{"took":3064,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":28,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9398432","_score":17.396236,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"NARRATIVE I am filing this report to formally document the theft of my identity and the subsequent fraudulent activities that have severely impacted my financial standing and reputation. Over the past several years, I have become aware of unauthorized and false information being reported on my credit report by various credit bureaus. I have not given consent for these activities, and they have caused significant harm to my credit rating and personal reputation.\n\nThe following unauthorized actions have been observed : 1. **Unauthorized Credit Inquiries : ** Numerous credit inquiries have been made without my knowledge or consent. \n2. **Fraudulent Accounts : ** New accounts have been opened in my name that I did not authorize.\n\n3. **Incorrect Personal Information : ** My personal information, including my address and employment details, have been altered inaccurately.\n\n4. **Unapproved Transactions : ** There have been multiple transactions and charges on my existing accounts that I did not make.\n\n5. **Unauthorized Reporting : ** There are numerous accounts being reported by credit bureaus without my consent.\n\nThese fraudulent activities have resulted in : - A significant drop in my credit score.\n\n- Denial of credit applications and loans.\n\n- Damage to my personal and professional reputation. - Emotional distress and financial hardship.\n\nUpon discovering these discrepancies, I have taken the following steps : 1. Contacted the credit bureaus ( Experian, XXXX, and XXXX ) to dispute the unauthorized entries. 2. Placed a fraud alert on my credit reports. \n3. Contacted my financial institutions to report the fraudulent activities and secure my accounts. 4. Filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ).\n\n5. Filed a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protect Bureau ( CFPB ) I am requesting a thorough investigation into this matter to identify the individual ( s ) /credit bureaus responsible for these fraudulent activities and to take appropriate legal action. I also seek assistance in rectifying my credit report and restoring my financial standing. \nI am willing to prosecute.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-07-01T21:13:28.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"85040","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9398432","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2024-07-01T21:03:42.000Z","state":"AZ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Debt was result of identity theft"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["- Damage to my <em>personal</em> and professional reputation. - Emotional distress and <em>financial</em> hardship.\n\nUpon <em>discovering</em> these discrepancies, I have taken the following steps : 1. Contacted the credit bureaus ( Experian, XXXX, and XXXX ) to dispute the unauthorized entries. 2. Placed a fraud alert on my credit reports. \n3. Contacted my <em>financial</em> institutions to report the fraudulent activities and secure my accounts. 4. Filed a <em>complaint</em> with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ).\n\n5."]},"sort":[17.396236,"9398432"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18163311","_score":14.621396,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint because my credit report contains numerous inaccuracies and unverifiable accounts that misrepresent my financial history and pose a serious risk to my creditworthiness. By law, I am entitled to a credit file that is accurate, complete, and verifiable under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to 602 ( a ), 604 ( a ), 605 ( a ), 607 ( b ), 609, 611, and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and ( a ) ( 2 ). Upon reviewing my credit report, I discovered multiple accounts and balances, as well as associated addresses, that appear to be reported inaccurately or without proper verification, including large balances allegedly owed to XXXX XXXX XXXX, and other creditors, as well as numerous medical collection accounts and auto loans, with inconsistent reporting of last activity dates, balances, and payment histories. Additionally, several addresses associated with my file, including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, AR XXXX, are inaccurate or unverifiable, further calling into question the integrity of the reporting on my credit profile. These errors collectively create a misleading narrative that could adversely impact my financial reputation, access to credit, and personal security. I am invoking my rights under FCRA 611 to dispute any information that is inaccurate or can not be properly verified and demand that all furnishers provide supporting documentation for every entry listed. Furthermore, under FCRA 605 ( a ), any information that can not be substantiated must be promptly removed to restore the accuracy of my file. I request a thorough and lawful reinvestigation of each account, complete disclosure of all documentation and verification used to support the reporting, correction or deletion of inaccurate information, and written confirmation of all actions taken to ensure that my credit report reflects only accurate, verifiable, and legally compliant information.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-19T03:31:51.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"72301","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18163311","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-12-19T03:22:52.000Z","state":"AR","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":["These errors collectively create a misleading <em>narrative</em> that could adversely impact my <em>financial</em> reputation, access to credit, and <em>personal</em> security. I am invoking my rights under FCRA 611 to dispute any information that is inaccurate or can not be properly verified and demand that all furnishers provide supporting documentation for every entry listed. Furthermore, under FCRA 605 ( a ), any information that can not be substantiated must be promptly removed to restore the accuracy of my file."],"product":["Credit reporting or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"]},"sort":[14.621396,"18163311"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18163312","_score":14.587697,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint because my credit report contains numerous inaccuracies and unverifiable accounts that misrepresent my financial history and pose a serious risk to my creditworthiness. By law, I am entitled to a credit file that is accurate, complete, and verifiable under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to 602 ( a ), 604 ( a ), 605 ( a ), 607 ( b ), 609, 611, and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and ( a ) ( 2 ). Upon reviewing my credit report, I discovered multiple accounts and balances, as well as associated addresses, that appear to be reported inaccurately or without proper verification, including large balances allegedly owed to XXXX XXXX XXXX, and other creditors, as well as numerous medical collection accounts and auto loans, with inconsistent reporting of last activity dates, balances, and payment histories. Additionally, several addresses associated with my file, including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, AR XXXX, are inaccurate or unverifiable, further calling into question the integrity of the reporting on my credit profile. These errors collectively create a misleading narrative that could adversely impact my financial reputation, access to credit, and personal security. I am invoking my rights under FCRA 611 to dispute any information that is inaccurate or can not be properly verified and demand that all furnishers provide supporting documentation for every entry listed. Furthermore, under FCRA 605 ( a ), any information that can not be substantiated must be promptly removed to restore the accuracy of my file. I request a thorough and lawful reinvestigation of each account, complete disclosure of all documentation and verification used to support the reporting, correction or deletion of inaccurate information, and written confirmation of all actions taken to ensure that my credit report reflects only accurate, verifiable, and legally compliant information.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-19T03:31:56.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"72301","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18163312","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-19T03:27:36.000Z","state":"AR","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["These errors collectively create a misleading <em>narrative</em> that could adversely impact my <em>financial</em> reputation, access to credit, and <em>personal</em> security. I am invoking my rights under FCRA 611 to dispute any information that is inaccurate or can not be properly verified and demand that all furnishers provide supporting documentation for every entry listed. Furthermore, under FCRA 605 ( a ), any information that can not be substantiated must be promptly removed to restore the accuracy of my file."],"product":["Credit reporting or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"]},"sort":[14.587697,"18163312"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18163313","_score":14.583315,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint because my credit report contains numerous inaccuracies and unverifiable accounts that misrepresent my financial history and pose a serious risk to my creditworthiness. By law, I am entitled to a credit file that is accurate, complete, and verifiable under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to 602 ( a ), 604 ( a ), 605 ( a ), 607 ( b ), 609, 611, and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and ( a ) ( 2 ). Upon reviewing my credit report, I discovered multiple accounts and balances, as well as associated addresses, that appear to be reported inaccurately or without proper verification, including large balances allegedly owed to XXXX XXXX XXXX, and other creditors, as well as numerous medical collection accounts and auto loans, with inconsistent reporting of last activity dates, balances, and payment histories. Additionally, several addresses associated with my file, including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, AR XXXX, are inaccurate or unverifiable, further calling into question the integrity of the reporting on my credit profile. These errors collectively create a misleading narrative that could adversely impact my financial reputation, access to credit, and personal security. I am invoking my rights under FCRA 611 to dispute any information that is inaccurate or can not be properly verified and demand that all furnishers provide supporting documentation for every entry listed. Furthermore, under FCRA 605 ( a ), any information that can not be substantiated must be promptly removed to restore the accuracy of my file. I request a thorough and lawful reinvestigation of each account, complete disclosure of all documentation and verification used to support the reporting, correction or deletion of inaccurate information, and written confirmation of all actions taken to ensure that my credit report reflects only accurate, verifiable, and legally compliant information.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-19T03:31:51.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"72301","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18163313","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-19T03:27:36.000Z","state":"AR","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":["These errors collectively create a misleading <em>narrative</em> that could adversely impact my <em>financial</em> reputation, access to credit, and <em>personal</em> security. I am invoking my rights under FCRA 611 to dispute any information that is inaccurate or can not be properly verified and demand that all furnishers provide supporting documentation for every entry listed. Furthermore, under FCRA 605 ( a ), any information that can not be substantiated must be promptly removed to restore the accuracy of my file."],"product":["Credit reporting or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"]},"sort":[14.583315,"18163313"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18521911","_score":14.031979,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint Narrative I am filing this complaint to dispute a collection account being reported by National Credit Systems in the amount of approximately {$5100.00}. I believe this account is inaccurate, unauthorized, and the result of improper handling of my information by my former apartment complex. \n\nI lived at my former apartment for approximately XXXX ( XXXX ) years and left in good standing. I was never informed of any outstanding balance when I moved out, nor did I receive any move-out charges, final bill, or notice from the property management company. \n\nSeveral months later, I discovered on my credit report that a third-party collection agency ( National Credit Systems ) was reporting that I owed over {$5000.00}. This was the first time I became aware of any supposed debt. \n\nDuring this time, the apartment property had changed ownership and management. When I went to the property to ask for an explanation and documentation, I was told that because it was new management, they could not assist me and had no records regarding my account. They also confirmed they did not send me anything. \n\nI did not give consent for my personal information to be transferred or sold to a third-party collection agency, particularly without any prior billing statement, notice, or attempt to contact me. I consider this to be improper and potentially unlawful handling of my information. \n\nTo date, National Credit Systems has not provided me with : A full itemized accounting of any alleged charges Copies of my lease records or move-out inspection Proof that I owe this debt Proof they have the legal right to collect it Instead, they are continuing to report this collection to the credit bureaus, which is causing serious harm to my credit and financial standing. \n\nI am requesting that the CFPB review this matter and require the company to : Provide full validation and supporting documentation of this alleged debt ; or Remove the collection entirely from my credit reports if they can not prove it is valid and legally owed. \n\nI dispute this collection in full, and I believe it is inaccurate, unfairly reported, and mishandled by both the apartment management and the collection agency. \n\nThank you for your assistance.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-07T04:23:55.000Z","issue":"False statements or representation","sub_product":"Rental debt","zip_code":"75126","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18521911","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"National Credit Systems,Inc.","date_received":"2026-01-07T03:52:45.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Attempted to collect wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> I am filing this <em>complaint</em> to dispute a collection account being reported by National Credit Systems in the amount of approximately {$5100.00}. I believe this account is inaccurate, unauthorized, and the result of improper handling of my information by my former apartment complex. \n\nI lived at my former apartment for approximately XXXX ( XXXX ) years and left in good standing."]},"sort":[14.031979,"18521911"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14374054","_score":13.316078,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Formal Complaint Against : USCB Corporation Complainant : XXXX XXXX, XXXX of XXXX XXXX ( a local, family-owned small business ) Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX Debt Collector : USCB Corporation Account ( s ) in Question : XXXX ; XXXX Total Amount Claimed : Approximately {$4000.00} Summary of Complaint : This complaint details an unfair and deceptive collection action being pursued against me, a fully insured patient and local small business owner, by USCB Corporation on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \" XXXX XXXX XXXX '' ). XXXX surprise medical bills from XX/XX/year>, now totaling nearly {$4000.00}, have been placed on my credit report as collection accounts without proper prior notification or a reasonable opportunity to resolve the claim with my insurance carrier. This action creates an undue financial hardship and is contrary to the community-focused, non-profit mission of the original creditor. \n\nDetailed Narrative of Events : Background : In XX/XX/year>, I required emergency ambulance services from XXXX XXXX XXXX. At the time of this service, I was a resident of XXXX  and fully covered by my health insurance plan. \n\nLack of Proper Notification : I received no certified mail or other formal, itemized bills from XXXX XXXX XXXX detailing these charges. My first substantive notification of this alleged debt was when I discovered XXXX collection accounts from USCB Corporation had been placed on my credit report, causing significant harm to my personal and business credit standing.\n\nUnfair Shifting of Administrative Burden : Upon contactin\ng the collection agency, I was informed that my insurance carrier had rejected the claims. As an insured patient, there is a good-faith expectation that the medical provider will meaningfully engage with the insurance company to resolve billing. Instead, the entire complex administrative burden of appealing an out-of-network claim has been unfairly shifted to me, long after the fact. This constitutes an unfair business practice. \n\nUnconscionable Demand & Undue Financial Hardship : XXXX XXXX XXXX is a non-profit organization that offers an annual subscription for approximately {$75.00}, which waives all out-of-pocket costs for emergency services for an entire household. The demand that I, an insured resident and local small business owner, now pay {$3000.00} is unconscionable and stands in stark contrast to their own community-based pricing model. This collection action places a severe and undue financial hardship on my family-owned business, straining our credit and impacting our ability to operate and provide employment within the same community XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nRefusal to Negotiate Reasonably : The collection agency, USCB Corporation, has been unwilling to consider a reasonable resolution and has offered no meaningful assistance, instead insisting on payment for the full, inflated amount.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-30T16:53:40.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Medical debt","zip_code":"19380","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14374054","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"USCB Corporation","date_received":"2025-06-30T16:38:26.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["My first substantive notification of this alleged debt was when I <em>discovered</em> XXXX collection accounts from USCB Corporation had been placed on my credit report, causing significant harm to my <em>personal</em> and business credit standing.\n\nUnfair Shifting of Administrative Burden : Upon contactin\ng the collection agency, I was informed that my insurance carrier had rejected the claims."]},"sort":[13.316078,"14374054"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18373792","_score":12.031271,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Product : Credit card Issue : Billing dispute / unauthorized charges/ improper account linkage Complaint Narrative : I am submitting this complaint regarding unauthorized credit card activity and improper linkage of my personal checking account to a credit card account I did not apply for, possess, or authorize. \n\n\n\nA U.S. Bank credit card account ending in XXXX was originally opened in my former husbands name in or around XXXX. I never applied for this card, never had possession of it, and never authorized its use or any payments toward it. \n\n\n\nMy former spouse and I separated in XX/XX/XXXX and were formally divorced in XX/XX/XXXX. At that time, I changed my name back to my maiden name and provided my local U.S. Bank branch with a copy of my divorce decree. I worked with a personal banker to separate my finances and was advised that I could safely keep my checking account ending in XXXX open for recurring bills if I changed my password. I was explicitly assured that my former husband would not be able to access this account. \n\n\n\nIn or around XXXX XXXXmore than three years after our separation and nearly three years after our divorcemy former husband reactivated the credit card ending in XXXX and took approximately a {$1300.00} cash advance. I did not authorize this reactivation, the cash advance, or any related charges. \n\n\n\nBeginning around that time, monthly payments of approximately {$350.00} were automatically withdrawn from my checking account ending in XXXX without my knowledge or consent. The transaction description appeared only as cc payment, which I reasonably believed referred to my separate, authorized U.S. Bank credit card. I had no way of knowing these withdrawals were being applied to my former husbands credit card account. \n\n\n\nAs a result, I unknowingly paid approximately {$2500.00} toward this unauthorized debt. When I later discovered the source of the payments, I made a {$98.00} payment in XXXX solely to prevent damage to my credit, as my former spouse is facing foreclosure and bankruptcy and could not make the payment. This payment was made under financial duress and does not constitute acceptance of responsibility for the debt. \n\n\n\nDespite these payments, the credit card still carries an outstanding balance of over {$2400.00}, and I am being pressured to continue paying for debt that is not mine. \n\n\n\nI did not authorize : the credit card application the reactivation of the card in XXXX the cash advance automatic payments from my checking account I have repeatedly raised this issue with my local branch and Card Services. Card Services stated there was nothing they could do, and branch management declined to provide written confirmation regarding the banks findings or internal controls. I have not been provided documentation showing how or when my personal account was linked to this credit card despite my divorce, name change, and reliance on bank assurances. \n\n\n\nI am requesting the following resolution : Reimbursement of all unauthorized payments withdrawn from my checking account ( approximately {$2500.00}, including the XXXX payment ). \nImmediate removal of my name from the credit card account ending in XXXX. \nWritten confirmation that my credit will not be adversely affected now or in the future. \nDocumentation showing who authorized the automatic payments from my checking account, including the date, method, and proof of authorization. \n\n\n\n\nThis situation represents a serious failure of internal controls, consent verification, and post-divorce account separation. I am requesting review and assistance from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to ensure proper resolution.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-30T17:46:24.000Z","issue":"Other features, terms, or problems","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"61107","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18373792","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"U.S. BANCORP","date_received":"2025-12-30T17:37:34.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Other problem"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Product : Credit card Issue : Billing dispute / unauthorized charges/ improper account linkage <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> : I am submitting this <em>complaint</em> regarding unauthorized credit card activity and improper linkage of my <em>personal</em> checking account to a credit card account I did not apply for, possess, or authorize. \n\n\n\nA U.S. Bank credit card account ending in XXXX was originally opened in my former husbands name in or around XXXX."]},"sort":[12.031271,"18373792"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14822892","_score":11.870568,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Respondent : Discover Financial Services ( DFS ) Account # : XXXX I. Comprehensive Narrative of Violations A. Fraudulent Account Timeline Manipulation Conflicting Opening Dates : XX/XX/XXXX Letter : Correctly states account opened XX/XX/XXXX. \nXX/XX/XXXX Letter : Falsely claims account opened XX/XX/XXXX ( 7-month fabrication ). \nXX/XX/XXXX Letter : Reverts to accurate XX/XX/XXXX date after being challenged. \nStrategic Misrepresentation : DFS used false \" XX/XX/XXXX '' date to artificially extend delinquency timeline by 10 months. \nCreated illusion of 26-month delinquency ( vs. actual 16 months ) to justify \" charged off '' status. \nB. Debt Cancellation & Ongoing Harassment IRS 1099-C Issuance ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : Legally canceled {$2600.00} debt under 26 U.S.C. 6050P. \nDFS continued collection efforts through XX/XX/XXXX ( 3 months post-cancellation ). \nDefective Dispute Process : 7+ Disputes Ignored : Certified mail, CFPB portal ( Case # XXXX )XXXX XXXX \nDFS Responses : XX/XX/XXXX : \" Account opened XX/XX/XXXX ... balance valid '' ( fraudulent timeline ). \nXX/XX/XXXX : \" Account opened XX/XX/XXXX '' ( partial correction while maintaining false 'charged off ' status ).\n\nII. Legal Violations A. FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) : Fabricated Data : Willful misrepresentation of account opening date to credit bureaus. \nPrecedent : XXXX v. XXXX & XXXX ( XXXX ) Creditors liable for \" reckless disregard '' of accuracy. \nB. Texas Finance Code 392.304 ( a ) ( 3 ) : Deceptive Trade Practice : Alternating dates created artificial delinquency narrative.\n\nC. ECOA 1691 ( d ) ( 1 ) : Disability Discrimination : Disproportionate harm to medically vulnerable consumer through convoluted disputes.\n\nD. GLBA 6802 : Data Weaponization : Exploited SSN/DOB to harass post-debt cancellation despite XXXX Privacy Policy. \nIII. Documented Harm Impact Evidence Credit Collapse ( XXXX  XXXX ) XX/XX/XXXX credit report showing DFSs {$2600.00} \" charged off '' balance XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  rejection letter ( XX/XX/XXXX ) citing credit report Secured Credit XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) for collateral-backed card Emotional Distress Hospital records linking stress to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Demands for Relief Immediate Corrective Action ( 14 Days ) : Update all credit bureaus to : {$0.00} balance \" Canceled '' status ( Code XXXX ) Standardized XX/XX/XXXX opening date Delete all references to \" XX/XX/XXXX '' and \" charged off '' coding. \nCease-and-Desist Directive : Effective immediately, I demand Discover Financial Services and any associated third parties : Cease Reporting Inaccurate Information : Remove all inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable information from my consumer file. \nCease Unauthorized Data Sharing : Stop sharing my personal information with unauthorized third parties. \nCease Unauthorized Inquiries : Prevent any unauthorized inquiries into my consumer file. \nProvide a detailed list of all entities that have accessed my file within the last 12 months. \nFailure to comply with this directive will result in further action, including filing complaints with the CFPB, FTC, and Texas Attorney Generals Office, as well as pursuing legal remedies for damages caused by noncompliance.\n\nFinancial Restitution : {$100000.00} Total : {$35000.00} ( credit/medical harm ) {$20000.00} ( emotional distress ) {$50000.00} ( punitive damages under FCRA 1681n ) Regulatory Action : CFPB : Audit DFSs XXXX account date reporting under Circular XXXX. \nTexas XXXX : Impose penalties under Tex. Fin. Code 392.401 ( $ XXXX ). \nV. Evidence Attachments DFS Letters : XX/XX/XXXX ( accurate date ) XX/XX/XXXX ( fraudulent \" XX/XX/XXXX '' claim ) XX/XX/XXXX ( partial correction ) IRS Form 1099-C ( XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX Report ( XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB Portal Submission","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-24T10:00:27.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77079","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14822892","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"DISCOVER BANK","date_received":"2025-07-24T07:26:45.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Respondent : <em>Discover</em> <em>Financial</em> Services ( DFS ) Account # : XXXX I. Comprehensive <em>Narrative</em> of Violations A. Fraudulent Account Timeline Manipulation Conflicting Opening Dates : XX/XX/XXXX Letter : Correctly states account opened XX/XX/XXXX. \nXX/XX/XXXX Letter : Falsely claims account opened XX/XX/XXXX ( 7-month fabrication ). \nXX/XX/XXXX Letter : Reverts to accurate XX/XX/XXXX date after being challenged."],"product":["Credit reporting or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"],"company":["<em>DISCOVER</em> BANK"]},"sort":[11.870568,"14822892"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"8639443","_score":11.271362,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, Iowa XXXX Subject : Formal Complaint Regarding Credit Report Inconsistencies and Lack of Resolution from Equifax Dear XXXX, I hope this letter finds you well. I am writing to bring to your attention a distressing matter I have been grappling with since XX/XX/2024, concerning discrepancies within my credit reports obtained from XXXX. Despite repeated attempts to rectify these inconsistencies through XXXX 's purported assistance channels, the issue remains unresolved, leading me to seek your intervention in this matter. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I diligently accessed XXXX 's online credit report service to review my credit history. To my dismay, I discovered significant disparities between the report obtained from XXXX and that of Equifax. Consequently, I initiated several requests for assistance from Equifax and XXXX, Case # XXXX, Escalation Issue XXXX, and Case # XXXX, Case # XXXX, Case # XXXX, Case # XXXX, Case # XXXX, Case # XXXX but regrettably, despite my earnest efforts and numerous follow-ups, Equifax has failed to provide any not only meaningful updates or resolution to date that has been dismal at best indicating that its on the XXXX party that is having issue. \n\nCompounding this ordeal, in order to access updated credit reports without incurring hard inquiries, I was compelled to engage the services of multiple third-party entities, incurring personal expenses. Alarmingly, all reports procured from these entities corroborate the inaccuracies present in the XXXX report. Despite assurances from Equifax, XXXX, XXXX of profile refreshes, the persistence of erroneous information, such as falsely reported account being late, number of account open and addresses, persists unabated. \n\nAs an XXXX XXXX, I am well-versed in discerning technical intricacies. Contrary to Equifax 's assertions, it is evident that the root cause of these discrepancies lies within their systems, as corroborated by consistent inaccuracies across multiple reports obtained from reputable sources, including XXXX, XXXX, XXXX and XXXX ; which I have again paid to get the details as it is my only source to checking to see if the information is correct. \n\nWhile speaking with XXXX of the XXXX has also determined that other consumers where experiencing similar issues with Equifax and the information can on only come from them and no other place yet they repeatedly say that its other companies issue. And the stake is extremely high given all the inconsistencies. I even provided compelling thought process that could be very easily considered clear thought process to digest without going outside the narrative!! \n\nFurthermore, my interactions with Equifaxs support personnel have been deeply disheartening. Instead of earnestly addressing the issue, I have been met with dismissive responses and baseless attributions of fault to unspecified third-party vendors. \n\nSuch conduct not only exacerbates my frustration but also undermines the integrity of Equifax 's purported commitment to consumer advocacy and support. \nEnclosed with this correspondence are comprehensive documentation substantiating the aforementioned discrepancies, submitted to Equifax and now these updated details showing the error. I implore the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to intervene expeditiously and facilitate a thorough investigation into this matter. \n\nThe undue hardship and mental anguish I have endured, coupled with the lack of accountability demonstrated by Equifax, necessitate a prompt and equitable resolution.