obligations, which is humiliating. It causes unnecessary stress every time I try to apply for something as simple as a small credit line or rental housing. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Charge Off Issue : Reported as a charge off but balance is {$0.00}. \nLaw : FCRA 607 ( b ) requires maximum possible accuracy in reporting. \nStory : Reporting an account as charged off while also showing no balance is contradictory and deceptive. It portrays me as someone who defaulted on an obligation that does not even exist anymore. This has harmed me by lowering my credit score, making employers who check my credit view me as irresponsible, and preventing me from moving forward financially. This kind of misreporting is not just an error it is a stain on my reputation, making me look like someone who walks away from debts, which is completely untrue. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Charge Off Issue : Reporting both charge off and {$0.00} balance. \nLaw : FCRA 602 ( A ) demands fairness and accuracy in credit reporting.\n\nStory : This contradiction is creating a false narrative about me. A charge off is one of the most damaging statuses that can appear on a credit report, yet here it is being falsely applied even when no debt exists. This is deeply unfair because lenders see charge off and immediately assume I am a financial risk. It has created anxiety and despair for me every time I am turned down for credit. I am being judged for something that is not real, and this wrongful reporting is devastating. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Charge Off Issue : Another false charge off with a XXXX balance. \nLaw : FCRA 623 ( b ) obligates furnishers to correct and delete inaccurate information once disputed. \nStory : This account is also misreported, and it is worsening my credit profile. Having multiple false charge offs listed makes me look like I am financially reckless when I am not. This has resulted in denials for basic credit products, higher interest rates, and overall financial hardship. I have lost opportunities and suffered emotionally because of the shame and stress of being unfairly labeled as someone who defaults. \nXXXX XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Issue : Multiple unauthorized inquiries from the same source. \nLaw : FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) limits inquiries to authorized purposes only.\n\nStory : These three entries suggest that I made multiple credit applications, which is false. They create the illusion of excessive credit-seeking behavior. This kind of reporting damages my reputation, lowers my score, and creates unnecessary barriers when I try to improve my financial standing. It also makes me worry that my information is being misused or accessed without proper safeguards. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Issue : Unauthorized hard pulls lowering my score. \nLaw : FCRA 604 and FDCPA 807 ( 8 ) prohibit misrepresenting consumer credit activity.\n\nStory : These three unauthorized inquiries damage my score and portray me as financially unstable. Each entry adds to the false image of desperation for credit. This has caused denials for auto loans, credit cards, and even apartment rentals. These false inquiries are making me look unreliable when the truth is I did not authorize them. \nXXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX : Unauthorized multiple inquiries. \nLaw : FCRA 604 and 616 hold furnishers and CRAs liable for unauthorized access. \nStory : I never consented to these hard pulls. Having multiple XXXX inquiries creates a damaging picture that I am shopping around for risky loans. This has led to lenders questioning my stability and rejecting my applications. It also makes me fear that my personal data is being misused by third parties without my knowledge. \nXXXX XXXX  XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Issue : Unauthorized mortgage-related inquiries. \nLaw : FCRA 604 only allows permissible purposes with consumer consent. \nStory : I was not applying for a mortgage on this date. These inquiries create the false image that I was seeking a mortgage, which lowers my score and makes me look financially unstable. Landlords and creditors may wrongly assume I am overextended or dishonest. This is extremely stressful and unfair. \nSummary of Harm : Experians ongoing allowance of these inaccuracies has caused me repeated denials for credit cards, auto loans, and even rental applications. I have been embarrassed, stressed, and humiliated by having to explain false information that should never have been reported. These errors lower my credit score, damage my reputation, and limit my access to fair credit opportunities. \nRequested Relief : 1. Immediate deletion of all wrong addresses, false accounts, and unauthorized inquiries listed above.\n\n2. Written confirmation of deletions and corrections.\n\n3. Enforcement action against Experian for repeated violations of the FCRA and FDCPA.\n\n4. Compensation for damages caused by this false reporting, including financial losses and emotional distress. \nI request that the CFPB investigate this matter immediately and hold Experian accountable for their repeated negligence and willful non-compliance with federal law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-21T19:33:40.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"37931","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15434103","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-08-21T19:29:24.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I <em>have</em> been embarrassed, stressed, and humiliated by <em>having</em> to explain false information that should never <em>have</em> been reported. These errors lower my credit score, damage my reputation, and limit my access to fair credit opportunities. \nRequested Relief : 1. Immediate deletion of all wrong addresses, false <em>accounts</em>, and <em>unauthorized</em> inquiries listed above.\n\n2. Written confirmation of deletions and corrections.\n\n3."]},"sort":[11.866707,"15434103"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15255240","_score":11.7484255,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to formally dispute multiple inaccuracies on my credit report that have caused significant financial harm, stress, and reputational damage. These inaccuracies include wrong addresses, late payments, charge-offs, collection accounts, and unauthorized hard inquiries. Despite my efforts to correct these errors with the reporting agencies, they persist, which is not only unfair but also violates my rights under federal law. \nFrom the outset, I have observed persistent misreporting, including addresses that have never been associated with me, accounts inaccurately marked as late or charged-off, and collection entries I do not recognize. These errors have caused undue stress, financial limitations, and damage to my creditworthiness. Despite my efforts to resolve these errors directly with the reporting agencies, the inaccuracies remain. I am invoking my rights under FCRA to ensure that all erroneous information is corrected immediately. \nXXXX Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Issue : Late Payment Law : FCRA 1681i Requires verification of disputed information and deletion if unverifiable. \nStory : I have consistently made timely payments on this account. The reported late payments are entirely inaccurate and have caused unnecessary damage to my credit profile. The financial institutions negligence in reporting accurate information has left me unfairly penalized, impacting my XXXX XXXX and borrowing capacity. \nXXXX  Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Issue : Late Payment Law : FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) Obligation of furnishers to provide accurate information. \nStory : I have maintained regular payments and have documentation proving no late payments occurred. The reporting of delinquency is false and unjustified. This misreporting has led to repeated inquiries being viewed negatively by lenders and has compromised my financial opportunities. \nXXXX Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Issue : XXXX XXXX : FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) Requires furnisher to correct or delete inaccurate information after notice. \nXXXX : This account has been inaccurately charged-off despite all payments being up to date or resolved. This charge-off falsely reflects financial irresponsibility and severely reduces my ability to secure credit. Immediate investigation and correction are required. \nXXXX Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Issue : XXXX XXXX : FCRA 1681i ( a ) CRAs must delete unverifiable information within XXXX  days. \nXXXX : The charge-off listed is inaccurate. I have paid all obligations or have a standing agreement with the creditor. The presence of this charge-off in my credit report is fraudulent, misleading lenders, and limiting my financial mobility. \nXXXX Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Issue : XXXX XXXX : FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) Correct inaccurate reporting after dispute. \nXXXX : This account shows a charge-off that never occurred. The reporting entity has failed to ensure the accuracy of the account status. This false information directly harms my creditworthiness and must be removed promptly. \nXXXX XXXX Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Issue : Late Payment Law : FCRA 1681i ( a ) Disputed information must be investigated.\n\nStory : I have never missed a payment on this account as documented in my statements. The reported late payment is a clear misrepresentation and has unnecessarily damaged my credit history. Immediate correction is requested. \nXXXX Account # XXXX XXXX Issue : Late Payment Law : FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) Furnishers must ensure accurate information reporting. \nStory : All payments were made in a timely manner. Misreporting late payments affects my financial credibility, and I insist on verification and correction. \nXXXX Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Issue : Late Payment Law : FCRA 1681i ( a ) Credit bureaus must remove unverifiable disputed information. \nXXXX : The reported late payments are false. I have documentation to prove all payments were timely. This inaccurate reporting diminishes my creditworthiness and misleads potential lenders. \nXXXX Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Issue : Charge-off Law : FCRA 1681i Obligation to investigate disputes and remove unverified items. \nXXXX : The charge-off reported on this account is incorrect. It creates a false narrative of financial irresponsibility, limiting my ability to obtain future credit and negatively impacting my personal finances. \nXXXX XXXX  Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX ( Balance {$250.00}, Opened XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Issue : Collection Law : FCRA 1681i ( a ) CRAs must investigate disputes thoroughly. \nXXXX : This collection is misreported. The negative effect on my credit limits my ability to obtain loans or financial services. Immediate correction or removal is demanded. \nXXXX Accounts ( Multiple # XXXX : XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ) Issue : Collection Law : FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) & 1681i ( a ) Accurate reporting and dispute investigation required. \nStory : These accounts are all misreported as delinquent. I have records proving no outstanding debts for these accounts. Their reporting is severely damaging to my financial credibility and must be corrected immediately. \nXXXX  Account # XXXX ( Balance {$840.00}, Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Issue : Collection Law : FCRA 1681i ( a ) Credit bureaus must verify disputed items or remove them. \nStory : I dispute this debt as it is incorrectly attributed to me. The false reporting restricts my access to credit and financial services. Immediate investigation and removal are necessary. \nXXXX XXXX  Accounts ( Remaining # XXXX : XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ) Issue : Collection Law : FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) & 1681i ( a ) Ensure maximum accuracy and remove unverifiable debts. \nStory : Each of these accounts is inaccurately reported. Their repeated presence on my credit report compounds the negative impact on my XXXX XXXX and misleads lenders. XXXX or deletion is demanded immediately. \nXXXX Account # XXXX ( Balance {$500.00}, Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Issue : Collection Law : FCRA 1681i ( a ) CRAs must investigate disputed information. \nStory : I have no obligation related to this account. Its reporting is erroneous and adversely affects my credit score, limiting financial opportunities. Immediate removal is required. \nInquiries : - XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Issue : Unauthorized Hard Inquiry Law : FCRA 1681b ( f ) Hard inquiries require permissible purpose ; unauthorized inquiries must be removed. \nStory : I did not authorize these inquiries. Their presence is unfair and negatively affects my creditworthiness. Immediate deletion is requested.