{"took":126,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":31,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13050999","_score":26.30097,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint Narrative : I am filing this complaint against TransUnion for its failure to properly resolve a dispute concerning an inaccurate account from XXXX XXXX ( Account # XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX  and the reporting of incorrect personal information ( inaccurate names ) tied to my credit file. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I formally disputed this account and the associated name inaccuracies with TransUnion. On XX/XX/XXXX, TransUnion responded that there was wrong information about this item and other items on your report, and they claimed the information had been updated. However, the account remains on my credit report, is still reporting negative information, and is continuing to hurt my credit score. \n\nThis is unacceptable under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), which requires credit bureaus to ensure that all data is complete, accurate, and verifiable. If TransUnion found inaccuracies, the appropriate resolution would be the removal of the accountnot just an update that still reflects flawed or misleading data. \n\nAdditionally, my credit file still contains incorrect variations of my name, which I included in my original dispute and explicitly requested be removed. TransUnion failed to address this part of my dispute. \n\nI request the CFPB to investigate TransUnions failure to correct and remove this account and the inaccurate personal information. I am asking for full deletion of the XXXX XXXX account due to its inconsistent and harmful reporting, and for all inaccurate names to be permanently removed from my credit file.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-17T18:36:49.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"17104","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13050999","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-17T17:47:26.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Personal information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> : I am filing this <em>complaint</em> against <em>TransUnion</em> for its <em>failure</em> to properly resolve a <em>dispute</em> concerning an inaccurate account from XXXX XXXX ( Account # XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX  and the reporting of incorrect personal information ( inaccurate names ) tied to my credit file. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I <em>formally</em> <em>disputed</em> this account and the associated name inaccuracies with <em>TransUnion</em>."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[26.30097,"13050999"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18338570","_score":24.57605,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB Complaint Narrative TransUnion LLC Company : TransUnion LLC Issue : Credit reporting / Failure to investigate dispute Date ( s ) : XX/XX/year> Complaint On XX/XX/year>, I submitted multiple written disputes to TransUnion LLC disputing materially inaccurate and internally inconsistent tradelines appearing on my TransUnion consumer credit report dated XX/XX/year>. These disputes were sent directly by me, signed by me, and properly addressed to TransUnions designated dispute address. Each dispute requested reinvestigation pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), and included formal requests for the Method of Verification under 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ). \n\nInstead of conducting any reinvestigation, TransUnion mailed me a postcard dated XX/XX/year> stating that TransUnion did not process a request involving my credit information because it didnt appear to come from you or someone youve authorized. TransUnion asserted that it only processes requests submitted directly by the consumer or an officially authorized third party, and took no investigative action whatsoever. \n\nXXXX refusal is unlawful. \n\nThe FCRA does not permit a consumer reporting agency to disregard or refuse a written dispute sent directly by the consumer based on speculation about authorization or submission method. FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) requires a reinvestigation when a consumer notifies the agency of a dispute. My disputes were sent directly by me, were signed, and contained sufficient information to identify the accounts and the basis of dispute. TransUnion has provided no factual basis for claiming otherwise. \n\nBy refusing to reinvestigate, TransUnion failed to comply with its statutory obligations, including but not limited to : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation after notice of dispute 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) failure to provide Method of Verification disclosures 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) failure to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy TransUnions conduct appears systemic and intentional. The refusal postcard suggests TransUnion is imposing extra-statutory requirements on consumers and using form responses to avoid lawful disputes, rather than investigating the accuracy of reported information.\n\nAs a result of TransUnions refusal, inaccurate and misleading tradelines remain published on my credit report, causing ongoing harm.\n\nRequested Resolution I am requesting that the CFPB require TransUnion to : 1. Acknowledge receipt of my XX/XX/year> written disputes 2. Conduct a full reinvestigation of each disputed tradeline as required by FCRA 1681i 3. Provide complete Method of Verification disclosures under 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ), including the entities contacted, the manner of verification, and documentation relied upon 4. Correct or delete any information that can not be verified as accurate, complete, and legally reportable This complaint preserves all rights and remedies available under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 1681o for willful and negligent noncompliance.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-29T12:46:39.000Z","issue":"Unable to get your credit report or credit score","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"97202","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18338570","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-29T12:39:23.000Z","state":"OR","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Other problem getting your report or credit score"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CFPB <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> <em>TransUnion</em> LLC Company : <em>TransUnion</em> LLC Issue : Credit reporting / <em>Failure</em> to <em>investigate</em> <em>dispute</em> Date ( s ) : XX/XX/year> <em>Complaint</em> On XX/XX/year>, I submitted multiple written <em>disputes</em> to <em>TransUnion</em> LLC <em>disputing</em> materially inaccurate and internally inconsistent tradelines appearing on my <em>TransUnion</em> consumer credit report dated XX/XX/year>. These <em>disputes</em> were sent directly by me, signed by me, and properly addressed to <em>TransUnions</em> designated <em>dispute</em> address."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[24.57605,"18338570"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14533245","_score":21.437504,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against TransUnion LLC for failure to maintain accurate, verifiable, and complete information on my credit report, in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). Despite my efforts to resolve these issues directly with the credit reporting agency, my file continues to reflect serious inaccuracies, including wrong addresses and inaccurate account reporting, which are causing significant harm to my financial well-being and violating my rights as a consumer. \nDisputed Addresses : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, TX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, LA XXXX Issue : These addresses are incorrectly listed on my TransUnion credit report. I have never lived at or been affiliated with these locations. Their presence on my report indicates either mixed file issues or erroneous third-party data submission. This has created confusion and possible identity conflation, which exposes me to fraudulent association and unjustified credit risk. \nViolation : FCRA 602 ( A ) mandates that consumer reporting agencies ensure the maximum possible accuracy of the information they maintain. FCRA 607 ( b ) further requires agencies to use reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy and integrity of consumer data. TransUnion has failed to meet these standards. \nDisputed Account : XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date Opened : XX/XX/year>XXXX  High Balance : {$2600.00} XXXX XXXX Issue : This account is inaccurately reporting late payments. These derogatory entries are false, outdated, or unverified. I have not received any proper documentation proving the legitimacy of the reported delinquencies despite my dispute under FCRA 611. \nViolation : Under FCRA 611, TransUnion is obligated to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of disputed information and delete any data that can not be verified. FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) entitles me to receive full documentation supporting any account being reported. TransUnion has continued to report this account without providing verification, documentation, or evidence, thus violating federal law.\n\nNarrative/ Consumer Impact Statement : I have been unfairly denied credit and experienced emotional distress due to the presence of false addresses and derogatory information on my credit report. I take my credit reputation seriously, and TransUnion 's negligence has caused measurable harm. My attempts to resolve these issues directly through disputes have been unsuccessful, and I believe that TransUnion is willfully ignoring the legal requirements under the FCRA. \nResolution Sought : I am requesting that the CFPB conduct an immediate investigation into TransUnion 's practices and ensure the following : 1. Permanent deletion of the two inaccurate addresses listed above 2. Complete validation or removal of the disputed XXXX XXXX account 3. Assurance that TransUnion updates and maintains accurate information in accordance with the FCRA Please consider this a formal complaint and assist me in holding TransUnion accountable for these violations.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-08T22:03:10.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77082","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14533245","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-08T21:57:59.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Resolution Sought : I am requesting that the CFPB conduct an immediate <em>investigation</em> into <em>TransUnion</em> 's practices and ensure the following : 1. Permanent deletion of the two inaccurate addresses listed above 2. <em>Complete</em> validation or removal of the <em>disputed</em> XXXX XXXX account 3. Assurance that <em>TransUnion</em> updates and maintains accurate information in accordance with the FCRA Please consider this a <em>formal</em> <em>complaint</em> and assist me in holding <em>TransUnion</em> accountable for these violations."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["<em>Investigation</em> took more than 30 days"]},"sort":[21.437504,"14533245"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13824243","_score":18.929747,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"To : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, UT XXXX Subject : Formal Dispute Inaccurate Credit Reporting, Overpayment, and Unapplied Payments Account Numbers : Ending in XXXX  & XXXX To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to dispute the inaccurate and damaging reporting of XXXX XXXX  credit card accounts, referenced above, which are currently marked as settled for less than owed. This reporting is factually incorrect, as your own correspondence confirms that I paid more than the balance owed at the time of settlement. \n\nFurthermore, in prior communications, XXXX acknowledged that I was attempting to have your institution locate missing payments that were never properly applied or reconciled. Those unresolved payments further compromise the integrity of the account record. \n\nXXXX also admitted that I did in fact pay more than the amount owed yet they still are reporting settled less than amount owed. \n\nXXXX stated that I owed {$840.00} when they decided to close my account due to a business decision conveniently after requesting them to review my account for a payment which was mailed. \n\nXXXX admitted that they did not investigate the claim they just closed the account, there is no evidence or proof of investigation but they did state in the report that they DID NOT investigate properly they just documented it and closed the account. \n\nI paid over {$1000.00} for the debt owed which is more than what is actually owed. \n\nXXXX used deceptive practices to induce false information and created a false narrative on my credit report. \n\nXXXX stated I paid them exactly what I owed on my second account yet still stated that I paid less than the balance due. \n\nXXXX has proven that they have committed fraud. \n\n\nLet me be clear : I am not requesting a refund of overpayments. \nI am demanding the removal or correction of false and misleading credit information which continues to cause measurable harm to my financial standing. \nAlternatively, I seek monetary relief for the damages and losses I have sustained due to Discovers continued misreporting of these accounts. \n\nThis situation is a direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to : FCRA XXXX ( b ) : Duty to report complete and accurate information FCRA XXXX : Failure to perform a meaningful reinvestigation FCRA XXXX ( b ) : Failure to correct inaccurate or unverifiable information upon notice The accounts in question were settled and in XXXX case, overpaid yet they are still being reported with language such as settled for less than owed, accompanied by derogatory payment history blocks that create a false narrative I am requesting the following actions : XXXX. Immediate correction or deletion of these XXXX accounts from all credit reporting agencies ( XXXX XXXX, TransUnion, and XXXX ). \nXXXX. A written acknowledgment that the inaccurate reporting has been removed or corrected. \nXXXX. If you fail to comply, I will pursue monetary relief through legal channels and regulatory bodies due to negligence, financial harm, and reputational damage caused by your continued misreporting. \n\nYou have XXXX days from receipt of this letter to resolve the matter, as required by the FCRA. \n\nPlease consider this a formal demand under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and notice of potential legal action if this is not corrected. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX Enclosures : Discovers written response acknowledging overpayment CFPB complaint reference # XXXX Credit report with highlighted errors","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-31T19:34:31.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33613","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13824243","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-31T19:34:07.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, UT XXXX Subject : <em>Formal</em> <em>Dispute</em> Inaccurate Credit Reporting, Overpayment, and Unapplied Payments Account Numbers : Ending in XXXX  & XXXX To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to <em>dispute</em> the inaccurate and damaging reporting of XXXX XXXX  credit card accounts, referenced above, which are currently marked as settled for less than owed."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[18.929747,"13824243"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11124273","_score":18.208502,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Upon reviewing my credit reports from TransUnion, XXXX, and XXXX, I identified significant discrepancies, inaccuracies, and potential violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices ( UDAP ), and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) by XXXX XXXX XXXX and TransUnion, which have caused significant harm to my creditworthiness and financial opportunities. \n\nAccount ending in # XXXX Identified inaccuracies and discrepancies : 1. Inconsistent Payment History Across CRAs The payment history reported by XXXX, TransUnion, and XXXX contains discrepancies. For example, the 30, 60, 90, and 120+day late payments or ND appear to be reported inconsistently between CRAs, creating conflicting narratives of delinquency timelines. Under FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ), furnishers must report accurate, complete, and consistent information. These inconsistencies harm my creditworthiness and suggest a lack of proper verification or diligence in XXXX and TransUnions reporting process. \n\n2.Erroneous Reporting of Account Status The account is marked as closed, past due, and written off yet still reflects monthly updates as charged off in violation of FCRA 1681i and 1692e ( 2 ) ( A ) by misrepresenting the debts legal status. A charge-off means the creditor has acknowledged the debt as uncollectible for accounting purposes. Reporting a past due amount inaccurately implies that payments are still expected or that the account is still in a state of delinquency rather than a charge-off. While I understand XXXX  right to report the status of my account each month, the repeated reporting of CO ( Charge-Off ) month after month, despite the charge-off being a one-time event, has a disproportionately negative impact on my credit score. This continuous reporting inaccurately suggests ongoing delinquency when, in fact, the charge-off occurred only once. Such repetitive reporting creates an impression of recurring negative events, harming my score in a manner that seems excessive and punitive. Under FCRA 1681c, consumer information should be reported in a manner that is both accurate and fair. The current approach is being as an undue hindrance to my credit recovery and access to financial opportunities. \n\n3. Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Investigation I have filed multiple disputes with XXXX and TransUnion in the past regarding these issues, only to receive responses stating that the information has been verified and/or updated without any specific address of the discrepancies. Furthermore, XXXX deemed my most recent disputes as frivolous or irrelevant requiring new evidence to conduct a re-investigation but failed to notify me with specific reasons and supporting documentation within five days, this is a violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 3 ). By failing to conduct a reasonable investigation, as required under FCRA 1681i, XXXX and TransUnion has demonstrated willful negligence in its responsibility to maintain accurate and complete credit reporting data. The lack of attention to these errors indicates a lack of good faith and suggests intentional noncompliance with federal law. \n\n4.Acknowledgment of Disputes Without Corrective Action Despite disputes starting as far back as XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX has repeatedly marked my account as verified without addressing the documented discrepancies. In XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX marked my dispute as DRG ( Dispute Resolved Reported by Grantor ) but continued reporting inaccuracies, further proving noncompliance with FCRA 1681i ( duty to investigate disputes ). XXXX  repeated failure to investigate and correct these inaccuracies reflects willful noncompliance, negligence, and bad-faith practices, constituting violations of FCRA, FDCPA, and UDAP. \n\nTransUnion has continued to publish XXXX  inaccurate data without conducting a reasonable investigation, violating FCRA 1681e ( b ), which requires consumer reporting agencies ( CRAs ) to ensure maximum possible accuracy. Despite my disputes, TransUnion has dismissed my concerns, relying solely on the data provided by XXXX without independent verification, as required under FCRA 1681i. \n\nFCRA Violations : XXXX violated 1681c and 1681i by reporting inaccurate delinquency, obsolete information, and failing to investigate disputes. They also violated 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A by failing to report accurate and consistent information. XXXX and TransUnion violated 1681e ( b ) by failing to ensure maximum possible accuracy in my credit report. XXXX  repeated failure to address or rectify the inaccuracies after being notified multiple times, as well as the CRAs acceptance of XXXX  incomplete or incorrect responses violates 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( E ). Additionally, both XXXX and TransUnions failure to provide the MOV as requested is a violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 7 ) and 611 ( a ) ( 6 ). Without the MOV, I am unable can not verify the legitimacy of their reinvestigation or determine whether the information was truly verified raising further doubt about the accuracy of the account. The inability to validate their process allows inaccurate information to remain on my credit report, continuing to damage my credit score and financial reputation. \n\nFDCPA Violations : The reporting of charge-offs month after month by XXXX, as if they are recurring events misrepresents the legal status of the debt, violating FDCPA 1692e ( 2 ) ( A ). XXXX  actions are misleading and deceptive, constituting unfair debt collection practices. The continuous reporting of false information and TransUnions failure to verify such data represent unfair and deceptive practices under 15 U.S.C. 45. \n\nGiven the documented violations and the impact they have had on my credit and financial opportunities, I am formally requesting an compensation check in the amount of {$12000.00}. This amount reflects both the statutory damages I am entitled to under FCRA 1681n, 1681o, FDCPA 1692k, as well as the actual damages I have suffered due to higher interest rates, denied credit applications, and the emotional distress associated with this ongoing situation. I request that the compensation check be made payable to XXXX XXXX and sent to my address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, MI XXXX Please send the check via certified mail to ensure secure delivery. \n\nIn addition to the financial compensation, I request the immediate deletion of this account from all consumer reporting agencies. \n\nI look forward to your prompt attention to this matter and expect a response within 14 days of receipt of this complaint. Failure to comply may result in further legal action to enforce my rights under consumer protection laws. \n\nI have attached evidence, including credit reports, dispute records, and correspondence, to support my claims.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-13T04:16:12.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"480XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11124273","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2024-12-13T04:11:26.