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-03-27T23:50:26.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"75039","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"8639443","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2024-03-27T22:48:16.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Personal information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["To my dismay, I <em>discovered</em> significant disparities between the report obtained from XXXX and that of Equifax."],"product":["Credit reporting or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"],"sub_issue":["<em>Personal</em> information incorrect"]},"sort":[11.271362,"8639443"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18942686","_score":11.202712,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Proposed CFPB Complaint Narrative ( from the perspective of XXXX XXXX ) My name is XXXX XXXX. I am filing this complaint against Truist Bank regarding unauthorized debit card transactions on my Truist business checking account and Truists refusal to fully reimburse clearly fraudulent activity. \nBank : Truist Bank Account type : Business checking ( used primarily for marketing expenses ) Account number : XXXX Total disputed amount : Approximately {$42000.00} Main unauthorized merchant : XXXX ( online gambling ) Discovery of fraud : Around XX/XX/year>XXXX  Background I operate a small business and maintained a business checking account with Truist that I used mainly to pay for marketing and lead generation. This account was not used heavily for day-to-day expenses and I did not monitor it as closely as my primary operating account. \nAround [ insert month/year when it started ], I allowed a sales representative who was working with my business to use my Truist debit card solely for business-related lead generation expenses. Examples of what I authorized included : XXXX advertising XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  from third-party vendors Other specific marketing-related services we discussed There was no written contract authorizing broader usage of the card. The authorization was strictly verbal and limited only to lead generation and marketing for my business. I never authorized this person to use my card for personal expenses, gambling, or any non-business purposes. \n\nDiscovery of Unauthorized Transactions I only became aware of the fraudulent activity after : A notification from XXXX about a withdrawal of approximately {$2000.00}, and/or A fraud alert text message from Truist notifying me of suspected fraudulent activity. \nThese alerts prompted me to immediately review my Truist account activity. When I checked my statements and online banking, I discovered : Multiple transactions to XXXX, an online gambling platform Other transactions and withdrawals that were not related to lead generation or any approved business expense The fraudulent activity appeared to have occurred over a period of several months ( approximately six months ) In total, the unauthorized charges and withdrawals were approximately {$42000.00}. \nI never knowingly authorized any transactions with XXXX or any gambling website. I also did not authorize XXXX cash withdrawals for that purpose. These charges are completely inconsistent with the limited purpose for which I allowed my debit card to be used. \n\nMy Actions After Discovering the Fraud As soon as I discovered the suspicious transactions, I immediately contacted Truist Bank to : Report the fraud Request that my debit card be blocked Dispute all unauthorized transactions Ask for an investigation and reimbursement I also began gathering documentation, including : Bank statements showing the unauthorized transactions Screenshots and/or records of the Truist fraud text message The XXXX notification showing the suspicious withdrawal I explained to Truist that : The card had been entrusted to a sales representative only for limited, specific business expenses ( lead generation and marketing ). \nI did not authorize gambling transactions, personal expenses, or large withdrawals for any non-business purposes. \nI had no knowledge of these unauthorized transactions until I received the alerts and reviewed my statements. \n\nTruists Response Truist informed me that because this is a business account, they would only consider reimbursement for transactions within a 30-day window prior to my dispute or discovery. I was told that they would not reimburse the full amount of the unauthorized activity, despite the following : I reported the fraud immediately upon discovering it.\n\nThe pattern of transactions ( XXXX  etc. ) is clearly inconsistent with the stated business use of the account. \nThe person using the card exceeded the scope of any permission I gave and used the card in a deceptive and unauthorized way. \nIn effect, Truist has taken the position that I am only eligible to recover a small portion of the ~ {$42000.00} in unauthorized charges because of an internal 30-day limitation, even though I did not and realistically could not discover the unauthorized pattern earlier given how the account was used and the nature of the charges.\n\nFrom my perspective, Truist : Failed to adequately protect my account from clearly abnormal and high-risk activity ( e.g., large and repeated transactions to an online gambling site ), and Is now refusing to make me whole, even though I acted promptly once I became aware of the fraud.\n\nHarm Suffered As a small business owner, this has caused severe financial harm : Approximately {$42000.00} was removed from my Truist account due to unauthorized activity. \nThe loss has significantly affected my business cash flow and my ability to pay for legitimate business expenses. \nI have invested substantial time and effort trying to work with Truists fraud and claims departments without a satisfactory resolution. \n\nWhat I Am Requesting I respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau : Investigate Truist Banks handling of my fraud claim, including : Their decision to limit reimbursement to only 30 days of unauthorized transactions despite prompt reporting upon discovery. \nWhether their policies and practices for business debit card fraud resolution are fair and compliant with applicable laws and regulations. \nRequire Truist to reimburse all unauthorized transactions related to : XXXX and other gambling or non-business merchants XXXX withdrawals and other non-authorized transfers not related to my agreed-upon business purposes Ensure that any related negative impacts ( fees, account status, internal records, etc. ) are corrected. \nI am prepared to provide : Copies of my bank statements highlighting the unauthorized transactions Any fraud alert messages from Truist The XXXX notification regarding the {$2000.00} withdrawal Any additional documentation CFPB or Truist may require to support this complaint Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am asking for assistance because I believe I have been the victim of a serious fraud, and Truist has not adequately protected me or fully addressed the loss. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-23T01:53:19.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"22153","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18942686","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-11-30T03:55:55.000Z","state":"VA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Proposed CFPB <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> ( from the perspective of XXXX XXXX ) My name is XXXX XXXX. I am filing this <em>complaint</em> against Truist Bank regarding unauthorized debit card transactions on my Truist business checking account and Truists refusal to fully reimburse clearly fraudulent activity."],"company":["TRUIST <em>FINANCIAL</em> CORPORATION"]},"sort":[11.202712,"18942686"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6237885","_score":10.79244,"_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 have <em>personal</em> 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 charges until <em>Discover</em> resolves this matter correctly. \n\nThese charges were made without my knowledge and without my permission, which is the very definition of fraudulent transactions."],"company":["<em>DISCOVER</em> BANK"]},"sort":[10.79244,"6237885"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10572725","_score":10.343144,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Complaint Against TransUnion Date : XX/XX/XXXX Summary of Complaint : TransUnion has repeatedly failed to remove fraudulent accounts and unauthorized inquiries from my credit report, despite extensive documentation. This inaction has not only impacted my credit but also severely affected my ability to secure housing when my premature daughter was born. I am requesting CFPBs intervention to enforce my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) Section 605B, which mandates the removal of adverse information resulting from identity theft within four business days of substantiation.\n\nConsumer Complaint Narrative Over the past two years, I have fought tirelessly to correct fraudulent information on my credit report after becoming a victim of identity theft. Despite submitting all required documentation, TransUnion has not acted within the legal timeframes mandated by FCRA Section 605B. Their continued inaction has affected my financial stability and prevented me from moving into a suitable home when my premature daughter was born, exacerbating an already stressful and critical time for my family. \n\nBackground and Documentation Provided In my efforts to address this issue, I have submitted all required documentation to TransUnion, including : 1. FTC Identity Theft Reports : XX/XX/XXXX : Initial report outlining unauthorized accounts and inquiries. \nXX/XX/XXXX : Follow-up report documenting the persistence of fraudulent items. \nXX/XX/XXXX : Latest report, underscoring the urgency and requesting immediate corrective action. \nXXXX. Sworn Affidavit : Submitted in XX/XX/XXXX, this affidavit, signed under penalty of perjury, confirms my identity theft status and lists unauthorized accounts and inquiries, requesting their removal as per FCRA Section 605B. \nXXXX. Police Report : In XX/XX/XXXX, I filed an official police report documenting the identity theft, highlighting misuse of my personal information to open lines of credit and create unauthorized inquiries. \nXXXX. Certified Dispute Letters : I have sent more than a dozen certified letters to TransUnion, detailing fraudulent entries with supporting evidence. Despite receiving these, TransUnion has either ignored my requests or dismissed them without conducting a thorough investigation. \n\nFraudulent Accounts and Unauthorized Inquiries The following fraudulent items remain on my credit report : Unauthorized Hard Inquiries The following inquiries were conducted without my authorization : 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  Fraudulent Accounts The following accounts were fraudulently opened or manipulated without my consent, impacting my credit and stability : XXXX. Account with a financial institution, balance reported as {$57000.00}, closed in XX/XX/XXXX. \nXXXX. Account with XXXX XXXX XXXX, open balance {$100.00}, opened in XX/XX/XXXX. \nXXXX. Account with XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, fraudulent amount {$10000.00}, discovered in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nUrgent Request for CFPB Intervention Under FCRA Section 605B, TransUnion is required to block and remove information resulting from identity theft within four business days upon receiving substantiated documentation. I have provided all necessary information, including FTC identity theft reports, a sworn affidavit, a police report, and certified dispute letters. TransUnions continued inaction represents a violation of federal law and has imposed severe hardships on me, including the inability to secure housing during a critical time for my family.\n\nImpact Statement TransUnions failure to address this fraudulent activity has had a profound impact on my life. When my XXXX XXXX was born in early XXXX, I was unable to move into a suitable home because of the damage done to my credit by these fraudulent items. Despite my efforts to resolve this, TransUnions inaction has left me without options. I am turning to the CFPB as my last resort, hoping for a swift and just resolution. \n\nThank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to CFPBs intervention in ensuring my rights are upheld.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-10-26T06:23:10.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"90404","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10572725","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2024-10-26T06:05:50.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Consumer <em>Financial</em> Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) <em>Complaint</em> Against TransUnion Date : XX/XX/XXXX Summary of <em>Complaint</em> : TransUnion has repeatedly failed to remove fraudulent accounts and unauthorized inquiries from my credit report, despite extensive documentation. This inaction has not only impacted my credit but also severely affected my ability to secure housing when my premature daughter was born."],"product":["Credit reporting or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"]},"sort":[10.343144,"10572725"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9634787","_score":7.934869,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"Problem : I was the victim of fraud and theft from my checking account by way of my debit card numbers being stolen. This theft wiped out the money in my checking account and triggered overdraft protection to cover the cost of the fraudulent purchases. \nI discovered the theft had taken place over XXXX days ( XX/XX/year> and XX/XX/year> ). The thieves purchased tickets for a XXXX event in XXXX, Florida that was held XX/XX/XXXX. \nThey purchased over the XXXX days XXXX sets of tickets via XXXX XXXX XXXX. This company is affiliated with XXXX. The XXXX transactions were : XX/XX/year> : {$2100.00} and {$2000.00} and on XX/XX/year> : {$2000.00} and {$2100.00}, the total loss to me was {$8400.00}. \nWhen this occurred, I did not have Wells Fargo transaction alerts set up on my phone or computer thus it was not immediately discovered. I happened to see the charges on XX/XX/year> because I noticed XXXX charge when I went to do a XXXX transfer to someone. I called Wells Fargo as soon as discovered that as well as all of the other transactions later that evening. I mentioned to the person I talked to that the ticket purchase triggered overdraft protection in the amount of {$3500.00} ( this dollar amount is included in the {$8400.00} referenced above. ) When I talked to the woman who took my initial information, she told me the overdraft would be considered as part of the fraud and I did not need to contact another WF agency to report that. She also felt that dollar amount would be credited pretty quickly. That did not occur.\n\nI called repeatedly over several days after the initial call because I did not hear from the fraud department as promised and I was very upset that Wells Fargo had not alerted me to the transactions that were totally aberrant regarding my past records/transactions. I still dont understand why WF allowed the transactions to occur- four sets of high priced tickets over two days without ever reaching me to confirm the transactions were legitimate no phone messages, no text messages from WF.\n\nWhen I did finally talk to a person from the WF fraud department, he identified himself as XXXX and he told me he had closed my case and my claim was denied. This closure took place without him or anyone else from the fraud department talking to me. He stated he might reopen the case if I could provide evidence from XXXX or XXXX where the tickets were released to ( e.g. a cell phone or email address ). At that point I was floored because I had seen no emails re ticket purchases or anything else that looked out of line. \nFrom that discussion I learned that not only did the thieves have my debit card numbers, but they had also hacked into my email address. I initially saw no evidence of this but post my conversation, I talked to others and did my own research re email hacking and hidden information. I looked into retrieving previously deleted emails it was then I was able to see the ticket transactions and know more fully what the criminals had purchased. The purchases were via XXXX but the emails indicates XXXX sent you tickets for XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( customer support ). I am still not sure how or why the thieves purchased via XXXX but then used XXXX to transfer the tickets from XXXX. The email said the tickets would be moved to your ticketmaster account. \nNote : I never saw/found any emails from WF asking me to verify the ticket purchase were approved by me. If they sent one and the hackers replied, I should still have been able to find it amongst the other data I was able to find. I found all the transactions regarding XXXX ( orders : XXXX, XXXX ). I also looked at the XXXX transaction records for my account, those purchases/tickets do not appear there. The perpetrators used my debit card info, my email address but a different XXXX account for the transfer. The only name I have from the email from XXXX re the transfer is XXXX. I saved all of these documents and am ready and willing to share per your request. \nOnce I had the data noted above, I reported the fraud/theft to my local police department, XXXX, NJ as well as the FBI. \nI also made numerous calls to XXXX ( XXXX ) and they did their own investigation. They acknowledged there was an ongoing dispute with the orders referred to and suggested, I work with my financial institution to start a chargeback on my account. They would not release any information to me regarding where the tickets were released nor to whom they went too. \nI presented that email from XXXX and asked that my case be reopened WF refused..\n\nThough WF has not released to me the report they complied despite my request, I was able to learn they felt my claim was not legitimate because : 1 ) I took several days to report the loss ( I reported the loss as soon as I knew about it. ) 2 ) I had not reported the credit card overdraft part ( that was not true, I reported it the very night I called. ) XXXX ) I have a pattern of purchasing tickets ( While I have in the past purchased tickets for the ballet, the opera, the theatre, and a rare concert nowhere in my history are high priced/high volume ticket purchases, nowhere in my record are any tickets for the XXXX ( XXXX had to actually think about what XXXX referred XXXX when I found the emails ). It belies any reasonable, logical thinking that I would wipe out my checking account, trigger overdraft expense for the purchase of XXXX sets of XXXX tickets or anything else. There is nothing in my history to support that conclusion. \nXXXX ) When I did finally speak to the XXXX, reference above he asked if the debit card was ever out of my possession, I told him no but when I talked about the theft, I would make mention of my debit card being stolen conflating the debit card numbers with the actual physical card. Though I told him the card was not out of my possession he took exception to me not being distinct and stating debit card numbers and he used that as part of his rationale to indicate I was the guilty party and not the victim. He said I was not consistent. That was an innocent mistake, made by a person who had been traumatized by the email hack and debit card ( numbers/information ) theft. \nI feel strongly that by the time I talked to XXXX, the person who closed my case before talking to me ( the victim ), he had a predetermined narrative of my being responsible for the charges. Anything I said to him was interpreted through a lens to support his guilt determination. My statements and actions were misconstrued to fit his negative narrative. His report has also prejudiced others Ive reached out to for help from WF. I have hit a brick wall trying to get assistance from them.\n\nI have not been treated fairly.\n\nI went to the local WF bank branch to state my complaints. The personal banker there, XXXX XXXX, tried to be of assistance and called the WF Fraud department. I talked briefly to a different person who also identified himself as XXXX, he read the report of the first while I was on the phone and it became quickly clear to me, he was negatively influenced by what was written. He was not supportive, he was argumentative and also treated me like a person who had to proof they were not guilty rather than a victim. He would not detail the report when I asked him what was written. \nOnce I deduced that the second XXXX was unduly influenced by the report of the first XXXX, I asked for my case to be reviewed by someone who is open minded, to view my case from a fresh perspective without the prejudicial notes from the first XXXX. When Ive called WF regarding this, there is a recording that indicates they sometimes record phone calls I have nothing to hide and an unbiased person, listening to the tapes from my first call to my last, would recognize I was victimized not only by the thieves but also by the institution that was supposed to protect my interests, my assets Wells Fargo. \nIt is absurd for Wells Fargo to conclude that a woman in her early XXXX would decimate her checking account, and trigger overdraft protection in pursuit of a series of high-priced tickets for a XXXX match XXXX XXXX! \nAlso, equally ridiculous, someone from WF wrote in my account re the denial on 3/14/2024 that my dispute reason was : I dont remember this transaction.\n\nI never stated I did not recall the transactions. Without equivocation, I was not aware of the purchases and never approved them. For wholly unclear reasons, WF chose to record it as a memory issue. That statement is antithetical to the truth and belies logic. \nI have been trying to get WF to reverse their decision and reimburse me for the fraudulent transactions since XX/XX/year>. I have hit nothing but brick walls. I am at a loss ( figuratively and literally ) and am reaching out to your agency for assistance.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-07-29T02:06:23.000Z","issue":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"088XX","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9634787","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2024-07-29T00:56:37.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Transaction was not authorized"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I went to the local WF bank branch to state my <em>complaints</em>. The <em>personal</em> banker there, XXXX XXXX, tried to be of assistance and called the WF Fraud department. I talked briefly to a different person who also identified himself as XXXX, he read the report of the first while I was on the phone and it became quickly clear to me, he was negatively influenced by what was written."]},"sort":[7.934869,"9634787"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3494659","_score":7.8604603,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX I, XXXX XXXX ( hereinafter I, me, and/or mine ) went to the PNC Bank branch at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, DC XXXX to close my Virtual Wallet checking account, a three-tiered checking account ( with \" Spend, '' \" Reserve, '' and \" Growth '' tiers all nested into a \" Virtual Wallet '' ) that I had opened approximately five years prior. I was assisted by the branch manager, and I stated that I wished to close my Virtual Wallet  account and end my banking relationship with PNC. The branch manager confirmed my identity and worked to close my Virtual Wallet on his  computer. After a few minutes, he stated that my account was closed and gave me a cashier 's check for the balance remaining in my account at that time. The branch manager also offered to securely destroy my debit card for the Virtual Wallet account and I gave the card to him, leaving the branch assuming that I no longer had a banking relationship with PNC. \n\nI discovered in XX/XX/XXXX that my accounts had not been completely closed, rather only the Spend tier had been closed. PNC had kept what were formerly the Reserve and Growth portions of my Virtual Wallet open as two separate accounts, one of which had accrued a {$13.00} service fee for low balance and inactivity. I called a PNC customer service representative on XX/XX/XXXX seeking to have the service fee refunded and to close the two accounts, as I had never intended to keep those accounts open. I had requested to close my Virtual Wallet in its entirety on XX/XX/XXXX, not just the Spend portion. The PNC representative on the phone refused to forgive any fees or close any accounts and informed me that I would need to go into a branch to close my accounts. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I visited the same XXXX XXXX PNC branch referenced above and informed a PNC representative at the front desk of my issue and desire to close my accounts. She informed me that one of my accounts could be closed immediately as it had a {$0.00} balance. While PNCs negligence in failing to timely close this account upon my original XX/XX/XXXX request is troubling, the account was closed on XX/XX/XXXX and is not at issue in this complaint. \n\nThe other account -- account number XXXX, formerly the Reserve portion of my Virtual Wallet as evidenced by the attached list of account numbers which was on the bottom of a sheet of checks given to me by PNC upon opening my Virtual Wallet account -- however, had a {$13.00} negative balance due to a service fee. The PNC representative at the front desk of the branch assured me that when the branch manager returned to the branch that afternoon, she would have him forgive the {$13.00} in fees and close the account. But, she said, the transaction would not post in my account until the next day, so account closing would be delayed until that time. The PNC representative also promised to send me documentation verifying closure of my two then-open accounts the following day by email and I gave the representative my email address. Documentation regarding the closure of my accounts does not exist since my interaction with the PNC representative at the branch was a verbal exchange and she later failed to send me any documentation by email, but evidence from PNCs own account records supports my story and the conclusion that PNC intended to close my account on XX/XX/XXXX without charge. \n\nTwo account statements from PNC covering the periods XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, respectively, corroborate the above narrative and evince PNC 's intention to forgive the service charge on my account to bring the account to a positive balance such that it may be closed. Both statements are attached to this complaint. The statement for the period XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX shows, on page 3, a Calculated Service Charge of {$13.00} charged on XX/XX/XXXX. The statement for the period XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX shows, on page 3, a Calculated Service Charge Refund of {$13.00}, just as the branch representative said it would. \n\nHowever, PNC acted negligently once more after refunding the service charge and never closed the account once the account had been brought to a non-negative balance, as the branch representative I spoke to said PNC would. I received no documentation stating that my account had been closed, nor did I receive notice that the account had remained open. I trusted that after following PNC 's own instructions to go to a branch to close my account and that after receiving an assurance from a PNC representative that my accounts would be closed that all of my accounts would actually be closed. PNC and its representatives acted negligently in failing to close my account once a refund had been applied. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I received an account statement from PNC showing that although the refund for the XXXX service charge had posted, so had another service charge and my account was once again at a negative balance. I received a similar statement on XX/XX/XXXX, reflecting another service charge for the account. \n\nI contacted PNC through the secure message center on their website on XX/XX/XXXX, requesting once again that they refund any outstanding service charges and close the XXXX account, as the account should never have remained open after my XX/XX/XXXX account closure nor after my XX/XX/XXXX visit to a PNC branch. I received a response from PNC on XX/XX/XXXX stating that to close my account, I needed to send my current mailing address so that documentation regarding closure of my account could be sent to me. I responded with my address the same day but was dismayed to receive a response from PNC stating that an additional courtesy refund is unavailable at this time and that to close the account I must pay the current negative balance. The message exchange between myself and PNC, in its entirety, is attached to this complaint. \n\nPNC has, in the last month, sent me a debit card for my account that remains open -- a debit card ending in XXXX. I have not, and do not intend to, activate this debit card. On information and belief, this debit card is associated with the XXXX account and the account for this debit card should be closed along with the XXXX account. \n\nUpon final preparation of this complaint, I visited PNC 's personal banking website, intending to capture the current negative balance associated with the XXXX account and any balance associated with the debit card ending in XXXX. The XXXX account, at the time of my visit to PNC 's website had mysteriously disappeared from personal banking homepage, without a renewed request from me to close the account. Website screen captures from XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX are attached to this complaint showing that PNC had removed the account from my personal view. No documentation has been sent to me notifying me that PNC has closed my account, and thus I have no reason to believe that the XXXX account is closed at this time. PNC has moved from committing negligence to covering up their errors at my ongoing expense. \n\nPNC has exhibited a pattern of negligence regarding the closure of my accounts. All three tiers of my Virtual Wallet account should have been closed on XX/XX/XXXX. The accounts which remained open due to PNCs error should have been closed after my XX/XX/XXXX visit to the same PNC branch. Instead, PNC now attempts to charge me to correct its own errors, effectively imposing a financial penalty for closing my account -- a penalty inconsistent with PNCs own policy of charging no fees at account closure. \n\nI have attempted on multiple occasions to close my account through various channels -- in person, online, and over the phone -- yet PNCs negligence continues. The continued accrual of service charges on the XXXX account demonstrates that financial injury to me will continue absent intervention against PNC. PNC should allow me to close all accounts free of charge, as I have clearly and continuously requested since XX/XX/XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-01-13T19:50:49.000Z","issue":"Closing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"200XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3494659","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"PNC Bank N.A.","date_received":"2020-01-13T19:21:06.000Z","state":"DC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Fees charged for closing account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Upon final preparation of this <em>complaint</em>, I visited PNC 's <em>personal</em> banking website, intending to capture the current negative balance associated with the XXXX account and any balance associated with the debit card ending in XXXX. The XXXX account, at the time of my visit to PNC 's website had mysteriously disappeared from <em>personal</em> banking homepage, without a renewed request from me to close the account."]