\n\nConclusion : These repeated inaccuracies, misreported late payments, charge-offs, collections, incorrect addresses, and unauthorized inquiries constitute multiple violations of the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 ). They have caused severe financial harm, undue stress, and hindered my ability to access credit. I demand that all inaccurate information be investigated, corrected, or removed immediately. Failure to resolve these disputes will compel me to escalate the matter, including filing complaints with the FTC, seeking legal remedies, and pursuing civil action for damages caused by negligent reporting.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-13T21:25:41.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77088","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15255240","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-08-13T21:23:13.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am submitting this <em>complaint</em> to formally dispute multiple inaccuracies on my credit report that <em>have</em> caused significant financial harm, stress, and reputational damage. These inaccuracies include wrong addresses, late payments, <em>charge</em>-offs, collection <em>accounts</em>, and <em>unauthorized</em> hard inquiries. Despite my efforts to correct these errors with the reporting agencies, they persist, which is not only unfair but also violates my rights under federal law."]},"sort":[11.7484255,"15255240"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5765019","_score":11.56882,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"The below narrative can also be found on the attached file named \" Complaint Letter.pdf ''. \n\nI want to file a complaint about HSBC XXXX on them not exercising due diligence and inappropriately reporting me to the credit bureau for late payment. \nI am a current HSBC credit card holder. However, I rarely use HSBC 's credit card. ( please see the attached HSBC credit card statement regarding my usage of HSBC 's credit card ). \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I was charged by a merchant ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) without my consent for USD XXXX. Since I rarely use HSBC 's credit card and knowing that I haven't used it for months, I was not tracking my statement. Owing to this, I had a missed payment and I was notified by HSBC via a letter for non-payment. I called HSBC on XX/XX/XXXX and disputed the charge as I did not authorize it. I also told HSBC that to block this merchant from charging me again in the future. HSBC acknowledged ( acknowledged by HSBC XXXX XXXX, employee ID XXXX ) over the phone to me that they had disputed the charge. HSBC claimed that the charge for whatever reason was valid, but they had refunded me the late fee and interest charge. I was assured by a HSBC associate that I should not expect any unauthorized from that merchant. I have also explicitly asked HSBC to remove my late payment record that they had reported to the credit bureau due to the fact that it was an unauthorized charge and I should not be responsible for the payment. HSBC said over the phone to me that they had filed a correction request to the credit bureau, but to my knowledge they did not do anything as the late payment record can still be found on my credit report. \n\nTo my disbelief, 8 Months after on XX/XX/XXXX I was again charged by the same merchant XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) for USD XXXX, on my new, replaced HSBC credit card ( HSBC had since replaced my credit card twice ). Since I haven't used my replaced card ( and knowing I probably never will ), I was not monitoring the credit card statement. That again incured a late fee and interest charged. I called HSBC on XX/XX/XXXX to reason and dispute with HSBC, and HSBC agreed to I ) remove the late fee and interest charge, XXXX ) start an investigation and dispute the charges, and ; III ) try to remove the late payment record reported to the credit bureau as I have disputed the event, and also to the fact that I have asked HSBC to block that merchant from charging me again in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nHSBC submitted a credit bureau dispute on XX/XX/XXXX, but then they replied to me via a letter that no late payment was reported to the credit bureau during that period, and thus there is nothing to correct. Since the result of dispute investigation was not made known to me by that time, I decided to wait and act until the investigation is done and communicated with me. Little did I know that during that period, HSBC reported me to the credit agency that I missed another payment. I was shocked to learn this only through my credit monitoring app ( \" XXXX XXXX  '' ). HSBC effectively just told me to wait for the investigation but also on the other hand reported me to the credit bureau on a late payment that I have just disputed and explicitly asked them not to. I called immediately HSBC on XX/XX/XXXX and spoke with HSBC XXXX XXXX ( Employee ID XXXX ) and asked how did this happen. I found that not only HSBC has not cleaned up my credit report from XX/XX/XXXX, but they were now adding another late payment record to my credit report in XXXX. I immediately asked XXXX to help to put a stop to my entire card. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX confirmed that HSBC has filed a dispute regarding both my XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX event to the credit bureau, and also my case was escalated and will be reviewed and contacted by someone from HSBC. During my talk with XXXX, I demand answers to the following questions : I ) I have disputed this merchant ( XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) once already on XX/XX/XXXX and asked for a permanent block from this merchant at that time. Why is this merchant allowed to continue to charge me? \nII ) I have already disputed the XX/XX/XXXX charges with HSBC by calling HSBC on XX/XX/XXXX. But why did HSBC just go ahead and reported me having a late payment when I was awaiting HSBC 's investigation result? This is not ethical, especially since HSBC knows that I cared about my XXXX XXXX and had communicated this explicitly with HSBC. \nIII ) I was assured by HSBC back in XXXX that I should have a new replacement card with a different card number and I shall not see any fraudulent charges. How did this happen again? \n\nI requested compensation for my loss. I was in a process of buying a house, and the sudden drop in XXXX XXXX caused me to lose the opportunity. I demanded compensation of either the amount of XXXX money or HSBC willing to be my loaner when another opportunity shows up. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email from XXXX XXXX, a Customer XXXX XXXX, citing my complaint number to be XXXX. I called that number given by XXXX at least 3 times and left messages, but I never got a response back from XXXX. I finally heard back from XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX ( Her response email is attached ). Her response was unacceptable to me, as she just noted that HSBC has found no wrongdoings and denied that I have requested to block transactions from merchant XXXX XXXX XXXX. This is in total contradiction to what the HSBC XXXX have told me during all the previous phone calls, and XXXX did not back up her statement with any more details. Upon confirmation with HSBC XXXX XXXX ( employee ID XXXX ), I confirmed that all HSBC phone calls are recorded. I thus requested HSBC to share those phone call recordings with me, especially concerning the phone call made on XX/XX/XXXX, as I clearly remember that I have asked HSBC to not let that merchant to charge me again on that day. XXXX has not responded to me since even though she had assured XXXX that she was going to communicate with me on XX/XX/XXXX. She never called me back nor respond to my request. \n\nI am deeply disappointed that HSBC has not exercised their due diligence to take heed to their customer 's requests, and even to some extent deceiving their customer in my view. In my case, I was told by multiple agents that a correction had been made to the credit bureau, but that never happened. I have asked HSBC to block the merchant from charging me again, yet that again never happen. What's most important is HSBC advised me that I can sit and wait until the investigation is complete on my disputed payment, but in reality, they reported me for late payment to the credit bureau while I was waiting for the investigation result. \n\nAttached below is supportive evidence \" Account summary and transactions.pdf ''. This shows that I rarely use HSBC 's credit card, and thus I did not actively monitor the credit card 's statement knowing that I had not used it. \n\" XX/XX/XXXX - 10 day letter.pdf ''. This shows that I had already had an issue with the merchant in the past for XXXX consecutive unauthorized {$5.00} USD charges and I had disputed XXXX of those ( i.e. {$5.00} USD ) to HSBC on XX/XX/XXXX. ( presumably, as I no longer have access to my old 's credit card bank statement to confirm ). \n\" XXXX  XXXX XXXX ''. This is the latest reply I got from HSBC. HSBC had not provided any objective evidence to support its claim for saying \" I found no instances before XX/XX/XXXX in which you requested to block any transactions from \" XXXX ''. \". My request for obtaining a record of the conversation I had with HSBC on XX/XX/XXXX has also been ignored by HSBC. XXXX XXXX XXXX is mentioned to be the Customer XXXX  XXXX, and XXXX XXXX is mentioned to be the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n*A copy of the conversation I had with HSBC XXXX XXXX XXXX Employee ID XXXX ) can also be provided if needed. I can not upload it as it exceeds CFBPs XXXX uploading limit. But please reach out to me for a copy if needed, as XXXX and I have discussed most of my claims above. \n\n\nXXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2022-07-12T06:18:24.