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Failure</em> to Conduct a Reasonable <em>Investigation</em> I have filed multiple <em>disputes</em> with XXXX and <em>TransUnion</em> in the past regarding these issues, only to receive responses stating that the information has been verified and/or updated without any specific address of the discrepancies."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[18.208502,"11124273"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10424640","_score":18.11584,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Credit Reporting Agency XXXX RE : Demand for Immediate Deletion of Inaccurate Debt Information Dear TransUnion, This letter serves as a formal demand for the immediate removal of inaccurate and unverified debt information reported by XXXX XXXX XXXX on my credit report. Despite repeated requests for validation and investigation, TransUnion has continued to verify this inaccurate information without conducting proper investigations as mandated by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). The failure of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX provide proper documentation and account statements from XXXX, when they claim the account was opened, further proves that this information is inaccurate and unverifiable. If this alleged fraudulent was opened in XX/XX/XXXX, why does all the statements begin in XXXX. Clearly an issue. TransUnion would have definitely indicated if a proper investigation was done instead of accepting hush money. I Ask for you TransUnion to ask XXXX XXXX  for documents from XXXX and I guarantee that they can not produce because there are none with this fraudulent account. This is clearly a fraudulent inaccurate account that is being furnished. \n\nRelevant Consumer Laws Supporting My Dispute : XXXX. Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) - 15 U.S.C. 1692g : Under the FDCPA, a debt collector must provide proper validation of the debt, including the amount owed and evidence that the debt is valid and collectible. [ Creditor or Debt Collector Name ] has failed to provide any records or statements from XXXX, despite their claim that the account was opened that year. This failure to validate the debt is a clear violation of FDCPA. \nXXXX. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) - 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( Reinvestigation of Disputed Information ) : The FCRA mandates that credit reporting agencies, upon receiving a dispute, must conduct a reasonable investigation to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the information they report. TransUnion has failed to conduct such an investigation, instead verifying inaccurate and unverifiable information. This failure is a violation of my rights under the FCRA. \n\n\n\nCase Law Supporting FCRA Violations : XXXX XXXX Trans Union XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) : The court held that credit reporting agencies must go beyond the information provided by creditors and conduct a reasonable investigation of their own. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) : The court ruled that simply relying on information provided by creditors without independent verification is insufficient and violates the FCRAs requirements for a reasonable investigation. \nXXXX. FCRA - 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ( Requirement for Maximum Accuracy ) : Credit reporting agencies are required to use reasonable procedures to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of the information they report. The failure of TransUnion to verify the accuracy of the information provided by XXXX XXXX XXXX especially in light of their failure to provide proper account records from XXXX, constitutes a violation of this requirement. \nCase Law Supporting Maximum Accuracy Standard : XXXX XXXX Trans Union Credit Information XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) : The court emphasized that credit reporting agencies are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of their reports and that consumers can sue for damages when inaccurate information is reported. \nXXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) : This case confirmed that failing to ensure maximum accuracy, particularly when inaccurate information causes harm to the consumer, constitutes a violation of the FCRA. \nXXXX. Statute of Limitations Acknowledgment : In a letter I received from XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding a dispute on this account, they explicitly acknowledged that they believed the statute of limitations on this debt had expired. Reporting a debt that the creditor itself believes is beyond the statute of limitations is both misleading and inaccurate, constituting a violation of FCRAs requirement for accurate reporting. \n\n\nAdditional Violations and Harm : The continued reporting of this inaccurate information has caused substantial financial harm, including credit denials, higher interest rates, and emotional distress. By failing to properly investigate and correct this information, TransUnion has directly contributed to this harm. Their failure to uphold their legal responsibilities will not go unchallenged. \n\nDemands : I demand the immediate removal of this inaccurate and unverified debt from my credit report. This demand is supported by the creditors failure to validate the debt in accordance with the FDCPA, and XXXX failure to conduct a proper investigation under the FCRA. The ongoing verification of this inaccurate information despite clear evidence of its inaccuracy constitutes a violation of the FCRA and will be addressed in a court of law. \n\nIf this matter is not resolved within XXXX days of the receipt of this letter, I will proceed with formal legal action against XXXX, for their violations of the FDCPA and FCRA. I will seek statutory, punitive, and compensatory damages for the harm caused. Additionally, I will file formal complaints with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) to ensure these violations are properly addressed. \n\nXXXX. This letter serves as formal notice of my dispute. I expect written confirmation that this inaccurate account has been removed from my credit report immediately! \n\nThis letter serves as a formal demand for the immediate removal of inaccurate and unverified debt information reported by XXXX XXXX on my credit report. The information being reported is blatantly inaccurate, and XXXX has failed in their legal duty to ensure that the information on my credit report is correct. Despite repeated disputes, XXXX has continued to verify the inaccurate reporting without conducting proper investigations to ensure maximum accuracy as required by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \n\nXXXX XXXX claims that the account was opened in XXXX, yet they are only providing account statements from XXXX onward, which is a clear attempt to conceal the truth. I have requested account records from XXXX, but XXXX XXXX  has failed to provide any documentation or statements from that time. This lack of evidence from the creditor demonstrates that their reporting is inaccurate and unsubstantiated, and that TransUnion has continued to verify false information without adequate investigation. \n\nIt is clear that this behavior is not only misleading but also a violation of the FCRA, TransUnion credit reporting agency has failed to uphold their responsibility to ensure the information they report is accurate. Instead of conducting a thorough investigation, TransUnion is simply accepting whatever the creditor says, despite their financial ties, which raises significant concerns about bias and conflicts of interest. \n\nLegal Violations : XXXX. Failure to Provide Account Information ( XXXX ) : The creditor claims the account was opened in XXXX, yet they have failed to provide any statements or records from that year, demonstrating that the information being reported is false and unverified. \nXXXX. Failure to Investigate Dispute ( FCRA XXXX ) : TransUnion has failed to properly investigate my dispute, instead opting to verify inaccurate information without ensuring maximum accuracy. \nXXXX. Financial Conflict of Interest : The fact TransUnion has financial relationships with the creditor raises significant concerns about bias and their inability to provide a fair and unbiased investigation. \nXXXX. Harm Caused by Inaccurate Reporting : This inaccurate reporting has caused substantial damage to my credit report and personal finances, resulting in credit denials, higher interest rates, and emotional distress. \n\nI have been requesting validation of this debt in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S. Code 1692g, for over XXXX  months. During this time, XXXX XXXX XXXX has repeatedly failed to provide the legally required validation or proof of ownership of this debt. Additionally, they have failed to make any reasonable effort to notify me properly of the alleged debt. Evidence in my possession shows that their correspondence has been returned as undeliverable. \n\nEven if XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX attempts to send a validation letter now, it is too late. Their failure to provide timely validation within the legally mandated XXXX window has already caused extensive damage to my credit report and life. For XXXX  months, this unverified and inaccurate information has remained on my credit report, directly resulting in credit denials, financial loss, and emotional distress. \n\nLegal Violations : XXXX. Failure to Validate Debt ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) : The debt collector has not provided validation within the legally required timeframe, violating the FDCPA. \nXXXX. Continued Reporting of Inaccurate Information : The ongoing reporting of this unvalidated debt is a direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), which mandates that only accurate and verifiable information be reported. \nXXXX. Harm Caused by Their Actions : Due to the prolonged reporting of inaccurate information, I have faced credit denials, adverse credit terms, and significant emotional distress. This damage is directly attributable to their unlawful actions. \n\nGiven the circumstances, I demand that this debt be removed from my credit report immediately. The delayed response from XXXX XXXX  and XXXX can not undo the harm that has already been caused. I reserve the right to pursue legal action for violations of both the FDCPA and the FCRA, including claims for statutory damages, compensation for financial harm, and punitive damages for the emotional distress I have endured. \nPlease understand that this letter serves as formal notice of my dispute, and I demand that you cease reporting this debt immediately. \nSupporting documentation of the letter from XXXX XXXX XXXX which clearly either dont car about the law and send false information to there consumer to change the narrative. Just on this statement alone XXXX XXXX XXXX should be brought on criminal charges I was advised by a attorney to sue XXXX XXXX XXXX immediately. There interpretation of the law is baffling. ( They wrote in the letter to address the situation they said A undeliverable notice satisfies the legal requirement of the FDCPA validation process when FDCPA clearly says the opposite. I can go on further but the lawsuit will set them straight. \nIm fully Prepared for escalation with legal counsel if the issue is not resolved.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-10-11T15:09:09.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77584","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10424640","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2024-10-11T14:49:35.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This <em>failure</em> to validate the debt is a clear violation of FDCPA. \nXXXX. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) - 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( Reinvestigation of <em>Disputed</em> Information ) : The FCRA mandates that credit reporting agencies, upon receiving a <em>dispute</em>, must conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> to ensure the accuracy and <em>completeness</em> of the information they report. <em>TransUnion</em> has failed to conduct such an <em>investigation</em>, instead verifying inaccurate and unverifiable information."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[18.11584,"10424640"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13680299","_score":17.947323,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX SSN ( last four ) : XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX To : TransUnion/Experian Subject : Formal Dispute of XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Original Creditor XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Account Reference Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Dispute Under FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681i, and 1681s-2 Dear TransUnion and Experian, I am writing to formally dispute the inaccurate and incomplete information being reported on my credit file concerning an account from XXXX XXXX XXXX, associated with the original creditor XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This account is reported with multiple material inconsistencies between your respective bureaus, which violate my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and compromise the integrity of my consumer report. \n\nBelow are the specific issues I demand be investigated and resolved : 1. Inconsistent Account Opening Dates TransUnion reports : XX/XX/XXXX Experian reports : XX/XX/XXXX This discrepancy in reported opening dates violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), which mandates that information reported must be accurate to the maximum extent possible. Conflicting foundational data is clear evidence of unreliable furnishing. \n\n2. Omission of \" Number of Months ( Terms ) '' This field is left blank by both TransUnion and Experian. \nAs this is critical contractual information, its omission renders the account unverifiable and fails to meet the requirements of completeness and accuracy outlined in 1681i ( a ).\n\n3. Missing Credit Limit No credit limit is listed by either bureau.\n\nA credit or collection account missing this fundamental data is deficient in substance and does not allow for a fair interpretation of the account 's severity or impact. This omission further supports deletion under FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 1681i.\n\n4. Missing Past Due Amounts Both bureaus fail to report any past due amounts.\n\nA collection or delinquent account lacking this detail is misleading, suggesting it may not be delinquent at all. This constitutes incomplete and inaccurate reporting under 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). \n\n5. Inconsistent and Misleading Comments TransUnion comments : Placed for Collection Experian : No comment listed The presence of conflicting comment data between credit bureaus creates an inconsistent narrative of account status, in direct conflict with the duty to report data uniformly and clearly under 1681e ( b ).\n\n6. Date Last Active Conflict TransUnion reports : XX/XX/XXXX Experian reports : XX/XX/XXXX This is clear grounds for deletion or a full-scale reinvestigation. \n\nDEMAND FOR ACTION Pursuant to the rights granted to me under FCRA 1681i, I demand that you : Delete this account entirely from my credit file if it can not be verified as 100 % accurate and complete in every respect. \n\nDo not simply verify or update the accountI am specifically demanding that the listed discrepancies be individually addressed, not generically corrected or verified without documentation. \n\nShould you choose to verify the account, I am formally invoking my right to a Method of Verification ( MOV ) under 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), which includes : -The name and contact information of the data furnisher ; -A detailed explanation of the reinvestigation procedures used ; -Copies of all original documents used to support and verify the accuracy of the reportingsuch as signed contracts, billing records, and payment history. \n\nNOTICE OF NONCOMPLIANCE Please be aware that any failure to delete or fully correct the above-referenced account within 30 days of this dispute will be interpreted as willful noncompliance with the FCRA, triggering my right to : File a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX CFPB ) ; File a complaint with the New York State Attorney Generals Office ; Seek legal remedies under FCRA 1681n for willful noncompliance and 1681o for negligent noncompliance, including statutory, actual, and punitive damages. \nPlease provide a written response within 30 days, outlining the actions taken and enclosing the necessary documentation. \n\nThank you for your immediate attention to this matter. \n\nAttached Is My State Id ( Verification ) Bank Statement ( proof of address ) XXXXXXXX XXXX Inconsistencies Highlighted Sincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-23T04:32:21.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"10009","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13680299","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-05-23T04:31:42.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX SSN ( last four ) : XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX To : TransUnion/Experian Subject : <em>Formal</em> <em>Dispute</em> of XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Original Creditor XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Account Reference Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) <em>Dispute</em> Under FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681i, and 1681s-2 Dear <em>TransUnion</em> and Experian, I am writing to <em>formally</em> <em>dispute</em> the inaccurate and incomplete information being reported on my"]},"sort":[17.947323,"13680299"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13679228","_score":17.947323,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX SSN ( last four ) : XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX To : TransUnion/Experian Subject : Formal Dispute of XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Original Creditor XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Account Reference Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Dispute Under FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681i, and 1681s-2 Dear TransUnion and Experian, I am writing to formally dispute the inaccurate and incomplete information being reported on my credit file concerning an account from XXXX XXXX XXXX, associated with the original creditor XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This account is reported with multiple material inconsistencies between your respective bureaus, which violate my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and compromise the integrity of my consumer report. \n\nBelow are the specific issues I demand be investigated and resolved : 1. Inconsistent Account Opening Dates TransUnion reports : XX/XX/XXXX Experian reports : XX/XX/XXXX This discrepancy in reported opening dates violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), which mandates that information reported must be accurate to the maximum extent possible. Conflicting foundational data is clear evidence of unreliable furnishing. \n\n2. Omission of \" Number of Months ( Terms ) '' This field is left blank by both TransUnion and Experian. \nAs this is critical contractual information, its omission renders the account unverifiable and fails to meet the requirements of completeness and accuracy outlined in 1681i ( a ).\n\n3. Missing Credit Limit No credit limit is listed by either bureau.\n\nA credit or collection account missing this fundamental data is deficient in substance and does not allow for a fair interpretation of the account 's severity or impact. This omission further supports deletion under FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 1681i.\n\n4. Missing Past Due Amounts Both bureaus fail to report any past due amounts.\n\nA collection or delinquent account lacking this detail is misleading, suggesting it may not be delinquent at all. This constitutes incomplete and inaccurate reporting under 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). \n\n5. Inconsistent and Misleading Comments TransUnion comments : Placed for Collection Experian : No comment listed The presence of conflicting comment data between credit bureaus creates an inconsistent narrative of account status, in direct conflict with the duty to report data uniformly and clearly under 1681e ( b ).\n\n6. Date Last Active Conflict TransUnion reports : XX/XX/XXXX Experian reports : XX/XX/XXXX This is clear grounds for deletion or a full-scale reinvestigation. \n\nDEMAND FOR ACTION Pursuant to the rights granted to me under FCRA 1681i, I demand that you : Delete this account entirely from my credit file if it can not be verified as 100 % accurate and complete in every respect. \n\nDo not simply verify or update the accountI am specifically demanding that the listed discrepancies be individually addressed, not generically corrected or verified without documentation. \n\nShould you choose to verify the account, I am formally invoking my right to a Method of Verification ( MOV ) under 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), which includes : -The name and contact information of the data furnisher ; -A detailed explanation of the reinvestigation procedures used ; -Copies of all original documents used to support and verify the accuracy of the reportingsuch as signed contracts, billing records, and payment history. \n\nNOTICE OF NONCOMPLIANCE Please be aware that any failure to delete or fully correct the above-referenced account within 30 days of this dispute will be interpreted as willful noncompliance with the FCRA, triggering my right to : File a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX CFPB ) ; File a complaint with the New York State Attorney Generals Office ; Seek legal remedies under FCRA 1681n for willful noncompliance and 1681o for negligent noncompliance, including statutory, actual, and punitive damages. \nPlease provide a written response within 30 days, outlining the actions taken and enclosing the necessary documentation. \n\nThank you for your immediate attention to this matter. \n\nAttached Is My State Id ( Verification ) Bank Statement ( proof of address ) XXXXXXXX XXXX Inconsistencies Highlighted Sincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-23T04:32:21.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"10009","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13679228","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-23T03:58:51.