},"sort":[7.8604603,"3494659"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12926172","_score":7.151006,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Adverse Action Narrative TransUnions Systematic Violation of FCRA 615 ( a ) and Federal Law I am submitting this narrative to document TransUnions unlawful reporting of fraudulent accounts and adverse public records without evidence of proper adverse action notification from furnishers, in direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), specifically 15 U.S.C. 1681m ( a ), and multiple provisions under Title 18 of the U.S. Code.\n\n1. Legal Obligation to Provide Adverse Action Notices According to FCRA 615 ( a ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681m ), if a creditor, lender, or any entity takes adverse action against a consumer based on information obtained from a consumer reporting agency ( CRA ), they are required to send an adverse action notice that includes : The name and contact information of the CRA.\n\nA statement that the CRA did not make the decision to take the adverse action.\n\nA notice of the consumer 's right to a free credit report.\n\nThe right to dispute inaccuracies with the CRA. \n\nFailure to issue this notice is not only a violation of federal law it undermines my ability to respond, dispute, or correct errors in a timely manner. \n\n2. TransUnions Violation of this Requirement TransUnion is knowingly reporting fraudulent accounts and public records including bankruptcies and collection accounts without verifying whether an adverse action notice was sent by the creditor or data furnisher. \n\nIn many of these cases, the creditor used an address that does not belong to me and to which I never had access. \n\nThis is supported by : My FTC Identity Theft Report ( Report # XXXX ), which identifies accounts on my credit report that I never authorized and which are tied to unauthorized addresses, such as XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX none of which are my legal residences. \n\nMy XXXX XXXX Police Report ( XXXX ) documenting the loss of my drivers license, Social Security card, and other personal documents. These materials were likely used by third parties to fraudulently open accounts in my name. \n\nBecause these furnishers had incorrect and unauthorized addresses, it is legally impossible for them to have fulfilled the adverse action notice requirement under 1681m. If I never received a notice, I was never informed of the creditors adverse decision, and therefore deprived of my opportunity to dispute it.\n\nTransUnion, as the consumer reporting agency, has a duty under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) to maintain maximum possible accuracy in the consumer file and to use reasonable procedures to ensure that furnishers are compliant with the law. Allowing accounts to report without confirming proper adverse action notifications were issued to the consumer shows a failure of those procedures. \n\n3. Adverse Action Violations = FCRA Noncompliance + Criminal Conduct TransUnions willful and repeated actions violate : FCRA 615 ( a ) : No adverse action notices = illegal reporting.\n\nFCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to use reasonable procedures to ensure furnishers followed the law.\n\nFCRA 1681n & 1681o : Willful and negligent noncompliance with FCRA obligations.\n\nFCRA 1681i : Failure to investigate after formal disputes.\n\nBecause TransUnion continues reporting these accounts after receiving identity theft documentation, this conduct also meets the threshold for criminal violations : Wire Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ) : Transmitting false credit data electronically.\n\nMail Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ) : Using USPS to deliver credit reports containing knowingly inaccurate data.\n\nObstruction of Justice ( 18 U.S.C. 1519 ) : Ignoring FTC and police documentation.\n\nComputer Fraud and Abuse Act ( 18 U.S.C. 1030 ) : Unauthorized access, use, and dissemination of sensitive consumer data.\n\nAiding and Abetting ( 18 U.S.C. 2 ) : TransUnions cooperation with creditors who failed to follow the law makes them liable as a principal actor. \n\n4. The Core Issue : Lack of a Permissible Address = No Legal Notice Possible The entire adverse action process depends on a valid and current consumer address. In my case, creditors used old or fraudulent addresses, which means : They could not have legally notified me.\n\nI never received notice of these debts or denials.\n\nThe entries on my credit file were made and reported illegally.\n\nBy allowing these entries to remain on file despite having received identity theft affidavits and police documentation, TransUnion is complicit in these legal violations.\n\nthis formal complaint against TransUnion and TransUnion for multiple violations of federal law, including but not limited to the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Title 18 of the U.S. Code. My primary concern arises from the mishandling of my credit file, improper reinsertion of fraudulent accounts, failure to block fraudulent information, and obstruction of justice. Background of the Incident I lost my purse, which contained my government-issued ID, Social Security card , and financial documents. Despite my efforts to recover it, I was unable to do so. At the time, I did not immediately report the loss, as I did not notice any unauthorized activity. However, upon reviewing my credit report, I discovered that fraudulent accounts had been opened shortly after the loss using my stolen information. These fraudulent accounts were not only unauthorized but also resulted in adverse actions sent to an address that does not belong to me. I have since filed a police report and an FTC Identity Theft Report to document and address this identity theft. Despite these reports, TransUnion has refused to remove fraudulent accounts and TransUnions Special Handling Department, under the authority of an individual named XXXX, has been uncooperative, dismissive, and has failed to take the necessary protective actions regarding my identity and account security. Violations Committed by TransUnion 1. Unlawful Reinsertion of Fraudulent Accounts TransUnion initially removed a fraudulent account after my dispute, only to reinsert it without the legally required notice, violating 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) of the FCRA. This action deprived me of my right to dispute it again, a blatant violation of consumer protection laws. 2. Failure to Block Fraudulent Information Under FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( a ), a credit reporting agency must block identity theft-related information within four business days after receiving appropriate documentation, such as an FTC Identity Theft Report and a police report. Despite my submission of these documents, TransUnion refused to comply, allowing fraudulent accounts to continue damaging my credit profile. 3. Failure to Validate Information I formally requested debt validation for these fraudulent accounts under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ), but TransUnion failed to provide any proof that I authorized the accounts. If no such proof exists, they are legally required to delete the information immediately, yet they continue to report these fraudulent accounts. 4. Criminal Violations Committed by TransUnion By knowingly reporting false information, TransUnion is engaged in multiple criminal offenses, including : Wire Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ) : Transmitting fraudulent credit information electronically across state lines, despite receiving an FTC Identity Theft Report and a police report. Bank Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ) : Knowingly allowing fraudulent accounts to remain, misleading federally insured financial institutions in lending decisions. Mail Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ) : Enabling creditors to send adverse action notices to an incorrect address, preventing me from disputing fraudulent accounts. Conspiracy to Commit Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 371 ) : Willfully collaborating with creditors to maintain fraudulent accounts despite evidence of identity theft. Obstruction of Justice ( 18 U.S.C. 1519 ) : Refusing to acknowledge official reports, obstructing federal investigations, and hindering regulatory enforcement efforts. Violations Committed by TransUnions Special Handling Department 1. Failure to Properly Investigate and Protect My Identity TransUnion, under the supervision of an individual named XXXX in the Special Handling Department Case Number : XXXX has failed to secure my credit file and has acted in bad faith. Despite my request for added security measures, XXXX has been uncooperative, rude, and negligent in addressing my identity theft concerns. This is a direct violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681b ( a ) ( 2 ), which mandates credit bureaus to ensure the accuracy and protection of consumer credit reports. 2. Failure to Adhere to the FCRA and CFPB Guidelines As a consumer reporting agency, TransUnion is required to maintain accurate credit files and must comply with all consumer protection laws. Their failure to do so constitutes : Negligent Noncompliance with the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681o ) : Failing to take reasonable steps to prevent identity theft and fraudulent credit reporting. Willful Noncompliance with the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n ) : Knowingly allowing inaccurate and fraudulent information to remain on my credit report. I lost my PURSE, which contained sensitive personal information, including my government-issued ID, Social Security card , and financial documents. Despite retracing my steps, I was unable to recover it. At the time, I did not report the loss because I did not notice any immediate fraudulent activity. Recently, while reviewing my credit report, I discovered fraudulent accounts had been opened in my name shortly after the loss. These accounts were opened without my authorization, using my stolen information, and adverse actions were sent to an address that does not belong to me. I am filing this report because I believe the person who found my wallet used my personal information to commit identity theft. I am pursuing all legal remedies to resolve this matter and hold the responsible party accountable. I am filing this complaint against TransUnion for multiple violations of federal law regarding their handling of fraudulent accounts on my credit report. Despite an FTC Identity Theft Report already on file and a newly filed police report, TransUnion continues to report accounts that were fraudulently opened in my name. These accounts stem from a stolen wallet containing my government-issued ID, Social Security card , and financial information, which led to unauthorized credit activity. Violations Committed by TransUnion 1. Unlawful Reinsertion of Fraudulent Accounts TransUnion initially deleted an account after my dispute, only to reinsert it without legally required notice under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ). This is a clear violation, as they failed to provide written notification within five business days, depriving me of my right to dispute it again. 2. Failure to Block Fraudulent Information Under FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( a ), TransUnion must block information resulting from identity theft within four business days after receiving proper documentation, including an FTC Identity Theft Report and a police report. They refused to comply, allowing creditors to continue reporting fraudulent accounts. 3. Failure to Validate Information I requested debt validation for the fraudulent accounts as required under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ), but TransUnion failed to provide any proof that I authorized these accounts. If no legal proof exists, they are obligated to delete the information immediately. 4. Criminal Violations Committed By knowingly reporting false information, TransUnion is engaging in wire fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ), bank fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ), and mail fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ), as they transmitted fraudulent data electronically and allowed adverse action notices to be sent to an incorrect address. Additionally, their actions amount to conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371, as they are willfully participating in deceptive financial reporting that harms consumers. TransUnion is not above the law and can not continue to act as if they are merely a reporting entity while ignoring their legal obligations. I will pursue civil litigation if necessary and will also escalate this matter to the United States District Attorney for criminal review. There is indisputable evidence proving TransUnion Is noncompliance, and they can not lawfully claim innocence given the facts presented. Criminal Violations Committed by TransUnion Under Title 18 U.S. Code TransUnion actions in knowingly re-reporting fraudulent accounts, failing to block identity theft-related information, and refusing to comply with federal dispute laws constitute multiple criminal violations under Title 18 of the United States Code . These violations extend beyond civil infractions and fall under federal criminal law, which carries severe penalties, including fines and imprisonment. Below are the specific statutes TransUnion has violated : 1. Wire Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ) TransUnion has engaged in wire fraud by electronically transmitting false and misleading information across state lines. Despite receiving an FTC Identity Theft Report and a police report, they continue to report fraudulent accounts as valid. By doing so, they knowingly facilitate the misrepresentation of my financial status to lenders, which can cause financial harm, denials of credit, or higher interest rates. This constitutes a scheme to defraud, using electronic means to commit fraud against me as a consumer. 2. Bank Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ) TransUnion refusal to correct fraudulent accounts enables creditors to make lending decisions based on false information. This affects federally insured banks that rely on TransUnion reports when determining loan eligibility. By knowingly allowing fraudulent accounts to remain, TransUnion is aiding and abetting bank fraud by facilitating financial deception that leads to wrongful lending or credit denials. 3. Mail Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ) TransUnion permitted creditors to send adverse action notices to an incorrect address, resulting in my inability to dispute fraudulent accounts in a timely manner. Mailing false credit reports and adverse actions based on fraudulent data constitutes mail fraud, as they knowingly sent or caused misleading documents to be mailed, which is a federal offense. XXXX. Conspiracy to Commit XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) TransUnion willful collaboration with creditors to keep fraudulent accounts reporting, despite clear evidence of identity theft, constitutes conspiracy to commit fraud. They are acting in concert with financial institutions by refusing to delete fraudulent accounts, ultimately harming consumers while profiting from inaccurate credit reporting. XXXX. Obstruction of Justice ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) TransUnion refusal to acknowledge official identity theft complaints, police reports, and FTC reports amounts to obstruction of justice. By ignoring and delaying legally required actions, they are actively interfering with federal investigations and regulatory enforcement, which is a federal crime. \n\nUnder the FCRA, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, a consumer reporting agency XXXX furnish a consumer report only under certain circumstances and for specified permissible purposes. I did not authorize these entities to access my credit information, nor did any permissible purpose exist for such inquiries and account postings. Therefore, their actions constitute a direct violation of federal law. 2. Unauthorized Access under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ( CFAA ), 18 U.S.C. 1030 ( a ) ( 2 ) Accessing my credit information without proper authorization may also constitute a violation of the CFAA, 18 U.S.C. 1030 ( a ) ( 2 ), which prohibits intentionally accessing a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access to obtain information. By retrieving my credit report without my consent, these entities have potentially engaged in unlawful access to protected computer systems containing my personal and financial data. 3. TransUnion 's Responsibility under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) As a consumer reporting agency, TransUnion is obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation if a consumer disputes the completeness or accuracy of any item in their credit file. Failure to promptly correct or delete inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable information after such a dispute constitutes non-compliance with federal law. It is imperative that TransUnion upholds its legal duties to ensure the integrity of the information it reports. 4. Failure to Assure Maximum Possible Accuracy, 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) Under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), TransUnion must follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. The inclusion of unauthorized inquiries and accounts indicates a failure to maintain reasonable procedures, thereby violating this provision of the FCRA. 5. Facilitating Violations of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), 15 U.S.C. 6801 The GLBA requires financial institutions to protect the security and confidentiality of consumers ' nonpublic personal information. By allowing unauthorized entities to access and place information on my credit report, TransUnion may be facilitating violations of the GLBA, compromising the privacy and security of my personal financial data. 6. Negative Impact on My Creditworthiness These unauthorized inquiries and accounts have adversely affected my credit score and creditworthiness, causing potential harm to my financial reputation and opportunities. Under the FCRA, I have the right to dispute inaccurate information and expect timely correction to prevent further damage. 7. Violation of Wire Fraud Statute ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ) TransUnion has committed wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1343 by electronically transmitting unauthorized hard inquiries and accounts on my credit report without my explicit consent. By using interstate wire communications to execute this scheme, TransUnion intentionally misrepresented my credit information. Despite prior disputes and notices, the company repeatedly included these unauthorized entries, demonstrating an intentional effort to defraud me through electronic means. This misuse of electronic systems to disseminate false information satisfies all elements required for wire fraud under federal law. 8. Violations Under the XXXX XXXX and Corrupt Organizations Act ( XXXX ) ( 18 U.S.C. 19611968 ) This marks the third instance in which TransUnion has been involved in reporting unauthorized inquiries and accounts from the same entities on my credit report. Under the XXXX XXXX and Corrupt Organizations Act ( XXXX ), 18 U.S.C. 19611968, engaging in a pattern of racketeering activity connected to an enterprise is prohibited. TransUnion 's repeated unauthorized reporting of this information, in collaboration with these companies, constitutes a pattern of racketeering activity. By knowingly facilitating these unauthorized entries, TransUnion is participating in an enterprise engaging in illegal activities, thereby violating XXXX statutes. 9. Violation of Mail Fraud Statute ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ) TransUnion is sending me copies of my credit report via postal mail, which contain unauthorized and inaccurate information. By using the United States Postal Service to deliver these credit reports with knowingly incorrect data, TransUnion is utilizing the mail system to further a scheme that misrepresents my creditworthiness. This action constitutes mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1341, which prohibits the use of the postal service in executing a scheme to defraud or obtain money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises. TransUnion 's deliberate dissemination of false credit information through the mail meets all legal criteria for mail fraud as defined by federal law. 10. Aiding and Abetting Unauthorized Activities ( 18 U.S.C. 2 ) TransUnion is allowing these companies to place unauthorized inquiries and accounts on my credit report without proper verification or permissible purpose. By facilitating these unlawful actions and failing to protect me as a consumer, TransUnion is aiding and abetting these entities in violating federal laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Under 18 U.S.C. 2, anyone who aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces, or procures the commission of a federal offense is punishable as a principal. TransUnion 's negligence and failure to exercise due diligence make them complicit in these unlawful activities, directly contributing to the harm inflicted upon me. 11. Grounds for Bank Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ) TransUnion 's actions also constitute bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1344, which prohibits schemes to defraud financial institutions or to obtain assets under their control by means of false or fraudulent pretenses. By inaccurately reporting information that adversely affects my creditworthiness, TransUnion is influencing financial institutions to make decisions based on false information. This leads to wrongful financial gain for the entities involved and causes financial harm to me. Manipulating credit reports in this manner meets the criteria for bank fraud as defined by federal law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-10T17:01:45.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"77038","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12926172","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-10T16:11:33.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I lost my PURSE, which contained sensitive <em>personal</em> information, including my government-issued ID, Social Security card , and <em>financial</em> documents. Despite retracing my steps, I was unable to recover it. At the time, I did not report the loss because I did not notice any immediate fraudulent activity. Recently, while reviewing my credit report, I <em>discovered</em> fraudulent accounts had been opened in my name shortly after the loss."]},"sort":[7.151006,"12926172"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18398627","_score":6.7221823,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Wells Fargo exhibits consistent and deliberate dishonest and fraudulent behavior, including disingenuousness, negligence, deception, and unethical business practices. Leveraging its apparent power advantage, such as access to a team of high-powered, costly attorneys and resources, the bank has prolonged this case for a year, yet has failed to provide any evidence to clear itself of the alleged crimes. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and his team of high-powered attorneys, like his predecessor, demonstrate a blatant disregard for the law. They appear to believe they can bypass legal requirements by relying solely on words, without supporting legal documents, to dismiss allegations of fraudulent, deceptive, and wrongful practices by the Wells Fargo executive team and employees.\n\nWithout legal help and limited resources, I have spent years meticulously gathering and presenting significant evidence of Wells Fargos misconduct, wrongdoing, and criminal behavior. If Wells Fargo had not fraudulently issued that credit card, falsely reported my creditdamaging my lifeand breached our loan agreements, imposing close to {$200000.00} in penalties, I wouldnt be facing this devastating, life-altering crisis. \n\nWells Fargo has failed to provide evidence regarding the credit card : The application for the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of credit limit increase from {$5000.00} to {$50000.00}. \nXXXX XXXX confirmation letter for the credit increase to {$50000.00}. \nEvidence of running XXXX hard credit reports, indicated by Wells Fargo, XXXX for the {$5000.00} limit and another for the {$50000.00} limit. \nExplanation as to why the personal card was sent to my business address? \n\nAccording to Wells Fargos analysis, its employees applied for roughly XXXX credit card accounts on behalf of consumers without authorization. Wells Fargo executives tend to quickly blame employees when directed to use deceptive practices to boost sales. \n\nThe law states that individuals at the bank who were involved in or directed the fraud, including senior employees and executives, XXXX face criminal charges, including potential imprisonment and significant personal fines. \n\nWells Fargo has further worsened its situation by persistently engaging in deceptive and willful misconduct, including lying about the application of the loan prepayment penalty and repricing charges. \n\nWells Fargo claimed it used repricing for the loan refinance, even though the loan document clearly states that a prepayment penalty was charged to us. Additionally, Wells Fargo said it assessed a prepayment penalty on the loan payoff, even though the loan document explicitly states that a repricing penalty was applied. Wells Fargo acknowledged our initial and ongoing agreement to waive any prepayment penalty under Same Lender Loyalty ( the same deal we had for the refinance ). \n\nHowever, Wells Fargo deceptively revised the loan payoff document by rebranding the prepayment penalty as a Repricing fee and intentionally concealed the true nature of the prepayment penalty. This misleading and deceptive statement was used to impose an early payoff penalty of {$54000.00}, which is illegal under consumer protection laws such as the Dodd-Frank Act, enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX CFPB ). \n\nAccording to XXXX, XXXX '' is a term used in the context of loan agreements and generally used for refinance and refers to adjusting the interest rate, not a penalty itself. The fee for paying off a loan early is called a prepayment penalty or an early payoff penalty. \n\nIn addition, there was no mention of repricing when we signed the loan or at payoff. Repricing was introduced as a new term without prior disclosure. \n\nTruth in Lending Act ( TILA ) / Regulation Z : This federal law requires lenders to provide clear and standardized disclosures of all credit terms and costs ( including the Annual Percentage Rate, finance charges, and payment schedule ) before the loan is finalized ( consummation ). The goal is to allow you to compare loan offers and avoid misleading practices. \nClosing Disclosure : For mortgages, you must receive a Closing Disclosure at least XXXX business days before closing. This document finalizes the terms. If terms change after this, a new disclosure and potentially a new waiting period are required. \nUnfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) : Introducing surprise fees or terms at the last minute could also be considered a deceptive practice, which is prohibited under consumer financial protection laws enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ).\n\nContract Law : A loan agreement is a binding contract. Generally, one party can not unilaterally change the agreed-upon terms unless the original contract explicitly allows for the specific change ( e.g., a variable interest rate clause that outlines how the rate can change ).\n\nThe law states that when a bank lies or engages in deceptive practices, it will face severe consequences, including substantial fines, restitution orders to repay affected customers, reputational damage, operational restrictions, and potential criminal charges for individuals involved. These actions are categorized as Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ) and are illegal under federal and state laws, most notably the Dodd-Frank Act and the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Act. \n\nDuring a discussion with XXXX XXXX from Wells Fargos XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), I discovered that the Wells Fargo CEO has been directly involved in my complaints and in the decision-making process. In their latest response letter, XXXX stated that, after further review, they found no errors or misconduct in Wells Fargos practices and therefore decided not to pay the {$30.00} XXXX in compensation. Instead, they offered a {$270.00} customer appreciation check for the inconvenience caused. \n\nWells Farog has a long history of deception and wrongful business practices and systemic issues and consumer harm in creating fake records, forged signatures on account-opening documents and credit card applications to make them appear legitimate, constitutes identity-related fraud in addition to identity fraud, false credit reporting and derogatory reporting, false statements, misrepresentation of facts, deceptive practices, and falsification of information to gain customers business as part of a widespread scheme to meet aggressive sales goals.\n\nI have a compelling case against Wells Fargo, backed by numerous facts indicating violations of both state and federal laws stemming from its actions, including recent false statements about conducting two hard credit inquiries and misrepresentations in the loan documents regarding prepayment and repricing.\n\nWells Fargo has a duty to prevent economic and emotional harm to its customers. Wells Fargos intentional wrongful actsfraud, perjury, negligence, and wrongful credit reportinghave caused me years of financial, emotional, and mental suffering.\n\nWells Fargo did not exercise reasonable care to prevent the financial and credit damages I experienced. No amount of money can fully compensate for the Emotional Distress and Anguish, pain, and suffering caused by Wells Fargos actions from XXXX to XXXX. I lost the most productive years of my professional and personal life and suffered greatly. \n\nThe consequences of Wells Fargos actions include civil lawsuits and punitive damages, supported by evidence of forgery, identity theft, fraud, violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), negligence, deceptive practices, defamation, and related offenses. Punitive damages are justified to punish Wells Fargo and prevent similar conduct in the future. This case calls for damages of {$30.00} XXXX, including {$5.00} XXXX designated for the CFPB. These funds will be used to monitor Wells Fargos operations, halt its deceptive and fraudulent practices, and prevent future issues.\n\nUltimately, justice must be served for those who suffered, and Wells Fargo must be held accountable. I request that the CFPB take enforcement action against Wells Fargo for its pattern of fraud, misrepresentation, and false statements, and for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, regulatory requirements, banking laws, consumer protection statutes, and credit reporting regulations.\n\nIn addition to filing complaints with the FDIC, the State Regulator, the Attorney General, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( OCC ), and the FTC, and the Wells Fargo Board of Directors.