{"took":1008,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":6,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14536179","_score":23.385284,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Formal Complaint Against Equifax FCRA Violations, Identity Theft, and Improper Use of Automated Dispute Systems ( e-OSCAR ) Complaint Summary : I am filing this complaint against Equifax for ongoing violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), specifically related to their failure to conduct a manual and meaningful reinvestigation of fraudulent and inaccurate items on my credit report. Despite multiple disputes and supporting documentation, Equifax has relied on automated dispute processing systems such as e-OSCAR, which do not satisfy the legal requirements for thorough investigations under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ).\n\nManual Investigation Request Statement : I am formally requesting that all disputed items on my Equifax credit report undergo a manual reinvestigation, as required under the FCRA. Automated systems like e-OSCAR are not capable of properly evaluating the complexity of identity theft cases or verifying documentation such as : FTC Identity Theft Reports Police Reports FCRA 605C Self-Attestation Statements Supporting affidavits and dispute narratives I am requesting written confirmation that Equifax : Did not rely solely on e-OSCAR or automated verification tools. \n\nManually reviewed all supporting documentation I submitted. \n\nContacted each furnisher individually with my specific allegations.\n\nVerified whether furnishers conducted a proper FCRA 1681s-2 investigation.\n\nFailure to complete a manual investigation and failure to notify me of the method of verification for each account is a violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 7 ).\n\nAdditional Violations and Timeline : On XX/XX/2025, I filed my first complaintEquifax closed it without adequately addressing my concerns. \n\nOn XX/XX/2025, I re-submitted additional evidence, and the investigation again concluded with a generic non-monetary relief response. \n\nOn XX/XX/2025, I provided more documentation via a phone-submitted CFPB complaint. Equifax responded on XX/XX/2025 without detailing verification steps or providing names of furnishers involved. \n\nDespite repeated documentation and proof of identity theft, including multiple FTC reports and law enforcement case numbers, Equifax continues to report disputed, inaccurate, or unverifiable data.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-10T02:20:15.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30315","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14536179","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-10T02:15:08.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additional Violations and Timeline : On <em>XX/XX</em>/2025, I filed my first <em>complaint</em><em>Equifax</em> <em>closed</em> it without adequately addressing my concerns. \n\nOn <em>XX/XX</em>/2025, I re-submitted additional evidence, and the investigation again concluded with a generic non-monetary relief response. \n\nOn <em>XX/XX</em>/2025, I provided more documentation via a phone-submitted <em>CFPB</em> <em>complaint</em>. <em>Equifax</em> <em>responded</em> on <em>XX/XX</em>/2025 without detailing verification steps or providing names of furnishers involved."],"company":["<em>EQUIFAX</em>, INC."]},"sort":[23.385284,"14536179"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14482068","_score":18.831625,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I previously filed a complaint concerning inaccurate items reporting on my credit file, specifically three CITICARDS XXXX accounts. \n\nEquifax responded to my initial complaint, stating that they \" verified that this item belongs to you '' and that \" this account has been updated. '' They further indicated that \" additional information has been provided from the original source regarding this item '' and that \" the following fields have been modified : CLOSED DATE, SCHEDULED PAYMENT, HIGH CREDIT, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION '' ( with variations across the three accounts ).\n\nDespite Equifax 's claim of \" verification '' and \" modification, '' the core inaccuracies on my credit report have not been adequately addressed or corrected, and in some cases, new errors or omissions persist. Equifax 's response implies that the previously reported information was indeed inaccurate, yet their \" fix '' was merely to modify certain fields rather than fully correct or delete the erroneous entries.\n\nThe specific errors that remain uncorrected or have been inadequately addressed are as follows : 1. Persistent Inaccuracies and Future Dates ( CITICARDS CBNA Account ending in XXXX ) : Equifax 's report for this account continues to display future dates for critical fields. Specifically, the \" Date of Last Activity, '' \" Date of 1st Delinquency, '' and \" Date of Last Payment '' are all listed as XX/XX/XXXX. As of XX/XX/XXXX, these dates are in the past, but when the report was generated, they were in the future, which is a clear factual impossibility and a severe reporting error. This indicates that the \" modifications '' made by Equifax did not correct this fundamental error.\n\nThe \" Payment History '' section also reflects ongoing delinquency into XXXX, which is directly tied to these erroneous future dates and is therefore inaccurate.\n\nThe fields \" Term Duration '' and \" Date Closed '' remain blank, despite the account being explicitly labeled \" Closed. '' This is an omission of material information.