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX SSN ( last four ) : XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX To : TransUnion/Experian Subject : <em>Formal</em> <em>Dispute</em> of XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Original Creditor XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Account Reference Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) <em>Dispute</em> Under FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681i, and 1681s-2 Dear <em>TransUnion</em> and Experian, I am writing to <em>formally</em> <em>dispute</em> the inaccurate and incomplete information being reported on my"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[17.947323,"13679228"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16423816","_score":17.561546,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Formal Escalation Portfolio Recovery Associates ( XXXX ) Continued False Reporting, Failure to Validate, and CFPB Inaction -- - Complaint Narrative : I am filing this new complaint because Portfolio Recovery Associates ( XXXX ) continues to report XXXX alleged XXXX Bank accounts ( ending in XXXX and XXXX ) that are inaccurate, unverified, and unlawfully damaging my credit, despite multiple CFPB complaints and extensive documentation proving they can not validate the debts. \n\nThis is now my fifth complaint regarding these same accounts, which shows an ongoing pattern of noncompliance and disregard for the law. My prior complaint numbers include : # XXXX ( XX/XX/year> ) # XXXX ( XX/XX/year> ) # XXXX ( XX/XX/year> ) # XXXX ( XX/XX/year> ) In their most recent response ( XX/XX/year> ), XXXX once again failed to provide proper debt XXXX under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA, XXXX U.S.C. XXXX ) or comply with their duties under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ). \n\nXXXX has only provided internal business records and billing statements not : XXXX. A signed contract or original application proving I opened these accounts. \n\n\nXXXX. A complete chain of title showing legal transfer from XXXX XXXX  to XXXX. \n\n\nXXXX. Proof of legal authority to collect or report these debts. \n\n\n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ), once a consumer disputes a debt, collection and credit reporting must cease until proper validation is provided. XXXX violated this law by continuing to report unverified accounts. \n\nUnder 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), furnishers must investigate and correct inaccurate or incomplete information when notified by credit bureaus or the CFPB. PRAs repeated refusal to do so is a clear and willful violation of federal law. \n\nPRAs statement that my dispute was untimely is false. I have filed multiple CFPB complaints and disputes throughout 2025 all while the accounts are actively reporting. Their claim is a deceptive attempt to avoid their legal obligations. \n\n\n-- - CFPB Accountability It is unacceptable that the CFPB continues to mark my complaints as closed while the company remains in violation of federal law. This process is supposed to protect consumers, not shield repeat violators. \n\nIf the CFPB continues to close complaints without requiring deletion or compliance, it defeats the entire purpose of having this agency. Consumers like me deserve enforcement and accountability, not form letters and dismissals. \n\nBecause of XXXX ongoing false reporting and the XXXX lack of enforcement, I will be filing a formal complaint with the Texas Attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and pursuing legal action under the FDCPA and FCRA. \n\n\n-- - Requested Resolution I demand the following actions : XXXX. Immediate and permanent deletion of both Portfolio Recovery Associates accounts ( ending in 2459 and 3109 ) from all credit bureaus ( Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion ). \n\n\nXXXX. These accounts must never appear on my credit reports again under any name, trade line, or variation. I am requesting that CFPB ensure no reinsertion of these accounts under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ).\n\n3. A formal CFPB investigation into Portfolio Recoverys pattern of deceptive reporting and noncompliance. \n\n\nXXXX. Referral to the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) and Texas Attorney General for enforcement and penalties against XXXX for repeated violations. \n\n\nXXXX. Written confirmation that XXXX has been instructed to permanently remove these accounts and cease all collection activity. \n\n\n\n\n-- - Summary Portfolio Recovery Associates has repeatedly violated the FDCPA and FCRA through unlawful collection, continued false reporting, and deceptive responses to federal complaints. The CFPBs repeated closure of these complaints without action enables continued harm to consumers. \n\nI expect this matter to be treated as a formal escalation and enforcement request not another routine review. If no corrective action is taken within 30 days, I will proceed with complaints to the Texas Attorney General, Federal Trade Commission, and consumer litigation counsel for damages and injunctive relief.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-07T13:59:45.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"77082","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16423816","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2025-10-07T13:42:42.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Subject : <em>Formal</em> Escalation Portfolio Recovery Associates ( XXXX ) Continued False Reporting, <em>Failure</em> to Validate, and CFPB Inaction -- - <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> : I am filing this new <em>complaint</em> because Portfolio Recovery Associates ( XXXX ) continues to report XXXX alleged XXXX Bank accounts ( ending in XXXX and XXXX ) that are inaccurate, unverified, and unlawfully damaging my credit, despite multiple CFPB <em>complaints</em> and extensive documentation proving they can not validate the debts."]},"sort":[17.561546,"16423816"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18880880","_score":16.487177,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"The information reported is inaccurate and/or incomplete. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Metro 2 reporting standards, credit reporting agencies are required to ensure that all information is accurate, complete, and properly reported.\n\nI respectfully request that you investigate this item, verify it with the furnisher, and correct or remove it from my credit report as required by law. \n\n\n\nPlease send me a written response confirming the outcome of your investigation. I have enclosed copies of supporting documentation where applicable. \n\n\n\nThank you for your prompt attention to this matter. \n\n\n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX TransUnion XXXX XXXX XXXX Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type : Finance other than personal XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, VA XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXX Prepared For XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX generated : XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XXXX XXXX XXXX Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type : Finance, personal XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, IN XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type : Finance other than personal XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, VA XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type : Banks and XXXX & XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, VA XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXX XXXX : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nInquiries XXXX Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX By mail only This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXX Prepared For XXXX XXXX XXXX generated : XX/XX/XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Business Type : All Banks - non specific XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, ND XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Inquired on XXXX XXXX, XXXX Business Type : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, NJ XXXX By mail only This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type : Bank XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, VA XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type : XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NV XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nInquiries XXXX Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type : Bank XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, DE XXXX By mail only This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXX Prepared For XXXX XXXX XXXX generated : XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type : All Banks - non specific XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Inquired on XXXX XXXX, XXXX Business Type : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX By mail only This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Inquired on XX/XX/XXXX Business Type : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Business Type : XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, NV XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX This inquiry is scheduled to continue on record until XX/XX/XXXX XXXX : XXXX Page 21 of 30 15 U.S. Code 1681i I closed copies of 3 reports and its different on each one. Please fix it. All XXXX credit reports should say the same thing why XXXX they reporting the same thing? Experience data breach dispute letter XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX SSN ( Last XXXX ) : XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Subject : Data Breach Dispute Unauthorized and Unverifiable Credit Information To Whom It May Concern, I am formally disputing inaccurate, unauthorized, and unverifiable information appearing on my consumer credit report as a result of a data breach involving my personal identifying information.\n\nUnder the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ), you are required to ensure maximum possible accuracy and lawful reporting. Due to the compromise of my personal data, I dispute any accounts, inquiries, balances, collections, or public records that I did not expressly authorize.\n\nI demand that you conduct a lawful reinvestigation pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i and delete any information that can not be verified with original creditor documentation, including a signed agreement or proof of lawful data acquisition.\n\nFailure to comply within 30 days may result in complaints filed with the CFPB, my State Attorney General, or pursuit of legal remedies. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX SSN ( Last XXXX ) : XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Subject : Data Breach Dispute Unauthorized and Unverifiable Credit Information To Whom It May Concern, I am formally disputing inaccurate, unauthorized, and unverifiable information appearing on my consumer credit report as a result of a data breach involving my personal identifying information.\n\nUnder the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ), you are required to ensure maximum possible accuracy and lawful reporting. Due to the compromise of my personal data, I dispute any accounts, inquiries, balances, collections, or public records that I did not expressly authorize. \nI demand that you conduct a lawful reinvestigation pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i and delete any information that can not be verified with original creditor documentation, including a signed agreement or proof of lawful data acquisition.\n\nFailure to comply within 30 days may result in complaints filed with the CFPB, my State Attorney General, or pursuit of legal remedies. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX SSN ( Last XXXX ) : XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Subject : Data Breach Dispute Unauthorized and Unverifiable Credit Information To Whom It May Concern, I am formally disputing inaccurate, unauthorized, and unverifiable information appearing on my consumer credit report as a result of a data breach involving my personal identifying information.\n\nUnder the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ), you are required to ensure maximum possible accuracy and lawful reporting. Due to the compromise of my personal data, I dispute any accounts, inquiries, balances, collections, or public records that I did not expressly authorize.\n\nI demand that you conduct a lawful reinvestigation pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i and delete any information that can not be verified with original creditor documentation, including a signed agreement or proof of lawful data acquisition.\n\nFailure to comply within 30 days may result in complaints filed with the CFPB, my State Attorney General, or pursuit of legal remedies. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB COMPLAINT XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nComplaint Narrative : I am filing this complaint against XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for failure to maintain maximum possible accuracy of my consumer credit file and for continuing to report unauthorized, inaccurate, and unverifiable information after my personal identifying information was compromised in a data breach. \n\nMy identifying information is as follows : Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of Birth : XX/XX/XXXX Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, NY XXXX Due to the exposure of my personal data, I formally disputed all accounts, inquiries, and data on my Experian credit report that were not expressly authorized by me. Experian failed to provide strict proof of authorization, including signed contracts or original creditor documentation, yet continues to report this information.\n\nThis conduct violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act, including but not limited to : 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) failure to assure maximum possible accuracy 15 U.S.C. 1681i failure to conduct a lawful reinvestigation 15 U.S.C. 1681b impermissible reporting without valid authorization I am requesting that Experian immediately delete any inaccurate, unverifiable, or unauthorized information from my credit file and provide written confirmation along with an updated credit report. Continued reporting of compromised data causes ongoing financial and reputational harm.\n\nCFPB COMPLAINT XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Complaint Narrative : I am submitting this complaint against XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX for failure to correct and delete inaccurate, unauthorized, and unverifiable credit information that appears on my consumer report following a compromise of my personal data. \n\nMy personal identifying information includes : Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of Birth : XX/XX/XXXX Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, NY XXXX XXXX  has continued to report accounts and data that I did not authorize and that can not be validated with original documentation. Despite receiving dispute notices, Equifax has failed to demonstrate lawful acquisition, chain of custody, or permissible purpose for reporting this information. \nThis constitutes violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, including : Failure to ensure accuracy under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) Failure to properly reinvestigate under 15 U.S.C. 1681i Reporting without permissible purpose under 15 U.S.C. 1681b I am requesting immediate deletion of all unauthorized or unverifiable data and written confirmation of compliance. XXXX continued inaction is causing ongoing harm and exposes them to liability for willful noncompliance. \n\n\n\nCFPB COMPLAINT TRANSUNION Company : XXXX XXXXXXXX Complaint Narrative : I am filing this complaint against XXXX XXXXXXXX for reporting inaccurate and unauthorized information on my consumer credit report after my personal identifying information was compromised in a data breach. \n\nMy identifying details are : Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of Birth : XX/XX/XXXX Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, NY XXXX TransUnion has failed to provide competent evidence that the information it reports was lawfully obtained or authorized by me. No original signed contracts, applications, or proof of permissible purpose have been produced. Despite this, TransUnion continues to publish the disputed data.\n\nThis violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act, including : 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) accuracy requirements 15 U.S.C. 1681i reinvestigation duties 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 responsibilities related to disputed information I am requesting immediate deletion of all inaccurate and unauthorized entries, written confirmation of the corrections, and a complete updated credit report. Continued reporting of compromised data is harmful and unlawful","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-21T03:59:59.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"10460","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18880880","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SUNRISE CREDIT SERVICES, INC","date_received":"2026-01-21T03:27:39.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CFPB <em>COMPLAINT</em> <em>TRANSUNION</em> Company : XXXX XXXXXXXX <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> : I am filing this <em>complaint</em> against XXXX XXXXXXXX for reporting inaccurate and unauthorized information on my consumer credit report after my personal identifying information was compromised in a data breach."],"sub_issue":["Didn't receive notice of right to <em>dispute</em>"]},"sort":[16.487177,"18880880"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14466420","_score":15.981796,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Disclosure : As a consumer fully exercising my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), I am documenting each step in preparation for formal legal escalation, if necessary. \n\nClarification : This complaint is separate and distinct from any previously filed complaints against Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. It addresses new violations and failures, specifically their refusal to provide verification documentation related to the XXXX XXXX dispute, as required under FCRA 1681g and 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). It is not duplicative in subject matter or legal basis. This is not a re-dispute. \n\nReference : Disputed XXXX XXXXXXXX account beginning with XXXX ( TransUnion and Experian format ) or ending in XXXX ( Equifax format ) showing a balance of {$690.00} and a credit limit of {$500.00}. \n\nSubject : Complaint Against Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion for FCRA Violations Improper Verification of a XXXX XXXXXXXX Account and Refusal to Provide Verification Documentation ( FCRA 1681g, 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), and Related Provisions ) Narrative : This complaint is directed against the three nationwide consumer reporting agencies Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion for willfully and negligently violating multiple provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) in their handling of my dispute regarding an inaccurate and unverifiable tradeline from XXXX XXXX \n\nBackground Facts The XXXX XXXX tradeline has been the subject of prior disputes and legal inquiries, with certified dispute letters sent in XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted a supplemental dispute to Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax identifying the XXXX XXXX tradeline as unverifiable, incomplete, and misleading, and specifically requested : - Full payment history - Signed agreements - Itemized statements - Proof of debt ownership or immediate deletion if documentation could not be produced. \nThis dispute cited FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and demanded compliance. To date, no documentation has been provided by either XXXX XXXX or the credit reporting agencies. The tradeline remains legally unverifiable and must be deleted. \nThe payment history was altered following my dispute confirming that the original reporting contained inaccuracies yet no supporting documentation or explanation was provided for these changes. \n\nXXXX XXXX failed to respond to the dispute and did not furnish any signed contracts, transactional records, or itemized billing history, undermining any claim of verification. \n\nExperian manipulated the reported payment history after my dispute by shifting the XXXX delinquency from XX/XX/XXXX ( pre-dispute ) to XX/XX/XXXX ( post-dispute ). This shift artificially extends the derogatory impact of the tradeline by delaying the Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) without notice or documentation in violation of FCRA 607 ( b ), 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), and 1681i. \n\nXXXX investigation results are misleading. Their post-dispute report falsely claims an update to the XXXX XXXX in XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, stating it was 120 days late. However, these same delinquency ratings were already present in the XX/XX/XXXX report, before the dispute was filed. \n- This misrepresentation creates the false appearance of meaningful verification or correction, despite no new information or documentation. \n- Such conduct likely violates FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) ( false verification ) and 607 ( b ) ( failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy ).\n\nThe reported account balance exceeds the credit limit, suggesting unverified fees or interest accruals, which were neither explained nor validated during the reinvestigation. \n\nNone of the CRAs provided notice of the changes made to the tradeline, violating FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ), which mandates that consumers be informed of results and the method used during reinvestigation. \n\nUnverified Account Elements : XXXX XXXXXXXX failed to produce any of the following when requested through dispute or reinvestigation : Itemized balance history or account statements Signed applications or cardholder agreements Records of authorized or signed transactions Evidence of mailed or delivered late payment/charge-off notices Proof of consent to fees, interest, or terms of credit Full payment posting history Evidence of ownership or authorization to report the debt The absence of this documentation from both the furnisher and the CRAs shows that the account was not properly verified and remains unsubstantiated under FCRA standards. These failures also likely violate : New York XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which prohibits inclusion of information that can not be verified as accurate and complete New York XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, prohibiting deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of business Failure of the Verification Process Only Two Possibilities, Both Unlawful : 1. Reliance on e-OSCAR System Checkbox Responses : If the CRAs relied solely on automated responses from the furnisher via the e-OSCAR platform without reviewing actual documentation they failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation in violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) and 607 ( b ). Such XXXX reliance is negligent and fails to meet the standard of maximum possible accuracy. \n2. Review of Incomplete or Unsent Documentation : If the CRAs received documentation from XXXX XXXXXXXX and either : o Chose not to review it ; or o Reviewed it but ignored the lack of responsive data ; Then they engaged in willful violations of FCRA 1681i, 1681g, and possibly 616617 concerning civil liability.