\n\nAnalysis and interpretation of key phrases in Wells Fargo 's Final Response WF : We take allegations of employee misconduct seriously and referred this matter for review. Due to privacy, personnel outcomes remain internal. \n\nEnclosed are statements from XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX. If you believe transactions were unauthorized, contact Credit Card Fraud Claims at XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). We can not provide additional documentation on the credit limit increase due to retention limits, but confirm the request was approved on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nCredit applications and limit increases involve a hard inquiry, standard industry practice, which XXXX temporarily affect your credit score. A limit increase updates your existing account, not creating a new one ; each account appears individually on your credit report. \n\nAn identity theft claim was investigated, and per our letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, we found no fraud or unauthorized transactions. \n\nEvidence shows you activated the card, made payments, or benefited from the account. Any temporary credit will be reversed. \n\nImplication : This is a crucial admission. Wells Fargo asserts a fact ( the approval date ) but can not produce the evidence ( the signed request or the hard inquiry report ). Federal banking regulations and the FCBA generally require institutions to retain records relating to account openings and disputes for a minimum of XXXX years, and often longer in cases of alleged fraud. An attorney can argue that their inability to produce this evidence means they can not prove you authorized the change. \n\nWF : Evidence shows you activated the card, made payments, or benefited from the account. '' Implication : They are leveraging the fact that the unauthorized employee used my business accounts to make payments, misrepresenting this as my authorization or activation. This clearly shows the payments were disguised and made without my knowledge or consent.\n\nWF : An identity theft claim was investigated, and per our letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, we found no fraud or unauthorized transactions. '' Implication : This is their final, formal denial of my claim. It solidifies their position and opens the door to file a lawsuit after exhausting all mandatory dispute-resolution channels.\n\nThese statements provide further insight into Wells Fargo 's defensive stance and highlight key areas your attorney will focus on : WF : Our review confirms the application address was your employer 's at the time. '' This confirms negligence in verifying the nature of the address. A personal credit card should typically not be mailed to a business address without specific, verified instructions. This indicates a failure of the bank 's procedure for verifying the application details and the recipient 's authority. \n\nWF : A {$270.00} customer appreciation check was issued and cashed in XX/XX/XXXX. '' Implication : This constitutes XXXX XXXX unethical business practice and a trap tactic, arguing that by cashing this check ( entirely unrelated, and it was for customer appreciation and convenience ), I somehow accepted a resolution or benefit that compromises my ability to sue for the larger issue. Wells Fargo needs to clarify the nature of the check directly. \n\nWF : Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, we report accurate account history. '' Implication : This is the core of the legal battle. I maintain that the history is not accurate because the entire account was fraudulent from inception. Their statement that the account is \" suppressed from monthly reporting due to first delinquency on XX/XX/XXXX, '' is standard procedure, but doesn't validate the underlying debt. Wells Fargos prior admission ( correcting my credit report after the CFPB complaint ) as evidence that their reporting was, in fact, inaccurate.\n\nWF : Our review confirms the application address was your employer 's at the time. Regarding collection calls, they are courtesy, not guaranteed. Account status can be reviewed via mailed statements or online. We honored your cease-and-desist request ; legally required communications will continue. A {$270.00} customer appreciation check was issued and cashed in XX/XX/XXXX. We regret any inconvenience. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, we report accurate account history. Your account is suppressed from monthly reporting due to first delinquency on XX/XX/XXXX. For credit report questions, contact the agencies directly. You are entitled to XXXX free report annually. \n\nImplication : Wells Fargo asserts it has XXXX separate credit reports, but where are theyone for the {$5000.00} limit and another for the {$50000.00} limit? Recent evidence demonstrates that Wells Fargo lied and misrepresented that it ran XXXX hard credit inquiries on me in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nMoreover, there was no application for the XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card, yet the signature on the application they provided was clearly forged. Initially, Wells Fargo stated that a signature was required in-branch to open the account, but later reversed course, asserting that no signature was required. \n\nWells Fargo has a six-month rule : a customer can not get approved for a new Wells Fargo credit card if they have opened one with Wells Fargo within the last six months.\n\nWF : Their business real estate loan originated on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXnterest. The rate adjustment in XXXX, reduced to XXXX XXXX with a repricing fee of {$110000.00}, which was paid. \nThis is incorrect ; we were charged a prepayment penalty on the refinance. \n\nThe payoff request in XXXX, a payoff demand included a prepayment penalty of {$54000.00} due to market conditions. No errors were found ; all actions aligned with the loan terms. Compensation is declined. \n\nImplication : This is false ; we were charged a repricing fee of {$54000.00} for the loan payoff, not for the refinance. The settlement agreement for the loan payoff included a prepayment penalty. Realizing we had a deal, like the one for the original loan/refinancing, with the difference that the person who sold us a bill of goods was still an employee of Wells Fargo , we brought this to her attention. Wells Fargo engaged in deceptive tactics, created a new payoff form that changed the term from 'prepayment ' to 'repricing, ' and imposed a penalty of {$54000.00}.\n\nWF : \" A {$270.00} customer appreciation check was issued and cashed in XX/XX/XXXX. '' Implication : This is WFs trap tactic, claiming that cashing this unrelated check ( for a different matter ) somehow indicates I accepted a resolution or benefit that could jeopardize my ability to pursue the larger claim. The check was offered by an employee of Wells Fargos escalation department as compensation for the inconvenience and as a gesture of appreciation for the customer.\n\nWF : \" Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, we report accurate account history. '' Implication : This is the core of the legal battle. I maintain that the history is not accurate because the entire account was fraudulent from inception. Their statement that the account is \" suppressed from monthly reporting due to first delinquency on XX/XX/XXXX, '' is standard procedure, but doesn't validate the underlying debt. Using Wells Fargos prior admission ( correcting my credit report after the CFPB complaint and finding discrepancies in Wells Fargo 's credit reporting ) as evidence that their reporting was, in fact, inaccurate.\n\nWF : Our review confirms the application address was your employer 's at the time. Regarding collection calls, they are courtesy, not guaranteed. Account status can be reviewed via mailed statements or online. We honored your cease-and-desist request ; legally required communications will continue. A {$270.00} customer appreciation check was issued and cashed in XX/XX/XXXX. We regret any inconvenience. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, we report accurate account history. Your account is suppressed from monthly reporting due to first delinquency on XX/XX/XXXX. For credit report questions, contact the agencies directly. You are entitled to XXXX free report annually. \n\nTheir business real estate loan originated on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXnterest. The rate adjustment in XXXX, reduced to XXXX XXXX  with a repricing fee of {$110000.00}, which was paid. \n\nImplication : This statement is false ; Wells Fargo breached our agreement and charged a prepayment penalty of {$110000.00} on the refinance, not on repricing.\n\nWF : The payoff request in XXXX, a payoff demand included a prepayment penalty of {$54000.00} due to market conditions. No errors were found ; all actions aligned with the loan terms. Compensation is declined. \n\nImplication : This is incorrect ; the first settlement agreement for the loan payoff included a prepayment penalty. The new loan payoff rebranded the prepayment penalty as a repricing fee to conceal its true purpose, resulting in another significant loss. \nWells Fargo used deception to induce us to enter into a financial transaction and breached our agreements. Wells Fargo was fully aware of applicable lending laws and deliberately misrepresented information and instructed notes regarding the waiver of the prepayment penalty on the refinance and payoff, on which we relied in doing business with Wells Fargo. \n\nWells Fargo responded in a letter, For clarity and consistency, our policy is based on written documentation and verbal agreements are not legally binding. \n\nWells Fargo relied on its extensive knowledge of lending laws, gave false information, and misled us into doing business with it. We were assured by the loan agent that we would not be charged a penalty for refinancing with Wells Fargo or for early payment, as documented in the loan agreement, pursuant to the loan agents instructions. Wells Fargo breached our contract agreement and imposed a prepayment penalty for the refinance. \n\nDate of XXXX : XXXX : Account opened fraudulently with a forged signature, negligence in account management, and erroneous credit reporting. \n\nTimeline of Events of Wells Fargos Negligence Causing Irreversible Harm Approximate Date Event Description XXXX Wells Fargo issues a personal credit card for American Express Propel in my name with an initial {$5000.00} credit limit via a forged signature. \nAccording to Wells Fargo, the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, following a credit card application submitted on XX/XX/XXXX, for which information was provided at a branch, and my signature was obtained. \nXXXX Wells Fargo sends the personal credit card to my business address, in the hands of an unauthorized employee with access to mail and business accounts. \nXXXX The employee uses the credit card and disguises payments made from my business accounts under business expenses. \nXXXX ( Date of Discovery ) Employee leaves employment. I take over accounts payable and discover a {$55000.00} balance on an unknown credit card. \nXXXX I immediately contact Wells Fargo to report the account as fraudulent. \nXXXX Wells Fargo finds \" no fraud, '' citing that the account was actively used and paid from my accounts for XXXX years. \nXXXX I refuse to pay the fraudulent balance. WF charges off the account and reports non-payment to credit bureaus. I requested that WF to remove the negative credit reporting. WF responded as below : XXXX My XXXX XXXX drops from XXXX to XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX remains suppressed due to derogatory marks ( approx. XXXX years ). \nXX/XX/XXXX I contacted WF debt collection and provided my SS # and my name to locate the account on my credit report. The agent was not able to locate the account on my credit report. \nXXXX I file a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and request all documentation from WF. I found discrepancies in Wells Fargos credit reporting. WF realizes its mistake, immediately reverses its credit reporting. Approximately XXXX derogatory marks are cleared. My XXXX XXXX rises to XXXX and week later to XXXX. \nLate XXXX After months of review and providing my evidence of fraud, Wells Fargo issues a final statement asserting they found \" no wrongdoing. '' XXXX. List of Evidence and Discrepancies I possess documented evidence illustrating Wells Fargos multiple inconsistencies across its narratives and credit reporting practices.\n\n.\n\nEvidence/Discrepancy Description and Status of WF Response Forged Signature I insisted the signature on the application provided by WF was not mine. WF claimed it was signed in a branch, then later claimed no signature was required.\n\nGeneric Application Wells Fargo provided a generic application form with the alleged forged signature, which lacked specific details ( e.g., name of credit card, purpose, initial credit limit ). \nCredit Limit Discrepancy The XXXX Welcome Letter indicated a {$5000.00} limit. Wells Fargo claims I requested an immediate increase to {$50000.00} the next day, claiming it ran XXXX hard credit inquiry, but can not produce any supporting documentation. No letter from XXXX XXXX XXXX to confirm the increase from {$5000.00} to {$50000.00}. \nMissing Documentation Wells Fargo could not produce evidence of the requested credit limit increase, the XXXX XXXX reports/inquiries, approval letter for the increase from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX proof of the \" in-branch '' signing process. \nWF Internal Policy Violations Issuing another credit card with such limit, contradicts with Wells Fargos internal policy, where customers can not get a new card within XXXX months of a prior XXXX, and legitimate limit increases require application/re-application procedures Credit Limit Contradiction with Wells Fargos Policy WF claims an immediate verbal increase to $ XXXX was permitted which contradicts with the company policy. i.e, XXXX of my personal credit cards had a limit of $ XXXX, I asked Wells Fargo agent to reduce the limit from XXXX to XXXX. The same week, I changed my mind, and I told them to keep the limit at XXXX. I was told I could increase the limit verbally, and I needed to reapply for the credit increase. \nProof of Payments from Business Account and Not the Personal Account The business records showing payments were made from my business accounts by the unauthorized employee in possession of the XXXX XXXX XXXX card, under general credit card charges and payments which can be cross-referenced with the credit card statements. \nCFPB Correspondence Complete history of my complaint with the CFPB portal, including all responses from Wells Fargo and the final determination of \" no wrongdoing '' despite the mountain of evidence against. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX derogatory reports over 7 years. \nProved discrepancies in Wells Fargo reporting, which had to make correction to my credit report. My score changed in XXXX from XXXX to XXXX. \nWells Fargo found guilty of wrong credit reporting Wells Fargo 's correction of my credit report following my CFPB complaint further confirms that Wells Fargo made a credit reporting error, and Wells Fargo continues to deny any wrongdoing. \nMy Existing Accounts I had no need for a {$50.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX card, I already held several personal and business with WF issued XXXX months prior, in addition to having other credit cards from other financial institutions, such as XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, demonstrating no need for a new XXXX Propel card. \nThis contradicts their standard policy where customers can not get a new card within XXXX months of a prior XXXX, Timeline of Events of WFs Negligence Causing Irreversible Harm. \n\nApproximate Date Event Description XXXX Wells Fargo XXXX an XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card account in my name with a initial {$5000.00} credit limit via a forged signature. \nXXXX WF issues the personal credit card to my place of business address, where an unauthorized employee had access to mail and business accounts. \nXXXX The unauthorized employee uses the credit card and disguises payments made from my business accounts. \nXXXX ( Date of Discovery ) Employee leaves employment. I take over accounts payable and discover a {$50000.00} balance on an unknown credit card. \nXXXX I immediately contact Wells Fargo to report the account as fraudulent. \nXXXX Wells Fargo finds \" no fraud, '' citing that the account was actively used and paid from my accounts for XXXX years. \nXXXX I refuse to pay the fraudulent balance. WF charges off the account and reports non-payment to credit bureaus. I requested that WF to remove the negative credit reporting. WF responded as below : XXXX My XXXX XXXX drops from XXXX to XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX remains suppressed due to derogatory marks ( approx. XXXX years ). \nXX/XX/XXXX I contacted WF debt collection and provided my SS # and my name to locate the account or my credit report. The agent was not able to locate the account on my credit report. WF sent a response they show no record of me contacting Wells Fargo agent for inquiry. Soon After I file a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and request all documentation from WF. \nXXXX I found discrepancies in Wells Fargos credit reporting. WF realizes its mistake, immediately reverses its credit reporting. Approximately XXXX derogatory marks are cleared. My XXXX XXXX rises to XXXX and week later to XXXX. \nLate XXXX After months of review and providing my evidence of fraud, Wells Fargo issues a final statement asserting they found \" no wrongdoing. ''","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-01T00:58:06.000Z","issue":"Fees or interest","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"91101","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18398627","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2026-01-01T00:47:05.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem with fees"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["My Existing Accounts I had no need for a {$50.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX card, I already held several <em>personal</em> and business with WF issued XXXX months prior, in addition to having other credit cards from other <em>financial</em> institutions, such as XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, demonstrating no need for a new XXXX Propel card."]},"sort":[6.7221823,"18398627"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21035137","_score":6.646788,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Complainant : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Companies Complained About : XXXX. Affirm, Inc. ( 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 ( Affirm Virtual Card / installment loan serviced by Affirm on behalf of XXXX XXXX ) - XXXX XXXX : {$5000.00} physical check ( XXXX ) mailed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX, intended to pay off the above loan ( and XXXX other Affirm loans ). \n- XXXX Affirm loans paid in full on XX/XX/XXXX ( Affirm has admitted receipt of those two checks ).\n\nComplaint Type : Credit reporting / Debt collection / Payday / installment / personal loans/ Other consumer financial product or service ( UDAAP violations ) Narrative of Facts ( Chronological and Factual ) : I have an existing Affirm loan ( XXXX ) issued by XXXX XXXX XXXX On multiple occasions in XXXX XXXX, I logged into my existing Affirm account solely to check the processing status of a physical check mailed by XXXX XXXX XXXX to pay down this loan. I did not apply for any new loan, pre-qualification, or qualifying power option. Despite never selecting or authorizing any credit pull, Affirm automatically ran my credit report anyway. This resulted in unauthorized hard or soft inquiries. \n\nI have received XXXX emails per day from Affirm falsely blaming XXXX XXXX  for not lending me money and blaming me for the {$5000.00} check that XXXX mailed on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nCheck Mishandling Timeline ( supported by XXXX  records and XXXX  ) : - XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX  mailed the {$5000.00} check to Affirm to pay off loan XXXX ( and the other XXXX Affirm loans, which were received and processed by Affirm ). \n- XX/XX/XXXX : Because Affirm claimed it never received the check, XXXX stopped payment and issued a replacement check. \n- XXXX XX/XX/XXXX : Affirm first claimed it received the replacement check, then discovered the stop-payment and now claims it still has not received it. \n- XX/XX/XXXX : To avoid a late payment on Affirm ( which would have damaged my otherwise perfect recent payment history ), I signed a XXXX  Skip-a-Pay XXXX  extension on my {$10000.00} XXXX  personal loan ( Loan # XXXX ). XXXX waived the {$30.00} fee and approved the deferral solely so I could manually pay Affirm the {$380.00} installment due in 5 days. \n\nAffirm has now admitted that the other XXXX checks mailed the same day were received and applied, yet continues to lose or misplace the third check and blames me. The loan remains due again in 5 days, and Affirm continues to send daily emails threatening adverse action and falsely stating that my repayment history with Affirm is the reason for denials. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX an adverse-action letter denying a new loan application ( which I did not initiate ) and citing repayment history with Affirm, length of credit history, and XXXX XXXX while simultaneously mishandling the very payments intended to resolve the account. My credit reports ( XXXX  XXXX XXXX = XXXX ; XXXX  XXXX XXXX = XXXX ; XXXX  XXXX XXXX in Good range ) confirm 100 % on-time payments on all open accounts, no recent lates, and Exceptional payment history across Affirm, XXXX, and all other tradelines. The only historical negative is a XXXX Chapter XXXX bankruptcy that has long since aged off for most purposes. \n\nXXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX Violations : XXXX. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), XXXX XXXX. XXXX et seq., especially XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX and used my consumer report without a permissible purpose. Logging into an existing account to view payment/check status is not a permissible purpose. The repeated qualifying power pulls were performed without my initiation or consent. \n\nXXXX. FCRA XXXX The XX/XX/XXXX adverse-action notice is incomplete and misleading because it blames my repayment history with Affirm while Affirm was simultaneously losing the check that would have brought the account current.\n\n3. Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ) / Regulation B, 15 U.S.C. 1691 et seq. Failure to provide accurate, specific reasons for adverse action ; unfair treatment by blaming me for checks that Affirm admits it lost while processing identical checks sent the same day. All three checks were to be received on XX/XX/XXXX same day as the other XXXX loans were received. \n\nXXXX. Dodd-Frank Act Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( UDAAP ), XXXX U.S.C. XXXX et seq. \n- Deceptive : Repeated emails and statements blaming XXXX XXXX  or me for lost checks that Affirm itself mishandled. \n- Unfair : Forcing unnecessary credit pulls and payment disruptions that generate extra interest on a 35.98 % APR loan. \n- Abusive : Taking advantage of my existing account relationship to run credit without consent and extend repayment through servicing errors. \n\nXXXX. Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) / Regulation Z, 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. Mishandling of checks has caused undisclosed extensions, extra interest, and altered payment schedules without proper notice or re-disclosure. \n\nXXXX. Nevada XXXX XXXX Practices XXXX ( XXXX XXXX and XXXX et seq. ) False representations about receipt of payments, loan status, and responsibility for the lost checks in order to extract additional interest. \n\nRequested Relief : I respectfully request that the CFPB : XXXX. XXXX Affirm XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX  for the above violations. \nXXXX. XXXX immediate cessation of all unauthorized credit inquiries when I merely log in to view account or payment status. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX trace, credit, or waive any issues related to the {$5000.00} check ( XXXX ) and bring loan XXXX current without further penalty or interest caused by their errors. \nXXXX. Require accurate, complete adverse-action notices that do not falsely blame my repayment history. \nXXXX. XXXX Affirm to stop the daily deceptive emails blaming XXXX XXXX  or me. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX any inaccurate credit reporting and remove any negative marks caused by these servicing errors. \nXXXX. XXXX any appropriate compensation for the extra interest, fees, and harm caused by the check mishandling and unauthorized pulls. \n\nI have attached or can provide : - XX/XX/XXXX adverse-action letter - XXXX  Skip-a-Pay XXXX  Certificate of Completion ( XX/XX/XXXX ) - XXXX  proof of check mailing and stop-payment records- Copies of the daily Affirm emails - Recent credit reports ( XXXX, XXXX, XXXX  ) showing 100 % on-time payment history I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-08T01:03:44.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"89115","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21035137","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Affirm Holdings, Inc","date_received":"2026-04-08T00:52:29.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Complaint</em> Type : Credit reporting / Debt collection / Payday / installment / <em>personal</em> loans/ Other consumer <em>financial</em> product or service ( UDAAP violations ) <em>Narrative</em> of Facts ( Chronological and Factual ) : I have an existing Affirm loan ( XXXX ) issued by XXXX XXXX XXXX On multiple occasions in XXXX XXXX, I logged into my existing Affirm account solely to check the processing status of a physical check mailed by XXXX XXXX XXXX to pay down this loan."]},"sort":[6.646788,"21035137"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3740201","_score":6.43582,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I was the victim of credit card fraud from an ex girlfriend who used my cards for her own personal gain using 3 separate credit cards from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX without my permission and without my knowledge. One of these cards is through XXXX XXXX XXXX. I have cleared the fraudulent charges on my other two cards by submitting a fraud report to those companies, but XXXX has refused to do a fair and impartial investigation to clear the debt from my name even with the substantial evidence which has been presented to them. I am submitting this complaint due to violations committed by XXXX XXXX XXXX under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Fair Credit Billing Act. The final complaint submitted to XXXX XXXX XXXX was received with the following statement made by them in writing which outlines their lack of investigations. \" We previously responded to your concerns in our enclosed letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, in which we enclosed a copy of the Card member Agreement that says on page 1 that you, as the Primary Card member, are responsible for all charges made including anyone you permit to use your account. '' They then proceed to state \" Although we understand your claim that your ex-girlfriend used the credit card without your permission, you acknowledge that you made and agreement with her to repay you for the purchases and acknowledge that you allowed her to handle your finances. We consider this to be a civil matter, not fraud, and best handled outside of the credit card industry. Our decision remains unchanged '' This letter was received by myself on XX/XX/XXXX and is entirely inaccurate on the information submitted to XXXX XXXX XXXX on the fraud report and continues to be perpetuated by false information reported to the credit bureaus as well. When I submitted the report of the fraudulent activity, I never stated I asked the ex-girlfriend to repay ME for these fraudulent charges, I offered her the ultimatum to repay the fraudulent charges to XXXX and clear the credit card of all debt or to face criminal prosecution. She then made a few payments on the card, but then recanted her promise to pay and was ultimately charge with two felony charges by the XXXX, NC Police Department. XXXX also inaccurately states that I claimed this ex-girlfriend handled my finances. At no time has she ever handled my fiances and this information is completely inaccurate. However, even if this information WAS accurate, there is no place under the law that would excuse felony credit card fraud and identity theft and make this matter a civil matter. XXXX has not once called me after repeated requests and complaints over this matter to actually conduct an accurate and thorough interview. After this last \" investigation '' I received a call stating an investigator name XXXX would contact me in the coming days as she works on the investigation. I never received that call, in fact there was no information provided by me at all in this investigation other than information they claim I provided and used that is full of inaccuracies entered from their initial investigation two years ago. Instead, I received a letter stating \" Our decision remains unchanged '' and then cites inaccuracies that persist from the initial investigation 2 years ago that I have continued to point out are incorrect. I have had nothing to do with this re-investigation and they appear to simply be reading someone else 's notes and then copying what they had to say which includes falsehoods such as \" He allowed her to use his card '' or \" You allowed her to handle your finances '' when in reality they are misapplying statements that were made about unrelated items. I have never had the chance to have a fair and ACCURATE investigation as it is glaringly obvious XXXX does not want to conduct a real investigation because they know the fraud I experienced must be deleted from my account and clear my credit of this charge card. XXXX states the following inaccuracies on their investigations but has never validated or even contacted me to verify any of the information which they seem to use to make their determination. 1. I allowed the ex-gf to use the cards. -I made it abundantly clear to XXXX XXXX XXXX I never authorized nor knew about the fraudulent charges. Once I discovered the illegal charges, I gave the person who was still a current girlfriend at the time the ultimatum to repay the money for the theft ( to the credit card companies ) or I would file criminal charges. The reason I did not immediately file criminal charges is to avoid her becoming a convicted felon. She was at the end of two years of college classes to become an XXXX   and was almost ready to graduate and she was also a XXXX  mother. As stated earlier, we were still romantically involved and I did not want to ruin years of schooling for her XXXX. Instead, trying to be fair, I offered her the chance to make things right with the credit card companies or turn her over to the police, but ultimately that would be her decision. The woman in question did make payments to the cards for a short period of time then stopped entirely and directly refused to pay off her fraudulent charges. By the time I filed criminal charges I had ended the relationship, removed her from my home, and reported the fraud she had committed to the credit card companies. I attempted to make the credit card companies whole by first giving her ( the ex-gf ) the opportunity to repay the money and avoid prosecution. It seemed like the \" nice-guy '' option as everyone would win in this scenario. She would avoid any charges and could continue on her career as a XXXX  and set a good example to her children ( she was also a XXXX   mother ), the credit card companies would be repaid in full PLUS interest on her fraudulent charges, and I would not have to deal with this nightmare of fighting to clear my name of charges I did not authorize or know about. XXXX now contends that makes this a \" civil '' matter. I directly dispute that allegation as I have consulted with my local police department who agree, this is a criminal matter and on XX/XX/XXXX filied one charge of Financial Transaction Card Fraud. An additional charge of Felony Identity Theft was added by Investigator XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. As explained to me by Investigator you can not make a felony into a civil matter, and allowing her to repay the money to XXXX  is actually called \" continuation of a felony ''. The investigator stated it would not be something you would likely understand and obviously you were trying to do what is right, but XXXX XXXX XXXX absolutely should know that a felony can not be absolved by paying restitution it simply \" continues '' even if the debt was cleared, however that was not the case here as the ex-gf failed to pay the money as promised. 