\n\n2. Inadequate Correction of \" Scheduled Payment '' and \" High Credit '' ( All Three XXXX XXXX Accounts ending in XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ) : Equifax explicitly stated that the \" Scheduled Payment '' and \" High Credit '' fields were \" modified. '' This confirms that the information previously reported for these fields was inaccurate. For accounts that are \" Closed '' and \" Charge Off '' ( as indicated by narrative codes XXXX and XXXX ), the \" Scheduled Payment Amount '' should consistently be {$0.00}, as no further payments are scheduled. While it now shows {$0.00}, the fact that it required modification indicates prior misreporting.\n\nThe \" High Credit '' field was also modified. While this may reflect the highest bal\nance, the modification itself points to an initial inaccuracy that was not fully explained or justified as to why it was wrong in the first place.\n\n3. Missing Information on Closed Accounts ( All Three XXXX XXXXXXXX Accounts ) : For all three accounts, which are clearly marked as \" Closed, '' the \" Term Duration '' and \" Date Closed '' fields are consistently blank. This represents incomplete reporting and makes it difficult to ascertain the full status and history of these accounts. 4. Failure to Delete or Fully Correct Inaccurate Information : Equifax 's response focused on \" verification '' and \" modification '' rather than deletion or complete correction of the erroneous data. Modifying a field that was initially incorrect does not fully resolve the issue of inaccurate reporting, especially when fundamental errors like future dates persist. The Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) requires credit reporting agencies to ensure maximum possible accuracy. Simply \" updating '' inaccurate data, particularly when it relates to dates and payment status on closed accounts, falls short of this requirement. I request that the CFPB investigate Equifax 's failure to properly correct these\nsignificant errors after their initial investigation. Equifax violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation ( 1681i ) and failing to ensure maximum possible accuracy ( 1681e ( b ) ). They did not provide verification documentation and continue to report conflicting and harmful information.These inaccuracies are detrimental to my credit profile and are a direct violation of my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA )","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-05T04:20:39.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33614","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14482068","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-05T03:55:29.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with personal statement of dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I previously filed a <em>complaint</em> concerning inaccurate items reporting on my credit file, specifically three CITICARDS <em>XXXX</em> accounts."],"company":["<em>EQUIFAX</em>, INC."]},"sort":[18.831625,"14482068"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16372668","_score":14.036312,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this formal complaint pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), regarding the continued, improper reporting of inaccurate and unverifiable debts on my consumer credit report. I have previously disputed these accounts, including filing formal complaints with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) on or around XX/XX/XXXX, specifically citing violations of the FCRA and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). Despite having clearly disputed these accounts, they remain improperly verified and reported. \nThe following accounts are either collection accounts or charged-off accounts that were disputed, and which remain inaccurately or unverifiably reported on my file as of XX/XX/XXXX. Many of the collection accounts are currently or were recently marked as \" Consumer Disputes This Account Information '' ( Narrative Code XXXX or similar remarks ), yet they still appear : Portfolio Recovery Associates ( Debt Buyer ) Account Number : * XXXX ( Equifax ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$2300.00} Status : Collection Account. Reported continuing collection activity despite dispute and request to cease communication. Failure to provide chain of title validation. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX  ) Account Number : * XXXX ( Equifax ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$1500.00} Status : Collection Account. Marked : Consumer Disputes This Account Information ( Code 166 ). Improperly verified without full validation documentation. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Account Number : * XXXX ( Equifax ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$1400.00} Status : Collection Account. Marked : Consumer Disputes This Account Information ( Code 166 ). Improperly verified/re-reported after dispute. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) Account Number : * XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$1000.00} Status : Collection Account. Marked : Consumer Disputes This Account Information ( Code 166 ). \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Numbers : XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX XXXXXXXX ( Equifax/Experian ) XXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$740.00} Status : Collection Account. Still reporting disputed collection. \nXXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : At Home Professions Seminars ) Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( Experian ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$260.00} Status : Collection Account. Still reporting disputed collection. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX  Account Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$34000.00} Status : Charge Off. Account closed. Continued reporting of charged-off status with outstanding balance after closure. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Account Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$5100.00} Status : Charge Off. Account closed XX/XX/XXXX. Continued reporting of charged-off status with outstanding balance after closure. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Account XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$4200.00} Status : Charge Off. Marked as Account Previously in Dispute - Now Resolved by Data Furnisher ( Code XXXX ). \nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$940.00} Status : Charge Off. Last Payment Date XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX of negative payment history remains inaccurate ( charged-off status reported through XXXX despite {$0.00} balance/closure ). \nBASIS FOR COMPLAINT AND SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS Your agency is in direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by failing to perform reasonable reinvestigations and continuing to report inaccurate or unverifiable information related to these accounts.\n\nFailure to Conduct Proper Reinvestigation ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ) : Despite providing clear disputes, your agency failed to conduct a reasonable investigation as required by law. The continued reporting of these disputed accounts demonstrates a failure to resolve the underlying inaccuracies before verification, which is required under FCRA 1681i. The CRAs verified these accounts, sometimes adding remarks like \" Account previously in dispute - investigation complete, reported by data furnisher '', without deleting the contested, highly negative data that have been formally disputed, demonstrating a failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy. For debt buyers like XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, documentation establishing a continuous and unbroken chain of assignment to the specific account must be provided for verification to be proper. By reporting these debts as verified, your agency implicitly accepted inadequate documentation.\n\nFDCPA Violations by Furnishers and CRAs : The collection accounts listed ( e.g., XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX ) continue to be reported as collection activity. This violates FDCPA 1692g ( b ), which requires debt collectors to cease collection of a disputed debt until verification is obtained and mailed to the consumer. In the case of XXXX XXXX XXXX, they responded to a CFPB complaint by confirming measures were taken to stop communication, yet the account remains listed as a collection on my credit reports, showing conflicting information and ongoing collection activity ( credit reporting ).","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-05T19:41:06.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"122XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16372668","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-05T19:40:34.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In the <em>case</em> of <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, they <em>responded</em> to a <em>CFPB</em> <em>complaint</em> by confirming measures were taken to stop communication, yet the account remains listed as a collection on my credit reports, showing conflicting information and ongoing collection activity ( credit reporting )."],"company":["<em>EQUIFAX</em>, INC."]},"sort":[14.036312,"16372668"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16372913","_score":14.007437,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this formal complaint pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), regarding the continued, improper reporting of inaccurate and unverifiable debts on my consumer credit report. I have previously disputed these accounts, including filing formal complaints with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) on or around XX/XX/XXXX, specifically citing violations of the FCRA and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). Despite having clearly disputed these accounts, they remain improperly verified and reported. \nThe following accounts are either collection accounts or charged-off accounts that were disputed, and which remain inaccurately or unverifiably reported on my file as of XX/XX/XXXX. Many of the collection accounts are currently or were recently marked as \" Consumer Disputes This Account Information '' ( Narrative Code XXXX or similar remarks ), yet they still appear : Portfolio Recovery Associates ( Debt Buyer ) Account Number : * XXXX ( Equifax ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$2300.00} Status : Collection Account. Reported continuing collection activity despite dispute and request to cease communication. Failure to provide chain of title validation. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX  ) Account Number : * XXXX ( Equifax ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$1500.00} Status : Collection Account. Marked : Consumer Disputes This Account Information ( Code 166 ). Improperly verified without full validation documentation. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Account Number : * XXXX ( Equifax ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$1400.00} Status : Collection Account. Marked : Consumer Disputes This Account Information ( Code 166 ). Improperly verified/re-reported after dispute. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) Account Number : * XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$1000.00} Status : Collection Account. Marked : Consumer Disputes This Account Information ( Code 166 ). \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Numbers : XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX XXXXXXXX ( Equifax/Experian ) XXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$740.00} Status : Collection Account. Still reporting disputed collection. \nXXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : At Home Professions Seminars ) Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( Experian ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$260.00} Status : Collection Account. Still reporting disputed collection. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX  Account Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$34000.00} Status : Charge Off. Account closed. Continued reporting of charged-off status with outstanding balance after closure. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Account Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$5100.00} Status : Charge Off. Account closed XX/XX/XXXX. Continued reporting of charged-off status with outstanding balance after closure. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Account XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$4200.00} Status : Charge Off. Marked as Account Previously in Dispute - Now Resolved by Data Furnisher ( Code XXXX ). \nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$940.00} Status : Charge Off. Last Payment Date XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX of negative payment history remains inaccurate ( charged-off status reported through XXXX despite {$0.00} balance/closure ). \nBASIS FOR COMPLAINT AND SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS Your agency is in direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by failing to perform reasonable reinvestigations and continuing to report inaccurate or unverifiable information related to these accounts.\n\nFailure to Conduct Proper Reinvestigation ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ) : Despite providing clear disputes, your agency failed to conduct a reasonable investigation as required by law. The continued reporting of these disputed accounts demonstrates a failure to resolve the underlying inaccuracies before verification, which is required under FCRA 1681i. The CRAs verified these accounts, sometimes adding remarks like \" Account previously in dispute - investigation complete, reported by data furnisher '', without deleting the contested, highly negative data that have been formally disputed, demonstrating a failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy. For debt buyers like XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, documentation establishing a continuous and unbroken chain of assignment to the specific account must be provided for verification to be proper. By reporting these debts as verified, your agency implicitly accepted inadequate documentation.\n\nFDCPA Violations by Furnishers and CRAs : The collection accounts listed ( e.g., XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX ) continue to be reported as collection activity. This violates FDCPA 1692g ( b ), which requires debt collectors to cease collection of a disputed debt until verification is obtained and mailed to the consumer. In the case of XXXX XXXX XXXX, they responded to a CFPB complaint by confirming measures were taken to stop communication, yet the account remains listed as a collection on my credit reports, showing conflicting information and ongoing collection activity ( credit reporting ).","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-05T19:40:59.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"122XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16372913","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-05T19:40:34.000Z","state":"NY","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":["In the <em>case</em> of <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, they <em>responded</em> to a <em>CFPB</em> <em>complaint</em> by confirming measures were taken to stop communication, yet the account remains listed as a collection on my credit reports, showing conflicting information and ongoing collection activity ( credit reporting )."],"company_public_response":["Company has <em>responded</em> to the consumer and the <em>CFPB</em> and chooses not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[14.007437,"16372913"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16373342","_score":14.001984,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this formal complaint pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), regarding the continued, improper reporting of inaccurate and unverifiable debts on my consumer credit report. I have previously disputed these accounts, including filing formal complaints with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) on or around XX/XX/XXXX, specifically citing violations of the FCRA and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). Despite having clearly disputed these accounts, they remain improperly verified and reported. \nThe following accounts are either collection accounts or charged-off accounts that were disputed, and which remain inaccurately or unverifiably reported on my file as of XX/XX/XXXX. Many of the collection accounts are currently or were recently marked as \" Consumer Disputes This Account Information '' ( Narrative Code XXXX or similar remarks ), yet they still appear : Portfolio Recovery Associates ( Debt Buyer ) Account Number : * XXXX ( Equifax ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$2300.00} Status : Collection Account. Reported continuing collection activity despite dispute and request to cease communication. Failure to provide chain of title validation. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX  ) Account Number : * XXXX ( Equifax ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$1500.00} Status : Collection Account. Marked : Consumer Disputes This Account Information ( Code 166 ). Improperly verified without full validation documentation. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Account Number : * XXXX ( Equifax ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$1400.00} Status : Collection Account. Marked : Consumer Disputes This Account Information ( Code 166 ). Improperly verified/re-reported after dispute. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) Account Number : * XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$1000.00} Status : Collection Account. Marked : Consumer Disputes This Account Information ( Code 166 ). \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Numbers : XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX XXXXXXXX ( Equifax/Experian ) XXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$740.00} Status : Collection Account. Still reporting disputed collection. \nXXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : At Home Professions Seminars ) Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( Experian ) Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$260.00} Status : Collection Account. Still reporting disputed collection. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX  Account Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$34000.00} Status : Charge Off. Account closed. Continued reporting of charged-off status with outstanding balance after closure. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Account Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$5100.00} Status : Charge Off. Account closed XX/XX/XXXX. Continued reporting of charged-off status with outstanding balance after closure. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Account XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$4200.00} Status : Charge Off. Marked as Account Previously in Dispute - Now Resolved by Data Furnisher ( Code XXXX ). \nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$940.00} Status : Charge Off. Last Payment Date XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX of negative payment history remains inaccurate ( charged-off status reported through XXXX despite {$0.00} balance/closure ). \nBASIS FOR COMPLAINT AND SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS Your agency is in direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by failing to perform reasonable reinvestigations and continuing to report inaccurate or unverifiable information related to these accounts.\n\nFailure to Conduct Proper Reinvestigation ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ) : Despite providing clear disputes, your agency failed to conduct a reasonable investigation as required by law. The continued reporting of these disputed accounts demonstrates a failure to resolve the underlying inaccuracies before verification, which is required under FCRA 1681i. The CRAs verified these accounts, sometimes adding remarks like \" Account previously in dispute - investigation complete, reported by data furnisher '', without deleting the contested, highly negative data that have been formally disputed, demonstrating a failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy. For debt buyers like XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, documentation establishing a continuous and unbroken chain of assignment to the specific account must be provided for verification to be proper. By reporting these debts as verified, your agency implicitly accepted inadequate documentation.\n\nFDCPA Violations by Furnishers and CRAs : The collection accounts listed ( e.g., XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX ) continue to be reported as collection activity. This violates FDCPA 1692g ( b ), which requires debt collectors to cease collection of a disputed debt until verification is obtained and mailed to the consumer. In the case of XXXX XXXX XXXX, they responded to a CFPB complaint by confirming measures were taken to stop communication, yet the account remains listed as a collection on my credit reports, showing conflicting information and ongoing collection activity ( credit reporting ).","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-05T19:41:03.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"122XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16373342","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-10-05T19:17:32.000Z","state":"NY","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":["In the <em>case</em> of <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, they <em>responded</em> to a <em>CFPB</em> <em>complaint</em> by confirming measures were taken to stop communication, yet the account remains listed as a collection on my credit reports, showing conflicting information and ongoing collection activity ( credit reporting )."],"company_public_response":["Company has <em>responded</em> to the consumer and the <em>CFPB</em> and chooses not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[14.001984,"16373342"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2837246","_score":9.585545,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"In XX/XX/XXXX, one month after moving from XXXX  to XXXX, my wife XXXX opened a new checking account at Captial One 360 Bank. We had previously banked at XXXX and discovered that XXXX had closed all their branches in XXXX. We found a Capital One branch located close to our home and decided to open an account there. \n\nWhen my wife went to the branch she was told that Capital One had a service called Capital One 360, which was their online banking. We were not told that this service would mean that the actual