\n\nViolation of the 30-Day Deadline ( Equifax ) : As of this filing, Equifax has failed to provide the results of its reinvestigation, despite receiving my dispute by certified mail on XX/XX/XXXX. This exceeds the 30-day limit established by FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) and 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ). The disputed XXXX XXXX tradeline continues to appear on my report ( as confirmed via XXXX XXXX ), despite no timely reinvestigation result being issued.\n\nFailure to Provide Required Disclosures : All three CRAs failed to comply with FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) and 1681g, which require : The method of verification Documentation or evidence reviewed Name and contact information of the verifying party Key Violations Include : 1. FCRA 1681i Failure to Conduct Reasonable Reinvestigation 2. FCRA 1681e ( b ) / 607 ( b ) Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy 3. FCRA 1681g / 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) Failure to Provide Verification Method and Documentation 4. FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) Failure to Notify of Dispute Outcome Properly 5. FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Obligation to Delete Tradeline When Information Can not Be Verified Any continued attestation that this account is verified or updated without producing responsive documentation may constitute false certification, constructive fraud, or deceptive practices in violation of federal and state laws. \n\nLEGAL NOTICE AND FINAL OPPORTUNITY FOR RESOLUTION I am documenting this matter in good faith and notifying all parties that, unless this unverifiable tradeline is permanently deleted from my credit file within 15 calendar days, I will proceed with formal legal escalation. This includes : Filing small claims lawsuits against each CRA in New York State Filing complaints with the New York State Attorney General and Better Business Bureau Submitting additional FCRA claims to federal regulators This is not a demand for financial compensation, but a legal demand for the immediate and permanent deletion of the unverified tradeline. If deletion occurs in good faith within the timeframe stated, I will consider the matter resolved and will not pursue further action. \n\nRespectfully Submitted, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-04T17:48:40.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"11214","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14466420","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-04T17:39:53.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Disclosure : As a consumer fully exercising my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), I am documenting each step in preparation for <em>formal</em> legal escalation, if necessary. \n\nClarification : This <em>complaint</em> is separate and distinct from any previously filed <em>complaints</em> against Equifax, Experian, and <em>TransUnion</em>."]},"sort":[15.981796,"14466420"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12989688","_score":15.974924,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"FollowUp Dispute Verification Failure to Comply with FCRA & TILA ( Proof attached; please DELETE the following TransUnion accounts immediately ) I am writing to formally COMPLAIN about the accuracy of information that still appears on my TransUnion credit report. Your previous response stated these tradelines were verified ; however, the attached XXXX screenshots datedXXXX clearly prove multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 611, the Fair Credit Debt Reporting Act ( FCDRA ), and the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ). \n\nXXXX-ACCOUNTS TO BE REMOVED XXXX. XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX Acct # XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX Acct # XXXX XXXX. XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # XXXX XXXX SPECIFIC INACCURACIES STILL UNRESOLVED * Balances/ Credit Limits : TransUnion shows {$0.00} balances or positive creditlimits that do not match XXXX or XXXX. \n* HighCredit & PastDue Figures : Wide dollaramount discrepancies exist across the three bureaus for every tradeline listed above. \n* Last Reported & DateLastActive Fields : TransUnion dates conflict with the dates reported by XXXX and/or XXXXindicating unreliable datafurnishing. \n* PaymentHistory Grids : TransUnion displays continuous CO ( chargeoff ) codes, while the other bureaus alternate between XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. \n* Comment Codes : Notes such as Charged off as bad debt ( TU ) versus Account in disputereported by subscriber ( XXXX ) reveal that verification was not based on original documentation. \n\nXXXX LEGAL BASIS FOR REMOVAL XXXX. 15U.S.C.1681i ( 7 ) You must supply a written description of your investigation within 15days ; you have failed to do so. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Verification must rely on physical review of the original signed contracts or chargeoff ledgers, not automated eOSCAR replies. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.1681e ( b ) TransUnion must follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy; conflicting data proves noncompliance. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.1681i ( 5 ) Information that can not be verified must be deleted. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.1681s2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishers must report only accurate information ; by continuing to publish their conflicting figures, TransUnion is facilitating their violation. \nXXXX. TILA15U.S.C.1601 Credit information must be transparent and accurate ; these tradelines fail that standard. \n\nXXXX REQUESTED ACTIONS ( WITHIN15CALENDARDAYS ) XXXX  DELETE the XXXX tradelines and any related hard inquiries immediately, unless you can produce the original signed contracts, complete account ledgers, and chargeoff worksheets for each account. \n* PROVIDE the full narrative of every verification step you performed, including the name and contact information of each furnisher consulted. \n* ISSUE an updated TransUnion credit report showing the deletions or corrections. \n\nXXXX CONSEQUENCES OF NONCOMPLIANCE If you do not comply within the 15day timeframe, I will : * File complaints with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), and my State Attorney General.\n\n* Seek statutory damages of up to {$1000.00} per violation under 15U.S.C.1681n, plus actual damages under 1681o. \n* Pursue civil action for defamation, negligence, and willful noncompliance. \nThank you for your immediate attention to this matter. I expect your written confirmation within the period prescribed by law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-15T04:13:53.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33126","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12989688","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-15T04:13:29.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["FollowUp <em>Dispute</em> Verification <em>Failure</em> to Comply with FCRA & TILA ( Proof attached; please DELETE the following <em>TransUnion</em> accounts immediately ) I am writing to <em>formally</em> COMPLAIN about the accuracy of information that still appears on my <em>TransUnion</em> credit report."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[15.974924,"12989688"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12989707","_score":15.951391,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"FollowUp Dispute Verification Failure to Comply with FCRA & TILA ( Proof attached; please DELETE the following TransUnion accounts immediately ) I am writing to formally COMPLAIN about the accuracy of information that still appears on my TransUnion credit report. Your previous response stated these tradelines were verified ; however, the attached XXXX screenshots datedXXXX clearly prove multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 611, the Fair Credit Debt Reporting Act ( FCDRA ), and the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ). \n\nXXXX-ACCOUNTS TO BE REMOVED XXXX. XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX Acct # XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX Acct # XXXX XXXX. XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # XXXX XXXX SPECIFIC INACCURACIES STILL UNRESOLVED * Balances/ Credit Limits : TransUnion shows {$0.00} balances or positive creditlimits that do not match XXXX or XXXX. \n* HighCredit & PastDue Figures : Wide dollaramount discrepancies exist across the three bureaus for every tradeline listed above. \n* Last Reported & DateLastActive Fields : TransUnion dates conflict with the dates reported by XXXX and/or XXXXindicating unreliable datafurnishing. \n* PaymentHistory Grids : TransUnion displays continuous CO ( chargeoff ) codes, while the other bureaus alternate between XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. \n* Comment Codes : Notes such as Charged off as bad debt ( TU ) versus Account in disputereported by subscriber ( XXXX ) reveal that verification was not based on original documentation. \n\nXXXX LEGAL BASIS FOR REMOVAL XXXX. 15U.S.C.1681i ( 7 ) You must supply a written description of your investigation within 15days ; you have failed to do so. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Verification must rely on physical review of the original signed contracts or chargeoff ledgers, not automated eOSCAR replies. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.1681e ( b ) TransUnion must follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy; conflicting data proves noncompliance. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.1681i ( 5 ) Information that can not be verified must be deleted. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.1681s2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishers must report only accurate information ; by continuing to publish their conflicting figures, TransUnion is facilitating their violation. \nXXXX. TILA15U.S.C.1601 Credit information must be transparent and accurate ; these tradelines fail that standard. \n\nXXXX REQUESTED ACTIONS ( WITHIN15CALENDARDAYS ) XXXX  DELETE the XXXX tradelines and any related hard inquiries immediately, unless you can produce the original signed contracts, complete account ledgers, and chargeoff worksheets for each account. \n* PROVIDE the full narrative of every verification step you performed, including the name and contact information of each furnisher consulted. \n* ISSUE an updated TransUnion credit report showing the deletions or corrections. \n\nXXXX CONSEQUENCES OF NONCOMPLIANCE If you do not comply within the 15day timeframe, I will : * File complaints with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), and my State Attorney General.\n\n* Seek statutory damages of up to {$1000.00} per violation under 15U.S.C.1681n, plus actual damages under 1681o. \n* Pursue civil action for defamation, negligence, and willful noncompliance. \nThank you for your immediate attention to this matter. I expect your written confirmation within the period prescribed by law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-15T04:13:55.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33126","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12989707","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-15T04:13:29.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["FollowUp <em>Dispute</em> Verification <em>Failure</em> to Comply with FCRA & TILA ( Proof attached; please DELETE the following <em>TransUnion</em> accounts immediately ) I am writing to <em>formally</em> COMPLAIN about the accuracy of information that still appears on my <em>TransUnion</em> credit report."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[15.951391,"12989707"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12989718","_score":15.936453,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"FollowUp Dispute Verification Failure to Comply with FCRA & TILA ( Proof attached; please DELETE the following TransUnion accounts immediately ) I am writing to formally COMPLAIN about the accuracy of information that still appears on my TransUnion credit report. Your previous response stated these tradelines were verified ; however, the attached XXXX screenshots datedXXXX clearly prove multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 611, the Fair Credit Debt Reporting Act ( FCDRA ), and the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ). \n\nXXXX-ACCOUNTS TO BE REMOVED XXXX. XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX Acct # XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX Acct # XXXX XXXX. XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # XXXX XXXX SPECIFIC INACCURACIES STILL UNRESOLVED * Balances/ Credit Limits : TransUnion shows {$0.00} balances or positive creditlimits that do not match XXXX or XXXX. \n* HighCredit & PastDue Figures : Wide dollaramount discrepancies exist across the three bureaus for every tradeline listed above. \n* Last Reported & DateLastActive Fields : TransUnion dates conflict with the dates reported by XXXX and/or XXXXindicating unreliable datafurnishing. \n* PaymentHistory Grids : TransUnion displays continuous CO ( chargeoff ) codes, while the other bureaus alternate between XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. \n* Comment Codes : Notes such as Charged off as bad debt ( TU ) versus Account in disputereported by subscriber ( XXXX ) reveal that verification was not based on original documentation. \n\nXXXX LEGAL BASIS FOR REMOVAL XXXX. 15U.S.C.1681i ( 7 ) You must supply a written description of your investigation within 15days ; you have failed to do so. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Verification must rely on physical review of the original signed contracts or chargeoff ledgers, not automated eOSCAR replies. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.1681e ( b ) TransUnion must follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy; conflicting data proves noncompliance. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.1681i ( 5 ) Information that can not be verified must be deleted. \nXXXX. 15U.S.C.1681s2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishers must report only accurate information ; by continuing to publish their conflicting figures, TransUnion is facilitating their violation. \nXXXX. TILA15U.S.C.1601 Credit information must be transparent and accurate ; these tradelines fail that standard. \n\nXXXX REQUESTED ACTIONS ( WITHIN15CALENDARDAYS ) XXXX  DELETE the XXXX tradelines and any related hard inquiries immediately, unless you can produce the original signed contracts, complete account ledgers, and chargeoff worksheets for each account. \n* PROVIDE the full narrative of every verification step you performed, including the name and contact information of each furnisher consulted. \n* ISSUE an updated TransUnion credit report showing the deletions or corrections. \n\nXXXX CONSEQUENCES OF NONCOMPLIANCE If you do not comply within the 15day timeframe, I will : * File complaints with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), and my State Attorney General.\n\n* Seek statutory damages of up to {$1000.00} per violation under 15U.S.C.1681n, plus actual damages under 1681o. \n* Pursue civil action for defamation, negligence, and willful noncompliance. \nThank you for your immediate attention to this matter. I expect your written confirmation within the period prescribed by law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-15T04:13:55.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33126","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12989718","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-15T03:59:56.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["FollowUp <em>Dispute</em> Verification <em>Failure</em> to Comply with FCRA & TILA ( Proof attached; please DELETE the following <em>TransUnion</em> accounts immediately ) I am writing to <em>formally</em> COMPLAIN about the accuracy of information that still appears on my <em>TransUnion</em> credit report."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[15.936453,"12989718"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14460708","_score":15.636614,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Disclosure : As a consumer fully exercising my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), I am documenting each step in preparation for formal legal escalation, if necessary. \nClarification : This complaint is separate and distinct from any previously filed complaints against Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. It addresses new violations and failures, specifically their refusal to provide verification documentation related to the XXXX dispute, as required under FCRA 1681g and 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). It is not duplicative in subject matter or legal basis. This is not a re-dispute. \nReference : Disputed XXXX XXXX account beginning with XXXX ( Transunion and Experian format ) or ending in XXXX ( Equifax format ), depending on the formatting used. This account currently reflects a charge-off status, past due balance {$5000.00}, Credit limit {$4000.00} and derogatory payment history on my credit report. \nSubject : Complaint Against Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion for FCRA Violations Improper Verification of a XXXX Account and Refusal to Provide Verification Documentation ( FCRA 1681g, 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), and Related Provisions Narrative This complaint is directed against the XXXX nationwide consumer reporting agencies Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion for willfully and negligently violating multiple provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) in their handling of my dispute regarding an inaccurate and unverifiable tradeline from XXXX XXXX. \nBackground Facts The XXXX tradeline has been the subject of prior disputes and legal inquiries, with certified dispute letters sent in XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted a supplemental dispute to Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax identifying the XXXX XXXX as unverifiable, incomplete, and misleading, and specifically requested : - Full payment history - Signed agreements - Itemized statements - Proof of debt ownership or immediate deletion if documentation could not be produced.\n\nThis dispute cited FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and demanded compliance. To date, no documentation has been provided by either XXXX or the credit reporting agencies. The tradeline remains legally unverifiable and must be deleted. \nXXXX failed to respond to the dispute and did not furnish any signed contracts, transactional records, or itemized billing history, undermining any claim of verification. \nExperian marked the tradeline as Verified and Updated, but failed to produce any new data or explanation. This suggests the investigation was superficial or automated a likely violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ). \nExperian altered the past due as of date from XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX without any legitimate basis or new account activity a post hoc manipulation that falsely extends the accounts derogatory status and misrepresents account activity in violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 607 ( b ) TransUnion returned a similarly vague outcome, labeling the account as 'verified ' without providing any documentation from XXXX or describing the method of verification. \nTransUnion and XXXX report a XXXX XXXX of {$5000.00}, while simultaneously reporting a charge-off and current balance of {$5000.00} exceeding the {$4000.00} credit limit. No documentation has been provided to justify the {$4.00} discrepancy, nor explain how or when this high balance occurred. The inconsistency raises concerns of unverified interest, fees, or internal reporting inflation, and violates the requirement for maximum possible accuracy under FCRA 607 ( b ). This High Balance was not disclosed in earlier reports, and its appearance only after my dispute suggests a possible post hoc or reconstructed update, not a verified fact. Without itemized statements or creditor explanation, this change is unverifiable and must be treated as such under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). \nBalance and Timeline Inconsistencies o The Transunion dispute result report labels the account as having an Original Charge-off of {$5000.00} in XX/XX/XXXX, yet separately lists a High Balance of {$5000.00} a value that exceeds the charge-off amount. Since charge-off represents the final balance deemed uncollectible, a higher balance appearing after the account was charged off is both procedurally and logically inconsistent. \no Furthermore, the term Original Charge-off misleadingly implies that there were multiple charge-off events, but no additional charge-off dates or updates are listed. There is also no date provided for when the High Balance occurred, nor was any supporting documentation offered.\n\no These inconsistencies violate the Fair Credit Reporting Acts standard for maximum possible accuracy ( FCRA 607 ( b ) ) and materially misrepresent the nature of the debt. The CRAs updated this account without verifying its accuracy or ensuring consistency between fields. \nThe charge-off balance ( {$5000.00} ) exceeds the original credit limit ( {$4000.00} ), raising major concerns about unverifiable over-limit fees or interest which must be validated but were not. \nNo payments or updates have occurred since XX/XX/XXXX, yet the account is still listed as updated as of XX/XX/XXXX likely using stale or recycled data. This violates FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). \nThe reported account balance exceeds the credit limit, suggesting unverified fees or interest accruals, which were neither explained nor validated during the reinvestigation. \nScheduled payment and actual payment history remain at {$0.00} for over XXXX  months, yet the account is still reported as a valid, active charge-off contradicting the requirement to report accurate and current data. \nNone of the CRAs provided notice of the changes made to the tradeline, violating FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ), which mandates that consumers be informed of results and the method used during reinvestigation. \nUnverified Account Elements : XXXX failed to produce any of the following when requested through dispute or reinvestigation : Itemized balance history or account statements Signed applications or cardholder agreements Records of authorized or signed transactions Evidence of mailed or delivered late payment/charge-off notices Proof of consent to fees, interest, or terms of credit Full payment posting history Evidence of ownership or authorization to report the debt The absence of this documentation from both the furnisher and the CRAs shows that the account was not properly verified and remains unsubstantiated under FCRA standards. These failures also likely violate : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which prohibits inclusion of information that can not be verified as accurate and complete XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, prohibiting deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of business Failure of the Verification Process Only XXXX Possibilities, Both Unlawful : 1. Reliance on e-OSCAR System Checkbox Responses : If the CRAs relied solely on automated responses from the furnisher via the e-OSCAR platform without reviewing actual documentation they failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation in violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) and 607 ( b ). Such blind reliance is negligent and fails to meet the standard of maximum possible accuracy.