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"98021","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5765019","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS INC.","date_received":"2022-07-12T05:36:17.000Z","state":"WA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with personal statement of dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The below <em>narrative</em> can also be found on the attached file named \" <em>Complaint</em> Letter.pdf ''. \n\nI want to file a <em>complaint</em> about HSBC XXXX on <em>them</em> not exercising due diligence and inappropriately reporting me to the credit bureau for late payment. \nI am a current HSBC credit card holder. However, I rarely use HSBC 's credit card. ( please see the attached HSBC credit card statement regarding my usage of HSBC 's credit card )."]},"sort":[11.56882,"5765019"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15546482","_score":11.472013,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I am filing this complaint against the credit reporting agencies and furnishers for multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq. ). My credit file contains inaccurate, unverifiable, and misleading information that has caused me financial harm, reputational damage, and emotional distress. Despite my disputes, these items remain uncorrected. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX APT XXXX XXXX XXXX, TX XXXX Wrong Address Issue : I have never lived at this address. It is a completely incorrect association on my credit profile.Law : Under FCRA 611, I have the right to dispute inaccurate information, and you must conduct a reinvestigation and remove unverifiable data.Story : Having this address tied to my file has caused repeated embarrassment and difficulty in proving my true residency. I have lost valuable time and money because creditors and employers question why I am linked to an unfamiliar residence. This creates a false narrative of instability, making it seem like I move frequently or hide my true history, which is not the case. These false addresses make it harder for me to rent an apartment, qualify for a loan, or even prove my background to potential employers. \nXXXX XXXX High Credit : {$29000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment Issue : The reported late payments are inaccurate, unverifiable, and misleading. They do not reflect my actual payment history.Law : Under FCRA 1681i and 1681e ( b ), the information reported must be accurate, complete, and properly verified.Story : The reporting of late payments has drastically lowered my XXXX XXXX, which has cost me countless opportunities. For example, I was recently denied refinancing on my car loan, forcing me to remain locked into a higher interest rate. This means I am paying hundreds of dollars more each month than I should. These false lates also prevented me from being approved for a mortgage, delaying my dream of becoming a homeowner. The stress, frustration, and humiliation of explaining to creditors that these lates are not mine has taken a serious emotional toll. \nXXXX XXXX High Credit : {$100.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Chargeoff Issue : Reported as a charge-off, but no proof of my responsibility has ever been provided.Law : Under FCRA 1681i and FDCPA 807, furnishing unverifiable information is unlawful.Story : The fact that such a tiny balance of {$100.00} is being used to label me as someone with a charge-off is outrageous. This false entry has unfairly kept me from getting approved for personal credit cards, auto loans, and better financing options. Lenders look at this report and assume I am irresponsible, when in fact the reporting is false. This has caused embarrassment in front of family and friends when I was denied credit in a store, simply because this unverifiable account is poisoning my file. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX High Credit : {$1200.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment Issue : The alleged late payments are inaccurate and no valid proof has been provided to substantiate them.Law : Under FCRA 611 and 1681i, you are obligated to reinvestigate and delete unverifiable items.Story : These false late payments are preventing me from moving forward in life. I was recently denied an auto loan, which has left me struggling with unreliable transportation. My XXXX XXXX has dropped significantly, making every financial decision harder and more expensive. I am paying higher insurance premiums, higher interest rates, and being denied basic opportunities because of these inaccurate reports. The emotional stress of being treated as delinquent when I am not has been overwhelming. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX LL XXXX High Credit : {$530.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Collection Issue : This collection is inaccurate and unverifiable. No signed contract or validation proving liability has been provided.Law : XXXX FCRA XXXX and FDCPA XXXX ( b ), debt furnishers must validate accounts before reporting them.Story : This small {$530.00} collection has had a disproportionate negative effect on my credit life. I was denied approval for a basic personal loan because lenders saw this collection and assumed I was irresponsible. I have had to explain myself to landlords who viewed me as a risk for rental housing. The embarrassment and stress of having to defend myself over something that is not even validated has been overwhelming. It has damaged my confidence and prevented me from pursuing financial opportunities that should have been available to me. \nUnauthorized & Excessive Inquiries XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Story : This unauthorized inquiry made me appear like I applied for a loan. It has hurt my credibility with lenders.Law : FCRA XXXX requires inquiries to be initiated by the consumer. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Story : This inquiry falsely portrays me as applying for multiple loans. My score was lowered unfairly.Law : FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) makes unauthorized inquiries unlawful. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Story : This inquiry connects me to an auto dealer I never authorized. It made me look desperate for financing.Law : FCRA 604 ( b ) requires my written authorization for such inquiries. \nXXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Story : I never applied for this credit card, yet the inquiry remains. It lowered my score and confused creditors.Law : FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 2 ) restricts inquiries unless I directly applied. \nDamages & Relief Requested The cumulative impact of these false addresses, unverifiable accounts, charge-offs, collections, and unauthorized inquiries has caused : Loan denials ( personal, auto, housing ) Higher insurance premiums Emotional distress, embarrassment, and reputational harm Loss of financial opportunities Requested Action : Require the credit reporting agencies and furnishers to delete or correct all disputed items immediately. \nEnsure compliance with FCRA 611, 616, and 617 for reinvestigation and consumer remedies.\n\nInvestigate the unauthorized inquiries and hold furnishers accountable for FCRA 604 violations. \nEnforce penalties for continued noncompliance. \nConclusion I respectfully request the CFPB to investigate these violations, hold the credit bureaus and furnishers accountable, and compel them to correct my credit file. I also request confirmation that these inaccurate items are permanently deleted.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-27T23:46:12.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"75126","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15546482","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-08-27T23:43:53.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The embarrassment and stress of <em>having</em> to defend myself over something that is not even validated has been overwhelming. It has damaged my confidence and prevented me from pursuing financial opportunities that should <em>have</em> been available to me. \n<em>Unauthorized</em> & Excessive Inquiries XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Inquiry Story : This <em>unauthorized</em> inquiry <em>made</em> me appear like I applied for a loan. It has hurt my credibility with lenders.Law : FCRA XXXX requires inquiries to be initiated by the consumer."]},"sort":[11.472013,"15546482"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14552238","_score":11.311833,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"To Whom It May Concern, I am filing this formal complaint against Experian due to their persistent and willful reporting of inaccurate, incomplete, and unverifiable information on my credit report. These errors are causing significant harm to my financial well-being and are in direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S. Code 1681. Despite previous disputes, XXXX  has failed to investigate or correct the false entries. I am now escalating to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to demand immediate enforcement of my rights. Below is a breakdown of each inaccurate entry : Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX Issue : This address is not associated with me at any point in time. I have never lived, worked, or conducted any financial business from this location. XXXX XXXXs reporting of this address is completely erroneous and misleading. \nLaw : FCRA 1681e ( b ) XXXX is required to maintain maximum possible accuracy. Reporting this wrong address demonstrates negligence and creates the risk of mixing my credit data with another individual 's.\n\nStory : Due to this false address, lenders have questioned my identity during credit checks, and I've been flagged for possible fraud. This has delayed credit approvals and caused emotional distress. Ive submitted utility bills, lease agreements, and my ID to show my real addresses, but XXXX ignored it. \nAddress : XXXX XXXX XXXX  CA XXXX Issue : This is another incorrect and unrecognized address appearing on my credit report.\n\nLaw : FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681i ( a ) XXXX must delete inaccurate data after a reinvestigation. Despite multiple requests and evidence, they have failed to remove this false address.\n\nStory : Having unverified addresses listed suggests potential identity theft or file contamination, and this creates mistrust between me and lenders. I have no ties to this location, yet my profile continues to carry this error. \nAccount : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance Owed : {$0.00} Status : Charge-Off * * Issue : This account is being inaccurately reported as a charge-off despite showing a {$0.00} balance. A charged-off status with no balance is contradictory and misleading. \nLaw : FCRA 1681e ( b ) requires accuracy in reporting. 1681i ( a ) failure to reasonably investigate disputed information. 1681s-2 ( b ) furnishers must correct or delete inaccurate data. \nStory : I disputed this account with proof that the account was settled and closed. XXXX  failed to correct the charge-off status, even after the creditor confirmed the balance is {$0.00}. The false charge-off is damaging my credit score and reputation. It implies I defaulted when I didnt, which has led to denial of loans and employment setbacks. \nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : I never interacted with Ally Financial or authorized a credit pull.