bank branch would be unable to assist us with anything other than deposits and withdrawals. She was sold on this service because it was billed as easy and convenient as well as having no minimum balance. \n\nAt the opening of the account, she deposited two personal checks : 1 ) {$2300.00} from XXXX XXXX, who was our landlord in XXXX  ( check was the return of our one month security deposit on the apartment ), 2 ) {$2400.00} from XXXX XXXX ( payment for summer tutoring services performed by myself ). Thus the total initial deposit was {$4700.00}. \n\nFrom the opening of the account until XX/XX/XXXX we had no intention of using any of the funds in that account. The account had been opened as a rainy day fund, and with the beginning of XX/XX/XXXX rent due, that rainy day had come. In the meanwhile though, my wife had installed the Capital One mobile app and had periodically checked on the account via the app without any issue. We were concerned by the Equifax hack and have been periodically monitoring our bank accounts to check that nothing was amiss. \n\nApparently Capital One sent an email to the effect that more information was needed and the account would be locked until they received more information. This email is dated XX/XX/XXXX. Unfortunately, my wife did not read that email and failed to respond. Thus we relied upon our continued access to the mobile website which did not display a warning or other indication that something was amiss with the account. I have included a screenshot of the email as forwarded from my wife to me. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX my wife and I walked into the same branch, Capital One at Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX TX XXXX intending to withdraw some funds to make XXXX rent payment. We were surprised when the branch representative said that the account had been \" locked '' XXXX her words XXXX. She then told us that since this is a XXXX account, that the actual branch didn't have any access to the account particulars and everything would have to be done over the phone. She then dialed a line that would connect us to the people who would unlock the account. At the time we thought that a lock must have been placed as a security precaution if the bank had detected some potentially fraudulent attempt to access the account. \n\nThe number the representative dialed connected to a customer service rep who then informed us that all he could do is connect us to the security team. This connection was merely sending us to a voicemail. The branch representative was surprised by this and decided to try again since we were sitting in an actual Capital One bank and could provide all the necessary identification needed for security purposes. After 40 minutes we connected with someone who then told us that the security team could not be reached in any other way other than the connection they gave us that would lead directly to a voicemail. Frustrated and needing the money, my wife left a voicemail with her name and phone number. The branch representative then told us that if they got back to us before close of business that day, we could then return and withdraw money. When asked how long it might take, she assured us that at most 72 hours, which already seemed like an unreasonably long time to return a phone call to a customer who can not access needed funds. \n\nOn the same day, my wife had connected her XXXX account to the CapitalOne account and XXXX did a micro {$.00} transaction to verify the existance and access to that account. My wife then transferred {$320.00} from her XXXX account to the CapitalOne account on XX/XX/XXXX with confirmation that the transfer was completed. She checked on the mobile app and it displayed a deposit of {$320.00} from XXXX. \n\nAround XXXX on the same day, worried that we would not be able to access the account, I called in to try to get contact with someone who could unlock the account. I explained to the person the urgency of the situation since we needed that money to pay for rent. He said that he understood, but we were given the same non-explanation and connected to the line which did not ring at all and went directly to voicemail. I asked to speak to his manager and he refused. I asked to speak with someone who handles customer complaints and he directed me to an email only, saying that there were no live people I could contact. I wrote a long email describing my complaint to XXXX but did not receive any response, not even an autoreply saying that the message has been received. \n\nThe following day, XX/XX/XXXX, unable to access the account, our account at XXXX XXXX  where we had connected an autopay became overdrawn. Unsure whether someone from Captial One would contact us that day, my wife asked a friend of hers to lend us some money and transfer funds to our XXXX account to cover our overdrawn balance. \n\nIn our last previous phone call with a live person, we had been told that it would most likely be within a week at most that we would hear back from the security team. Meanwhile from XX/XX/XXXX, my wife called back each morning, often on hold for 15-40 minutes before speaking to someone with no further information on the account and then getting forwarded to the same voicemail where she left a name and number. This continued until XX/XX/XXXX, when a week had now passed with no attempt to contact us. \n\nNow, we began to worry about XXXX rent and not wanting to borrow even more money from a family friend, I used my twitter account to post several tweets detailing our ordeal and the complete lack of responsiveness on the part of Capital One. I received a message in reply from @ XXXX asking for my wife 's name and zip code in a Direct Message. I responded to that request giving them my wife 