\n\n2. Review of Incomplete or Unsent Documentation : If the CRAs received documentation from XXXX  XXXX and either : o Chose not to review it ; or o Reviewed it but ignored the lack of responsive data ; Then they engaged in willful violations of FCRA 1681i, 1681g, and possibly 616617 concerning civil liability.\n\nViolation of the 30-Day Deadline ( Equifax and XXXX Bank ) : As of this filing, Equifax has failed to provide the results of its reinvestigation, despite receiving my dispute by certified mail on XX/XX/XXXX. This exceeds the XXXX limit established under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) and 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ). The disputed XXXX tradeline continues to appear on my report ( as confirmed via XXXX XXXX ), despite no timely reinvestigation result being issued. An immediate deletion of the account is a must. \nFurthermore, XXXX XXXX failed to respond to my direct dispute within this 30-day period, and did not supply any of the required verification documents ( e.g., signed agreements, billing records, proof of ownership ). The continued presence of this tradeline after the expiration of the statutory reinvestigation period without verified supporting evidence constitutes a violation of the FCRA and triggers the CRAs duty to delete the account under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). An immediate deletion of the account is a must.\n\nFailure to Provide Required Disclosures : All three CRAs failed to com\nply with FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) and 1681g, which require : The method of verification Documentation or evidence reviewed Name and contact information of the verifying party Key Violations Include : 1. FCRA 1681i Failure to Conduct Reasonable Reinvestigation 2. FCRA 1681e ( b ) / 607 ( b ) Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy 3. FCRA 1681g / 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) Failure to Provide Verification Method and Documentation 4. FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) Failure to Notify of Dispute Outcome Properly 5. FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Obligation to Delete Tradeline When Information Can not Be Verified Any continued attestation that this account is verified or updated without producing responsive documentation may constitute false certification, constructive fraud, or deceptive practices in violation of federal and state laws. \nLEGAL NOTICE AND FINAL OPPORTUNITY FOR RESOLUTION I am documenting this matter in good faith and notifying all parties that, unless this unverifiable tradeline is permanently deleted from my credit file within XXXX calendar days, I will proceed with formal legal escalation. This includes : Filing small claims lawsuits against each CRA in XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Filing complaints with the XXXX XXXX State Attorney General and XXXX XXXX XXXX Submitting additional FCRA claims to federal regulators This is not a demand for financial compensation, but a legal demand for the immediate and permanent deletion of the unverified tradeline. If deletion occurs in good faith within the timeframe stated, I will consider the matter resolved and will not pursue further action.\n\nDocumentation Request Under FCRA Pursuant to FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) and 1681g, this communication also serves as my formal request for all records, data, and descriptions of the procedures used to verify the accuracy and completeness of the XXXX XXXX  account referenced in this complaint. \nPlease provide : The method of verification, All documentation or evidence reviewed, and The name and contact information of the party who verified the account. \nThis information must be provided within XXXX calendar days of this notice, in accordance with federal law. \nPlease refer to the attached Exhibit Index for a complete list of supporting documentation Respectfully Submitted, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-05T00:09:43.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"11214","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14460708","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-04T23:58:51.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Disclosure : As a consumer fully exercising my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), I am documenting each step in preparation for <em>formal</em> legal escalation, if necessary. \nClarification : This <em>complaint</em> is separate and distinct from any previously filed <em>complaints</em> against Equifax, Experian, and <em>TransUnion</em>."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[15.636614,"14460708"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14463946","_score":15.634466,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Disclosure : As a consumer fully exercising my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), I am documenting each step in preparation for formal legal escalation, if necessary. \nClarification : This complaint is separate and distinct from any previously filed complaints against Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. It addresses new violations and failures, specifically their refusal to provide verification documentation related to the XXXX dispute, as required under FCRA 1681g and 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). It is not duplicative in subject matter or legal basis. This is not a re-dispute. \nReference : Disputed XXXX XXXX account beginning with XXXX ( Transunion and Experian format ) or ending in XXXX ( Equifax format ), depending on the formatting used. This account currently reflects a charge-off status, past due balance {$5000.00}, Credit limit {$4000.00} and derogatory payment history on my credit report. \nSubject : Complaint Against Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion for FCRA Violations Improper Verification of a XXXX Account and Refusal to Provide Verification Documentation ( FCRA 1681g, 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), and Related Provisions Narrative This complaint is directed against the XXXX nationwide consumer reporting agencies Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion for willfully and negligently violating multiple provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) in their handling of my dispute regarding an inaccurate and unverifiable tradeline from XXXX XXXX. \nBackground Facts The XXXX tradeline has been the subject of prior disputes and legal inquiries, with certified dispute letters sent in XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted a supplemental dispute to Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax identifying the XXXX XXXX as unverifiable, incomplete, and misleading, and specifically requested : - Full payment history - Signed agreements - Itemized statements - Proof of debt ownership or immediate deletion if documentation could not be produced.\n\nThis dispute cited FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and demanded compliance. To date, no documentation has been provided by either XXXX or the credit reporting agencies. The tradeline remains legally unverifiable and must be deleted. \nXXXX failed to respond to the dispute and did not furnish any signed contracts, transactional records, or itemized billing history, undermining any claim of verification. \nExperian marked the tradeline as Verified and Updated, but failed to produce any new data or explanation. This suggests the investigation was superficial or automated a likely violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ). \nExperian altered the past due as of date from XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX without any legitimate basis or new account activity a post hoc manipulation that falsely extends the accounts derogatory status and misrepresents account activity in violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 607 ( b ) TransUnion returned a similarly vague outcome, labeling the account as 'verified ' without providing any documentation from XXXX or describing the method of verification. \nTransUnion and XXXX report a XXXX XXXX of {$5000.00}, while simultaneously reporting a charge-off and current balance of {$5000.00} exceeding the {$4000.00} credit limit. No documentation has been provided to justify the {$4.00} discrepancy, nor explain how or when this high balance occurred. The inconsistency raises concerns of unverified interest, fees, or internal reporting inflation, and violates the requirement for maximum possible accuracy under FCRA 607 ( b ). This High Balance was not disclosed in earlier reports, and its appearance only after my dispute suggests a possible post hoc or reconstructed update, not a verified fact. Without itemized statements or creditor explanation, this change is unverifiable and must be treated as such under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). \nBalance and Timeline Inconsistencies o The Transunion dispute result report labels the account as having an Original Charge-off of {$5000.00} in XX/XX/XXXX, yet separately lists a High Balance of {$5000.00} a value that exceeds the charge-off amount. Since charge-off represents the final balance deemed uncollectible, a higher balance appearing after the account was charged off is both procedurally and logically inconsistent. \no Furthermore, the term Original Charge-off misleadingly implies that there were multiple charge-off events, but no additional charge-off dates or updates are listed. There is also no date provided for when the High Balance occurred, nor was any supporting documentation offered.\n\no These inconsistencies violate the Fair Credit Reporting Acts standard for maximum possible accuracy ( FCRA 607 ( b ) ) and materially misrepresent the nature of the debt. The CRAs updated this account without verifying its accuracy or ensuring consistency between fields. \nThe charge-off balance ( {$5000.00} ) exceeds the original credit limit ( {$4000.00} ), raising major concerns about unverifiable over-limit fees or interest which must be validated but were not. \nNo payments or updates have occurred since XX/XX/XXXX, yet the account is still listed as updated as of XX/XX/XXXX likely using stale or recycled data. This violates FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). \nThe reported account balance exceeds the credit limit, suggesting unverified fees or interest accruals, which were neither explained nor validated during the reinvestigation. \nScheduled payment and actual payment history remain at {$0.00} for over XXXX  months, yet the account is still reported as a valid, active charge-off contradicting the requirement to report accurate and current data. \nNone of the CRAs provided notice of the changes made to the tradeline, violating FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ), which mandates that consumers be informed of results and the method used during reinvestigation. \nUnverified Account Elements : XXXX failed to produce any of the following when requested through dispute or reinvestigation : Itemized balance history or account statements Signed applications or cardholder agreements Records of authorized or signed transactions Evidence of mailed or delivered late payment/charge-off notices Proof of consent to fees, interest, or terms of credit Full payment posting history Evidence of ownership or authorization to report the debt The absence of this documentation from both the furnisher and the CRAs shows that the account was not properly verified and remains unsubstantiated under FCRA standards. These failures also likely violate : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which prohibits inclusion of information that can not be verified as accurate and complete XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, prohibiting deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of business Failure of the Verification Process Only XXXX Possibilities, Both Unlawful : 1. Reliance on e-OSCAR System Checkbox Responses : If the CRAs relied solely on automated responses from the furnisher via the e-OSCAR platform without reviewing actual documentation they failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation in violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) and 607 ( b ). Such blind reliance is negligent and fails to meet the standard of maximum possible accuracy.\n\n2. Review of Incomplete or Unsent Documentation : If the CRAs received documentation from XXXX  XXXX and either : o Chose not to review it ; or o Reviewed it but ignored the lack of responsive data ; Then they engaged in willful violations of FCRA 1681i, 1681g, and possibly 616617 concerning civil liability.\n\nViolation of the 30-Day Deadline ( Equifax and XXXX Bank ) : As of this filing, Equifax has failed to provide the results of its reinvestigation, despite receiving my dispute by certified mail on XX/XX/XXXX. This exceeds the XXXX limit established under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) and 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ). The disputed XXXX tradeline continues to appear on my report ( as confirmed via XXXX XXXX ), despite no timely reinvestigation result being issued. An immediate deletion of the account is a must. \nFurthermore, XXXX XXXX failed to respond to my direct dispute within this 30-day period, and did not supply any of the required verification documents ( e.g., signed agreements, billing records, proof of ownership ). The continued presence of this tradeline after the expiration of the statutory reinvestigation period without verified supporting evidence constitutes a violation of the FCRA and triggers the CRAs duty to delete the account under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). An immediate deletion of the account is a must.\n\nFailure to Provide Required Disclosures : All three CRAs failed to com\nply with FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) and 1681g, which require : The method of verification Documentation or evidence reviewed Name and contact information of the verifying party Key Violations Include : 1. FCRA 1681i Failure to Conduct Reasonable Reinvestigation 2. FCRA 1681e ( b ) / 607 ( b ) Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy 3. FCRA 1681g / 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) Failure to Provide Verification Method and Documentation 4. FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) Failure to Notify of Dispute Outcome Properly 5. FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Obligation to Delete Tradeline When Information Can not Be Verified Any continued attestation that this account is verified or updated without producing responsive documentation may constitute false certification, constructive fraud, or deceptive practices in violation of federal and state laws. \nLEGAL NOTICE AND FINAL OPPORTUNITY FOR RESOLUTION I am documenting this matter in good faith and notifying all parties that, unless this unverifiable tradeline is permanently deleted from my credit file within XXXX calendar days, I will proceed with formal legal escalation. This includes : Filing small claims lawsuits against each CRA in XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Filing complaints with the XXXX XXXX State Attorney General and XXXX XXXX XXXX Submitting additional FCRA claims to federal regulators This is not a demand for financial compensation, but a legal demand for the immediate and permanent deletion of the unverified tradeline. If deletion occurs in good faith within the timeframe stated, I will consider the matter resolved and will not pursue further action.\n\nDocumentation Request Under FCRA Pursuant to FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) and 1681g, this communication also serves as my formal request for all records, data, and descriptions of the procedures used to verify the accuracy and completeness of the XXXX XXXX  account referenced in this complaint. \nPlease provide : The method of verification, All documentation or evidence reviewed, and The name and contact information of the party who verified the account. \nThis information must be provided within XXXX calendar days of this notice, in accordance with federal law. \nPlease refer to the attached Exhibit Index for a complete list of supporting documentation Respectfully Submitted, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-05T00:09:43.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"11214","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14463946","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-05T00:09:17.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Disclosure : As a consumer fully exercising my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), I am documenting each step in preparation for <em>formal</em> legal escalation, if necessary. \nClarification : This <em>complaint</em> is separate and distinct from any previously filed <em>complaints</em> against Equifax, Experian, and <em>TransUnion</em>."]},"sort":[15.634466,"14463946"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11742224","_score":15.187569,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally dispute the accuracy and completeness of several items on my credit report issued on [ Report Date ]. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), I have the right to dispute any information I believe to be inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable. Please investigate and remove or correct the following items promptly. Below, I have listed the accounts in question, their inaccuracies, and the applicable FCRA violations : XXXX XXXX  ( Account # XXXX ) **Error : Balance discrepancies : TransUnion : {$510.00} XXXX : {$580.00} XXXX : $ XXXXViolation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) - Failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy of reported data.Requested Action : Verify and correct balance or delete if unverifiable. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX ( Account # XXXX ) **Error : Past due balance of {$80.00}, marked as Late 30 Days despite being disputed.Violation : FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) - Failure to update and correct disputed information.Requested Action : Remove the past-due balance or the entire account if it can not be verified. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX ( Account # XXXX ) **Error : Charged-off account with a reported past-due amount of {$120.00}, conflicting Collection/Chargeoff statuses across bureaus.Violation : FCRA 1681i - Failure to investigate and correct errors after a dispute.Requested Action : Delete the account or ensure the status is accurately reflected across all bureaus. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX ( Account # XXXX ) **Error : Account is reported as both Derogatory and Paid, creating a conflicting status.Violation : FCRA 1681c ( a ) - Reporting of misleading or inaccurate information.Requested Action : Verify and correct or delete the account. \n\nXXXX. Bankruptcy InformationError : XXXX  XXXX Bankruptcy marked as Dismissed with conflicting remarks across all bureaus.Violation : FCRA 1681c ( a ) ( 1 ) - Reporting outdated or misleading public record information.Requested Action : Remove or correct public record details. \nDamages and Notice of Legal Remedies Legal Basis for This Dispute 1. Violation of 15 USC 1681b ( 2 ) : You must have a permissible purpose and proper authorization to disclose or maintain my consumer information, including any alleged bankruptcy. You have failed to demonstrate compliance with this requirement.\n\n2. Violation of 15 USC 1681q : Reporting or maintaining inaccurate information without proper validation constitutes a willful misrepresentation of my credit data, which is considered fraudulent.\n\n3. Violation of 18 USC 1028A : The improper handling or dissemination of personal data, including the unverified bankruptcy entry, may fall under identity theft or fraud statutes, subjecting violators to significant penalties.\n\n4. Violation of 15 USC 1681c-2 : Under federal law, you are required to block fraudulent information upon my dispute. You have not complied with this requirement despite the disputed nature of this entry. \n\nEach violation of the above laws constitutes grounds for a statutory fine of {$1000.00} per instance, which I intend to pursue if this matter is not resolved promptly. Additionally, I reserve the right to escalate this issue by filing complaints with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and taking legal action. \n\nXXXX. XXXX  ( Account # XXXX ) **Error : Account is reported as Derogatory but shows no past due amounts, creating confusion in the status.Violation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) - Failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy.Requested Action : Clarify account status or remove if unverifiable. \n\n7. DEPT OF EDUCATIONXXXX ( Multiple Accounts ) Error : Accounts marked as Resolved Dispute but consumer disagrees with resolution.Violation : FCRA 1681i - Failure to conduct a proper reinvestigation.Requested Action : Reinvestigate disputes or remove the disputed accounts. \n\nXXXX. XXXX ( Account # XXXX ) Error : Account listed as Paid but linked to XXXX XXXX Bankruptcy, leading to a conflicting narrative.Violation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) - Inconsistent account reporting.Requested Action : Correct the status or delete the account. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX ( Account # XXXX ) **Error : Account marked as Wage Earner Plan and Derogatory despite being disputed and resolved.Violation : FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) - Furnishing inaccurate information.Requested Action : Verify or remove. \n\nPer the FCRA, I expect you to : Conduct a thorough investigation of these items. \n\nProvide me with a written response detailing the results of your investigation. \n\nCorrect or delete any unverifiable or inaccurate information. \n\nSend me an updated copy of my credit report. \n\nIf the disputed items are not resolved to my satisfaction, I will escalate the matter to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) for further review. Please be advised that I have also copied this letter to the CFPB for documentation purposes. \n\nI have attached a copy of my credit report with the disputed items highlighted, as well as identification documents to verify my identity ( e.g., drivers license, utility bill ). \n\nThank you for addressing this matter promptly. I look forward to your response within the 30-day period mandated by the FCRA. Please contact me by mail at the address listed above or by phone at [ Your Phone Number ] if you require additional information.