\n\nLaw : FCRA 1681b ( f ) Story : Multiple lenders are running unauthorized inquiries, possibly due to incorrect addresses on my profile. XXXX negligence in protecting and validating my file is unacceptable. \nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : No permission was granted for this inquiry. \nLaw : FCRA 1681b ( f ) Story : These unverified inquiries are damaging my score and credibility. I reached out to XXXX and they confirmed no recent application was made. \nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Issue : No credit application from my side. \nLaw : FCRA 1681b Story : This inquiry could result from file confusion due to the inaccurate addresses listed earlier. XXXX has not secured my file from being accessed improperly. \nInquiry XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Unauthorized inquiry Law : FCRA 1681b ( f ) Story : I never attempted to open an account with this credit union. This inquiry misrepresents my credit behavior. \nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Never applied for credit with them Law : FCRA 1681b Story : Repeated errors like this one show XXXX lack of internal controls and failure to protect consumer data. \nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Unsolicited hard inquiry Law : FCRA 1681b Story : These errors are piling up and giving a false narrative to lenders about my borrowing habits. \nInquiry : XXXXXXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : I did not authorize this Law : FCRA 1681b Story : This company had no reason or right to access my credit. The inquiry was made without my knowledge. \nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Unauthorized inquiry Law : FCRA 1681b Story : This continued exposure of my credit file without justification has caused me emotional distress and financial harm.\n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX  Date : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Same as above Law : FCRA 1681b Story : XXXX repeated failure to filter unauthorized access shows a breach of consumer trust. \nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Duplicate unauthorized inquiry Law : FCRA 1681b Story : XXXX is showing up multiple times without justification. These inquiries collectively dropped my score and suggest potential identity misuse. \nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : No application was submitted Law : FCRA 1681b Story : I never applied for an XXXX line with XXXX, and yet XXXX  allowed the inquiry. This suggests a breach of my file or error in address matching. \nStory : These unauthorized pulls are impacting my ability to secure housing and auto loans due to \" excessive inquiriesXXXX XXXX XXXX  has failed to meet their responsibilities under FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681i ( a ), 1681s-2 ( b ), and 1681b. Their neglect in verifying information and securing my file from unauthorized access has caused severe and ongoing damage to my credit profile and personal life. I respectfully ask that the CFPB enforce compliance, require XXXX  to delete all inaccurate addresses, correct or delete the misreported account, and remove all unauthorized inquiries listed above. I am requesting a full investigation into these matters and appropriate regulatory penalties for XXXX failure to uphold the law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-09T13:23:42.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"92880","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14552238","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-07-09T13:20:56.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Account</em> : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance Owed : {$0.00} Status : <em>Charge</em>-Off * * Issue : This <em>account</em> is being inaccurately reported as a <em>charge</em>-off despite showing a {$0.00} balance. A charged-off status with no balance is contradictory and misleading. \nLaw : FCRA 1681e ( b ) requires accuracy in reporting. 1681i ( a ) failure to reasonably investigate disputed information. 1681s-2 ( b ) furnishers must correct or delete inaccurate data."]},"sort":[11.311833,"14552238"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15893823","_score":10.572409,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I am filing this complaint regarding multiple inaccurate, unverifiable, and unauthorized items on my credit report. These items violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681 ) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692 ). The continued reporting of these items has caused significant harm to my credit score, financial opportunities, and personal well-being. I demand immediate investigation, validation, and deletion of all unverifiable or inaccurate items. \nWrong Address Reporting ( Identity & FCRA Violation ) XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX XXXX XXXX, NJ XXXX Wrong Address I have never lived at this address. Allowing this false information to remain is reckless. Under FCRA 611 ( a ), disputed information must be verified or removed. Story : XXXX XXXX is not a city where I ever resided or worked. Having this address tied to my profile is extremely concerning because it shows potential mixed file or identity theft. This creates long-term financial damage and unnecessary investigations every time I apply for credit or employment. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NJ XXXX Wrong Address This incorrect address being reported suggests a possible case of mixed file or identity theft. It is unlawful under FCRA 605B for credit bureaus to knowingly continue reporting fraudulent or inaccurate information once disputed. Story : This XXXX address has no relation to me, yet it has been attached to my report for months. Each time I apply for housing or auto financing, creditors bring this up, questioning why so many suspicious addresses appear. This constant harassment and doubt is deeply unfair and damaging. \nAccount Issues ( Charge Offs and Inaccuracies ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$2000.00} Charge Off This account is being inaccurately reported as a charge off. The reporting lacks full documentation of original signed contract, payment history validation, and chain of custody of the account. Under FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ), I am entitled to original documentation to verify this account. Failure to provide such is grounds for deletion. Story : This account is over XXXX XXXX XXXX and has long exceeded the reasonable statute of limitations in my state. Yet it continues to reappear as a charge off, unfairly harming my score. I have repeatedly requested validation and none has been given. This makes it impossible for me to qualify for fair credit rates, and it has even affected my ability to refinance my vehicle loan. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$1900.00} Charge Off This account is also being reported as a charge off without proper verification. According to FCRA 611 and FDCPA 807 ( 8 ), debt collectors and furnishers may not report information they know to be false or unverifiable. Story : This account is from XXXX, and I no longer have any records or statements on it. If the furnisher can not provide original signed contracts and full history, it should not remain on my report. Having this old, unverifiable charge off makes me look like a high-risk borrower even though I have worked hard to rebuild my credit. This is blocking me from mortgage pre-approvals and better loan opportunities. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$2000.00} Charge Off This account is not properly validated and continues to appear with negative reporting. Without furnishing original signed agreements, full payment history, and proper validation, this reporting is illegal. FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) requires furnishers to report accurate information only. Story : XXXXXXXX XXXX  has refused to provide full validation. I was never given a breakdown of charges, late fees, or even proof that the balance is accurate. This shows they are reporting incomplete and inaccurate information. This charge off has followed me for years, hurting every attempt I make to secure credit for basic needs like auto loans and credit cards. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$400.00} Charge Off This charge off is being reported in error and without proper investigation. FCRA 611 ( b ) requires reinvestigation of disputed items. Story : This XXXX account was closed years ago and should not still be appearing as a charge off. The balance reported is inaccurate and no original contract or signed application has ever been produced. I am being punished for an account that is not even validated. Because of this small {$400.00} account, my creditworthiness has been destroyed in situations where lenders look at charge offs more harshly than collections. This false report is completely unfair and unlawful. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$300.00} Charge Off * * This account is reported as a charge off without any supporting documents such as contract, billing statements, or payment breakdown. Under FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ), the furnisher must produce the original contract. Story : I never received validation for this account. Even though the amount is small, the negative charge off is destroying my credit score. Lenders treat all charge offs the same, regardless of balance, which makes me look like a high-risk borrower. Because of this, I have been denied even small credit card applications and have faced embarrassing rejections at banks when applying for overdraft protection. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$1000.00} Charge Off * * This XXXX account is inaccurately reported. No signed contract or detailed records have been provided. FCRA 611 requires reinvestigation, but I was given a generic verified result without evidence. Story : I tried to resolve this directly with the bank, but they never gave me real proof. This account was reported as a charge off too quickly and unfairly. As a result, my creditworthiness has been destroyed when applying for retail and department store credit lines. Employers also check my report and this false entry has already impacted my job opportunities. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$4800.00} Charge Off * * This is one of the most harmful accounts being reported as a charge off. The balance shown is not consistent across bureaus, which proves inaccuracy. Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), furnishers must ensure accuracy. Story : XXXX has never shown me the full account breakdown. I have requested validation multiple times, but only received generic responses. This charge off, being nearly {$5000.00}, has blocked me from housing approvals and auto loan financing. Landlords have openly told me that this XXXX account made them deny my rental applications. This is causing serious hardship and emotional stress. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$1100.00} Charge Off * * This account is another inaccurate Affirm charge off. The reporting is damaging because it appears as though I have multiple defaults with the same company. Story : I never saw a valid signed agreement or accurate statements for this account. Affirms reporting practices are misleading, and they have duplicated negative entries under different account numbers. This makes me look like a repeat offender and completely destroys my credibility with lenders. I have been working hard to rebuild my credit, but this single companys multiple errors are sabotaging my financial recovery. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$240.00} Charge Off * * Even though the balance is very small, this charge off is extremely damaging. FCRA 611 ( b ) requires that disputed information be properly investigated, which has not been done. Story : I never received contract copies or a breakdown of how the {$240.00} balance turned into a charge off. It is unreasonable to punish me for a small disputed balance in a way that has the same weight as a {$10000.00} charge off. This single item has made creditors treat me as a delinquent borrower, even though the amount itself is insignificant and unverifiable. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXate Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$320.00} Charge Off * * This account is unverifiable and still being reported. Story : The reporting is misleading because XXXX accounts appear multiple times under different account numbers, which exaggerates the damage to my credit. Instead of showing XXXX issue, the credit bureaus are displaying XXXX or XXXX different charge offs, all from XXXX. This creates a false narrative that I am repeatedly defaulting, which is completely untrue. Because of this false reporting, I was recently denied financing for essential household appliances, forcing me into high-cost alternatives. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$610.00} Charge Off * * This XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX account is reported as a charge off without validation. FCRA 609 requires proof of contract and history. Story : I never received a proper validation letter from the furnisher. The account was charged off unusually quickly, suggesting either an error or unfair reporting practices. This false negative item has damaged my credit score significantly. I have faced embarrassment when trying to open a simple checking account because the bank flagged me as high risk after seeing this charge off. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX High Credit : {$740.00} Charge Off * * This XXXX XXXX charge off is XXXX of the most harmful items because it comes from a major bank. Lenders view this as a serious risk. Story : I disputed this account and requested full documentation, but XXXX XXXX never produced original signed agreements or chain of title. The account is unverifiable, yet it remains on my report. Because of this false negative, I was denied a mortgage pre-approval. The impact is not just financial but also emotional, as I can not move forward with buying a home due to inaccurate reporting. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$1300.00} | Charge Off * * This account is a duplicate entry, appearing twice on my credit report. Reporting duplicates inflates my alleged delinquency unfairly and violates FCRA 607 ( b ). Story : The same account is listed twice, making it appear that I have multiple defaults when it is only one. This has directly lowered my credit score, caused multiple loan rejections, and created unnecessary stress. The duplicity shows gross negligence by the furnisher and credit bureau. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$1300.00} | Charge Off * * This is the duplicate of the above account. Story : Having this account listed twice exaggerates negative reporting and misrepresents my financial behavior. I never authorized multiple listings, and no validation was ever provided. This has harmed my ability to secure even small personal loans, as lenders perceive multiple charge-offs. Immediate removal is required. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$710.00} | Charge Off * * This account is reported as a charge-off but lacks proper validation and proof of original contract. Under FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ), I am entitled to original documents. Story : Despite multiple disputes, XXXX XXXX has not supplied signed agreements or payment history. This false reporting has affected my mortgage pre-approvals and access to affordable credit. It creates a false impression of irresponsibility, causing financial and emotional damage. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$630.00} | Charge Off * * This account lacks proper documentation. Story : The creditor has not provided signed agreements or account history. Reporting this as a charge-off without validation is a violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) and shows reckless disregard for accuracy. This false reporting has impacted my credit score, leading to higher interest rates and denied applications. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$640.00} | Charge Off * * This account is inaccurately reported. Story : The furnisher has failed to validate the debt or produce original documentation. This misleading reporting portrays me as a delinquent borrower. I was denied financing for essential household needs because lenders interpreted this charge-off as proof of irresponsible behavior. It is damaging and unnecessary. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$510.00} | Charge Off * * This account is reported without proper validation. Story : XXXX has not provided original contracts or statements. Reporting unverifiable accounts violates FCRA 623 ( b ) ( 1 ). The accounts presence has damaged my credit score, blocked me from fair financing, and caused repeated stress and embarrassment. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$290.00} | Charge Off * * This account is being reported without proper validation. Story : I never received a signed contract, billing statements, or account history. Reporting this small balance as a charge-off portrays me as financially irresponsible. Lenders have denied me credit because of this unverifiable entry. The stress of being falsely reported has affected my ability to manage finances responsibly. The continued reporting violates FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) and 611. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$180.00} | Charge Off * * This account is also unverified and inaccurately reported. Story : XXXX has failed to provide original documentation despite multiple disputes. Multiple small charge-offs from the same company create a false narrative of repeated defaults. As a result, my creditworthiness is misrepresented, lenders view me as high-risk, and I have been denied low-limit loans and retail credit cards. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$570.00} | Charge Off * * This account is inaccurate and unverifiable. Story : XXXX has not provided any proof of account ownership, payment history, or signed agreements. The accounts presence has lowered my credit score, blocked approval for retail and personal loans, and caused undue stress. Reporting unverifiable accounts violates FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$660.00} | Charge Off * * This account is reported without documentation. Story : XXXXXXXX XXXX has not validated the debt or shown signed agreements. The false reporting misleads lenders into believing I am delinquent, resulting in higher interest rates and repeated credit denials. This violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and constitutes reckless reporting. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$430.00} | Charge Off * * This account is unverified. Story : XXXX XXXX has failed to produce original contracts or payment history. The charge-off is reported without verification, misrepresenting my financial responsibility. Because of this, lenders have rejected my loan applications, and I have been forced into high-cost alternatives for necessary credit. This violates FCRA 611. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$540.00} | Charge Off * * This account is inaccurately reported and unverified. Story : XXXX XXXX has not supplied documentation to validate this debt. Reporting this account as a charge-off is misleading and harmful. The repeated appearance of unverified accounts on my credit report creates a false impression of financial irresponsibility and has prevented me from accessing credit that I rightfully deserve. This violates FCRA 623 ( b ) ( 1 ) .\\ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$120.00} | Charge Off * * This account is reported as a charge-off but lacks proper verification. Story : I never received signed agreements, billing statements, or account validation. The small balance has been reported disproportionately as a charge-off, negatively affecting my credit score and misrepresenting my financial responsibility. Lenders have denied credit applications based on this unverifiable information. This violates FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) and 611. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Credit : {$460.00} | Charge Off * * This account is inaccurately reported. Story : XXXX has not provided any documentation validating this debt. Reporting an unverifiable charge-off violates FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). The negative reporting has harmed my creditworthiness, caused denial of loans, and created undue stress. The account must be immediately deleted until validation is provided. \nXXXXXXXX XXXX  Date of Inquiry : XX/XX/XXXX | Inquiry Only * * I dispute this hard inquiry as unauthorized. Story : I did not apply for credit with XXXX XXXX. FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) requires that inquiries be authorized by the consumer. This unauthorized inquiry is harming my credit score and must be removed immediately. \nXXXX XXXX Date of Inquiry : XX/XX/XXXX | Inquiry Only * * This hard inquiry is unauthorized. Story : I never authorized XXXX XXXX to pull my credit. FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) protects consumers from unauthorized credit checks. The reporting of this inquiry is illegal and damaging. I request immediate removal from my credit file. \nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Date of Inquiry : XX/XX/XXXX | Inquiry Only * * This hard inquiry is not authorized. Story : I did not apply for credit with XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX at this date. Unauthorized inquiries negatively affect my credit score, misrepresent my credit behavior, and violate FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ). Immediate deletion is requested.\n\nConclusion : All of the above items wrong addresses, unverifiable charge-offs, duplicate entries, and unauthorized inquiries are inaccurate, misleading, and harmful. Their continued reporting misrepresents my financial history, lowers my credit score, and denies me access to fair credit. Under FCRA 607 ( b ), 609 ( a ), 611, 623, I demand immediate reinvestigation, verification, and permanent deletion of all unverifiable or unauthorized items.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-12T22:38:22.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"08060","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15893823","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-09-12T22:36:11.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Story : XXXX has never shown me the full <em>account</em> breakdown. I <em>have</em> requested validation multiple times, but only received generic responses. This <em>charge</em> off, being nearly {$5000.00}, has blocked me from housing approvals and auto loan financing. Landlords <em>have</em> openly told me that this XXXX <em>account</em> <em>made</em> <em>them</em> deny my rental applications. This is causing serious hardship and emotional stress."]