's name ( XXXX XXXX ) and our home zip code ( XXXX ). Within an hour I received a followup Direct Message : \" Thanks for the follow-up XXXX. We did some digging here, and while we're not able to place an outbound call in this case, we should be able to get you in touch with the right team. Have XXXX  call XXXX - this number will take her directly to the correct team to help. ^XXXX '' Hoping that this would be the end of our ordeal, my wife called in to that number. She was able to speak with a live person, who then told her that the account in question had been \" closed '' because they had not received a response from us when we opened the account. Keep in mind that neither the branch bank rep nor the phone reps had told us that the account was closed, merely that it was locked. My wife responded by saying that if the account had been closed, then why had she been able to continue to access the account through a mobile login, and further why was XXXX able to confirm the account and allow a transfer of {$320.00} into that account. \n\nThe representative did not explain how this could be possible, but continued to repeat that the account had been closed. We were fine with this, but needed our funds that were in three deposits 1 ) {$2300.00}, 2 ) {$2400.00}, and the final 3 ) {$320.00}. The representative then told my wife that CapitalOne would not issue us that money in a check, but that we would need to contact the original payor of the checks and XXXX to get them to \" reverse '' the payment. Having no idea what they were talking about, my wife said she would call them back after speaking with me. \n\nMeanwhile, she then attempted to log in to her mobile app, only now to discover that suddenly her login no longer worked and displayed a message to call a number. Thus CapitalOne retroactively decided to correct the access we had been given online to fit in line with their narrative. I have included a photo dated XX/XX/XXXX of my wife 's account on the tablet at the bank branch showing access to the account and some of the details of the account to show that CapitalOne is lying about having closed the account prior to XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI returned home immediately after receiving a stressed phone call from my wife and we dialed the number I had received on twitter. When my wife asked that the person speak with me, the representative stated that she would not speak with anyone other than my wife. I then turned the phone to speaker so that I could hear what the representative was saying. Again, she repeated the statement that we would need to go back to the payors of the checks and ask them to \" reverse '' the payment. The checks had been deposited in XXXX XXXX, and CapitalOne was telling us to get people to get their money back from checks that had been deposited. \n\nAs stated above, the two checks in question were from 1 ) our previous apartment landlord for a return of our security deposit, and 2 ) from the parent of a student of mine. We were told that when the issuing bank requested the \" reversal '' that the money would be returned to the accounts of the payors. When asked whether I would receive any documentation from CapitalOne saying that a reversal was made, I was told that they would provide no such documentation. CapitalOne was asking me to put myself in financial jeopardy by asking a landlord and a former client to get their money back, and then trust in their goodwill and moral fortitude that they would then write us new checks, all without any documentation from CapitalOne that something of this nature occurred and that payment that had previously been received and deposited was now no longer the case. Essentially, should the landlord and client decide to not issue new checks to us, I would have no evidence that they had not paid me. Finally, with regard to XXXX, the representative insisted that XXXX would be able to reverse the transaction. The payor in this case was my wife since the {$320.00} had come from her XXXX account. The representative would not answer any further questions, refused to listen to me further because she determined that she had nothing further to offer and then hung up on us. \n\nCompletely demoralized, I tracked down the phone number of our previous landlord and messaged her asking her to call me back. I explained the situation to her and while she was confused, she agreed to call her bank and ask them to do what CapitalOne had requested. \n\nFollowing that call, I placed another call to the mother of my student and explained again the same situation. She also agreed to do as CapitalOne asked. \n\nAfter that, my wife placed another call to XXXX asking them to \" reverse '' the payment. After speaking to a manager level representative, we were told that XXXX is not a financial institution and only had the ability to process funds in one direction, by giving it, not be taking it. \n\nMy wife then called the same number above to let them know that XXXX had said it was impossible to do as CapitalOne had asked. She further questioned why, if the account had been locked or \" closed '' as they intimated, had the XXXX connection been allowed, and why had CapitalOne even accepted a XXXX deposit. She received no explanation, and the rep only replied that now no deposits would be accepted. The representative then told her that because of the nature of our calls that CapitalOne had decided that they no longer wanted to do business with us. If our ordeal weren't so real, that would have almost been comically funny. \n\nMy wife replied that this was fine, that we only wanted to get our money back. The representative kept trying to insist that the paying institutions ( the banks from which the checks were drawn and XXXX ) would have to