\n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-25T18:13:30.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"60153","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11742224","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-25T18:13:28.000Z","state":"IL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am writing to <em>formally</em> <em>dispute</em> the accuracy and <em>completeness</em> of several items on my credit report issued on [ Report Date ]. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), I have the right to <em>dispute</em> any information I believe to be inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable. Please <em>investigate</em> and remove or correct the following items promptly."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[15.187569,"11742224"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13359162","_score":15.020262,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this formal complaint against TransUnion for knowingly and willfully furnishing inaccurate, misleading, and re-aged information regarding a charged-off account serviced by XXXX Bank. I am requesting immediate deletion of the account from my credit report due to multiple Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Metro 2 violations. \n\nXXXX current reporting as of XX/XX/XXXX, is materially inconsistent with documentation provided directly by XXXX XXXX including their XX/XX/XXXX response letter. Below is a full breakdown of each violation and inconsistency : Inaccuracy # 1 : Ongoing Updates After Charge-Off Reported Inaccuracy : TransUnion continues to update this charged-off account monthly through XX/XX/XXXX, showing a Charge-Off ( C/O ) status with an unpaid balance and past due amount of {$2500.00}. \n\nWhy Its Incorrect : The XXXX letter clearly states that this account was charged off and written off as of XX/XX/XXXX. No payments were made after that date. Therefore, continuing to report a past due balance each month after charge-off is inaccurate, misleading, and violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and Metro 2 Format Guidelines , which prohibit reporting new delinquencies after charge-off.\n\nLegal Rebuttal : Under Metro 2, a charged-off account must reflect the charge-off date and not be re-aged or updated monthly to falsely appear newly delinquent. Updating the same delinquency every month is a deceptive practice under UDAAP and FCRA 607 ( b ) ( CRA duty to ensure maximum accuracy ).\n\nInaccuracy # 2 : Misleading Balance Representation Reported Inaccuracy : TransUnion reports a balance and past due amount of {$2500.00} as of XX/XX/XXXX. However, the original charge-off balance according to XXXX own letter was {$1600.00}. \n\nWhy Its Incorrect : This contradicts FinWises own written response and suggests that the account balance was inflated post charge-off, which is unlawful. The balance should have been frozen as of the date the account was charged off in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nLegal Rebuttal : Per FCRA 623 and Metro 2, furnishers and CRAs can not misrepresent balances post charge-off. Updating or increasing the balance without further billing or payments after write-off is considered false furnishing and potentially debt re-aging.\n\nInaccuracy # 3 : No Indication of Account Transfer or Collection Reported Inaccuracy : TransUnion does not mark the account as Transferred or Sold to a third party, nor does it reflect any collection agency status. \n\nWhy Its Incorrect : XXXX XX/XX/XXXX letter confirms the account was placed with TrueAccord for collection as early as XXXX and again in XXXX. This transfer of collection authority is material and must be shown on the report per Metro 2 formatting rules.\n\nLegal Rebuttal : Failure to show that an account has been transferred to a collection agency misleads other creditors and violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( duty to update and correct previously reported data ). The absence of a transferred or collection status masks the true state of the debt.\n\nInaccuracy # 4 : Missing Payment History ( Pre-Charge-Off ) Reported Inaccuracy : XXXX file omits payment history entirely from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, and then abruptly reflects a charge-off from XX/XX/XXXX onward. \n\nWhy Its Incorrect : The consumer report fails to show the actual progression of payment behavior or accurate last payment made ( which is listed as XX/XX/XXXX ). This violates the completeness requirement under FCRA and Metro 2.\n\nLegal Rebuttal : FCRA 611 ( a ) and Metro 2 guidelines require complete and accurate reporting. Leaving out partial history while continuing monthly charge-off updates implies selective reporting, which is both misleading and prejudicial to my creditworthiness.\n\nInaccuracy # 5 : False Verified Status by TransUnion Reported Inaccuracy : Despite these glaring inconsistencies, TransUnion marked the account as Verified as of XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nWhy Its Incorrect : This verification occurred despite receiving contrary documentation directly from the creditor that confirms inaccuracies in balance and charge-off reporting. TransUnion failed to perform a reasonable reinvestigation under FCRA 611 ( a ).\n\nLegal Rebuttal : TransUnion is liable under FCRA 607 ( b ) and 611 ( a ) for failing to independently validate the data, especially when the consumer provides conflicting proof. Simply deferring to the furnisher without reconciling the discrepancies is a breach of CRA duties. \n\nAdditional Points : This account should have been frozen as of XX/XX/XXXX, reflecting the charge-off, a fixed balance ( originally {$1600.00} per XXXX ), and no further monthly derogatory updates. not actively updated through XX/XX/XXXX. \nMonthly updates showing a charge-off and unpaid balance for over 5 years post-default are intended to cause maximum derogatory harm, not reflect accuracy or completeness. \nThe XX/XX/XXXX letter from XXXX ( attached ) serves as primary evidence that the continued reporting is incorrect and not aligned with FCRA, FDCPA, or Metro 2. \n\nAccording to standard credit reporting and Metro 2 guidelines : Once an account is charged off, it must not continue to show new late payments, updated past due balances, or ongoing activity unless there is actual collection activity ( which must be reported accurately and separately ).\n\nContinuing to update a charge-off every month through 2025 falsely re-ages the debt and artificially extends its derogatory impact on your credit report.\n\nReporting a past due balance of {$2500.00} every month post-charge-off, with no payments made, is illegal and deceptive under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and Metro 2 standards. \n\n\nLegal Violations by XXXX Bank and TransUnion in This Account Reporting 1. FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate or Incomplete Information FinWise continued furnishing the account with a Charge-Off and a balance of {$2500.00} from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, even though : The original charge-off balance was {$1600.00}. \nThey state in their letter the debt was placed with a collection agency in XXXX and again in XXXX. \nNo payments were made after charge-off, meaning the balance should not have been changing or updated monthly. \n\nViolation : Furnishing false balance data and failing to update the tradeline to Transferred/Sold.\n\n2. FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Duty to Update and Correct Once FinWise placed the account with TrueAccord ( twice ), they were legally obligated to notify TransUnion that the account had been transferred or sold, which they did not. \n\nViolation : XXXX failed to notify the CRA of the transfer, while continuing to report the account as if it remained in their control. \n\n3. FCRA 607 ( b ) CRA Obligation to Ensure Accuracy TransUnion is not permitted to blindly rely on information from data furnishers. As a Credit Reporting Agency ( CRA ), it has an independent legal duty to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of all consumer information reported. \n\nViolation : TransUnion marked this account as XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX and has continued to do so for several years, despite numerous disputes and clear contradictory evidenceincluding FinWises own letter stating the debt was placed with a collection agency in XXXX and again in XXXX. TransUnion never fully investigated these discrepancies, failed to request proper documentation of ownership or chain of title, and chose to maintain false and misleading data on my credit report in violation of FCR\n\nA 607 ( b ). 4. FCRA 611 ( a ) Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation You submitted a dispute with evidence that : The account was charged off in XXXX. \nThe balance was originally {$1600.00}, not {$2500.00}. \nThe account was sent to collections twice, yet that wasnt disclosed to the CRA. \n\nViolation : TransUnion failed to reasonably investigate the dispute, ignored your evidence, and failed to reconcile conflicting information from XXXX own letters. \n\n5. FDCPA 807 False or Misleading Representations ( 15 U.S.C. 1692e ) XXXX claims to have placed this account in collections in XXXX and again in XXXX, but continued to report it as a direct creditor account through XXXX. \n\nViolation : This is false representation of debt status. You cant claim to have transferred a debt to a collection agency while continuing to report it yourself, especially if the CRA was not informed. \n\n6. FDCPA 809 Debt Validation and Disclosures ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) If XXXX placed the account with a collection agency in XXXX and again in XXXX, and never provided full chain of title or accurate disclosures to you during validation, then : Violation : They did not properly validate the debt, yet still allowed it to remain active and derogatory on your report. Theyve shown no legal documentation proving ownership. \n\n7. UDAAP Unfair, Dec\n\neptive, and Abusive Acts and Practices ( Consumer Financial Protection Act 1031 ) FinWises letter to you says one thing ( the debt was sent to collections ), while their credit reporting behavior reflects something entirely different. This two-faced strategy is classic UDAAP abuse. Violation : Misleading the consumer while maintaining a false narrative with the credit bureau is a deceptive and abusive practice, especially when the result is prolonged credit harm with no opportunity to verify or resolve the issue. 8. Metro 2 Reporting Guidelines Violations According to the CDIAs Metro 2 manual : A charge-off account must be frozen as of the charge-off date ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \nIf transferred or sold, it must reflect Transferred/Sold and should not reflect ongoing updates under the original creditors name.\n\nOnce placed with collections, the collection agency must take over reporting, and the original creditor should cease updates.\n\nViolations : Failure to stop monthly updates after charge-off.\n\nNo transfer/sale notations.\n\nNo collection tradeline shown. \nOngoing past due balance with {$0.00} paidfalse portrayal of delinquency. \n\nXXXX Bank can not have it both ways. In their XX/XX/XXXX letter, they admit that the debt was placed with a collection agency in XXXX and again in XXXX, yet they failed to notify TransUnion of either transfer. This means XXXX is furnishing one narrative to the credit bureaus, while telling me something completely different. That is not only deceptiveit is a blatant violation of the FCRA, FDCPA, and UDAAP.\n\nFurther, TransUnion failed to detect or investigate this contradiction, instead choosing to mark the account as verified without reconciling the conflicting ownership data. This calls into question the entire dispute process and whether TransUnion is acting in good faith to comply with its responsibilities under FCRA 611 ( a ) and 607 ( b ). \n\nXXXX can not backtrack now. Their own written admission confirms this account was transferred and therefore should have been marked as Transferred/Sold, frozen from updates, and removed from active derogatory scoring. I demand immediate deletion and regulatory investigation.\n\nRequested Resolution : Immediate deletion of this XXXX account ( XXXX * * * * ) from my TransUnion credit report. \nA full reinvestigation into why the account was marked verified despite conflicting evidence. \nAccountability for any violations of the FCRA, FDCPA, and UDAAP in TransUnions handling of this dispute.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-06T16:56:55.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"483XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13359162","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-06T16:25:20.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am filing this <em>formal</em> <em>complaint</em> against <em>TransUnion</em> for knowingly and willfully furnishing inaccurate, misleading, and re-aged information regarding a charged-off account serviced by XXXX Bank. I am requesting immediate deletion of the account from my credit report due to multiple Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Metro 2 violations."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[15.020262,"13359162"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16951209","_score":14.835307,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"EXHIBIT D Expanded Legal Violation Narrative Complainant : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX | SSN ( last XXXX ) : XXXX Phone : XXXX | Email : XXXX Account : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nAccount Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Reported by : TransUnion LLC Date : XX/XX/XXXX Purpose of Exhibit : This exhibit presents a plain-language legal analysis of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) violations related to the XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX tradeline referencing XXXX XXXX XXXX as the original creditor. \nEach violation below identifies the relevant FCRA section, evidence found in the consumers TransUnion report, and an explanation of how the conduct breaches federal law. This document is designed for review by CFPB investigators and reflects the complainants direct experience and resulting harm. \n1 Illegal Re-Aging and Inaccurate Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) Law Violated : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) and 605 ( a ) Evidence : Date Opened XX/XX/XXXX | Estimated Removal XX/XX/XXXX The Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) determines how long a negative account can remain on a credit report. This XXXX XXXX accounts removal date ( XX/XX/XXXX ) conflicts with its open date ( XX/XX/XXXX ), indicating unlawful re-aging. This practice extends the reporting period beyond XXXX years and violates the FCRAs accuracy requirement. Re-aging misleads lenders by making an older debt appear newer, causing unjust credit damage. \nImpact : The re-aged account artificially lowers credit scores, increases interest rates, and misrepresents credit history. Requested Action : Correct the DOFD to reflect the original XXXX delinquency date and adjust or delete the tradeline accordingly. \n2 Improper 'Past Due \" Field on a Collection Account Law Violated : FCRA 607 ( b ) Accuracy and completeness standard Evidence : Pay Status 'Collection ' | Past Due {$2500.00} Collection accounts can not lawfully carry a 'Past Due \" field since they are already defaulted and have no active billing cycle. By reporting this field, TransUnion and XXXX XXXX create the false impression that the consumer is behind on a current payment obligation. This inaccurate dual status ( 'Collection ' and 'Past Due ' ) exaggerates delinquency and further depresses the consumers credit score.\n\nImpact : Misleads lenders and damages payment history metrics used in credit scoring. Requested Action : Remove the 'Past Due ' field entirely and update the tradeline to reflect accurate collection-only status.\n\n3 Failure to Conduct a Human Reinvestigation After Dispute Law Violated : FCRA 611 ( a ) Duty to perform a reasonable reinvestigation Evidence : Remarks 'Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagreed \" This notation confirms that TransUnion received a formal dispute but failed to perform a lawful reinvestigation. No supporting documentation from the furnisher was provided, demonstrating that verification relied solely on automated systems such as eOSCAR. The FCRA requires a manual, documented verification processnot electronic confirmation without evidence.\n\nImpact : Deprives the consumer of due process and perpetuates false reporting. Requested Action : Conduct a manual reinvestigation and furnish written proof directly from XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. confirming the accounts validity. \n4 False 'Date Updated \" Activity ( Date Refreshing ) Law Violated : FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Evidence : Date Updated XX/XX/XXXX The tradeline shows a 'Date Updated ' of XX/XX/XXXX, suggesting new account activity even though this collection has been static since XXXX. This practice, known as 'date refreshing, ' manipulates credit scoring systems by making the debt appear recent and more severe. Such false updating is deceptive and undermines the accuracy standards required under the FCRA. \nImpact : Misrepresents account activity to creditors and causes ongoing harm by re-triggering delinquency scoring factors. Requested Action : Freeze the update date to reflect the true inactivity of the account or remove the tradeline entirely. \n5 Duplicate Reporting Between XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. \nLaw Violated : FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Evidence : Both XXXX and XXXX XXXX reporting identical {$2500.00} balances When a debt is sold or transferred, the original creditor must update its tradeline to {$0.00} and mark it 'sold/closed. ' Here, XXXX continues to report the same balance while XXXX XXXX also reports the debt, doubling the consumers total liability. This duplication creates false credit utilization ratios and unfairly amplifies the negative impact of a single debt. \nImpact : Distorts total debt load and damages creditworthiness. Requested Action : Ensure XXXX reports a {$0.00} balance and remove duplicate tradeline entries. \nSummary and Requested Relief : The combined violations described above constitute willful and negligent noncompliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Each violation carries a statutory penalty of {$1000.00}, totaling {$5000.00} for this account. This brings my cumulative total of identified TransUnion violations to {$39000.00} as of this filing. \nI respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau direct TransUnion to : ( 1 ) delete or correct the inaccurate tradeline, ( 2 ) require XXXX XXXX and XXXX to submit documentary evidence of accuracy, and ( 3 ) ensure no reinsertion occurs without full compliance under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ).\n\nDeclaration : I affirm under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this document is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. This Exhibit D is submitted in good faith to support my formal CFPB complaint dated XX/XX/XXXX. \nSignature : ________________________________ Date Signed : XX/XX/XXXX Name : XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-31T17:29:33.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"301XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16951209","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-31T17:20:28.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Requested Action : Remove the 'Past Due ' field entirely and update the tradeline to reflect accurate collection-only status.\n\n3 <em>Failure</em> to Conduct a Human Reinvestigation After <em>Dispute</em> Law Violated : FCRA 611 ( a ) Duty to perform a reasonable reinvestigation Evidence : Remarks '<em>Completed</em> <em>investigation</em> of FCRA <em>dispute</em> consumer disagreed \" This notation confirms that <em>TransUnion</em> received a <em>formal</em> <em>dispute</em> but failed to perform a lawful reinvestigation."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[14.835307,"16951209"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18637644","_score":14.829099,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB Complaint Narrative : Violations of FCRA and FDCPA Company Name : LVNV Funding XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number : [ Insert Last 4 : XXXX ] Resurgent ID : XXXX XXXX Summary of Dispute I am filing this complaint because XXXX XXXX XXXX and its servicer, XXXX XXXX XXXX, are in ongoing violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). Despite five ( 5 ) formal written requests for debt validation and proof of ownership, the company has failed to provide a complete \" Chain of Title '' or the required Purchase/Forward Flow Agreement. Furthermore, their own reported data contains a fatal legal contradiction that invalidates their claim of ownership.\n\nViolation 1 : Failure to Validate and False Representations ( FDCPA 1692g & 1692e ) I have disputed this debt five times. Under 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ), a debt collector must cease collection activity until it verifies. XXXX has provided data that is not only insufficient but factually impossible based on their own records : The Conflict : XXXX reports that Loan XXXX XXXX XXXX, Series XXXX, owned the account at the time of charge-off ( XX/XX/year> ). However, XXXX then claims they purchased the account from XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/year>. \n\nThe Legal Issue : If XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was the owner at charge-off, SoFi Lending Corp. had no legal \" Title '' to sell to LVNV unless a prior transfer back to SoFi occurred XXXX XXXX has refused to provide the Purchase Agreement/Forward Flow Agreement that would prove a legal transfer. \n\nViolation : Reporting a \" Seller '' ( SoFi ) that did not own the debt at the time of sale is a false representation of the character and legal status of the debt under 15 U.S.C. 1692e.\n\nViolation 2 : Continued Collection Without Verification ( FDCPA 1692g ) Because I have sent five separate requests for the Forward Flow Agreement and account-level schedules, and the company has failed to produce them while continuing to demand payment and report to my credit, they are in direct violation of the \" cease collection '' requirement of the FDCPA. A redacted bill of sale or a generic data printout does not constitute \" competent evidence '' of ownership when the chain of title is explicitly broken.