},"sort":[10.572409,"15893823"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18078721","_score":10.4389,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"# # COMPLAINT FORM - COMPLETE ANSWERS # # # * * Question 1 : Have you already tried to fix this problem with the company? * * * * Answer : YES * * * * Detailed Response to Include : * * \" Yes, I have attempted multiple remedies with both Chime and XXXX XXXX : * * Attempts with XXXX XXXX ( The Merchant ) : * * - Contacted XXXX XXXX support team regarding unauthorized duplicate accounts - Received official response ( XX/XX/year> ) confirming account verification rejection and permanent account lock - Requested refunds for fraudulent charges - No satisfactory resolution provided by merchant * * Attempts with Chime ( The Financial Institution ) : * * - Filed initial dispute in XX/XX/year> - Chime DENIED the dispute on XX/XX/year> - Immediately re-filed with complete documentation as Dispute # XXXX on XX/XX/year> - Currently in active investigation ( status : In Progress ) - Uploaded XXXX files of supporting documentation The merchant has not provided refunds, and Chime 's initial response was denial. I am now in the rebuttal and appeal process with Chime. '' * * * # # # * * Question 2 : Did you request information from the company? * * * * Answer : YES * * * * Detailed Response to Include : * * \" Yes, I specifically requested the following information from both XXXX XXXX and Chime : * * From XXXX XXXX ( Merchant ) : * * 1. Proof of account verification completed with legal identification 2. Explanation of how duplicate accounts were created under my name 3. Authorization documentation for each disputed transaction 4. Reason for permanent account lock 5. Refund for all unauthorized charges * * From Chime ( Financial Institution ) : * * 1. Explanation of why the original dispute was denied 2. Full documentation of their investigation 3. Reconsideration of the denial with new evidence 4. Status of current dispute # XXXX XXXX. Timeline for dispute resolution * * Documentation Received : * * - XXXX XXXX  provided an official support email ( XX/XX/year> ) confirming account issues but did NOT provide refunds or satisfactory resolution - Chime has not yet provided a written explanation of their original denial, though they have acknowledged the new dispute and are investigating '' * * * # # # * * Question 3 : What information did you request? ( Optional ) * * * * Answer ( Detailed List ) : * * \" I specifically requested the following categories of information : * * Account Verification & Compliance Information : * * - Proof that legal identification verification was completed before any charges were processed - Account verification status and dates - Identity verification compliance documentation ( KYC records ) - Account creation and activation records- Verification method and completion proof * * Fraudulent Activity Investigation : * * - Investigation of how duplicate accounts were created under my name - Security assessment of account compromise - Timeline of when duplicate accounts were discovered - Account creation IP addresses and timestamps- How unauthorized duplicate accounts were allowed to operate * * Transaction Authorization Documentation : * * - Written authorization for each of the XXXX  disputed transactions - Digital signatures or explicit customer consent records- Proof that customer explicitly authorized each charge - Terms and Conditions acceptance verification - Payment authorization records * * Account Restriction & Lock Details : * * - Reason for permanent account lock - Date decision to lock accounts was made - Retroactive review of account status at time each charge was processed - Policy violations documented - Terms and Conditions violations detailed * * Refund & Remediation : * * - Full refund for all fraudulent charges - Refund processing timeline - Account cleanup ( duplicate account removal ) - Compensation for fraudulent activity - Prevention measures to stop future unauthorized charges * * Regulatory Compliance : * * - Merchant account verification policies and procedures - Duplicate account prevention protocols- Payment processing compliance documentation - Chargeback and reversal procedures- Dispute investigation procedures followed '' * * * # # # * * Question 4 : Did the company provide this information? * * * * Answer : NO * * ( Select the \" NO '' option ) * * Detailed Response to Include : * * \" No, the company did NOT provide the information necessary to resolve this dispute.\n\n* * What XXXX XXXX DID Provide : * * - Official support email ( XX/XX/year> ) confirming : - Account verification was REJECTED - Multiple duplicate accounts were discovered- All accounts were PERMANENTLY LOCKED - Terms violations occurred * * What XXXX  XXXX  DID NOT Provide : * * - Proof of account verification ( they admit verification was rejected ) - Authorization documents for any transaction - Explanation of how duplicate accounts were created - Refund or compensation for fraudulent charges - Security investigation or account compromise report - Any satisfactory resolution * * What Chime DID Provide : * * - Dispute case number ( # XXXX ) - Request for additional documentation - Status update ( Agent investigating ) * * What Chime DID NOT Provide : * * - Written explanation of original denial ( XX/XX/year> ) - Written investigation findings- Provisional credit ( {$1200.00} ) - Resolution or refund ( case still in progress ) - Detailed response to appeals * * Critical Finding : * * Fortune Coins provided information that VALIDATES my fraud claim but did NOT provide refunds or resolution. In fact, their support email PROVES the charges were fraudulentthey admitted : 1. Account verification was REJECTED 2. Duplicate FRAUDULENT accounts existed 3. ALL accounts were PERMANENTLY LOCKED * * Yet despite this admission of fraud from the merchant, neither XXXX XXXX nor Chime has provided the critical information needed for resolution : A REFUND. * * * * Conclusion : * * The companies have not provided satisfactory information or resolution. The information they DID provide actually proves my fraud claim. Therefore, I am escalating to the CFPB for investigation and enforcement. '' * * * # # COMPLETE SUMMARY TABLE | Question | Answer | Status | | -- -- -- -- -- | -- -- -- -- | -- -- -- -- | | Tried to fix with company? | * * YES * * | Contacted both XXXX XXXX  and Chime multiple times | | Requested information? | * * YES * * | Specific, documented requests for verification and authorization | | What information requested? | * See detailed list * | Account verification, transaction authorization, refund details | | Company provide info? | * * NO * * | They provided admissions of fraud but NOT resolution | * * * # # STATEMENT TO INCLUDE WITH CFPB SUBMISSION * * '' Although both XXXX XXXX and Chime have provided limited information confirming the fraudulent nature of my accounts, neither company has provided the essential information required for resolution : proof of transaction authorization, account verification documentation, or a refund of fraudulent charges. * * * * In fact, XXXX XXXX ' own support email proves that : * * - Account verification was REJECTED - Multiple duplicate accounts were fraudulently created- ALL accounts were PERMANENTLY LOCKED * * Despite this clear evidence of fraud provided by the merchant themselves, I have received : * * - NO refunds from XXXX  XXXX  - NO satisfactory resolution from either company - NO adequate explanation of Chime 's original dispute denial * * I have attempted every reasonable remediation with both companies. Both have failed to provide adequate information or resolution. Therefore, I am escalating to the CFPB for investigation. * * '' * * * # # CRITICAL POINTS FOR CFPB These answers establish : * * I made good-faith efforts * * to resolve with the companies * * I specifically requested essential information * * they should have provided * * The companies failed to provide adequate information or resolution * * * * The merchant 's own communications prove fraud * * * * I have exhausted all reasonable remedies * * * * Escalation to CFPB is justified and necessary * * This positions your complaint perfectly for CFPB investigation and enforcement action against Chime for : - Improper dispute denial - Failure to investigate adequately - Violation of Regulation E And against XXXX XXXX  for : - Fraudulent merchant practices - Account verification failures - Unauthorized duplicate account creation More information # CFPB COMPLAINT : Chime Dispute # XXXX # # Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint Form -- - # # COMPLAINT INFORMATION * * Filing Date : * * XX/XX/year> * * Your Name : * * XXXX XXXX * * Your Email : * * XXXX * * Complaint Type : * * Billing disputes and problems * * Sub-Category : * * Dispute over a bill or service I didn't authorize -- - # # COMPANY INFORMATION * * Primary Company : * * Chime ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ) * * Company Address : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX * * Secondary Company Involved : * * XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX  ) * * Issue Date ( s ) : * * XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/year> * * Dispute Case Number : * * # XXXX -- - # # DETAILED COMPLAINT NARRATIVE * * What happened : * * I submitted a formal dispute to Chime ( Dispute # XXXX ) on XX/XX/year>, for unauthorized charges totaling {$1200.00} USD from XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ). This dispute involves XXXX transactions processed between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/year>. \n\n* * Why these charges are fraudulent and unauthorized : * * On XX/XX/year>, XXXX XXXX ' support team sent me an official email stating : \" Upon reviewing your account, we discovered numerous duplicate accounts under your name. We regret to inform you that we will no longer continue the account verification. We will now reject your account verification application. All accounts under your name have been permanently locked. '' This email proves : 1. My accounts were never legitimately verified with proper legal identification 2. Duplicate/fraudulent accounts existed under my name without my authorization 3. All accounts were permanently locked by the merchant 4. Therefore, all transactions processed on these unverified and later-locked accounts are fraudulent and unauthorized * * Pattern of merchant fraud : * * I have also successfully disputed charges from the same merchant ( XXXX XXXX ) through XXXX. Multiple XXXX disputes were closed in my favor, demonstrating a pattern of problematic practices by XXXX XXXX. The charges I am now disputing with Chime represent the same pattern : charges processed on unverified or compromised accounts. \n\n* * Evidence provided to Chime : * * I submitted XXXX files of documentation to Chime, including : - XXXX XXXX  ' official support email confirming account lock and verification rejection - All transaction confirmation emails from XXXX XXXX- XXXX dispute screenshots showing prior successful disputes against XXXX XXXX- Complete transaction history with dates, amounts, and transaction IDs- Bank records showing all charges * * Why this matters : * * Chime is responsible for handling this dispute fairly and thoroughly. The merchant 's own email proves these accounts were unverified and compromised. Chime should reverse all charges on these accounts, as they were processed on invalid accounts that the merchant itself has confirmed were never properly verified. \n-- - # # SPECIFIC COMPLAINT ISSUES * * Complaint Issue 1 : Failure to Investigate Authorized Disputed Charges * * * * Details : * * Chime received my dispute for unauthorized charges but has not yet resolved them ( case still marked \" In progress '' as of XX/XX/year> ). The evidence clearly shows these charges should be reversed immediately, as XXXX XXXX ' own email proves the accounts were unverified and later permanently locked. \n-- - * * Complaint Issue 2 : Merchant Account Verification Failure * * * * Details : * * XXXX XXXX allowed charges on accounts that were never properly verified with legal identification. When I requested refunds, their support team confirmed accounts were unverified and locked. Chime should hold XXXX XXXX  accountable for processing charges on unverified accounts. \n-- - * * Complaint Issue 3 : Pattern of Merchant Fraud Not Addressed * * * * Details : * * I have successfully disputed charges from XXXX XXXX through XXXX multiple times. Chime should be aware that this merchant has a documented history of fraudulent transactions across multiple payment platforms. My current dispute is part of this ongoing pattern. \n-- - # # REQUESTED RELIEF/RESOLUTION 1. * * Immediate reversal of all disputed charges : * * {$1200.00} USD 2. * * Full refund to my Chime account * * for all XXXX XXXX transactions 3. * * Chime should terminate its relationship with XXXX XXXX * * as a merchant due to pattern of fraudulent transactions 4. * * Investigation into whether XXXX XXXX violated payment processing agreements * * regarding account verification requirements 5. * * Chime should flag XXXX XXXX in their merchant database * * as a high-risk merchant with documented fraud history -- - # # TRANSACTION DETAILS | Date | Merchant | Amount | Transaction ID | Status | | -- -- -- | -- -- -- -- -- | -- -- -- -- | -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -| -- -- -- -- | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$140.00} | XXXX | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$190.00} | XXXX | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$290.00} | XXXX | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$190.