initiate the payment reversal. \n\nWhile she was on the phone, I received a call on my phone from our XXXX landlord. My landlord relayed how she had called her bank ( XXXX ) and asked to do what had been requested. She said that her bank said such a procedure was impossible, that the check had been deposited, and there couldn't even be a dispute of the check after such a long period had passed. According to XXXX policy, if XXXX had closed an account ( for whatever reason ) XXXX would have been required by law to issue a check for the balance in the account to the address on record. I hurriedly told my wife what our landlord had told me while she was still on the phone with CapitalOne. \n\nHe repeated the same lines again about getting a reversal until my wife asked to speak with a supervisor. When told that XXXX had told us their policy, he placed my wife on hold to speak with someone. When he returned he told my wife that if we received either a \" Hold Harmless Letter '' or \" Letter of Indemnity '' from the banks of the payors, CapitalOne would then issue a check to us. My wife had no idea what that meant and he refused to give further information and my wife judged that the representative did not know exactly what those things meant either. He did not offer any further instructions and no email sharing directions for how those letters were to be constructed was given. \n\nDespondent, my wife hung up after writing down what she had been told, including a fax number ( XXXX ) where we were to fax these letters once we had received them from our landlord and my former client. He still had not let us know how we were to resolve the {$320.00} from our XXXX account. \n\nAgain, I called our landlord to ask her to ask her bank for this, but now she was uncertain about signing a general letter of indemnity, not knowing how CapitalOne would use that letter. Since there was no specific direction regarding what terms would be needed in that letter, I could not tell her what she needed to hear. She agreed to ask her bank if they knew what CapitalOne would need, but she stated that while she would agree to an affadavit affirming the nature of the check that she wrote to us, she would likely not sign a general ( unspecific ) letter of indemnity. \n\nI received a similar reply from the mother of my student. \n\nNow we are completely out of options. CapitalOne says they closed the account. CapitalOne has now, beginning XX/XX/XXXX locked my wife out of online access. CapitalOne has told us of a method to recover the money that turned out to be impossible according to the banks of the check payors. CapitalOne now demands a legal instrument that the check payors are reluctant to sign. \n\nWe even visited our local XXXX XXXX  representative to ask for clarification and she informed us that XXXX XXXX, like XXXX, would have issued a check for the balance in the account upon closing the account. \n\nI discovered the CFPB from calling the Federal Reserve consumer help line and was transferred to a CFPB representative who was very helpful. \n\nWe are desperately in need of help. We were told that after filing the complaint that CapitalOne would have 15 calendar days to respond. 15 days would put us very close to the end of the month, at which point another rent payment will be due along with the other bills. We have not been able to make more than our minimum credit card balance payments and are essentially surviving on using credit cards to pay for gas, utilities, food, and essentials. We have a XXXX XXXX daughter and need this money to get some of our financial issues straightened.","date_sent_to_company":"2018-03-08T17:29:27.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"75034","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2837246","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2018-03-08T17:20:46.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["We even visited our local <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>  representative to ask for clarification and she informed us that <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, like <em>XXXX</em>, would have issued a check for the balance in the account upon closing the account. \n\nI discovered the <em>CFPB</em> from calling the Federal Reserve consumer help line and was transferred to a <em>CFPB</em> representative who was very helpful. \n\nWe are desperately in need of help."]},"sort":[9.585545,"2837246"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":6,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":6}]}},"product":{"doc_count":6,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":5,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":5}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":6,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with personal statement of dispute","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":6,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":6}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":6,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":5},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":6,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":6}]}},"company":{"doc_count":6,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":3},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":6,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"NY","doc_count":3},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"GA","doc_count":1},{"key":"TX","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":6,"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":2}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":6,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}},"_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":{}}}