2. XXXX alleges I allowed my ex-gf to \" handle my finances ''. Once again, this information is completely false and results in massive assumptions compiled by information that had to be twisted by the initial investigator. The information provided to the initial investigator that could only be where the investigator drew this conclusions was when I stated the now ex paid \" all the bills of the house '' meaning she had the lights, cable, rent etc in her name. I was NOT on the lease, I was not joint on any account with her of any kind. I simply paid her half of these items in cash to pay these house hold items. I lived with her, but the lease of that rental was in her name. To be fair, I paid my fair share of items that were used, but at no point did she handle my finances. I had my own bank account which she was not on, I paid all my own items such as cell phone, insurance, car payment, student loans etc myself. They came from my bank account which was again in my name. The only reason the household bills were ever mentioned to the initial investigator was because after reviewing the fraudulent charges, I noticed she was paying 100 % of these \" household bills '' with the stolen funds from my credit card AND collecting half of the bills from me personally in cash as well. So she was avoiding paying any of the bills since she was adding them to the cards, then still taking cash from me as if she was adding it to her money and sending out checks to pay those bills. I even discovered at least two forged credit card checks she used to pay the rent to the land lord, but once again also got half of the rent from me in cash. As a result, she managed to not pay any of the bills in her name for several months, collect money from me, and later also used the stolen card information to pay HER personal bills such as car insurance, cell phone bill, buy items online for her children, pay her child 's cell phone bill, put gas in har car, etc. That was all discovered shortly after I purchased my home and was confronted with the massive amount of credit card debt by my mortgage broker who then explained my credit bureau was showing maxed out cards. However, the \" investigators '' from XXXX also got this information wrong and somehow turned this into the ex must have had access to all my finances etc. They have failed to do any semblance of an investigation and have simply rehashed old inaccurate information and placed notes on the account never actually doing anything. As a result, I am filing this complaint with copies of the police report as well as the statutes of both State and Federal laws  which prove without a double that what XXXX alleges is civil is entirely criminal. There is no reason for this account to still be appearing on my credit bureau when the information they have been provided proves this account is the result of Credit Card Fraud! For  XXXX XXXX XXXX to continue to report this as a charge off and reporting this information as accurate is a concerted effort to intentionally inflict damages upon me for refusing to pay on this account due to the fact it is fraud. The following State of North Carolina Statutes define the charges made by the ex on my credit card as fraud : 14-113.9. Financial transaction card theft. ( a ) A person is guilty of financial transaction card theft when the person does any of the following : ( 1 ) Takes, obtains or withholds a financial transaction card from the person, possession, custody or control of another without the cardholder 's consent and with the intent to use it ; or who, with knowledge that it has been so taken, obtained or withheld, receives the financial transaction card with intent to use it or to sell it, or to transfer it to a person other than the issuer or the cardholder 14-113.13. Financial transaction card fraud. ( a ) A person is guilty of financial transaction card fraud when, with intent to defraud the issuer, a person or organization providing money, goods, services or anything else of value, or any another person, he ( 1 ) Uses for the purpose of obtaining money, goods, services or anything else of value a financial transaction card obtained or retained, or which was received with knowledge that it was obtained or retained, in violation of G.S. 14-113.9 or 14-113.11 or a financial transaction card which he knows is forged, altered, expired, revoked or was obtained as a result of a fraudulent application in violation of G.S. 14-113.13 ( c ) ; or ( 2 ) Obtains money, goods, services, or anything else of value by : a. Representing without the consent of the cardholder that he is the holder of a specified card ; or b. Presenting the financial transaction card without the authorization or permission of the cardholder ; or c. Representing that he is the holder of a card and such card has not in fact been issued ; or d. Using a financial transaction card to knowingly and willfully exceed : 1. The actual balance of a demand deposit account or time deposit account ; or 2. An authorized credit line in an amount which exceeds such authorized credit line in the amount of five hundred dollars ( {$500.00} ), or fifty percent ( 50 % ) of such authorized credit line, whichever is greater ; or ( 3 ) Obtains control over a financial transaction card as security for debt ; or ( 4 ) Deposits into his account or any account, by means of an automated banking device, a false, fictitious, forged, altered or counterfeit check, draft, money order, or any other such document not his lawful or legal property ; or ( 5 ) Receives money, goods, services or anything else of value as a result of a false, fictitious, forged, altered, or counterfeit check, draft, money order or any other such document having been deposited into an account via an automated banking device, knowing at the time of receipt of the money, goods, services, or item of value that the document so deposited was false, fictitious, forged, altered or counterfeit or that the above deposited item was not his lawful or legal property 14-113.11. Forgery of financial transaction card. ( a ) A person is guilty of financial transaction card forgery when : ( 2 ) With intent to defraud a purported issuer, a person or organization providing money, goods, services or anything else of value, or any other person, he falsely encodes, duplicates or alters existing encoded information on a financial transaction card or utters such a financial transaction card ; 14-113.15. Criminal receipt of goods and services fraudulently obtained. A person is guilty of criminally receiving goods and services fraudulently obtained when he receives money, goods, services or anything else of value obtained in violation of G.S. 14-113.13 ( a ) with the knowledge or belief that the same were obtained in violation of G.S. 14-113.13 ( a ). Conviction of criminal receipt of goods and services fraudulently obtained is punishable as provided in G.S. 14-113.17 ( a ) if the value of all the money, goods, services and anything else of value, obtained in violation of this section, does not exceed five hundred dollars ( {$500.00} ) in any six-month period ; conviction of criminal receipt of goods and services fraudulently obtained is punishable as provided in G.S . 14-113.17 ( b ) if such value exceeds five hundred dollars ( {$500.00} ) in any six-month period. ( 1967, c. 1244, s. 2 ; 1979, c. 741, s. 1. ) 14-113.17. Punishment and penalties. ( b ) A crime punishable under this Article is punishable as a Class I felony. ( 1967, c. 1244, s. 2 ; 1979, c. 741, s. 1 ; c. 760, s. 5 ; 1993, c. 539, ss. 55, 1183 ; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14 ( c ). The Federal Statutes which also confirm the actions against me as criminal fraud are as follows : 15 U.S.C. 1644 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 15. Commerce and Trade 1644. Fraudulent use of credit cards ; penalties ( a ) Use, attempt or conspiracy to use card in transaction affecting interstate or foreign commerce Whoever knowingly in a transaction affecting interstate or foreign commerce, uses or attempts or conspires to use any counterfeit, fictitious, altered, forged, lost, stolen, or fraudulently obtained credit card to obtain money, goods, services, or anything else of value which within any one-year period has a value aggregating {$1000.00} or more ; or ( d ) Receipt, concealment, etc., of goods obtained by use of card Whoever knowingly receives, conceals, uses, or transports money, goods, services, or anything else of value ( except tickets for interstate or foreign transportation ) which ( 1 ) within any one-year period has a value aggregating {$1000.00} or more, ( 2 ) has moved in or is part of, or which constitutes interstate or foreign commerce, and ( 3 ) has been obtained with a counterfeit, fictitious, altered, forged, lost, stolen, or fraudulently obtained credit card ; or ( f ) Furnishing of money, etc., through use of card Whoever in a transaction affecting interstate or foreign commerce furnishes money, property, services, or anything else of value, which within any one-year period has a value aggregating {$1000.00} or more, through the use of any counterfeit, fictitious, altered, forged, lost, stolen, or fraudulently obtained credit card knowing the same to be counterfeit, fictitious, altered, forged, lost, stolen, or fraudulently obtained shall be fined not more than {$10000.00} or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. It is obviously clear that there is no defense alleged by XXXX in any previous statement that would make this matter civil in any way. Both State and Federal laws make it very clear I was the vitim of fraud, as well as the local police department who have filed two felony charges against her. So, how can XXXX possibly make the claim to find this matter civil? The last time I checked the Prosecutors and Police officers who do this for a living decide what is a crime based on these very statutes, especially since they saw fit to file charges for the actions of this now ex-girlfriend. So what then could possibly motivate XXXX to continually file false information that my account information is \" accurate '' when the LAW says it is not just criminal, but FELONY charges that were committed. My rights under the Fair Debt Collection Act have been violation due to intentional and deceptive collection practices, unfair reporting of false information, and illegally reporting inaccurate information to creditors damaging my credit score resulting in higher interest rates on my home, car insurance, as well as knowingly keeping that false information on my credit bureau. They have also violated my rights under the Fair Credit Billing Act knowingly failing to investigate my claim of fraud and simply passing of their \" investigation '' as completed. This is obvious with prima facia evidence that they continue to claim the fraudulent charges are civil when their are a half dozen statutes listed that contradict their own statements. They are not qualified to make legal decisions on what is or is not fraud when the law has already clearly defined the actions that occurred in my case fall directly in the definition of credit card fraud. Cards were used without my knowledge, items were purchased over the internet falling under federal statutes, signatures on receipts were signed under my name which were then forgeries, credit card checks were cashed using my name to pay rent also adding to the fraud under Forgery of Financial Transaction and Receipt and Concealment of Goods Obtained by Use of Card. There is Statute after Statute that directly covers EVERYTHING that  happened to me as a victim of fraud, but XXXX XXXX XXXX wants to fake an investigation and call it civil. To continue this narrative is not just unjust, but it is borderline criminal on their part knowing that the lasting effects of their information is directly harming me financially. That is likely their motive for continuing to respond in the manner that they are an I surely hope an investigation is conducted by CFPB and additional fines and punitive damages are levied against them for their deceptive and illegal business practices.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-07-10T12:26:44.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"27530","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3740201","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2020-07-10T12:26:40.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am submitting this <em>complaint</em> due to violations committed by XXXX XXXX XXXX under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Fair Credit Billing Act."],"product":["Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"]},"sort":[6.43582,"3740201"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7460413","_score":6.434593,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX Narrative describing Identity Theft of my XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX checking account and compromising of my Credit Karma Debit Card personal information. XXXX My personal information on my Credit Karma account has been compromised since XX/XX/XXXX. I have been trying to resolve this issue with Credit Karma ever since I discovered it on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. During this time Credit Karma has demonstrated without any question that they are incapable of correcting this issue. Their response has been inept, untimely, and numerous mistakes have been made by Credit Karma. I have been in direct contact with the XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Fraud department since XX/XX/XXXX and they have been professional, competent, and solved the issue from their end immediately upon notification from me. I have had similar excellent experiences with the XXXX XXXX fraud department. Credit Karmas inept and unprofessional response to this issue is beyond comprehension. Credit Karmas customers do not have the ability to speak with their fraud department which they refer to as the specialty department. Credit Karmas customer service agents are not permitted to allow me to speak with their fraud department. They only take information and escalate it to the specialty department who has never responded to me in a competent or timely manner. When one follows up with their customer service agents, they have no clue what steps the Fraud department has taken. It is abundantly clear that Credit Karma does not have the security protocols in place or the staffing necessary to prevent or at least minimize identity theft of their customers. I have tried to permanently close this account with Credit Karma on at least 2 occasions but I was told that the account could not be closed as it was under review. Finally, as of last week, my account has been locked by Credit Karma. Since then I have not received an relevant information from Credit Karma regarding this issue with the exception of the email I received on Thursday, XX/XX/XXXX that was sent by CK indicating that their email was sent in error. A copy of the email is below. Be Below is a narrative description of this issue that I have compiled to the best of my ability. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX an unknown individual ( fraudster ) transferred {$2000.00} from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX ) checking account ending in XXXX to my Credit Karma Save account ending in XXXX. Five days later on XX/XX/XXXX he transferred the {$2000.00} from my Credit Karma Save account to my Credit Karma spend account ending in XXXX. The spend account was linked to my original Credit Karma Debit card ending in XXXX. He made the transfer by accessing my account online and using some of my personal information such as SS number, email address, and date of birth and requesting this transfer. I do not know if he had my bank information, but he may not have needed it to make the transfer since my XXXX checking account was already linked to my Credit Karma account. This was done by me when I first set up my Credit Karma account so that I could put funds into my Credit Karma account from my XXXX account. It is important to note that I never lost the possession of my Credit Karma debit card. I had it in my possession the entire time. \nI noticed this transfer on XX/XX/XXXX and reported it to my bank and to Credit Karma. I instructed my bank put a stop to all future transfers to Credit Karma. However, I mistakenly reported this unauthorized transfer as {$2000.00} instead of the correct amount of {$2000.00}. As a result, my bank contacted me about 2-3 weeks later saying that they could not locate a transfer of {$2000.00} and closed the case. Yet I did not realize that the bank closed the case because they contacted me via the message center on their XXXX  website. I did not see that message as I was expecting an email with the results of their investigation. For well over a month after I reported this to both XXXX and Credit Karma, I received no relevant information from Credit Karma regarding this case ( case # XXXX ) other that they kept informing me that my account was under review. Each time I called I was told that my case has been escalated to the speciality department. I later learned that their specialty department was their fraud department. It was made abundantly clear that the customer service department that I spoke to numerous times is not at all coordinated with the specialty or fraud department as I was getting conflicting information. I was never able to speak with someone from the fraud department directly as they would only email me days later. During this time I could not access my Credit Karma account online to check activity to see all these fraudulent charges because the fraudster changed my phone number associated with my Credit Karma account. The only way to see your account activity is for Credit Karma to send you a verification code via a text message which you then must input on the website. The verification code was constantly being sent to a phone number that was not mine as it was changed by the fraudster. \nDuring this time Credit Karma sent me a new debit card, even though I still had the original one. However, I was told that I could not activate the card because my account was still under review.\n\nI have had repeated calls to Credit Karma, too numerous to mention here, but 2 calls are significant. In late XXXX or early XXXX I called Credit Karma regarding the wrong phone # issue. I provided them with my personal information, by sending them a pic of my drivers license next to my face. At this point they were able to change my phone # to the correct one. However, shortly thereafter the fraudster used my information to change the phone back to a different one and again I could no longer access my account information. \nI called Credit Karma once again and this time they asked my to provide a copy of my Social Security card as well as my drivers license. I did so and my personal information was briefly correct on the Credit Karna account until the fraudster changed my personal info again. \nEvidently, the fraudster was able to change my information by using the Chat feature on the Credit Karma website. Evidently, CK Chat never asked him/her for a passcode or security question to verify that he was me. Each tome I called Credit Karma to attempt to address this, I was given a new and different case #. \nI am a member of XXXX, an XXXX XXXX XXXX. So on XX/XX/XXXX I contacted XXXX to assist me because I was getting nowhere with Credit Karma. On XX/XX/XXXX, we had a 3-way call between myself, XXXX and Credit Karma . It was during that call that we discovered that many, many additional charges were made using my Credit Karma account, but this time he was charging by using a digital debit card. We filed a new claim with Credit Karma ( case # XXXX ) to include the original {$2000.00} transfer and all the other charges on my Credit Karma account totaling {$4300.00} case # XXXX. At this time We also requested that this account be locked, but the representative told us in order to do that it to be escalated to the escalation team. Later that same day I received an email ( to my gmail account ) from CK alerting me that my account was in fact locked. However, on XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX I received an email from CK that says Good News a deposit of {$4000.00} was initiated to my CK Spend account and withdrawn from my XXXX acct ending in XXXX. How is this possible if my account was locked? \nOn XXXX at XXXX am I received an email from CK saying that my case was closed because that contacted me several days ago and that they have not heard back from me. However. They sent that email to the wrong email address sending it to my secondary email address not my primary which is the one I have always had with CK. On that same day on XXXX, myself and my representative from XXXX spoke to a CK customer service agent to try to get a resolution of this issue and to get a status update. The agent was initially trying to be helpful but upon gettig pertinent questions form the XXXX representative, the CK agent abruptly ended the call. \nFurthermore, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, I received an email from Credit Karma that a new digital Debit card has been requested. On XX/XX/XXXX I responded to ( XXXX ) that I DID NOT request or Authorize a digital debit card and instructed them in no uncertain terms not to activate it. It was not until XX/XX/XXXX, 3 days later, that I received an email back saying that there was no active digital debit card, yet someone tried to open one at some point. \nThen again, on XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX, I received an email from Credit Karma that my request to transfer {$4000.00} from my XXXX  account ending in XXXX was initiated and that my money is on the way. I made no such request and once again someone is accessing my account. It is abundantly clear that Credit Karma does not have adequate safeguards or security protocols in place to prevent this type of fraud. Other institutions have security questions that must be answered correctly or a security phrase that must be told to a representative. It is unfathomable that a financial organization can be so inept. \n\nOnce again, someone posing as me accessed my account and changed my phone number. Without that phone I could not go online and access my account. So on XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX, we had a 3 way call to Credit Karma between myself XXXX and credit Karma during which time the agent once again escalated my case to the escalation dept. to have my account locked. He also instructed me to contact member support vis chat to change my phone number back to my correct phone number XXXX. \nFinally, today XX/XX/XXXX my account has been locked as it should be. I know this because I tried to log in and I received the message that my account was locked. \nI have been an XXXX XXXX cardholder for decades and they routinely handle cases like this within days. The same applies to XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, who I have been a customer also for decades. With both organizations a customer who has been victimized by fraud is able to contact their fraud department directly. Their security protocols are infinitely superior to the ones that Credit Karma has in place. I have not been able to contact the fraud department or security department of Credit Karma. Below is an email I sent on to Credit Karma Member Support on XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX. This is only 1 of the numerous conflicting emails I have received from Credit Karma. One only needs to do a XXXX search of customer reviews of Credit Karma to see hundreds of devastating comments regarding the lack of professionalism, competency and integrity of Credit Karma. \n\nRe : Call from XXXX : Case # XXXX [ ref : XXXX : ref ] XXXX XXXX XXXX To : Credit Karma Member Support Fri XX/XX/XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX I need to get a PHONE CALL from the fraud department and speak to someone in that department immediately. I DO NOT WISH TO BE CONTACTED BY EMAIL. As demonstrated below, the emails I have received from Credit Karma have been full of mistakes and inconsistencies and they do not respond in a timely manner rather they respond numerous days later. days. My account has been hacked since XX/XX/XXXX by someone who keeps getting into my account and has stolen money from me using unauthorized transfers. My numerous, numerous calls to customer service have not solved the problem. It is incomprehensible that this has taken so long. I have been a cardholder of XXXX XXXX and a customer of XXXX XXXX  XXXX for decades. They would have taken care of this within days!! \n\nI have no confidence in Credit KARMA 'S ability to this problem. I need this problem corrected so that I may close my account permanently. \n\nPlease contact me immediately at XXXX. This is the only phone number I have had for the last 25 years and the only phone number that I have ever used with Credit Karma. Someone is getting into my account and changing my phone # with credit Karma. I must receive a call from Credit Karma or I will be forced to file a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Attorney General of California, and the Attorney General of West Virginia and XXXX XXXX \n\nXXXX XXXX ________________________________________ From : Credit Karma Member Support XXXX Sent : XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX To : XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX Subject : Call from XXXX : Case # XXXX [ ref : XXXX : ref ] Hi XXXX XXXX Please disregard this email it was sent in error. \nOnce again Apologies for the email, have a great day. \n\nRegards, Credit Karma Member Support -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - Original Message -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - From : Credit Karma Member Support [ XXXX ] Sent : XX/XX/XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX To : XXXX ; XXXX Subject : Call from XXXX : Case # XXXX [ ref : XXXX : ref ] Hi XXXX XXXX I hope you're doing well. In order to further assist you, we are requesting the following : Photos of both the front and back of your government-issued ID with a selfie of you holding your ID under your chin. \n\nA full copy of the bank statement from your linked [ XXXX XXXX XXXX ] account in XXXX format. \n\nAn explanation for why the transfer in the amount of {$2000.00} that was returned. \n\nYou can upload the requested documents using this secure link : UPLOAD HERE Regards, Credit Karma Member Support -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - Original Message -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - From : Credit Karma Member Support [ XXXX ] Sent : XX/XX/XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX To : XXXX Subject : Call from XXXX : Case # XXXX [ ref : XXXX : ref ] Hi XXXX XXXX Thanks for reaching out about this. I'm going to redirect your case to a more specialized team that is better suited to look further into the matter. \n\nIn the meantime, if your issue gets resolved on its own or if you have anything to add, please let us know by responding to this email. Thanks in advance for your patience Regards, Credit Karma Member Support ref : XXXX : ref","date_sent_to_company":"2023-08-29T01:35:44.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"20001","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7460413","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Credit Karma, LLC","date_received":"2023-08-29T01:15:09.000Z","state":"DC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX XXXX <em>Narrative</em> describing Identity Theft of my XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX checking account and compromising of my Credit Karma Debit Card <em>personal</em> information. XXXX My <em>personal</em> information on my Credit Karma account has been compromised since XX/XX/XXXX. I have been trying to resolve this issue with Credit Karma ever since I <em>discovered</em> it on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. During this time Credit Karma has demonstrated without any question that they are incapable of correcting this issue."]