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$1.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$7.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$4.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX  | {$1.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$290.00} | ( from transaction list ) | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$74.00} | XXXX | Disputed | | XX/XX/year> | XXXX | {$290.00} | XXXX | Disputed | * * Total Disputed Amount : {$1200.00} USD * * -- - # # KEY EVIDENCE SUPPORTING COMPLAINT # # # Evidence 1 : XXXX XXXX Support Email ( Critical ) * * Date : * * XX/XX/year>, XXXX PM * * From : * * XXXX * * Subject : * * Account Verification Status * * Full Email Content : * * \" Hi XXXX, Upon reviewing your account, we discovered numerous duplicate accounts under your name. We regret to inform you that we will no longer continue the account verification. \n\nWe will now reject your account verification application. All accounts under your name have been permanently locked. \n\nWhen you created an account on XXXX XXXX, you explicitly agreed to our Terms and Conditions. [ Link to T & Cs ] Please take note of the following section : - A check can only be issued to an open and operative Account, Operating one or opening duplicate Accounts may lead to the censure of all of your Accounts and render you ineligible.\n\nIf, however, please be aware that if you misuse your access in the future, they will also be banned. \n\nKind Regards, XXXX Customer Support Representative Get answers XXXX '' * * Why this is critical : * * This email proves XXXX XXXX : 1. Confirmed unverified accounts 2. Discovered duplicate/fraudulent accounts under my name 3. Rejected account verification 4. Permanently locked ALL accounts under my name 5. Admitted I should not have been able to operate multiple accounts This email alone proves all transactions were unauthorized and should be reversed. \n\n-- - # # # Evidence XXXX : XXXX Dispute Confirmations * * Multiple successful disputes closed in your favor against XXXX XXXX : * * - XXXX - {$190.00} USD ( Case Closed ) - XXXX - {$140.00} USD ( Case Closed ) - XXXX - {$290.00} USD ( Case Closed ) * * Why this matters : * * This demonstrates a pattern of XXXX XXXX processing fraudulent or unauthorized charges. XXXX has already determined similar charges were invalid, yet Chime has allowed the same merchant to continue charging the same account. \n\n-- - # # # Evidence 3 : Multiple Transaction Confirmations All transactions show XXXX XXXX  processed charges successfully on accounts that were later confirmed to be unverified and fraudulent. The confirmations themselves prove the merchant accepted charges knowing verification procedures were incomplete. \n\n-- - # # MERCHANT RESPONSE ANTICIPATED XXXX XXXX will likely claim : - \" Digital goods were delivered '' - \" Customer authorized the purchases '' - \" We don't require verification for virtual currency '' * * Why these arguments fail : * * - Their own support email proves accounts were unverified and locked - Unverified accounts = unauthorized charges - Their own terms state operating duplicate accounts violates their policy - XXXX has already ruled against them on similar charges - Chime holds merchants responsible for verification failures -- - # # PREVIOUS CONTACT WITH COMPANIES * * Chime Contact : * * - Submitted formal dispute : XX/XX/year> - Dispute Case # XXXX - Status : In progress / Agent investigating - Uploaded XXXX files of documentation * * XXXX XXXX Contact : * * - Received their support email confirming account lock : XX/XX/year> - No response to subsequent inquiries about refunds - Merchant has not addressed the fraudulent account issue -- - # # COMPLAINT AGAINST * * Primary : * * Chime ( and associated banks : The XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX. / XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ) * * Secondary : * * XXXX XXXX ( XXXX )- for fraudulent transaction processing -- - # # WHY I'M FILING THIS COMPLAINT I am filing this CFPB complaint because : 1. * * Chime is not moving quickly enough * * to resolve obvious fraud ( case marked \" In progress '' as of XX/XX/year> ) 2. * * The evidence is overwhelming and undisputed * * XXXX XXXX  ' own email proves the fraud 3. * * Pattern recognition failure * * Chime should be aware XXXX XXXX has prior XXXX disputes, yet allowed continued transactions 4. * * Consumer protection failure * * A major issue with Chime 's dispute process is that it allows merchants to continue processing charges on flagged accounts 5. * * Accountability requirement * * Chime needs to understand this merchant represents ongoing fraud risk to their customers -- - # # SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Please attach to this CFPB complaint : 1. * * XXXX XXXXs Support Email * * ( XX/XX/year> ) MOST CRITICAL 2. * * Chime Dispute Confirmation * * showing case # XXXX XXXX. * * XXXX Dispute Screenshots * * showing successful prior disputes XXXX. * * All transaction confirmations * * from XXXX XXXX 5. * * Bank statements * * showing the charges 6. * * Screenshots of the XXXX files uploaded * * to Chime 's dispute portal -- - # # AUTHORITY & LEGAL BASIS * * Regulations violated : * * - Regulation E ( Electronic Fund Transfers ) 12 CFR 1005 - Regulation Z ( Truth in Lending ) 12 CFR 1026 - Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act Consumer Financial Protection Bureau jurisdiction - Payment Card Network Rules ( XXXX  ) regarding merchant account verification * * Merchant violation : * * - XXXX XXXX violated Payment Card Association rules by processing transactions on unverified accounts - XXXX XXXX violated their own Terms and Conditions * * Bank responsibility : * * - Chime ( and underlying banks ) must properly investigate and resolve unauthorized transaction disputes - Chime is responsible for ensuring merchants comply with verification requirements -- - # # TIMELINE OF EVENTS - * * XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/year> : * * Fraudulent charges processed on unverified XXXX XXXX accounts - XXXX XXXX XX/XX/year> : * * XXXX XXXX  support confirms accounts unverified and permanently locked - * * XX/XX/year> : * * Original dispute with Chime denied ( based on dispute list screenshot ) - * * XX/XX/year> : * * Filed new dispute # XXXX with Chime - * * XX/XX/year>, XXXX XXXX  : * * Chime requested additional documentation - * * XX/XX/year>, XXXX XXXX  : * * Filing this CFPB complaint -- - # # CONSUMER CONTACT INFORMATION * * Name : * * XXXX XXXX * * Email : XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Account Number : * * ( Your Chime account number mask last 4 digits if preferred : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) * * Dispute Case Number : * * # XXXX -- - # # STATEMENT OF TRUTH I certify that the information provided in this complaint is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I am the account holder named above and have personally reviewed all evidence supporting this complaint. I am filing this complaint in good faith to protect myself and other consumers from XXXX XXXX ' fraudulent practices. \n\n* * Signature : * * XXXX XXXX * * Date : * * XX/XX/year> XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-16T17:22:01.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"463XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18078721","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Chime Financial Inc","date_received":"2025-12-16T16:52:31.000Z","state":"IN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Chime should reverse all <em>charges</em> on these <em>accounts</em>, as they were processed on invalid <em>accounts</em> that the merchant itself has confirmed were never properly verified. \n-- - # # SPECIFIC <em>COMPLAINT</em> ISSUES * * <em>Complaint</em> Issue 1 : Failure to Investigate Authorized Disputed <em>Charges</em> * * * * Details : * * Chime received my dispute for <em>unauthorized</em> <em>charges</em> but has not yet resolved <em>them</em> ( case still marked \" In progress '' as of XX/XX/year> )."],"product":["Checking or savings <em>account</em>"],"issue":["Problem with a lender or other company charging your <em>account</em>"],"sub_product":["Checking <em>account</em>"]},"sort":[10.4389,"18078721"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15409061","_score":9.992488,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"To the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am submitting this complaint regarding multiple inaccurate, unverifiable, and unauthorized items currently being reported on my credit file. These accounts and inquiries are in direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), and other federal consumer protection laws. The continued reporting of this information has caused me significant financial harm, emotional distress, and denial of fair access to credit. I respectfully request the CFPB to investigate these matters and ensure that the furnishers and credit reporting agencies are held accountable for their violations. \nBelow are the specific items in dispute : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, MI XXXX Wrong Address Issue : This address is being falsely reported as connected to me. \nLaw : FCRA 1681e ( b ) requires consumer reporting agencies to maintain maximum possible accuracy.\n\nStory : I have never resided at this address, nor have I had any connection to it. When a false address is placed on my credit profile, it creates confusion and raises suspicion as if I may be tied to accounts or activities that are not mine. This not only affects how lenders view me but also increases the risk of identity confusion and fraud. It is deeply unfair for me to be linked to an address I have never lived at, and it causes humiliation when I am questioned by creditors about residences that are unfamiliar to me. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, MI XXXX Wrong Address Issue : Incorrect and unrelated address linked to my profile. \nLaw : FCRA 1681c requires consumer reports to exclude inaccurate or outdated personal identifiers. \nStory : I have no relationship with this location whatsoever. Yet, it remains on my report as though it were part of my life history. This creates the false narrative that I am unstable, constantly moving, or associated with individuals I do not know. These types of inaccuracies have led to me being treated with suspicion when applying for housing or loans. This is not only financially damaging but emotionally exhausting, as I feel like my identity is being stolen and rewritten without my consent. \nXXXX XXXX Acct : XXXX High Credit {$600.00} Date Opened XX/XX/XXXX Charge-off Issue : This account is inaccurately reported as a charge-off. \nLaw : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) requires furnishers to provide accurate information, while FDCPA prohibits false, deceptive, or misleading representation of debt. \nStory : This account is damaging my credit profile by showing as a charge-off even though I have disputed it repeatedly and no verifiable proof has been produced. The burden of proof lies on the furnisher, not on me as the consumer. Yet, this account remains, making me look like someone who walks away from obligations. This false perception is ruining my ability to secure even small lines of credit, forcing me into financial dependency and making it harder for me to provide for my household. \nXXXX Acct : XXXX High Credit {$23000.00} Date Opened XX/XX/XXXX Charge-off Issue : Improper charge-off being reported. \nLaw : FCRA 611 ( a ) requires reinvestigation and correction of disputed information ; FDCPA 807 prohibits debt collectors from misrepresenting character, amount, or legal status of a debt.\n\nStory : The reporting of such a large balance as a charge-off paints me as irresponsible, which is not only untrue but devastating to my financial future. When a false charge-off of this size appears, I am immediately denied for credit, car financing, or even some job opportunities. The fact that no documentation has been provided to prove this debt only makes the harm worse. My financial and emotional stability is being crushed under the weight of this false entry. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX Acct : XXXX Past Due {$2600.00} Date Opened XX/XX/XXXX Charge-off Issue : Incorrect past-due balance reported as a charge-off. \nLaw : FCRA 605 ( c ) sets limits on the reporting of negative information ; data older than seven years should not be included.\n\nStory : This account is outdated and should no longer even appear on my report. Yet it is being kept alive as a weapon against my financial freedom. Every time I apply for credit, this outdated mark haunts me like a ghost from the past. It keeps me locked out of opportunities that could allow me to rebuild my life. This is unjust, unlawful, and needs to be corrected immediately. \nXXXX Acct : XXXX High Credit {$2900.00} Date Opened XX/XX/XXXX Collection Issue : Reported as a collection despite disputes. \nLaw : FCRA 611 and FDCPA 807 both require accuracy and prohibit misleading reporting.\n\nStory : I have disputed this account, yet it remains with no proof provided. It feels as if I am fighting a system that is stacked against me, where furnishers can report anything without proof and consumers are left to suffer the consequences. This reporting is unfair, misleading, and a direct violation of my rights. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX Collection High Credit : {$480.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : This account is being reported as a collection ; however, XXXX  XXXX  has failed to provide proper validation of debt. The account balance, dates, and ownership are unclear and unverifiable. \nLaw : Under FDCPA 809 ( b ) and FCRA 609 and 611, a debt collector must provide full validation of debt before reporting it. Continuing to report without validation violates federal law.\n\nStory : I have repeatedly experienced problems with XXXX XXXX reporting debts that are either unverifiable, inaccurate, or re-aged to make them appear recent. This is abusive and misleading reporting that directly harms my financial reputation. I never received original account details, proof of ownership, or chain of custody of this debt. Reporting a balance without verification is a direct violation of my rights. I demand deletion of this account immediately. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Collection High Credit : {$740.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Issue : XXXX XXXX  is reporting this collection without providing sufficient verification of the original account, the balance, or proof that they have the legal right to collect. \nLaw : FDCPA XXXX prohibits false or misleading representation of debt. FCRA 611 requires accurate reporting and reinvestigation of disputed accounts. \nStory : XXXX XXXX is known for purchasing old, unverified debts and reporting them as new collections. I never received full documentation proving that this account is legitimate or that they have the legal standing to collect. This account is damaging my score and preventing me from accessing fair credit opportunities. The continued reporting without proof is harassment and a violation of my rights under both FDCPA and FCRA. \nXXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Issue : These inquiries are being reported on my credit file without my knowledge, authorization, or permissible purpose. \nLaw : Under FCRA 604, a credit reporting agency may only furnish a consumer report when there is a permissible purpose. Inquiries made without my explicit authorization or legitimate purpose violate federal law.\n\nStory : These hard inquiries are damaging my creditworthiness by lowering my credit score and creating the impression that I am seeking excessive credit, which is not true. Many of these inquiries were conducted without my consent, and I never authorized these companies to access my credit file. The presence of these inquiries is misleading, harmful, and unlawful. I demand immediate removal of these unauthorized inquiries. \nConclusion : The reporting of these accounts and inquiries is inaccurate, unverifiable, and in violation of federal law. I am requesting that the CFPB investigate these matters, require the furnishers to provide complete documentation, and direct the credit reporting agencies to delete any information that can not be properly verified. The FCRA and FDCPA exist to protect consumers like me from unfair, misleading, and abusive practices, and I am asking for your assistance to ensure my rights are fully enforced.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-20T18:27:50.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"49519","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15409061","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-08-20T18:25:31.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["To the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am submitting this <em>complaint</em> regarding multiple inaccurate, unverifiable, and <em>unauthorized</em> items currently being reported on my credit file. These <em>accounts</em> and inquiries are in direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), and other federal consumer protection laws."]},"sort":[9.992488,"15409061"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":43,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":43}]}},"product":{"doc_count":43,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":22,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":22}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":7,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":6}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1},{"key":"Store credit card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Telecommunications debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt or credit management","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Student loan debt relief","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":43,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":17,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":17}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":6,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":6}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":3},{"key":"Problem with personal statement of dispute","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Closing your account","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":1},{"key":"Problem using a debit or ATM card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Transaction was not authorized","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Payment process","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"False statements or representation","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempted to collect wrong amount","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Fees or interest","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with fees","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Identity theft / Fraud / Embezzlement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Unauthorized withdrawals or charges","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":43,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":43}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":43,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":32},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":9},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":2}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":43,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":43}]}},"company":{"doc_count":43,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":10},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":8},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":7},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":4},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":3},{"key":"Chime Financial Inc","doc_count":2},{"key":"AFNI INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"Credit Karma, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"HSBC NORTH AMERICA HOLDINGS INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Nelnet, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"U.S. BANCORP","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":43,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TX","doc_count":10},{"key":"IL","doc_count":4},{"key":"KY","doc_count":4},{"key":"CA","doc_count":3},{"key":"IN","doc_count":3},{"key":"GA","doc_count":2},{"key":"MD","doc_count":2},{"key":"MI","doc_count":2},{"key":"NC","doc_count":2},{"key":"TN","doc_count":2},{"key":"CO","doc_count":1},{"key":"DC","doc_count":1},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"MN","doc_count":1},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":1},{"key":"OK","doc_count":1},{"key":"PA","doc_count":1},{"key":"SC","doc_count":1},{"key":"WA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":43,"company_public_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","doc_count":24},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":43,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":4},{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":2}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-15T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-15T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16469162,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[9.9936285,"15409061"]}}}