\n\nViolation 3 : Reporting Inaccurate/Incomplete Information ( FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) ) Under the FCRA, furnishers are required to report accurate information and conduct a reasonable investigation upon notice of a dispute. \n\nXXXX is reporting a \" Current Creditor '' status without possessing the underlying legal contract ( The Purchase Agreement ) that grants them that status. \n\nBy failing to correct the \" Seller '' vs. \" Charge-off Creditor '' discrepancy after being notified five times, they are willfully furnishing inaccurate information to the credit bureaus ( Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax ) .\n\nRequested Resolution Immediate Deletion : Since the company can not or will not provide the Purchase Agreement/Forward Flow Agreement to resolve the chain-of-title conflict, the account must be permanently deleted from all credit bureaus. \n\nCease and Desist : A formal notice from the company stating they have closed the file and will cease all collection efforts due to their inability to validate the debt. \n\nAudit : I request the CFPB to audit the \" Forward Flow '' documentation between SoFi and XXXX regarding this portfolio to verify if this specific account was even included in the legal transfer.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-11T20:17:20.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"190XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18637644","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.","date_received":"2026-01-11T20:16:55.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CFPB <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> : Violations of FCRA and FDCPA Company Name : LVNV Funding XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number : [ Insert Last 4 : XXXX ] Resurgent ID : XXXX XXXX Summary of <em>Dispute</em> I am filing this <em>complaint</em> because XXXX XXXX XXXX and its servicer, XXXX XXXX XXXX, are in ongoing violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA )."]},"sort":[14.829099,"18637644"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12926172","_score":14.52351,"_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":["<em>TransUnion</em> 's Responsibility under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) As a consumer reporting agency, <em>TransUnion</em> is obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation if a consumer <em>disputes</em> the <em>completeness</em> or accuracy of any item in their credit file. <em>Failure</em> to promptly correct or delete inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable information after such a <em>dispute</em> constitutes non-compliance with federal law."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Didn't receive notice of right to <em>dispute</em>"]},"sort":[14.52351,"12926172"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13912362","_score":14.029223,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This communication serves as a corrected and expanded formal demand under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Metro 2 compliance standards regarding numerous inaccurate, unverifiable, and non-compliant tradelines being reported on my TransUnion, XXXX XXXX XXXX consumer credit files. \n\nThe previous complaint I submitted included incorrect XXXX XXXX account numbers due to formatting issues in my credit report. Please consider this the official and corrected dispute with all verified and accurate information presented below. The continued presence of these false and duplicate entries has caused me significant financial harm, reputational damage, and emotional distress. If these violations are not corrected and permanently deleted within 15 calendar days, I will pursue civil claims under FCRA 616 and 617, along with all applicable legal remedies. \n\nDUPLICATE & CONFLICTING XXXX XXXX ACCOUNTS Multiple XXXX XXXX tradelines are being reported using the same account number prefix ( XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ), yet the balances, dates opened, and statuses conflict across bureaus : A XXXX account opened XX/XX/XXXX, shows a balance of {$2700.00}, status closed and paid, on TransUnion. \n\nThe same account number appears on XXXX opened XX/XX/XXXX, also with a {$2700.00} balance and paid status. \n\nAnother tradeline with the same number is shown opened XX/XX/XXXX, on TransUnion with a {$2300.00} balance and marked 30 days late. \n\nXXXX reports the same {$2300.00} balance, opened XX/XX/XXXX, but shows it as paid. \n\nA third variation is reported with a balance of {$15000.00}, opened XX/XX/XXXX, and marked refinanced on TransUnion. \n\nXXXX again lists the same account number opened XX/XX/XXXX, with a {$15000.00} balance and also marked refinanced. \n\nAnother entry shows the account opened XX/XX/XXXX, with a balance of {$12000.00} and status closed current on TransUnion. \n\nXXXX lists it as opened XX/XX/XXXX, with the same balance but again reported as a separate closed account. \n\nThese discrepancies violate FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) for furnishing inaccurate information, FCRA 611 ( a ) for failing to reinvestigate, and Metro 2 guidelines for allowing duplicate tradelines with inconsistent statuses and missing dispute flags. This is clear evidence of duplicate reporting under the same account number across multiple dates and statuses. \n\nXXXX XXXX Account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Auto Loan ) XXXX XXXX This charged-off auto loan is being reported to both TransUnion XXXX XXXX, but is missing entirely from XXXX. The account is listed as opened on XX/XX/XXXX, by TransUnion, and XX/XX/XXXX, by XXXX yet both report the exact same account number and loan terms. This inconsistency in the date of origination is a direct violation of Metro 2 reporting standards and FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ), which mandates accurate and uniform data furnishing across bureaus. \n\nThe account was closed and charged off on XX/XX/XXXX, with a reported balance of {$21000.00}. Despite this, both bureaus continue to show a past due amount of {$21000.00}, even though the account is already marked as charged off. This is impermissible under Metro 2, which clearly states that once an account is charged off, no ongoing delinquency or past due amount should be reported unless the consumer has resumed payments which has not occurred here. \n\nFurthermore, neither bureau accurately reflects the dispute history. XXXX includes language indicating a dispute ( subscriber reports dispute resolved consumer disagrees ), yet fails to apply the required Metro 2 dispute code ( XB ), and TransUnion falsely states account not disputed despite the same derogatory tradeline being under dispute. This constitutes violations under FCRA 611 ( a ) and 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) for misrepresenting or omitting dispute notations.\n\nAdditionally, both bureaus report a {$0.00} credit limit on a high-balance installment auto loan. This is materially misleading. A {$21000.00} auto loan should reflect either the original amount financed or a structured term limit not zero. This erroneous limit inflates my utilization ratios and impairs my creditworthiness, in violation of Metro 2 formatting rules and FCRA 623 ( a ). \n\nLastly, the complete absence of this account from XXXX may indicate selective furnishing, data suppression, or inconsistent transmission all of which violate FCRA 1681e ( b ) and undermine the integrity of my consumer file.\n\nViolations Identified : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Conflicting opening dates and false credit limit reporting FCRA 611 ( a ) : Inconsistent dispute response and reinvestigation failure FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) : Dispute flag not applied FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to furnish complete and accurate data to all bureaus Metro 2 Violations : Duplicate account number with inconsistent open dates Charge-off status paired with active past due balance Improper credit limit reporting Missing dispute code No XXXX reporting INACCURATE NEGATIVE ACCOUNTS : XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX. Account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Reported Limit : {$250.00} ( secured card ) Reported High Balance : {$430.00} impossible on a {$250.00} secured line Past Due Amount : {$180.00} on a closed, charged-off account No 1099-C issued, no payment since 2021 Violations : Metro 2 : Conflicting high balance and charge-off coding on a closed secured account FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) : No supporting charge-off documentation FCRA 623 ( a ) : Knowingly reporting unverifiable, mathematically impossible data XXXX. XXXX Account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This collection account is reported on all three bureaus TransUnion, XXXX XXXX XXXX with multiple conflicting data points, inaccurate classifications, and unresolved dispute flags. The errors are detailed below : 1. Conflicting Account Status Across Bureaus TransUnion : Status is Closed XXXX : Status is Closed XXXX : Status is Open This inconsistency directly contradicts Metro 2 standards. A collection account can not be both open and closed simultaneously across credit bureaus. \n\nViolation : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Inconsistent, inaccurate information being furnished Metro 2 Compliance : Status codes must match if the same account is being reported to multiple bureaus 2. Contradictory Dispute Flags TransUnion : Account not disputed XXXX : Account not disputed XXXX : Account disputed Consumer disputes this account information If I have disputed this account with any one bureau, all furnishers are required to investigate and ensure that dispute notations are consistent across all bureaus. Failing to do so violates the consumers rights under FCRA. \n\nViolation : FCRA 611 ( a ) : Inconsistent handling and failure to report dispute resolution uniformly Metro 2 : Dispute flags must be present and consistent across all systems 3. Inconsistent Creditor Remarks TransUnion : Collection account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements XXXX  : Customer disputed account reported by subscriber. Account seriously past due ; assigned to collection agency or internal recovery. \n\nXXXX : Consumer disputes this account information. Collection account. \n\nEach CRA presents a different narrative, despite reporting the same account and balance. Metro 2 mandates that commentary and dispute remarks must be standardized to prevent misleading or confusing entries. \n\nViolation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to ensure maximum accuracy of data Metro 2 Compliance : Mismatched commentary and remarks across furnishers 4. Inaccurate Payment Status Reporting TransUnion XXXX XXXX : Listed as \" Collection/Chargeoff '' XXXX : Listed as \" Late 120 Days '' A collection account can not simultaneously be labeled late 120 days. Once an account is in collections, it is charged off and closed, and should not carry an active delinquency aging status such as late 120.\n\nViolation : Metro 2 Violation : Improper account aging and status coding FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Inconsistent and inaccurate representation of account status 5. Identity Misassociation via Address History This account is also linked to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX GA, an address you have never resided at, as confirmed in your prior disputes. This points to potential identity theft or mixed file contamination. \n\nViolation : FCRA 605B : Consumer identity mismatch or identity theft-related entry FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to match consumer identity with sufficient accuracy Summary of Violations : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Reporting materially inconsistent, unverifiable account data FCRA 611 ( a ) : Failure to update and reflect dispute status across all bureaus FCRA 605B : Reporting data tied to a fraudulent or incorrect address FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to maintain accurate and complete file Metro 2 Compliance Breaches : Improper status codes, open/closed mismatch, missing dispute flags, misclassified aging statuses {$7200.00} balance with zero payment activity Tradeline classification varies per bureau Violations : FCRA 605B : Identity theft component address not linked to me Metro 2 : Discrepant open/closed statuses and activity dates FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to ensure accuracy and proper identity linkage 3. XXXX XXXX Account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This account is being inaccurately reported by both TransUnion and XXXX XXXX XXXX  failing to report the account at all. The following issues constitute serious violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Metro 2 compliance standards : False Late Payments on {$0.00} Balance : TransUnion reports a 30-day late payment in XX/XX/XXXX and a 60-day late payment in XX/XX/XXXX, despite the account showing a {$0.00} balance, no past due amount, and a final payment made on XX/XX/XXXX. The account was closed on XX/XX/XXXX. Reporting delinquencies on an account that was current, paid, and not past due is factually incorrect and damaging. \n\nInconsistent Dispute Resolution Status : TransUnion notes : Dispute resolved ; reported by grantor. \nXXXX notes : Account was in dispute now resolved reported by subscriber. \nXXXX reports nothing at all, not even the existence of the account. This failure to maintain consistent post-dispute notations is a clear violation of FCRA 611 ( a ). \n\nMissing Reporting on XXXX : The account is completely missing from XXXX, which raises concerns about selective furnishing, data suppression, or compliance issues with reporting obligations. All credit reporting agencies must furnish complete and uniform data, and this omission directly undermines the integrity of my credit profile.\n\nHigh Balance Greater Than Credit Limit : The reported high balance is {$270.00}, while the credit limit is only {$220.00}. No explanation or over-limit authorization coding is present. This may reflect a Metro 2 formatting error or unauthorized over-limit reporting, which inflates utilization ratios and causes unnecessary credit score damage. \n\nViolations Committed : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Furnishing knowingly inaccurate or unverifiable information FCRA 611 ( a ) : Failure to consistently report dispute results across all CRAs FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Incomplete and inconsistent reporting across bureaus FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) : No documentation supporting over-limit balance has been provided Metro 2 Guidelines Violated : Improper status codes, unresolved dispute flags, and high balance inconsistencies Violations : FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) : No authorization or legitimate credit transaction FCRA 609 ( a ) : Failure to disclose inquiry basis FCRA XXXX : Willful/negligent access with no consumer consent XXXX Account XXXX XXXX ( Secured Loan ) This account is reported by both TransUnion XXXX XXXX, and is missing entirely from XXXX It is listed as a secured loan with a high balance of {$720.00}, and a final payment made on XX/XX/XXXX. However, multiple reporting inconsistencies and Metro 2/FCRA violations are present across the bureaus. \n\nThe TransUnion tradeline states that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, while XXXX reports the opening date as XX/XX/XXXX. Although a small variance, Metro 2 compliance standards require uniformity across all CRAs. There is no valid reason for conflicting origination dates on a closed installment loan. \n\nThe account was closed on XX/XX/XXXX, with a {$0.00} balance and no past due amount, yet XXXX falsely reports a 30 days late payment status. TransUnion correctly shows the status as Current and does not report any delinquencies. Reporting a 30-day late on a {$0.00} balance account with no past due amount is both factually impossible and materially misleading. It causes undue harm to the consumer 's payment history and credit score. \n\nNo documentation of a late payment has been provided, and the final payment date listed on both bureaus ( XX/XX/XXXX ) shows the account was in good standing at the time of closure. This clearly indicates either a data error or wrongful derogatory coding on XXXX part. \n\nFurthermore, XXXX has no record of this account, despite it being a closed, paid loan which may reflect selective furnishing or failure to report uniformly. All tradelines should be consistently reported across all bureaus unless the consumer has opted out or the data has been suppressed post-dispute. \n\nViolations Committed : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Reporting inaccurate and unverifiable payment history FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to ensure maximum accuracy of information across CRAs FCRA 611 ( a ) : Failure to update or correct false information post-dispute Metro 2 Violations : Conflicting open dates between bureaus Improper late payment status on a paid {$0.00} balance account Missing reporting entirely on XXXX : UNAUTHORIZED HARD INQUIRIES ( NO PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE ) The following 10+ hard inquiries were reported on my TransUnion file, yet I have no associated applications, approvals, or open tradelines with these entities : Company Date Bureau 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 None of these inquiries resulted in a loan or credit approval. I did not authorize these parties to access my consumer file. They have materially damaged my score. Violations : FCRA 604 ( a ) Lack of permissible purpose for access FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) Failure to provide documentation upon request FCRA 616 & 617 Willful and negligent access causing harm Metro 2 : Lack of matching tradelines tied to inquiry originators","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-05T22:44:40.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"303XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13912362","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-05T22:01:39.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Contradictory <em>Dispute</em> Flags <em>TransUnion</em> : Account not <em>disputed</em> XXXX : Account not <em>disputed</em> XXXX : Account <em>disputed</em> Consumer <em>disputes</em> this account information If I have <em>disputed</em> this account with any one bureau, all furnishers are required to <em>investigate</em> and ensure that <em>dispute</em> notations are consistent across all bureaus. Failing to do so violates the consumers rights under FCRA."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[14.029223,"13912362"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13913692","_score":12.822977,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This communication serves as a corrected and expanded formal demand under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and XXXX XXXX compliance standards regarding numerous inaccurate, unverifiable, and non-compliant tradelines being reported on my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX consumer credit files. \n\nThe previous complaint I submitted included incorrect XXXX XXXX account numbers due to formatting issues in my credit report. Please consider this the official and corrected dispute with all verified and accurate information presented below. The continued presence of these false and duplicate entries has caused me significant financial harm, reputational damage, and emotional distress. If these violations are not corrected and permanently deleted within 15 calendar days, I will pursue civil claims under FCRA 616 and 617, along with all applicable legal remedies. \n\nDUPLICATE & CONFLICTING XXXX XXXX ACCOUNTS Multiple XXXX XXXX tradelines are being reported using the same account number prefix ( # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), yet the balances, dates opened, and statuses conflict across bureaus : A XXXX account opened XX/XX/XXXX, shows a balance of {$2700.00}, status closed and paid, on XXXX \n\nThe same account number appears on XXXX opened XX/XX/XXXX, also with a {$2700.00} balance and paid status. \n\nAnother tradeline with the same number is shown opened XX/XX/XXXX, on XXXX with a {$2300.00} balance and marked 30 days late. \n\nXXXX reports the same {$2300.00} balance, opened XX/XX/XXXX, but shows it as paid. \n\nA third variation is reported with a balance of {$15000.00}, opened XX/XX/XXXX, and marked refinanced on XXXX. \n\nXXXX again lists the same account number opened XX/XX/XXXX, with a {$15000.00} balance and also marked refinanced. \n\nAnother entry shows the account opened XX/XX/XXXX, with a balance of {$12000.00} and status closed current on XXXX \n\nXXXX lists it as opened XX/XX/XXXX, with the same balance but again reported as a separate closed account. \n\nThese discrepancies violate FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) for furnishing inaccurate information, FCRA 611 ( a ) for failing to reinvestigate, and Metro 2 guidelines for allowing duplicate tradelines with inconsistent statuses and missing dispute flags. This is clear evidence of duplicate reporting under the same account number across multiple dates and statuses. \n\nXXXX XXXX Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( Auto Loan ) * * This charged-off auto loan is being reported to both XXXX and Experian, but is missing entirely from Equifax. The account is listed as opened on XX/XX/XXXX, by TransUnion, and XX/XX/XXXX, by XXXX yet both report the exact same account number and loan terms. This inconsistency in the date of origination is a direct violation of XXXX XXXX reporting standards and FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ), which mandates accurate and uniform data furnishing across bureaus. \n\nThe account was closed and charged off on XX/XX/XXXX, with a reported balance of {$21000.00}. Despite this, both bureaus continue to show a past due amount of {$21000.00}, even though the account is already marked as charged off. This is impermissible under XXXX XXXX, which clearly states that once an account is charged off, no ongoing delinquency or past due amount should be reported unless the consumer has resumed payments which has not occurred here. \n\nFurthermore, neither bureau accurately reflects the dispute history. Experian includes language indicating a dispute ( subscriber reports dispute resolved consumer disagrees ), yet fails to apply the required XXXX XXXX dispute code ( XB ), and TransUnion falsely states account not disputed despite the same derogatory tradeline being under dispute. This constitutes violations under FCRA XXXX ( a ) and XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) for misrepresenting or omitting dispute notations. \n\nAdditionally, both bureaus report a {$0.00} credit limit on a high-balance installment auto loan. This is materially misleading. A {$21000.00} auto loan should reflect either the original amount financed or a structured term limit not zero. This erroneous limit inflates my utilization ratios and impairs my creditworthiness, in violation of XXXX XXXX formatting rules and FCRA 623 ( a ). \n\nLastly, the complete absence of this account from XXXX may indicate selective furnishing, data suppression, or inconsistent transmission all of which violate FCRA 1681e ( b ) and undermine the integrity of my consumer file. \n\nViolations Identified : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Conflicting opening dates and false credit limit reporting FCRA 611 ( a ) : Inconsistent dispute response and reinvestigation failure FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) : Dispute flag not applied FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to furnish complete and accurate data to all bureaus XXXX XXXX Violations : Duplicate account number with inconsistent open dates Charge-off status paired with active past due balance Improper credit limit reporting Missing dispute code No Equifax reporting XXXX NEGATIVE ACCOUNTS : XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Reported Limit : {$250.00} ( secured card ) Reported High Balance : {$430.00} impossible on a {$250.00} secured line Past Due Amount : {$180.00} on a closed, charged-off account No 1099-C issued, no payment since XXXX Violations : XXXX XXXX : Conflicting high balance and charge-off coding on a closed secured account FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) : No supporting charge-off documentation FCRA 623 ( a ) : Knowingly reporting unverifiable, mathematically impossible data XXXX. XXXX Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  This collection account is reported on all three bureaus XXXX XXXX and XXXX  with multiple conflicting data points, inaccurate classifications, and unresolved dispute flags. The errors are detailed below : 1. Conflicting Account Status Across Bureaus XXXX : Status is Closed XXXX : Status is Closed XXXX : Status is Open This inconsistency directly contradicts XXXX XXXX standards. A collection account can not be both open and closed simultaneously across credit bureaus. \n\nViolation : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Inconsistent, inaccurate information being furnished XXXX XXXX Compliance : Status codes must match if the same account is being reported to multiple bureaus 2. Contradictory Dispute Flags XXXX : Account not disputed XXXX  : Account not disputed XXXX : Account disputed Consumer disputes this account information If I have disputed this account with any one bureau, all furnishers are required to investigate and ensure that dispute notations are consistent across all bureaus. Failing to do so violates the consumers rights under FCRA.