},"sort":[6.434593,"7460413"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12856477","_score":5.8576136,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Re : Formal Complaint Request to Remove Two Inaccurate Late Payments from Credit Reports ( XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) To Whom It May Concern : I am writing to lodge a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and to request urgent assistance regarding inaccurate and unfair credit reporting on my student loan account. Specifically, I seek the removal of two late payment entries ( for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ) that currently appear on my credit reports with XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. These derogatory marks pertain to a XXXXXXXX XXXX  student loan that was sold/transferred to Firstmark Services during the exact period when I was incapacitated by a critical medical hardship. I believe the continued reporting of these late payments is unjust, misleading, and not in compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) given the circumstances outlined below. \n\nFrom XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, I was critically ill and hospitalized for extended periods, including time in an intensive care unit ( ICU ) and a subsequent psychiatric hospitalization. This was an XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that left me with no ability to manage my personal or financial affairs during those months. Naturally, I could not pay bills or even stay informed about my accounts while XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX My prolonged hospitalization was entirely unplanned and beyond my control a situation no one anticipates, and XXXX that made it impossible to meet normal financial obligations. \n\nUnbeknownst to me at the time, while I was XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX sold my student loan to XXXX XXXX  ( the transfer occurred sometime in late XXXX ). Because of my medical incapacitation, I did not receive or comprehend any communications about this loan transfer. I was not checking mail or email while hospitalized, and any notification from XXXX or XXXX about a new account number, payment portal, or due date went unnoticed. As a result, I had no knowledge that my loan payments were now owed to a different servicer. In practical terms, this meant the XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX payments went unpaid not out of neglect or refusal, but because I literally did not know where or to whom payment was due, nor was I in any condition to make payments during that timeframe. \n\nBy early XX/XX/XXXX, I had recovered enough to begin managing my finances again. Upon reviewing my accounts, I was alarmed to discover that my student loan was marked past due specifically, the XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX payments were reported as late. This was the first time I became aware that XXXX was now the loan holder and that the loan had effectively fallen into delinquency during my illness. I immediately contacted XXXX XXXX as soon as I learned of the issue, desperate to explain the situation and resolve any problems. I informed XXXX that I had been critically ill and unaware of the transfer, and that the missed payments were a direct result of these extraordinary circumstances. \n\nDuring my call with XXXX, a supervisory representative acknowledged the situation and the confusion arising from the loans transfer. The supervisor noted that many customers had experienced similar issues when XXXX took over loans from XXXX, indicating this was a known problem. I explained that I had been hospitalized and unable to receive notices or make payments. The supervisor was sympathetic and apologized for the difficulties I faced. Most importantly, XXXX supervisor explicitly promised that the two late payments ( XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ) would be removed from my credit reports given the extenuating circumstances. I was reassured that my situation was understood and that the credit reporting would be corrected as a courtesy and in recognition of the hardship I endured. \n\nIn addition to promising removal of the negative marks, XXXX approved me for its XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to help me get back on track. I was enrolled in a XXXX modified payment plan which substantially reduced my monthly payments for the next year ( initially to roughly 50 % of the normal payment, and later to 75 % ). I promptly accepted this modification plan and have abided by its terms since XX/XX/XXXX. This accommodation not only provided financial relief as I recovered, but it also demonstrates my good-faith effort to resolve the account once I regained the capacity to do so. The fact that XXXX offered and approved this program for me underscores that they recognized my hardship as legitimate. ( I have obtained a letter from XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX confirming my enrollment in the modification program, and I am attaching a copy of this letter to support my claim. ) However, despite XXXX assurances, the late payments for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX continue to appear on all three of my credit reports as of the date of this letter. These two derogatory marks have substantially lowered my credit score and are impeding my ability to move forward financially ( for example, The presence of these late payments on my credit report has significantly hindered my ability to rent an apartment. Many landlords and property management companies review applicants ' credit histories, and negative marks such as late payments can lead to application denials or require additional security deposits. This has made the process of finding suitable housing exceedingly challenging ). More importantly, the presence of these late payments presents an incomplete and misleading narrative of my credit history. Any reviewer of my credit report sees a XXXX delinquency, but sees none of the context behind it. I feel I was misled by the servicer into believing this issue would be fixed promptly, yet months later the harmful credit reporting remains. In its current state, my credit report does not accurately reflect my creditworthiness or intentions it instead reflects a breakdown in communication during a XXXX XXXX \n\nI contend that the continued reporting of these two late payments is not only unfair, but also in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The FCRAs fundamental purpose is to ensure fair and accurate credit reporting, as XXXX declared in its findings. In fact, XXXX noted that inaccurate credit reports directly impair the efficiency of the banking system, and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the public confidence. In line with this purpose, the FCRA imposes a duty on companies that furnish information to credit bureaus to report data that is truthful, accurate, and not misleading. Under Section 623 of the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ), a furnisher must not report information it knows or has reason to believe is inaccurate. Once I notified XXXX of the errors and my extraordinary situation, they had more than enough reason to believe the prior negative reporting was incorrect or at least contextually wrong. Continuing to report those late payments despite the clear evidence of my medical emergency and XXXX own acknowledgment of confusion appears to be a direct breach of their obligations under the FCRA. Furthermore, the FCRAs reinvestigation provisions ( Section 611, 15 U.S.C. 1681i, and corresponding furnisher duties in 1681s-2 ( b ) ) require that if an investigation finds information to be incomplete or inaccurate, that information must be promptly corrected or deleted so it does not continue to mislead. In this case, the reporting of these late payments without any notation of the circumstances is incomplete and thus inaccurate in effect, and it should have been corrected by removing the late payment entries as soon as the situation was explained. \n\nIn addition, I want to emphasize that even if one were to argue the late payment notations are factually true in isolation ( i.e. a payment due in XXXX was marked late in XXXX ), the context renders them materially misleading. Courts have held that a credit entry can be technically accurate yet still violate the FCRA if it creates a misleading impression about a consumers creditworthiness. In other words, information that is misleading in such a way and to such an extent that it can be expected to adversely affect credit decisions is considered inaccurate under the FCRA. Here, the reporting of a XXXX delinquency ( December 2024January 2025 ) on my loan creates a severely misleading impression : it suggests that I simply failed to pay my debt for two months, when in reality I was fighting for my life in the hospital and was never even aware of the need to pay a different servicer. Any lender or creditor viewing my report would draw the false conclusion that I was financially irresponsible during that period, which is absolutely not the case. This kind of omission of critical context is materially misleading by any measure, as it hides the true cause of the delinquency. I firmly believe that the current credit reporting on my loan is exactly the sort of unjust outcome the FCRA was designed to prevent. For the credit reporting system to be fair, it must take into account situations like mine and avoid penalizing a consumer for circumstances wholly outside their control. \n\nMoreover, CFPBs own guidance to furnishers and creditors encourages a flexible and empathetic approach in scenarios where consumers face serious hardships or life-altering events. During the XXXX pandemic, for example, the CFPB underscored that consumers benefit when lenders are flexible with payment accommodations and report those accommodations accurately ( rather than reporting the loans as delinquent ). The XXXX explicitly encourages lenders to continue to voluntarily provide payment relief to consumers and to report accurate information to credit bureaus relating to this relief. In other words, regulators expect furnishers to work constructively with borrowers in hardship and to ensure that credit reporting reflects any relief measures or agreements in place, instead of unfairly punishing the consumers credit record. While my situation was a personal medical crisis rather than a global pandemic, the underlying principle remains the same. I acted in good faith by promptly communicating and cooperating with my loan servicer once I was able, and the servicer in turn had a responsibility to handle my account with appropriate care and accuracy. Furnishers are expected to exercise discretion and not report derogatory information in a manner that misrepresents the consumers circumstances. In my case, rather than rigidly reporting two missed payments caused by a documented medical incapacity, the servicer should have taken the promised corrective action to ensure my credit report stayed accurate and fair. Failing to do so goes against both the letter and spirit of CFPBs guidance on credit reporting in the face of hardships. \n\nRequested Resolution : I respectfully request that the CFPB assist me in having the XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX late payment entries removed from my credit reports with XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. This adjustment is necessary to bring my credit profile back into alignment with the true facts and the FCRAs standards of accuracy. Given the circumstances detailed above my severe illness, the confusion surrounding the loans transfer, and XXXX own indication that the reporting would be fixed I believe that the removal of these derogatory marks is both warranted and urgently needed. I have already attempted to resolve this directly with the servicer ; however, since the issue remains unresolved despite their promises, I am turning to the CFPBs intervention. I am asking the XXXX to enforce my rights under federal law by ensuring that the furnishers involved ( XXXX  ) XXXX the information they are providing to the credit bureaus. In practical terms, this means updating my credit files so that no late payment is reported for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ( the months in question should have no negative mark at all ). This outcome will correct the record to accurately reflect my credit history and restore my good standing. I would appreciate confirmation once these late payments have been deleted across all three bureaus, and I welcome any other guidance the CFPB can provide in preventing such issues from harming consumers in the future. \n\nSupporting Documentation : To further support my claim, I have attached a copy of a letter from XXXX XXXX ( dated XX/XX/XXXX ) confirming my approval for the Student Loan Modification Program. This letter serves as evidence that XXXX acknowledged my situation and took steps to accommodate my hardship. It validates that I was actively working with the servicer in good faith and that they were aware of my medical issues. I believe this document, in conjunction with the explanation above, clearly illustrates that the negative credit reporting was an oversight that should have been rectified. Should you require any additional documentation, I am ready to provide hospital discharge papers, doctors letters, or any records necessary to substantiate the timeline and severity of my illness. My goal is simply to ensure my credit report is complete and accurate, as the law requires, and that I am not unfairly penalized for an event beyond my control. \n\nThank you very much for your time and consideration of this complaint. I trust that the CFPB will investigate this matter thoroughly and use its good offices to uphold the protections afforded to consumers under the FCRA. I have been a responsible borrower, and I hope that with the XXXX help, my credit reports will soon be corrected to remove any misleading information related to this incident. Please do not hesitate to contact me if any further information is needed. I look forward to a prompt and fair resolution of this issue so that I can put this difficult chapter behind me and rebuild my financial standing on accurate information. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-07T23:05:14.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"20832","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12856477","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Nelnet, Inc.","date_received":"2025-04-07T22:42:58.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XX/XX/XXXX Consumer <em>Financial</em> Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Re : Formal <em>Complaint</em> Request to Remove Two Inaccurate Late Payments from Credit Reports ( XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) To Whom It May Concern : I am writing to lodge a formal <em>complaint</em> with the Consumer <em>Financial</em> Protection Bureau and to request urgent assistance regarding inaccurate and unfair credit reporting on my student loan account."]},"sort":[5.8576136,"12856477"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12353562","_score":5.7091556,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX violated 18 U.S.C. 1343 ( XXXX XXXX ) by transmitting false data security assurances while failing to prevent unauthorized electronic access to consumer information. They violated 18 U.S.C. 1341 ( XXXX XXXXXXXX ) by sending misleading written communications claiming strong protections, then allowing breaches. Under 18 U.S.C. 1344 ( XXXX  XXXX ), they facilitated fraudulent use of compromised consumer nancial data, harming nancial institutions. By providing false statements to federal agencies and regulators, XXXX violated 18 U.S.C. 1001, and their repeated actions show a pattern of racketeering activity, violating 18 U.S.C. 1962 ( XXXX ). Their willful disregard of basic cybersecurity standards and enabling of identity theft also violate 18 U.S.C. 1028 ( Identity Theft ) and 18 U.S.C. 1030 ( Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ). Collectively, these acts form a conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371, demonstrating deliberate participation in unlawful In XX/XX/XXXX, during a trip to XXXX, Texas, I lost my wallet, which contained sensitive personal information, including my government-issued ID, Social Security card XXXX and financial documents. Despite retracing my steps, I was unable to recover it. At the time, I did not report the loss because I did not notice any immediate fraudulent activity. Recently, while reviewing my credit report, I discovered fraudulent accounts had been opened in my name shortly after the loss. These accounts were opened without my authorization, using my stolen information, and adverse actions were sent to an address that does not belong to me. I am filing this report because I believe the person who found my wallet used my personal information to commit identity theft. I am pursuing all legal remedies to resolve this matter and hold the responsible party accountable. I am filing this complaint against XXXX for multiple violations of federal law regarding their handling of fraudulent accounts on my credit report. Despite an FTC Identity Theft Report already on file and a newly filed police report, XXXX continues to report accounts that were fraudulently opened in my name. These accounts stem from a stolen wallet containing my government-issued ID, Social Security XXXX XXXX and financial information, which led to unauthorized credit activity. Violations Committed by XXXX XXXX XXXX Unlawful Reinsertion of Fraudulent Accounts XXXX initially deleted an account after my dispute, only to reinsert it without legally required notice under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ). This is a clear violation, as they failed to provide written notification within five business days, depriving me of my right to dispute it again. 2. Failure to Block Fraudulent Information Under FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( a ), XXXX must block information resulting from identity theft within four business days after receiving proper documentation, including an FTC Identity Theft Report and a police report. They refused to comply, allowing creditors to continue reporting fraudulent accounts. XXXX. Failure to Validate Information I requested debt validation for the fraudulent accounts as required under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ), but XXXX failed to provide any proof that I authorized these accounts. If no legal proof exists, they are obligated to delete the information immediately. XXXX. Criminal Violations Committed By knowingly reporting false information, XXXX XXXXs engaging in wire fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ), bank fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ), and mail fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ), as they transmitted fraudulent data electronically and allowed adverse action notices to be sent to an incorrect address. Additionally, their actions amount to conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371, as they are willfully participating in deceptive financial reporting that harms consumers. TBOM/CONTFIN is not above the law and can not continue to act as if they are merely a reporting entity while ignoring their legal obligations. I will pursue civil litigation if necessary and will also escalate this matter to the United States XXXXXXXX XXXX  for criminal review. There is indisputable evidence proving XXXX  Is noncompliance, and they can not lawfully claim innocence given the facts presented. Criminal Violations Committed by XXXX Under Title 18 U.S. Code XXXX actions in knowingly re-reporting fraudulent accounts, failing to block identity theft-related information, and refusing to comply with federal dispute laws constitute multiple criminal violations under Title XXXX of the United States Code. These violations extend beyond civil infractions and fall under federal criminal law, which carries severe penalties, including fines and imprisonment. Below are the specific statutes XXXX has violated : XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ) XXXX  has engaged in wire fraud by electronically transmitting false and misleading information across state lines. Despite receiving an FTC Identity Theft Report and a police report, they continue to report fraudulent accounts as valid. By doing so, they knowingly facilitate the misrepresentation of my financial status to lenders, which can cause financial harm, denials of credit, or higher interest rates. This constitutes a scheme to defraud, using electronic means to commit fraud against me as a consumer. XXXX. XXXX  XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ) TBOM/CONTFIN refusal to correct fraudulent accounts enables creditors to make lending decisions based on false information. This affects federally insured banks that rely on XXXX reports when determining loan eligibility. By knowingly allowing fraudulent accounts to remain, XXXX is aiding and abetting bank fraud by facilitating financial deception that leads to wrongful lending or credit denials. XXXX. XXXX XXXX  ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ) XXXX  permitted creditors to send adverse action notices to an incorrect address, resulting in my inability to dispute fraudulent accounts in a timely manner. Mailing false credit reports and adverse actions based on fraudulent data constitutes mail fraud, as they knowingly sent or caused misleading documents to be mailed, which is a federal offense. XXXX. Conspiracy to Commit Fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 371 ) XXXX willful collaboration with creditors to keep fraudulent accounts reporting, despite clear evidence of identity theft, constitutes conspiracy to commit fraud. They are acting in concert with financial institutions by refusing to delete fraudulent accounts, ultimately harming consumers while profiting from inaccurate credit reporting. XXXX. Obstruction of Justice ( 18 U.S.C. 1519 ) XXXX refusal to acknowledge official identity theft complaints, police reports, and FTC reports amounts to obstruction of justice. By ignoring and delaying legally required actions, they are actively interfering with federal investigations and regulatory enforcement, which is a federal crime. 6.Failure to Provide Adverse Action Notices Under 15 U.S.C. 1681m ( a ) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), creditors are legally required to provide adverse action notices when they deny credit based on information from a credit report. Despite repeated denials, none of the creditors reporting on my file have issued such notices, depriving me of my right to understand and dispute the reasons behind these adverse decisions. This failure violates federal law and undermines transparency in consumer reporting. 7.Fraudulent Use of False Addresses to Collect Debt The inaccurate addresses in my credit file have been exploited by creditors to conspire in fraudulent debt collection activities, violating both civil and criminal statutes. 8.Conspiracy to Legitimize Invalid Debts ( 18 U.S.C. 371 ) : TBOM/CONTFIN in collusion with associated creditors, has conspired to use fraudulent information to legitimize debts that are either invalid or outdated. By reporting incorrect addressesspecifically XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX tx XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX nj XXXX,, where I have never residedthey have fabricated a connection between me and these illegitimate debts. This calculated conspiracy aims to deceive and manipulate both consumers and financial institutions for unlawful financial gain. egregious violations committed by XXXX XXXX its affiliated creditors, and associated parties. Their actions not only contravene consumer protection laws but also constitute violations of criminal statutes, causing harm to my financial standing and perpetuating fraudulent practices. XXXX. Failure to Provide Adverse Action Notices Under 15 U.S.C. 1681m ( a ) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), creditors are legally required to provide adverse action notices when they deny credit based on information from a credit report. Despite repeated denials, none of the creditors reporting on my file have issued such notices, depriving me of my right to understand and dispute the reasons behind these adverse decisions. This failure violates federal law and undermines transparency in consumer reporting. 2. Inaccurate Address Reporting The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) identity theft report fraudulent addresses that have been inaccurately reported on my credit file, including : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX tx XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX nj XXXX These addresses are entirely fraudulent, and I have never resided at or been associated with them. XXXX continued inclusion of these addresses violates 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), which mandates credit reporting agencies to ensure maximum possible accuracy of the data they report. By knowingly including these false addresses, XXXX has acted negligently and in bad faith, directly facilitating harm to my creditworthiness and perpetuating fraudulent debt collection schemes. XXXX. Fraudulent Use of False Addresses to Collect Debt The inaccurate addresses in my credit file have been exploited by creditors to conspire in fraudulent debt collection activities, violating both civil and criminal statutes : : Conspiracy to Legitimize Invalid Debts ( 18 U.S.C. 371 ) : XXXX, in collusion with associated creditors, has conspired to use fraudulent information to legitimize debts that are either invalid or outdated. By reporting incorrect addressesspecifically XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX tx XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX nj XXXX,, where I have never residedthey have fabricated a connection between me and these illegitimate debts. This calculated conspiracy aims to deceive and manipulate both consumers and financial institutions for unlawful financial gain. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ) : XXXX has knowingly transmitted false address data and outdated debt information electronically across state lines. By doing so, they have engaged in wire fraud, intentionally deceiving financial institutions and other entities that rely on accurate credit information. Their actions have directly harmed me financially by negatively impacting my creditworthiness based on fabricated data. XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Distribution of Inaccurate Credit Reports ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ) : By mailing credit reports containing false addresses and obsolete debts, XXXX perpetuates a fraudulent scheme designed to mislead creditors and consumers. This misuse of the postal service to disseminate fraudulent information constitutes mail fraud. Their deliberate actions have sown confusion and inflicted unwarranted damage on my financial reputation. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Statutes ( 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq. ) : TBOM/CONTFIN persistent reporting of false information, combined with its collaboration with creditors engaging in deceptive practices, establishes a clear pattern of racketeering activity. Their systematic fraud falls squarely under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ( RICO ). By operating an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, XXXX has XXXX blatant disregard for federal law and consumer rights. XXXX XXXXXXXX Affecting Financial Institutions ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ) : By providing false data to financial institutions, XXXX has engaged in bank fraud. Their actions have undermined the integrity of the banking system, causing harm not only to me but also to lenders who rely on accurate information to make informed decisions. This deception has led to incorrect assessments of credit risk, potentially resulting in financial losses for these institutions. Fraudulent Misrepresentation Causing Direct Harm ( Common Law ) : TBOM/CONTFIN has intentionally misrepresented material information by reporting incorrect addresses and outdated debts. This fraudulent misrepresentation has directly harmed my financial standing, leading to unjust credit denials and tarnishing my reputation. Their willful deceit violates fundamental principles of honesty and fair dealing, inflicting measurable damages upon me. Unfair and Deceptive Practices Violating the FTC Act ( 15 U.S.C. 45 ) : XXXX actions constitute unfair and deceptive practices in violation of Section XXXX of the Federal Trade Commission Act. By misrepresenting my credit information, they have engaged in conduct that is unethical, unscrupulous, and substantially injurious to consumers. Their practices are not only unjustified but also violate established standards of commerce and trade. Detailed Application of Violations : Conspiracy ( 18 U.S.C. 371 ) : XXXX  deliberate collaboration with creditors to report false information is a calculated effort to deceive. By fabricating addresses and associating invalid debts with my credit file, they have created a false narrative intended to coerce payment on debts that are not legally enforceable. This conspiracy is a direct affront to federal statutes designed to protect consumers from such collusive fraud. XXXX XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ) : The electronic transmission of knowingly false credit data constitutes wire fraud. TBOM/CONTFIN actions were not accidental but intentional, with full awareness of the falsehoods being propagated. By transmitting this data, they have exploited interstate communication channels to perpetrate fraud, causing substantial financial harm to me and undermining the reliability of credit reporting systems. XXXX XXXXXXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ) : Utilizing the postal service to distribute fraudulent credit reports amplifies the severity of XXXX misconduct. Each mailed report containing false information is a deliberate act to mislead and defraud recipients. This systematic use of mail for fraudulent purposes demonstrates a flagrant disregard for federal law and the rights of consumers. RICO Violations ( 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq. ) : XXXX ongoing fraudulent activities, in partnership with deceptive creditors, constitute a pattern of racketeering activity as defined by XXXX statutes. Their enterprise operates with the explicit purpose of defrauding consumers and financial institutions. This sustained pattern of illegal conduct necessitates immediate legal action to halt their unlawful operations and hold them accountable for their actions. XXXX  XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ) : By providing financial institutions with false credit information, XXXX has directly influenced lending decisions, resulting in potential financial losses and unjust credit denials. Their intentional deception undermines the banking system 's integrity and violates federal laws designed to protect financial institutions from fraudulent activities. Fraudulent Misrepresentation ( Common Law ) : XXXX intentional reporting of false addresses and outdated debts is a clear case of fraudulent misrepresentation. They knew or should have known that this information was false, yet they willfully included it in my credit report. Their actions have caused me tangible harm, including damage to my credit score, denial of credit opportunities, and undue stress and hardship. Unfair Practices Under the FTC Act ( 15 U.S.C. 45 ) : TBOM/CONTFIN deceptive reporting practices are unfair under the FTC Act , causing substantial injury to consumers that is not reasonably avoidable and not outweighed by any benefits. Their actions are antithetical to fair business practices and have caused widespread harm to consumer trust and financial well-being. 5. Negligence and Malfeasance in Addressing Identity Theft TBOM/CONTFINs failure to correct these inaccuracies despite being notified through FTC Identity Theft Reports violates 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), which requires credit reporting agencies to investigate disputed items promptly and correct or delete inaccurate or unverifiable information. Their inaction constitutes gross negligence and deliberate malfeasance, further enabling creditors to exploit these inaccuracies. XXXX, which have caused significant harm to my financial standing and represent blatant violations of multiple federal statutes, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and other consumer protection laws. XXXX deliberate and systematic misconduct includes the following : XXXX. Violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) a. Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) : TBOM/CONTFIN is legally obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. Misreporting of Personal Information : XXXX  has reported incorrect addressesspecifically XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX tx XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX nj XXXX,, which are entirely false and have no association with me. Despite my notifications and disputes, these inaccuracies remain on my credit report. Inaccurate Account Information : XXXX  continues to report outdated debts that are over seven years old, which should have been excluded from my credit report. b. Inclusion of Obsolete Information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ) ) : Under 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ), consumer reporting agencies are prohibited from reporting accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss which are more than seven years old. c. Failure to Reinvestigate Disputed Information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ) : Per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), upon notification of disputed information, XXXX must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate. Neglect of Dispute Notices : Despite submitting formal disputes regarding the inaccurate addresses and outdated debts, XXXX has failed to conduct a proper reinvestigation or correct the misinformation. d. Failure to Provide Notice of Dispute to Information Furnishers ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ) ) : Under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ), XXXX is required to notify the furnisher of the disputed information within five business days. Lack of Communication : There is no evidence that XXXX  has notified the creditors furnishing the inaccurate information about my disputes, further perpetuating the presence of false data on my credit report. e. Failure to Note Disputed Information in Subsequent Reports ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( c ) ) : Per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( c ), if disputed information is not resolved, the consumer reporting agency must note the dispute in all subsequent consumer reports. Omission of Dispute Notation : XXXX has failed to include a notation of my disputes in subsequent credit reports, misleading creditors and other entities reviewing my credit history. f. Failure to Block Information Resulting from Identity Theft ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) : Under 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2, upon receiving an identity theft report, a consumer reporting agency must block the reporting of information that resulted from identity theft. Ignoring Identity Theft Reports : Despite providing FTC Identity Theft Reports # XXXX and # XXXX, TBOM/CONTFIN has not blocked the fraudulent addresses and accounts from my credit report. 2. Violations of Other Consumer Protection Laws a. Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) Violations ( 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq. ) : While the FDCPA primarily regulates XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX collaboration with creditors and XXXX XXXXXXXX in reporting invalid debts implicates violations of this act. Misrepresentation of XXXX : By reporting debts that are not legally enforceable due to expiration or identity theft, XXXX is facilitating unfair debt collection practices. b. Failure to Provide Adverse Action Notices ( 15 U.S.C. 1681m ) : Under 15 U.S.C. 1681m ( a ), any person who takes adverse action based on information in a consumer report must provide an adverse action notice to the consumer. Lack of Notification : Creditors relying on XXXX reports have taken adverse actions against me without providing the required notices, and XXXX has failed to ensure compliance with this requirement. XXXX Unfair Practices Under the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) : The Consumer Financial Protection Act prohibits unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in connection with consumer financial products or services. Unfair and Deceptive Reporting : XXXX persistent reporting of inaccurate information constitutes unfair and deceptive practices that harm consumers and distort the credit market. XXXX. Detailed Application of Violations a. Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) : XXXX negligence in reporting accurate information demonstrates a willful disregard for the FCRA 's requirements. Reasonable Procedures Not Followed : The continued presence of incorrect addresses and outdated debts indicates that XXXX has failed to implement reasonable procedures to ensure data accuracy. Willful Noncompliance : Given the repeated notifications and disputes submitted, XXXX inaction is not merely negligent but willful, exposing them to statutory and punitive damages under 15 U.S.C. 1681n. b. Inclusion of Obsolete Information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ) ) : Direct Violation : The inclusion of obsolete debts is a straightforward violation of the FCRA, causing unjust harm to my creditworthiness. Impact on Credit Opportunities : This outdated information adversely affects my ability to obtain credit, insurance, and employment opportunities. c. Failure to Reinvestigate Disputed Information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ) : XXXX failure to properly investigate disputed information undermines the FCRA 's dispute resolution mechanism. Denial of Rights : By not conducting a reasonable reinvestigation, TBOM/CONTFIN denies me the right to correct inaccuracies, a fundamental protection afforded by the FCRA. Perpetuation of Errors : This failure allows false information to persist, compounding the damage to my credit profile. d. Ignoring Identity Theft Reports ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) : TBOM/CONTFIN disregard for my identity theft reports exacerbates the harm caused by fraudulent activities. Mandatory Blocking Ignored : The FCRA requires blocking of information resulting from identity theft, yet TBOM/CONTFIN continues to report such data. Facilitating Fraud : By not removing this information, TBOM/CONTFIN enables identity thieves to continue exploiting my personal information. e. Unfair Practices Under the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) : TBOM/CONTFIN actions meet the criteria for unfair practices : Substantial Injury : The financial harm caused by inaccurate reporting is significant. Not Reasonably Avoidable : I have taken all reasonable steps to correct the inaccuracies, but TBOM/CONTFIN failures prevent resolution. No Countervailing Benefits : There is no justification for XXXX actions ; the harm outweighs any potential benefits. XXXX. Impact of XXXX Violations Financial Harm : Due to XXXX  misconduct, I have suffered from unjust credit denials, higher interest rates, and damage to my financial reputation. Emotional Distress : The stress and anxiety resulting from these violations have affected my well-being. Obstruction of Justice : XXXX actions obstruct my ability to protect myself from identity theft and to exercise my rights under federal law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-06T17:29:36.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"77006","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12353562","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"DigniFi","date_received":"2025-03-06T17:22:24.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Recently, while reviewing my credit report, I <em>discovered</em> fraudulent accounts had been opened in my name shortly after the loss. These accounts were opened without my authorization, using my stolen information, and adverse actions were sent to an address that does not belong to me. I am filing this report because I believe the person who found my wallet used my <em>personal</em> information to commit identity theft."]},"sort":[5.7091556,"12353562"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18160355","_score":5.616308,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Company : Experian Information Solutions , Inc . \nProduct : Credit Reporting Issue : Inaccurate information ; failure to conduct reasonable investigation ; identity theft ; unlawful reinsertion ; sham investigation practices COMPLAINT NARRATIVE I am filing this complaint against Experian Information Solutions , Inc. for repeated, ongoing, and systemic violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to failures under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), 1681i, 1681c-2, and 1681s-2, resulting in substantial and continuing harm to me as a consumer and as a documented victim of identity theft. \n\n1. IDENTITY THEFT FORMAL NOTICE PROVIDED AND IGNORED I am a verified victim of identity theft. I have provided Experian with : FTC Identity Theft Report IRS confirmation letter stating that I am a victim of identity theft Ongoing efforts to obtain a police report ( currently in process ) Despite receiving formal identity theft documentation, Experian has failed and refused to block or permanently suppress fraudulent information, as required under FCRA 1681c-2. Experian continues to report accounts that are not mine and that I have never authorized, used, or benefited from. \n\n\n\n2. FRAUDULENT MEDICAL DEBT XXXX XXXX XXXX ( {$2000.00} ) Experian continues to report or reinstate a fraudulent medical account from XXXX XXXX XXXX in the amount of {$2000.00}. \nI have never received medical treatment from this facility I did not authorize the use of my personal or insurance information This account is the result of medical identity theft I have repeatedly disputed this account and clearly informed Experian that it is not mine. Experian has nonetheless continued to mark the account as verified, without providing me with any documentation demonstrating how the account was linked to me or how it was allegedly verified. \n\nThis conduct constitutes : Failure to conduct a reasonable investigation Failure to block identity-theft-related information Improper reliance on furnisher assertions Reporting of demonstrably inaccurate information 3. STUDENT LOAN MISREPORTING DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION XXXX XXXX Experian is also reporting inaccurate delinquency information related to my federal student loans serviced by XXXX, despite being provided with clear, written proof that : My account is in an approved deferment The deferment period runs from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX I am not past due and can not lawfully be reported as delinquent during this period Other credit bureaus have taken corrective steps after receiving this documentation. Experian has not. \n\nInstead, Experian continues to report inaccurate late or delinquent status, causing unnecessary harm to my credit profile, despite indisputable evidence that the information is false. \n\n\n\n4. SHAM INVESTIGATIONS AND FAILURE TO VERIFY Experian engages in sham investigation practices by : Relying solely on automated responses from furnishers Failing to independently review documentary evidence provided by the consumer Repeatedly marking disputed accounts as verified without explanation Refusing to disclose the information allegedly relied upon to verify the accounts Each time I request : Please provide the documentation you received that allegedly verifies this account, Experian fails to provide any such documentation. \n\nThis is not a reasonable investigation under the FCRA. It is a rubber-stamp process that places furnisher convenience over statutory consumer protections. \n\n\n\n5. UNLAWFUL REINSERTION OF PREVIOUSLY DELETED INFORMATION Experian has failed to implement basic internal matching and suppression controls that prevent or greatly reduce the likelihood of reinsertion of previously deleted tradelines. \n\nSpecifically : Experian allows inaccurate accounts to reappear under the name of a new or modified furnisher Newly reported information is not properly matched against prior deletions, disputes, or identity-theft flags The same underlying fraudulent debt reappears without notice, explanation, or lawful reinvestigation Consumers, including myself, reasonably believe their credit reports have been corrected, only to later discover that the same inaccurate information has reappeared, sometimes under a different furnisher name, in violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ). \n\nExperian also fails to provide the required written notice of reinsertion, further compounding the violation. \n\n\n\n6. SYSTEMIC FAILURE AND DISPARATE TREATMENT AMONG BUREAUS Experian is the only credit bureau continuing to report these inaccuracies. Other bureaus have taken additional steps to investigate, verify, or remove the disputed information. \n\nExperians refusal to do so demonstrates : Failure to maintain reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy Disregard for identity theft protections Systemic overreliance on automated furnisher responses Indifference to consumer-provided evidence This conduct is especially troubling given public enforcement actions and lawsuits filed against Experian for sham investigations and inaccurate reporting, including actions brought by consumer protection authorities in early XXXX. \n\n\n\n7. CONSUMER HARM As a direct result of Experians actions and omissions, I have suffered : Ongoing credit damage Emotional distress and anxiety Time lost disputing the same inaccurate information repeatedly Continued exposure to unlawful collection efforts Denial or impairment of financial opportunities Experians conduct has made my life a living nightmare, despite my full cooperation, extensive documentation, and repeated good-faith efforts to resolve these issues. \n\n\nREQUEST FOR CFPB ACTION I respectfully request that the CFPB : 1. Investigate Experians dispute handling and reinsertion practices 2. Examine Experians reliance on automated furnisher responses 3. Require Experian to permanently block identity-theft-related accounts 4. Mandate correction of the inaccurate medical and student loan reporting 5. Require Experian to implement meaningful reinsertion-prevention controls 6. Impose corrective and enforcement action as appropriate FINAL STATEMENT Experians conduct is not accidental, isolated, or consumer-protective. It reflects systemic noncompliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act and a deliberate failure to protect identity theft victims from repeated harm. \n\nI am requesting immediate regulatory intervention. \n\nDate and Time of Call : XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX \n\n10. DEROGATORY AND DISCRIMINATORY CONDUCT BY EXPERIAN REPRESENTATIVE ( DOCUMENTED ) On XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX., I contacted Experian by telephone after being unable to submit my dispute online through Experians system. The online platform would not permit submission, forcing me to dispute verbally with a customer service representative. \n\nDuring this call, I attempted to clearly explain : The nature of the inaccurate information That I am a victim of identity theft What specific information needed to be recorded in the dispute How and where I could submit supporting documentation Due to ongoing communication difficulties and the seriousness of the dispute, I requested to speak with a representative located in the United States, solely for the purpose of ensuring accurate communication and proper documentation. \n\nIn response, the Experian representative accused me of being XXXX, repeatedly stating words to the effect of you are XXXX. This accusation was made despite my explicit statements that my request was based entirely on communication clarity and accuracy, not race, ethnicity, or nationality. \n\nI clearly and calmly stated that I was not being XXXX and that I simply needed assurance that the dispute was being recorded correctly and that I would be able to submit proof. Nonetheless, the representative persisted in labeling me as XXXX. \n\nThis conduct was : Unprovoked Derogatory Humiliating Unprofessional Completely inappropriate in a regulated consumer reporting context Being falsely accused of racism by an Experian representative during an identity theft dispute is deeply offensive and constitutes unacceptable customer service conduct. \n\n11. SYSTEMIC CUSTOMER SERVICE FAILURES AND CONSUMER HARM Experians practicesblocking online dispute submissions, forcing consumers to rely on verbal disputes, failing to ensure accurate recording of disputes, and allowing representatives to engage in derogatory conductcreate unnecessary and repeated harm to consumers. \n\nThese failures : Prevent consumers from clearly controlling the content of their disputes Increase the likelihood of mischaracterized or incomplete investigations Discourage effective resolution of identity theft claims Cause emotional distress and reputational harm This treatment compounds the damage caused by Experians continued reporting of inaccurate information and reflects a lack of diligence, accountability, and respect owed to consumers. \n\nExperian should be required to review the recorded call from XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX, as it will corroborate the obstruction of the dispute process and the derogatory statements made by its representative.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-19T00:42:07.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33407","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18160355","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-12-19T00:12:09.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Product : Credit Reporting Issue : Inaccurate information ; failure to conduct reasonable investigation ; identity theft ; unlawful reinsertion ; sham investigation practices <em>COMPLAINT</em> <em>NARRATIVE</em> I am filing this <em>complaint</em> against Experian Information Solutions , Inc. for repeated, ongoing, and systemic violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to failures under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), 1681i, 1681c-2, and 1681s-2, resulting in substantial and continuing harm to"],"product":["Credit reporting or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"]},"sort":[5.616308,"18160355"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18160360","_score":5.6115746,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Company : Experian Information Solutions , Inc . \nProduct : Credit Reporting Issue : Inaccurate information ; failure to conduct reasonable investigation ; identity theft ; unlawful reinsertion ; sham investigation practices COMPLAINT NARRATIVE I am filing this complaint against Experian Information Solutions , Inc. for repeated, ongoing, and systemic violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to failures under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), 1681i, 1681c-2, and 1681s-2, resulting in substantial and continuing harm to me as a consumer and as a documented victim of identity theft. \n\n1. IDENTITY THEFT FORMAL NOTICE PROVIDED AND IGNORED I am a verified victim of identity theft. I have provided Experian with : FTC Identity Theft Report IRS confirmation letter stating that I am a victim of identity theft Ongoing efforts to obtain a police report ( currently in process ) Despite receiving formal identity theft documentation, Experian has failed and refused to block or permanently suppress fraudulent information, as required under FCRA 1681c-2. Experian continues to report accounts that are not mine and that I have never authorized, used, or benefited from. \n\n\n\n2. FRAUDULENT MEDICAL DEBT XXXX XXXX XXXX ( {$2000.00} ) Experian continues to report or reinstate a fraudulent medical account from XXXX XXXX XXXX in the amount of {$2000.00}. \nI have never received medical treatment from this facility I did not authorize the use of my personal or insurance information This account is the result of medical identity theft I have repeatedly disputed this account and clearly informed Experian that it is not mine. Experian has nonetheless continued to mark the account as verified, without providing me with any documentation demonstrating how the account was linked to me or how it was allegedly verified. \n\nThis conduct constitutes : Failure to conduct a reasonable investigation Failure to block identity-theft-related information Improper reliance on furnisher assertions Reporting of demonstrably inaccurate information 3. STUDENT LOAN MISREPORTING DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION XXXX XXXX Experian is also reporting inaccurate delinquency information related to my federal student loans serviced by XXXX, despite being provided with clear, written proof that : My account is in an approved deferment The deferment period runs from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX I am not past due and can not lawfully be reported as delinquent during this period Other credit bureaus have taken corrective steps after receiving this documentation. Experian has not. \n\nInstead, Experian continues to report inaccurate late or delinquent status, causing unnecessary harm to my credit profile, despite indisputable evidence that the information is false. \n\n\n\n4. SHAM INVESTIGATIONS AND FAILURE TO VERIFY Experian engages in sham investigation practices by : Relying solely on automated responses from furnishers Failing to independently review documentary evidence provided by the consumer Repeatedly marking disputed accounts as verified without explanation Refusing to disclose the information allegedly relied upon to verify the accounts Each time I request : Please provide the documentation you received that allegedly verifies this account, Experian fails to provide any such documentation. \n\nThis is not a reasonable investigation under the FCRA. It is a rubber-stamp process that places furnisher convenience over statutory consumer protections. \n\n\n\n5. UNLAWFUL REINSERTION OF PREVIOUSLY DELETED INFORMATION Experian has failed to implement basic internal matching and suppression controls that prevent or greatly reduce the likelihood of reinsertion of previously deleted tradelines. \n\nSpecifically : Experian allows inaccurate accounts to reappear under the name of a new or modified furnisher Newly reported information is not properly matched against prior deletions, disputes, or identity-theft flags The same underlying fraudulent debt reappears without notice, explanation, or lawful reinvestigation Consumers, including myself, reasonably believe their credit reports have been corrected, only to later discover that the same inaccurate information has reappeared, sometimes under a different furnisher name, in violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ). \n\nExperian also fails to provide the required written notice of reinsertion, further compounding the violation. \n\n\n\n6. SYSTEMIC FAILURE AND DISPARATE TREATMENT AMONG BUREAUS Experian is the only credit bureau continuing to report these inaccuracies. Other bureaus have taken additional steps to investigate, verify, or remove the disputed information. \n\nExperians refusal to do so demonstrates : Failure to maintain reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy Disregard for identity theft protections Systemic overreliance on automated furnisher responses Indifference to consumer-provided evidence This conduct is especially troubling given public enforcement actions and lawsuits filed against Experian for sham investigations and inaccurate reporting, including actions brought by consumer protection authorities in early XXXX. \n\n\n\n7. CONSUMER HARM As a direct result of Experians actions and omissions, I have suffered : Ongoing credit damage Emotional distress and anxiety Time lost disputing the same inaccurate information repeatedly Continued exposure to unlawful collection efforts Denial or impairment of financial opportunities Experians conduct has made my life a living nightmare, despite my full cooperation, extensive documentation, and repeated good-faith efforts to resolve these issues. \n\n\nREQUEST FOR CFPB ACTION I respectfully request that the CFPB : 1. Investigate Experians dispute handling and reinsertion practices 2. Examine Experians reliance on automated furnisher responses 3. Require Experian to permanently block identity-theft-related accounts 4. Mandate correction of the inaccurate medical and student loan reporting 5. Require Experian to implement meaningful reinsertion-prevention controls 6. Impose corrective and enforcement action as appropriate FINAL STATEMENT Experians conduct is not accidental, isolated, or consumer-protective. It reflects systemic noncompliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act and a deliberate failure to protect identity theft victims from repeated harm. \n\nI am requesting immediate regulatory intervention. \n\nDate and Time of Call : XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX \n\n10. DEROGATORY AND DISCRIMINATORY CONDUCT BY EXPERIAN REPRESENTATIVE ( DOCUMENTED ) On XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX., I contacted Experian by telephone after being unable to submit my dispute online through Experians system. The online platform would not permit submission, forcing me to dispute verbally with a customer service representative. \n\nDuring this call, I attempted to clearly explain : The nature of the inaccurate information That I am a victim of identity theft What specific information needed to be recorded in the dispute How and where I could submit supporting documentation Due to ongoing communication difficulties and the seriousness of the dispute, I requested to speak with a representative located in the United States, solely for the purpose of ensuring accurate communication and proper documentation. \n\nIn response, the Experian representative accused me of being XXXX, repeatedly stating words to the effect of you are XXXX. This accusation was made despite my explicit statements that my request was based entirely on communication clarity and accuracy, not race, ethnicity, or nationality. \n\nI clearly and calmly stated that I was not being XXXX and that I simply needed assurance that the dispute was being recorded correctly and that I would be able to submit proof. Nonetheless, the representative persisted in labeling me as XXXX. \n\nThis conduct was : Unprovoked Derogatory Humiliating Unprofessional Completely inappropriate in a regulated consumer reporting context Being falsely accused of racism by an Experian representative during an identity theft dispute is deeply offensive and constitutes unacceptable customer service conduct. \n\n11. SYSTEMIC CUSTOMER SERVICE FAILURES AND CONSUMER HARM Experians practicesblocking online dispute submissions, forcing consumers to rely on verbal disputes, failing to ensure accurate recording of disputes, and allowing representatives to engage in derogatory conductcreate unnecessary and repeated harm to consumers. \n\nThese failures : Prevent consumers from clearly controlling the content of their disputes Increase the likelihood of mischaracterized or incomplete investigations Discourage effective resolution of identity theft claims Cause emotional distress and reputational harm This treatment compounds the damage caused by Experians continued reporting of inaccurate information and reflects a lack of diligence, accountability, and respect owed to consumers. \n\nExperian should be required to review the recorded call from XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX, as it will corroborate the obstruction of the dispute process and the derogatory statements made by its representative.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-19T00:42:06.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33407","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18160360","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-19T00:41:37.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Product : Credit Reporting Issue : Inaccurate information ; failure to conduct reasonable investigation ; identity theft ; unlawful reinsertion ; sham investigation practices <em>COMPLAINT</em> <em>NARRATIVE</em> I am filing this <em>complaint</em> against Experian Information Solutions , Inc. for repeated, ongoing, and systemic violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to failures under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), 1681i, 1681c-2, and 1681s-2, resulting in substantial and continuing harm to"],"product":["Credit reporting or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"]},"sort":[5.6115746,"18160360"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18160359","_score":5.6093645,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Company : Experian Information Solutions , Inc . \nProduct : Credit Reporting Issue : Inaccurate information ; failure to conduct reasonable investigation ; identity theft ; unlawful reinsertion ; sham investigation practices COMPLAINT NARRATIVE I am filing this complaint against Experian Information Solutions , Inc. for repeated, ongoing, and systemic violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to failures under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), 1681i, 1681c-2, and 1681s-2, resulting in substantial and continuing harm to me as a consumer and as a documented victim of identity theft. \n\n1. IDENTITY THEFT FORMAL NOTICE PROVIDED AND IGNORED I am a verified victim of identity theft. I have provided Experian with : FTC Identity Theft Report IRS confirmation letter stating that I am a victim of identity theft Ongoing efforts to obtain a police report ( currently in process ) Despite receiving formal identity theft documentation, Experian has failed and refused to block or permanently suppress fraudulent information, as required under FCRA 1681c-2. Experian continues to report accounts that are not mine and that I have never authorized, used, or benefited from. \n\n\n\n2. FRAUDULENT MEDICAL DEBT XXXX XXXX XXXX ( {$2000.00} ) Experian continues to report or reinstate a fraudulent medical account from XXXX XXXX XXXX in the amount of {$2000.00}. \nI have never received medical treatment from this facility I did not authorize the use of my personal or insurance information This account is the result of medical identity theft I have repeatedly disputed this account and clearly informed Experian that it is not mine. Experian has nonetheless continued to mark the account as verified, without providing me with any documentation demonstrating how the account was linked to me or how it was allegedly verified. \n\nThis conduct constitutes : Failure to conduct a reasonable investigation Failure to block identity-theft-related information Improper reliance on furnisher assertions Reporting of demonstrably inaccurate information 3. STUDENT LOAN MISREPORTING DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION XXXX XXXX Experian is also reporting inaccurate delinquency information related to my federal student loans serviced by XXXX, despite being provided with clear, written proof that : My account is in an approved deferment The deferment period runs from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX I am not past due and can not lawfully be reported as delinquent during this period Other credit bureaus have taken corrective steps after receiving this documentation. Experian has not. \n\nInstead, Experian continues to report inaccurate late or delinquent status, causing unnecessary harm to my credit profile, despite indisputable evidence that the information is false. \n\n\n\n4. SHAM INVESTIGATIONS AND FAILURE TO VERIFY Experian engages in sham investigation practices by : Relying solely on automated responses from furnishers Failing to independently review documentary evidence provided by the consumer Repeatedly marking disputed accounts as verified without explanation Refusing to disclose the information allegedly relied upon to verify the accounts Each time I request : Please provide the documentation you received that allegedly verifies this account, Experian fails to provide any such documentation. \n\nThis is not a reasonable investigation under the FCRA. It is a rubber-stamp process that places furnisher convenience over statutory consumer protections. \n\n\n\n5. UNLAWFUL REINSERTION OF PREVIOUSLY DELETED INFORMATION Experian has failed to implement basic internal matching and suppression controls that prevent or greatly reduce the likelihood of reinsertion of previously deleted tradelines. \n\nSpecifically : Experian allows inaccurate accounts to reappear under the name of a new or modified furnisher Newly reported information is not properly matched against prior deletions, disputes, or identity-theft flags The same underlying fraudulent debt reappears without notice, explanation, or lawful reinvestigation Consumers, including myself, reasonably believe their credit reports have been corrected, only to later discover that the same inaccurate information has reappeared, sometimes under a different furnisher name, in violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ). \n\nExperian also fails to provide the required written notice of reinsertion, further compounding the violation. \n\n\n\n6. SYSTEMIC FAILURE AND DISPARATE TREATMENT AMONG BUREAUS Experian is the only credit bureau continuing to report these inaccuracies. Other bureaus have taken additional steps to investigate, verify, or remove the disputed information. \n\nExperians refusal to do so demonstrates : Failure to maintain reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy Disregard for identity theft protections Systemic overreliance on automated furnisher responses Indifference to consumer-provided evidence This conduct is especially troubling given public enforcement actions and lawsuits filed against Experian for sham investigations and inaccurate reporting, including actions brought by consumer protection authorities in early XXXX. \n\n\n\n7. CONSUMER HARM As a direct result of Experians actions and omissions, I have suffered : Ongoing credit damage Emotional distress and anxiety Time lost disputing the same inaccurate information repeatedly Continued exposure to unlawful collection efforts Denial or impairment of financial opportunities Experians conduct has made my life a living nightmare, despite my full cooperation, extensive documentation, and repeated good-faith efforts to resolve these issues. \n\n\nREQUEST FOR CFPB ACTION I respectfully request that the CFPB : 1. Investigate Experians dispute handling and reinsertion practices 2. Examine Experians reliance on automated furnisher responses 3. Require Experian to permanently block identity-theft-related accounts 4. Mandate correction of the inaccurate medical and student loan reporting 5. Require Experian to implement meaningful reinsertion-prevention controls 6. Impose corrective and enforcement action as appropriate FINAL STATEMENT Experians conduct is not accidental, isolated, or consumer-protective. It reflects systemic noncompliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act and a deliberate failure to protect identity theft victims from repeated harm. \n\nI am requesting immediate regulatory intervention. \n\nDate and Time of Call : XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXX XXXX \n\n10. DEROGATORY AND DISCRIMINATORY CONDUCT BY EXPERIAN REPRESENTATIVE ( DOCUMENTED ) On XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX., I contacted Experian by telephone after being unable to submit my dispute online through Experians system. The online platform would not permit submission, forcing me to dispute verbally with a customer service representative. \n\nDuring this call, I attempted to clearly explain : The nature of the inaccurate information That I am a victim of identity theft What specific information needed to be recorded in the dispute How and where I could submit supporting documentation Due to ongoing communication difficulties and the seriousness of the dispute, I requested to speak with a representative located in the United States, solely for the purpose of ensuring accurate communication and proper documentation. \n\nIn response, the Experian representative accused me of being XXXX, repeatedly stating words to the effect of you are XXXX. This accusation was made despite my explicit statements that my request was based entirely on communication clarity and accuracy, not race, ethnicity, or nationality. \n\nI clearly and calmly stated that I was not being XXXX and that I simply needed assurance that the dispute was being recorded correctly and that I would be able to submit proof. Nonetheless, the representative persisted in labeling me as XXXX. \n\nThis conduct was : Unprovoked Derogatory Humiliating Unprofessional Completely inappropriate in a regulated consumer reporting context Being falsely accused of racism by an Experian representative during an identity theft dispute is deeply offensive and constitutes unacceptable customer service conduct. \n\n11. SYSTEMIC CUSTOMER SERVICE FAILURES AND CONSUMER HARM Experians practicesblocking online dispute submissions, forcing consumers to rely on verbal disputes, failing to ensure accurate recording of disputes, and allowing representatives to engage in derogatory conductcreate unnecessary and repeated harm to consumers. \n\nThese failures : Prevent consumers from clearly controlling the content of their disputes Increase the likelihood of mischaracterized or incomplete investigations Discourage effective resolution of identity theft claims Cause emotional distress and reputational harm This treatment compounds the damage caused by Experians continued reporting of inaccurate information and reflects a lack of diligence, accountability, and respect owed to consumers. \n\nExperian should be required to review the recorded call from XX/XX/XXXX at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX, as it will corroborate the obstruction of the dispute process and the derogatory statements made by its representative.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-19T00:42:06.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33407","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18160359","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-19T00:41:37.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Product : Credit Reporting Issue : Inaccurate information ; failure to conduct reasonable investigation ; identity theft ; unlawful reinsertion ; sham investigation practices <em>COMPLAINT</em> <em>NARRATIVE</em> I am filing this <em>complaint</em> against Experian Information Solutions , Inc. for repeated, ongoing, and systemic violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to failures under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), 1681i, 1681c-2, and 1681s-2, resulting in substantial and continuing harm to"],"product":["Credit reporting or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"]},"sort":[5.6093645,"18160359"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12354121","_score":5.4698544,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX 18 U.S.C. 1343 ( XXXX XXXX ) by transmitting false data security assurances while failing to prevent unauthorized electronic access to consumer information. They violated 18 U.S.C. 1341 ( Mail XXXX ) by sending misleading written communications claiming strong protections, then allowing breaches. Under 18 U.S.C. 1344 ( Bank XXXX ), they facilitated fraudulent use of compromised consumer nancial data, harming nancial institutions. By providing false statements to federal agencies and regulators, XXXX XXXX 18 U.S.C. 1001, and their repeated actions show a pattern of racketeering activity, violating 18 U.S.C. 1962 ( XXXX ). Their willful disregard of basic cybersecurity standards and enabling of identity theft also violate 18 U.S.C. 1028 ( Identity Theft ) and 18 U.S.C. 1030 ( XXXX XXXX and Abuse Act ). Collectively, these acts form a conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371, demonstrating deliberate participation in unlawful In XX/XX/XXXX, during a trip to XXXXXXXX XXXX I lost my wallet, which contained sensitive personal information, including my government-issued ID, Social Security XXXX XXXX and financial documents. Despite retracing my steps, I was unable to recover it. At the time, I did not report the loss because I did not notice any immediate fraudulent activity. Recently, while reviewing my credit report, I discovered fraudulent accounts had been opened in my name shortly after the loss. These accounts were opened without my authorization, using my stolen information, and adverse actions were sent to an address that does not belong to me. I am filing this report because I believe the person who found my wallet used my personal information to commit identity theft. I am pursuing all legal remedies to resolve this matter and hold the responsible party accountable. I am filing this complaint against XXXX for multiple violations of federal law regarding their handling of fraudulent accounts on my credit report. Despite an FTC Identity Theft Report already on file and a newly filed police report, XXXX continues to report accounts that were fraudulently opened in my name. These accounts stem from a stolen wallet containing my government-issued ID, Social Security XXXX XXXX and financial information, which led to unauthorized credit activity. Violations Committed by XXXX XXXX XXXX Unlawful Reinsertion of Fraudulent Accounts XXXX initially deleted an account after my dispute, only to reinsert it without legally required notice under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ). This is a clear violation, as they failed to provide written notification within XXXX business days, depriving me of my right to dispute it again. XXXX. Failure to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( a ), XXXX  must block information resulting from identity theft within XXXX business days after receiving proper documentation, including an FTC Identity Theft Report and a police report. They refused to comply, allowing creditors to continue reporting fraudulent accounts. XXXX. Failure to XXXX XXXX I requested debt validation for the fraudulent accounts as required under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ), but XXXX failed to provide any proof that I authorized these accounts. If no legal proof exists, they are obligated to delete the information immediately. XXXX. Criminal Violations Committed By knowingly reporting false information, XXXX XXXX XXXX in wire fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ), bank fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ), and mail fraud ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ), as they transmitted fraudulent data electronically and allowed adverse action notices to be sent to an incorrect address. Additionally, their actions amount to conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371, as they are willfully participating in deceptive financial reporting that harms consumers. XXXX  is not above the law and can not continue to act as if they are merely a reporting entity while ignoring their legal obligations. I will pursue civil litigation if necessary and will also escalate this matter to the United States XXXX Attorney for criminal review. There is indisputable evidence proving XXXX Is noncompliance, and they can not lawfully claim innocence given the facts presented. Criminal Violations Committed by XXXX Under Title 18 U.S. Code XXXX actions in knowingly re-reporting fraudulent accounts, failing to block identity theft-related information, and refusing to comply with federal dispute laws constitute multiple criminal violations under Title XXXX of the United States Code. These violations extend beyond civil infractions and fall under federal criminal law, which carries severe penalties, including fines and imprisonment. Below are the specific statutes XXXX has XXXX : XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ) XXXX has engaged in wire fraud by electronically transmitting false and misleading information across state lines. Despite receiving an FTC Identity Theft Report and a police report, they continue to report fraudulent accounts as valid. By doing so, they knowingly facilitate the misrepresentation of my financial status to lenders, which can cause financial harm, denials of credit, or higher interest rates. This constitutes a scheme to defraud, using electronic means to commit fraud against me as a consumer. XXXX. Bank XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ) XXXX refusal to correct fraudulent accounts enables creditors to make lending decisions based on false information. This affects federally insured banks that rely on XXXX XXXX XXXX determining loan eligibility. By knowingly allowing fraudulent accounts to remain, XXXX  is aiding and abetting bank fraud by facilitating financial deception that leads to wrongful lending or credit denials. XXXX. Mail XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ) XXXX permitted XXXX to send adverse action notices to an incorrect address, resulting in my inability to dispute fraudulent accounts in a timely manner. Mailing false credit reports and adverse actions based on fraudulent data constitutes mail fraud, as they knowingly sent or caused misleading documents to be mailed, which is a federal offense. XXXX. Conspiracy to Commit XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 371 ) XXXX willful collaboration with creditors to keep fraudulent accounts reporting, despite clear evidence of identity theft, constitutes conspiracy to commit fraud. They are acting in concert with financial institutions by refusing to delete fraudulent accounts, ultimately harming consumers while profiting from inaccurate credit reporting. XXXX. Obstruction of Justice ( 18 U.S.C. 1519 ) XXXX refusal to acknowledge official identity theft complaints, police reports, and FTC reports XXXX to obstruction of justice. By ignoring and delaying legally required actions, they are actively interfering with federal investigations and regulatory enforcement, which is a federal crime. XXXX to Provide Adverse Action Notices Under 15 U.S.C. 1681m ( a ) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), creditors are legally required to provide adverse action notices when they deny credit based on information from a credit report. Despite repeated denials, none of the creditors reporting on my file have issued such notices, depriving me of my right to understand and dispute the reasons behind these adverse decisions. This failure violates federal law and undermines transparency in consumer reporting. XXXXFraudulent Use of False Addresses to Collect Debt The inaccurate addresses in my credit file have been exploited by creditors to conspire in fraudulent debt collection activities, violating both civil and criminal statutes. XXXX to Legitimize Invalid Debts ( 18 U.S.C. 371 ) : XXXX in collusion with associated creditors, has conspired to use fraudulent information to legitimize debts that are either invalid or outdated. By reporting incorrect addressesspecifically XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, where I have never residedthey have fabricated a connection between me and these illegitimate debts. This calculated conspiracy aims to deceive and manipulate both consumers and financial institutions for unlawful financial gain. egregious violations committed by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and associated parties. Their actions not only contravene consumer protection laws but also constitute violations of criminal statutes, causing harm to my financial standing and perpetuating fraudulent practices. XXXX. Failure to Provide Adverse Action Notices Under 15 U.S.C. 1681m ( a ) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), creditors are legally required to provide adverse action notices when they deny credit based on information from a credit report. Despite repeated denials, none of the creditors reporting on my file have issued such notices, depriving me of my right to understand and dispute the reasons behind these adverse decisions. This failure violates federal law and undermines transparency in consumer reporting. XXXX. Inaccurate Address Reporting The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) identity theft report fraudulent addresses that have been inaccurately reported on my credit file, including : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX These addresses are entirely fraudulent, and I have never resided at or been associated with them. XXXX continued inclusion of these addresses violates 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), which mandates credit reporting agencies to ensure maximum possible accuracy of the data they report. By knowingly including these false addresses, XXXX has acted negligently and in bad faith, directly facilitating harm to my creditworthiness and perpetuating fraudulent debt collection schemes. XXXX. Fraudulent Use of False Addresses to Collect Debt The inaccurate addresses in my credit file have been exploited by creditors to conspire in fraudulent debt collection activities, violating both civil and criminal statutes : : Conspiracy to Legitimize Invalid Debts ( 18 U.S.C. 371 ) : XXXX, in collusion with associated creditors, has conspired to use fraudulent information to legitimize debts that are either invalid or outdated. By reporting incorrect addressesspecifically XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX,, where I have never residedthey have fabricated a connection between me and these illegitimate debts. This calculated conspiracy aims to deceive and manipulate both consumers and financial institutions for unlawful financial gain. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ) : XXXX has knowingly transmitted false address data and outdated debt information electronically across state lines. By doing so, they have engaged in wire fraud, intentionally deceiving financial institutions and other entities that rely on accurate credit information. Their actions have directly harmed me financially by negatively impacting my creditworthiness based on fabricated data. Mail XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ) : By mailing credit reports containing false addresses and obsolete debts, XXXX XXXX XXXX fraudulent scheme designed to mislead creditors and consumers. This misuse of the postal service to disseminate fraudulent information constitutes mail fraud. Their deliberate actions have sown confusion and inflicted unwarranted damage on my financial reputation. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Statutes ( 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq. ) : XXXX persistent reporting of false information, combined with its collaboration with creditors engaging in deceptive practices, establishes a clear pattern of racketeering activity. Their systematic fraud falls squarely under the XXXX XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ). By operating an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, XXXX has XXXX blatant disregard for federal law and consumer rights. Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ) : By providing false data to financial institutions, XXXX has XXXX in bank fraud. Their actions have undermined the integrity of the banking system, causing harm not only to me but also to lenders who rely on accurate information to make informed decisions. This deception has led to incorrect assessments of credit risk, potentially resulting in financial losses for these institutions. Fraudulent Misrepresentation Causing Direct Harm ( Common Law ) : XXXX has intentionally misrepresented material information by reporting incorrect addresses and outdated debts. This fraudulent misrepresentation has directly harmed my financial standing, leading to unjust credit denials and tarnishing my reputation. Their willful deceit violates fundamental principles of honesty and fair dealing, inflicting measurable damages upon me. Unfair and Deceptive Practices Violating the FTC XXXX ( 15 U.S.C. 45 ) : XXXX actions constitute unfair and deceptive practices in violation of Section XXXX of the Federal Trade Commission XXXX. By misrepresenting my credit information, they have engaged in conduct that is unethical, unscrupulous, and substantially injurious to consumers. Their practices are not only unjustified but also violate established standards of commerce and trade. Detailed Application of Violations : Conspiracy ( 18 U.S.C. 371 ) : XXXX deliberate collaboration with creditors to report false information is a calculated effort to deceive. By fabricating addresses and associating invalid debts with my credit file, they have created a false narrative intended to coerce payment on debts that are not legally enforceable. This conspiracy is a direct affront to federal statutes designed to protect consumers from such collusive fraud. XXXX XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1343 ) : The electronic transmission of knowingly false credit data constitutes wire fraud. XXXX actions were not accidental but intentional, with full awareness of the falsehoods being propagated. By transmitting this data, they have exploited interstate communication channels to perpetrate fraud, causing substantial financial harm to me and undermining the reliability of credit reporting systems. Mail XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1341 ) : Utilizing the postal service to distribute fraudulent credit reports amplifies the severity of XXXX misconduct. Each mailed report containing false information is a deliberate act to mislead and defraud recipients. This systematic use of mail for fraudulent purposes demonstrates a flagrant disregard for federal law and the rights of consumers. XXXX Violations ( 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq. ) : XXXX ongoing fraudulent activities, in partnership with deceptive creditors, constitute a pattern of racketeering activity as defined by XXXX statutes. Their enterprise operates with the explicit purpose of defrauding consumers and financial institutions. This sustained pattern of illegal conduct necessitates immediate legal action to halt their unlawful operations and hold them accountable for their actions. Bank XXXX ( 18 U.S.C. 1344 ) : By providing financial institutions with false credit information, XXXX has XXXX influenced lending decisions, resulting in potential financial losses and unjust credit denials. Their intentional deception undermines the banking system 's integrity and violates federal laws designed to protect financial institutions from fraudulent activities. Fraudulent Misrepresentation ( XXXX XXXX ) : XXXX  intentional reporting of false addresses and outdated debts is a clear case of fraudulent misrepresentation. They knew or should have known that this information was false, yet they willfully included it in my credit report. Their actions have caused me tangible harm, including damage to my XXXX XXXX, denial of credit opportunities, and undue stress and hardship. Unfair Practices XXXX the FTC XXXX ( 15 U.S.C. 45 ) : XXXX  deceptive reporting practices are unfair under the FTC XXXX XXXX causing substantial injury to consumers that is not reasonably avoidable and not outweighed by any benefits. Their actions are antithetical to fair business practices and have caused widespread harm to consumer trust and financial well-being. XXXX. Negligence and Malfeasance in Addressing Identity Theft XXXX failure to correct these inaccuracies despite being notified through FTC Identity XXXX Reports violates 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), which requires credit reporting agencies to investigate disputed items promptly and correct or delete inaccurate or unverifiable information. Their inaction constitutes gross negligence and deliberate malfeasance, further enabling creditors to exploit these inaccuracies. XXXX, which have caused significant harm to my financial standing and represent blatant violations of multiple federal statutes, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and other consumer protection laws. XXXX deliberate and systematic misconduct includes the following : XXXX. Violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) a. Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) : XXXX is legally obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. Misreporting of XXXX XXXX : XXXX  has reported incorrect addressesspecifically XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX,, which are entirely false and have no association with me. Despite my notifications and disputes, these inaccuracies remain on my credit report. Inaccurate Account Information : XXXX continues to report outdated debts that are over XXXX years old, which should have been excluded from my credit report. b. Inclusion of Obsolete Information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ) ) : Under 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ), consumer reporting agencies are prohibited from reporting accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss which are more than XXXX years old. c. Failure to Reinvestigate Disputed Information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ) : Per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), upon notification of disputed information, XXXX  must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate. Neglect of Dispute Notices : Despite submitting formal disputes regarding the inaccurate addresses and outdated debts, XXXX has XXXX to conduct a proper reinvestigation or correct the misinformation. d. Failure to XXXX Notice XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ) ) : Under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ), XXXX is required to notify the furnisher of the disputed information within XXXX business days. Lack of XXXX : There is no evidence that XXXX  has notified the creditors furnishing the inaccurate information about my disputes, further perpetuating the presence of false data on my credit report. e. Failure to Note Disputed Information in Subsequent Reports ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( c ) ) : Per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( c ), if disputed information is not resolved, the consumer reporting agency must note the dispute in all subsequent consumer reports. Omission of Dispute Notation : XXXX  has failed to include a notation of my disputes in subsequent credit reports, misleading creditors and other entities reviewing my credit history. f. Failure to XXXX XXXX Resulting from Identity Theft ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) : Under 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2, upon receiving an identity theft report, a consumer reporting agency must block the reporting of information that resulted from identity theft. Ignoring Identity Theft Reports : Despite providing FTC Identity Theft Reports # XXXX and # XXXXXXXX XXXX  has not blocked the fraudulent addresses and accounts from my credit report. XXXX. Violations of XXXX XXXX XXXX Laws a. Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) Violations ( 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq. ) : While the FDCPA primarily regulates debt XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX creditors and debt XXXX in reporting invalid debts implicates violations of this act. Misrepresentation of XXXX : By reporting debts that are not legally enforceable due to expiration or identity theft, XXXX XXXX XXXX unfair debt collection practices. b. Failure to Provide Adverse Action Notices ( 15 U.S.C. 1681m ) : Under 15 U.S.C. 1681m ( a ), any person who takes adverse action based on information in a consumer report must provide an adverse action notice to the consumer. Lack of Notification : Creditors relying on XXXX XXXX have taken adverse actions against me without providing the required notices, and TBOM/CONTFIN has failed to ensure compliance with this requirement. XXXX Unfair Practices Under the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) : The Consumer Financial Protection Act prohibits unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in connection with consumer financial products or services. Unfair and Deceptive Reporting : TBOM/CONTFIN persistent reporting of inaccurate information constitutes unfair and deceptive practices that harm consumers and distort the credit market. XXXX. Detailed Application of Violations a. Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) : XXXX negligence in reporting accurate information demonstrates a willful disregard for the FCRA 's XXXX. Reasonable Procedures Not Followed : The continued presence of incorrect addresses and outdated debts indicates that XXXX has XXXX to implement reasonable procedures to ensure data accuracy. Willful Noncompliance : Given the repeated notifications and disputes submitted, XXXX inaction is not merely negligent but willful, exposing them to statutory and punitive damages under 15 U.S.C. 1681n. b. Inclusion of Obsolete Information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ) ) : Direct Violation : The inclusion of obsolete debts is a straightforward violation of the FCRA, causing unjust harm to my creditworthiness. Impact on XXXX Opportunities : This outdated information adversely affects my ability to obtain credit, insurance, and employment opportunities. c. Failure to Reinvestigate Disputed Information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ) : XXXX failure to properly investigate disputed information undermines the FCRA 's XXXX resolution mechanism. Denial of Rights : By not conducting a reasonable reinvestigation, XXXX  denies me the right to correct inaccuracies, a fundamental protection afforded by the FCRA. Perpetuation of Errors : This failure allows false information to persist, compounding the damage to my credit profile. d. Ignoring Identity Theft Reports ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) : XXXX  disregard for my identity theft reports exacerbates the harm caused by fraudulent activities. Mandatory Blocking Ignored : The FCRA requires blocking of information resulting from identity theft, yet XXXX continues to report such data. Facilitating XXXX : By not removing this information, XXXX  enables identity thieves to continue exploiting my personal information. XXXX Unfair Practices Under the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) : XXXX actions meet the criteria for unfair practices : XXXX XXXX : The financial harm caused by inaccurate reporting is significant. Not Reasonably Avoidable : I have taken all reasonable steps to correct the inaccuracies, but XXXX failures prevent resolution. No Countervailing Benefits : There is no justification for XXXX actions ; the harm outweighs any potential benefits. XXXX. Impact of XXXX  Violations Financial Harm : Due to XXXX misconduct, I have suffered from unjust credit denials, higher interest rates, and damage to my financial reputation. Emotional Distress : The stress and anxiety resulting from these violations have affected my well-being. Obstruction of Justice : XXXX actions obstruct my ability to protect myself from identity theft and to exercise my rights under federal law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-06T17:38:14.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77006","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12354121","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Continental Finance Company, LLC","date_received":"2025-03-06T17:33:06.000Z","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":["Recently, while reviewing my credit report, I <em>discovered</em> fraudulent accounts had been opened in my name shortly after the loss. These accounts were opened without my authorization, using my stolen information, and adverse actions were sent to an address that does not belong to me. I am filing this report because I believe the person who found my wallet used my <em>personal</em> information to commit identity theft."],"product":["Credit reporting or other <em>personal</em> consumer reports"]},"sort":[5.4698544,"12354121"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":28,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":28}]}},"product":{"doc_count":28,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":10,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":10}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":5,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":5}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":5,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":2},{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Medical debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rental debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":3,"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":3}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":1},{"key":"Other personal consumer report","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":1,"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":"Mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Private student loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":28,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":10,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":8},{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":1},{"key":"Personal information incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem using a debit or ATM card","doc_count":2},{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":3,"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":2},{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute","doc_count":2},{"key":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Fees charged for closing account","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":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Other features, terms, or problems","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other problem","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a lender or other company charging your account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Transaction was not authorized","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":1,"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":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":28,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":28}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":28,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":21},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":5},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":2}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":28,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":28}]}},"company":{"doc_count":28,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":5},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":4},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":3},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":2},{"key":"U.S. BANCORP","doc_count":2},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":2},{"key":"Affirm Holdings, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Continental Finance Company, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Credit Karma, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"DigniFi","doc_count":1},{"key":"National Credit Systems,Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Nelnet, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"PNC Bank N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"USCB Corporation","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":28,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TX","doc_count":7},{"key":"AR","doc_count":3},{"key":"FL","doc_count":3},{"key":"CA","doc_count":2},{"key":"DC","doc_count":2},{"key":"AZ","doc_count":1},{"key":"GA","doc_count":1},{"key":"IL","doc_count":1},{"key":"MD","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"ND","doc_count":1},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":1},{"key":"NV","doc_count":1},{"key":"OR","doc_count":1},{"key":"PA","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":28,"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":14}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":28,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":5}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[5.4698544,"12354121"]}}}