\n\nViolation : FCRA 611 ( a ) : Inconsistent handling and failure to report dispute resolution uniformly XXXX XXXX : Dispute flags must be present and consistent across all systems 3. Inconsistent Creditor Remarks XXXX : Collection account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements Experian : Customer disputed account reported by subscriber. Account seriously past due ; assigned to collection agency or internal recovery. \n\nXXXX  : Consumer disputes this account information. XXXXollection account. \n\nEach CRA presents a different narrative, despite reporting the same account and balance. XXXX XXXX mandates that commentary and dispute remarks must be standardized to prevent misleading or confusing entries. \n\nViolation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to ensure maximum accuracy of data XXXX XXXX Compliance : Mismatched commentary and remarks across furnishers 4. Inaccurate Payment Status Reporting XXXX & XXXX : Listed as \" Collection/Chargeoff '' XXXX : Listed as \" Late 120 Days '' A collection account can not simultaneously be labeled late 120 days. Once an account is in collections, it is charged off and closed, and should not carry an active delinquency aging status such as late 120. \n\nViolation : XXXX XXXX Violation : Improper account aging and status coding FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Inconsistent and inaccurate representation of account status 5. Identity Misassociation via Address History This account is also linked to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX GA, an address you have never resided at, as confirmed in your prior disputes. This points to potential identity theft or mixed file contamination. \n\nViolation : FCRA 605B : Consumer identity mismatch or identity theft-related entry FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to match consumer identity with sufficient accuracy Summary of Violations : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Reporting materially inconsistent, unverifiable account data FCRA 611 ( a ) : Failure to update and reflect dispute status across all bureaus FCRA 605B : Reporting data tied to a fraudulent or incorrect address FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to maintain accurate and complete file XXXX XXXX Compliance Breaches : Improper status codes, open/closed mismatch, missing dispute flags, misclassified aging statuses {$7200.00} balance with zero payment activity Tradeline classification varies per bureau Violations : FCRA 605B : Identity theft component address not linked to me XXXX XXXX : Discrepant open/closed statuses and activity dates FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to ensure accuracy and proper identity linkage 3. XXXX XXXXXXXX Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This account is being inaccurately reported by both TransUnion and Experian, with Equifax failing to report the account at all. The following issues constitute serious violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and XXXX XXXX compliance standards : False Late Payments on {$0.00} Balance : TransUnion reports a 30-day late payment in XX/XX/XXXX and a 60-day late payment in XX/XX/XXXX, despite the account showing a {$0.00} balance, no past due amount, and a final payment made on XX/XX/XXXX. The account was closed on XX/XX/XXXX. Reporting delinquencies on an account that was current, paid, and not past due is factually incorrect and damaging. \n\nInconsistent Dispute Resolution Status : XXXX notes : Dispute resolved ; reported by grantor. \nXXXX notes : Account was in dispute now resolved reported by subscriber. \nXXXX reports nothing at all, not even the existence of the account. This failure to maintain consistent post-dispute notations is a clear violation of FCRA 611 ( a ).\n\nMissing Reporting on XXXX  : The account is completely missing from XXXX which raises concerns about selective furnishing, data suppression, or compliance issues with reporting obligations. All credit reporting agencies must furnish complete and uniform data, and this omission directly undermines the integrity of my credit profile. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : The reported high balance is {$270.00}, while the credit limit is only {$220.00}. No explanation or over-limit authorization coding is present. This may reflect a XXXX XXXX formatting error or unauthorized over-limit reporting, which inflates utilization ratios and causes unnecessary credit score damage.\n\nViolations Committed : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Furnishing knowingly inaccurate or unverifiable information FCRA 611 ( a ) : Failure to consistently report dispute results across all CRAs FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Incomplete and inconsistent reporting across bureaus FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) : No documentation supporting over-limit balance has been provided XXXX XXXX Guidelines Violated : Improper status codes, unresolved dispute flags, and high balance inconsistencies Violations : FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) : No authorization or legitimate credit transaction FCRA 609 ( a ) : Failure to disclose inquiry basis FCRA XXXX : Willful/negligent access with no consumer consent XXXX Account # XXXX ( Secured Loan ) This account is reported by both XXXX  and XXXX and is missing entirely from XXXX It is listed as a secured loan with a high balance of {$720.00}, and a final payment made on XX/XX/XXXX. However, multiple reporting inconsistencies and XXXX 2/FCRA violations are present across the bureaus. \n\nThe TransUnion tradeline states that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, while Experian reports the opening date as XX/XX/XXXX. Although a small variance, XXXX XXXX compliance standards require uniformity across all CRAs. There is no valid reason for conflicting origination dates on a closed installment loan. \n\nThe account was closed on XX/XX/XXXX, with a {$0.00} balance and no past due amount, yet XXXX falsely reports a 30 days late payment status. XXXX correctly shows the status as Current and does not report any delinquencies. Reporting a 30-day late on a {$0.00} balance account with no past due amount is both factually impossible and materially misleading. It causes undue harm to the consumer 's payment history and credit score. \n\nNo documentation of a late payment has been provided, and the final payment date listed on both bureaus ( XX/XX/XXXX ) shows the account was in good standing at the time of closure. This clearly indicates either a data error or wrongful derogatory coding on XXXX part. \n\nFurthermore, XXXX has no record of this account, despite it being a closed, paid loan which may reflect selective furnishing or failure to report uniformly. All tradelines should be consistently reported across all bureaus unless the consumer has opted out or the data has been suppressed post-dispute. \n\nViolations Committed : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Reporting inaccurate and unverifiable payment history FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to ensure maximum accuracy of information across CRAs FCRA 611 ( a ) : Failure to update or correct false information post-dispute XXXX XXXX Violations : Conflicting open dates between bureaus Improper late payment status on a paid {$0.00} balance account Missing reporting entirely on Equifax : UNAUTHORIZED HARD INQUIRIES ( NO PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE ) The following XXXX hard inquiries were reported on my TransUnion file, yet I have no associated applications, approvals, or open tradelines with these entities : Company Date Bureau XXXX XXXXXXXX XX/XX/XXXX NEIGHBORS BA XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX SYNCB/SAMS XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  None of these inquiries resulted in a loan or credit approval. I did not authorize these parties to access my consumer file. They have materially damaged my score. Violations : FCRA 604 ( a ) Lack of permissible purpose for access FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) Failure to provide documentation upon request FCRA 616 & 617 Willful and negligent access causing harm XXXX XXXX : Lack of matching tradelines tied to inquiry originators","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-05T22:44:38.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"303XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13913692","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-06-05T22:44:14.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Contradictory <em>Dispute</em> Flags XXXX : Account not <em>disputed</em> XXXX  : Account not <em>disputed</em> XXXX : Account <em>disputed</em> Consumer <em>disputes</em> this account information If I have <em>disputed</em> this account with any one bureau, all furnishers are required to <em>investigate</em> and ensure that <em>dispute</em> notations are consistent across all bureaus. Failing to do so violates the consumers rights under FCRA."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[12.822977,"13913692"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14973488","_score":10.558999,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This request is made pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), specifically 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), which requires that XXXX  conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of any disputed item on a consumers credit report. I am requesting, in accordance with federal law and pursuant to obligations enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), a full and complete Method of Verification ( MOV ) for the tradeline reported by LVNV Funding LLC under account number XXXX Furthermore, XXXX  is obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) ( iii ) to provide me with the business name and address of the furnisher, the telephone number if reasonably available, and a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information, including the name of the person or entity that verified it. I assert that XXXX  failed to provide a legally adequate response, and I request immediate correction and full compliance with disclosure. In addition, XXXX update notification dated XX/XX/XXXX, indicates changes made to this tradeline following a dispute initiated by me. However, the outcome remains opaque, inadequately explained, and devoid of any MOV documentation. This constitutes a breach of my rights under both the FCRA and the standards outlined in CFPB Supervision and Examination Manual guidelines for CRAs. XXXX  is further required to retain all internal documentation pertaining to this dispute under the FCRAs reasonable procedures requirement. I hereby demand a certified copy of the dispute file and internal notes concerning this tradelines reinvestigation. This includes any e-OSCAR communication sent or received, any documents provided by the furnisher, and any XXXX  notes regarding the legitimacy, legality, or accuracy of the LVNV Funding LLC entry. I also request the names and job titles of all personnel involved in processing, adjudicating, or responding to the dispute, whether automated or human, along with a breakdown of how the decision to update was reached, what specific changes were made, and what information formed the basis of the final outcome. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ), I assert that XXXX failed to notify me in writing of the nature of the information provided by LVNV Funding LLC during the reinvestigation process. The law mandates that if information is disputed, and a reinvestigation occurs, the CRA must inform the consumer of the procedure used, which includes the name, address, and contact number of any furnisher of information. No such detail was provided in this case. Furthermore, I formally object to XXXX  use of automated reinvestigation systems, such as e-OSCAR, without human verification or contextual review. This violates the reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy standard of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), as machine-generated responses are categorically incapable of considering nuanced dispute context, such as identity theft indicators, evidentiary documents, or consumer affirmations. This complaint also emphasizes XXXX systemic failure to maintain robust audit trails of dispute resolution. I demand a full log of the disputes lifecycle, including timestamps for when it was received, processed, transmitted to the furnisher, and when any data was updated. If no such timestamp exists, XXXX  is in violation of data retention best practices outlined in CFPB Examination Procedures for Consumer Reporting. Moreover, I challenge the integrity of XXXX  updated status. What exactly was updated? What data points were changed, corrected, or removed? If the dispute concluded without deletion, what evidence did XXXX  find persuasive in favor of the furnisher? Please itemize the alleged balance, date of delinquency, charge-off details, and date of last activity as they appeared before and after the update. Under the CFPBs Bulletin XXXX, consumer reporting agencies are explicitly warned against superficial reinvestigations that merely confirm the presence of data from a furnisher. The bureau reiterates that furnisher confirmation alone is insufficient when a dispute presents documentary evidence. My dispute contained sufficient detail to demand a deeper review, and yet I received no indication that XXXX  engaged in anything more than a basic ping to the furnisher. I am demanding that XXXX  provide copies of all documents obtained from LVNV Funding LLC in response to this dispute, including validation records, billing statements, account origination data, chain of title documentation, and any signed agreements bearing my name. If no such documentation exists, XXXX  is required under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) to delete the item. Additionally, XXXX  report formatting obfuscates the actual status of the account. Terms such as updated do not convey legal meaning and fail to fulfill XXXX  disclosure obligations under 15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ). I request a plain-language explanation of the current account status, balance, historical updates, and whether the data was ever suppressed, temporarily removed, or flagged for review. Furthermore, I assert that LVNV Funding LLC has no lawful basis to report this debt, as they have not furnished evidence of legal ownership, nor have they shown that the debt was incurred through a signed contract. If XXXX  possesses documentation attesting to the legal chain of custody of the debt ( e.g., bills of sale, assignment documents ), I demand immediate access to such materials. In summary, this multi-part complaint requires the following action : 1. A full Method of Verification disclosure consistent with 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ).\n\n2. Certified copies of all reinvestigation records including internal XXXX communications, e-OSCAR dispute tickets, and vendor interactions. \n3. Names, titles, and roles of XXXX  agents involved in this case. \n4. All documentation obtained from LVNV Funding LLC. \n5. A plain-language breakdown of the post-update data on my file. \n6. Immediate deletion of this tradeline if XXXX  can not supply full evidence of verification as mandated by law.\n\nFailure to comply with this request will be reported directly to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Trade Commission, and any relevant state Attorney General. \n\n\n\nXXXX  reliance on automated dispute handling not only undermines the integrity of the reinvestigation process but also erodes public trust in the accuracy of credit reporting. According to the CFPBs XXXX Annual Report on the Fair Credit Reporting Act, a significant portion of consumer complaints stem from XXXX  unwillingness or failure to provide meaningful responses to dispute inquiries. This case exemplifies that failure. I further assert that XXXX  has not complied with its statutory obligation to notify third parties who received the inaccurate information, per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( d ), once a dispute results in a change or deletion. Please confirm in writing whether any such third-party notifications were made, and if so, to whom and when. The definition of a reasonable reinvestigation under federal law has evolved. The Seventh Circuit in Henson v. CSC Credit Services and the Ninth Circuit in Dennis v. BEH-1 made it clear that mere passive forwarding of information does not meet the FCRAs reinvestigation standard. By failing to investigate the context and merit of my dispute, XXXX  is violating judicial precedent as well as statutory duty. Moreover, I request written assurance that XXXX  has implemented the procedural safeguards outlined in 12 C.F.R. 1022, including quality control standards for automated dispute resolution, training protocols for dispute agents, and periodic review of furnisher reliability. I am also demanding full metadata for the tradeline in question. This includes : Date account first reported by LVNV Funding LLC Date of last update Any suppressions or soft deletions Internal dispute flags or annotations Data-sharing history for this tradeline with third parties These metadata elements form part of the information that a consumer reporting agency is required to provide under 15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ) ( 1 ). \n\n\n\nXXXX  failure to supply a detailed and meaningful MOV places this account in violation of the maximum possible accuracy clause in 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). As such, I demand deletion of the LVNV tradeline until and unless you can provide : Documentary proof of account origination with my signature A complete chain of title, including assignments Full account history and billing cycle documentation Contact logs showing interactions between LVNV and XXXX  regarding my dispute Without such documentation, this entry is unverifiable and legally defective.\n\nI also assert potential violations of state-level consumer protection laws. For example, under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law ( UTPCPL ), a CRAs failure to correct false information after reasonable notice may constitute an unfair or deceptive act. XXXX pattern of generic, opaque dispute outcomes may violate this provision. In accordance with my rights, I intend to forward this complaint to the Pennsylvania Attorney Generals Bureau of Consumer Protection. Please consider this a formal notification of my intention to escalate unless remedial steps are taken within 30 days. Additionally, I am requesting that XXXX  clarify whether the XX/XX/XXXX update to this account included changes to : Balance Account status Payment history Date of last activity Date opened Creditor name For each field, I request both the previous value and the new value. This data is essential to assess whether the update constituted a meaningful correction or simply a cosmetic adjustment with no effect on my creditworthiness.\n\nPlease also explain whether XXXX  attempted to verify the legitimacy of the underlying debt contract with the original creditor before updating the LVNV account. If the debt is alleged to originate with a now-defunct lender, or a creditor who no longer maintains original records, XXXX  is under heightened obligation to scrutinize the data before republishing it. If you are unable to obtain these original records, then the account should be deleted, not updated. The continued reporting of unverifiable, unvalidated information is a direct violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). If XXXX records reflect that the LVNV tradeline was simply confirmed by the furnisher through an automated system, then this is legally insufficient. XXXX  must : 1. Independently verify the claim through documentation 2. Provide a full written MOV with named contacts 3. Suspend reporting during any extended reinvestigation period Failure to do so constitutes willful noncompliance under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and subjects XXXX  to potential statutory and punitive damages.\n\nI now formally reiterate that any continued reporting of the LVNV Funding LLC tradeline, without verifiable documentary support and a complete MOV response, will be treated as willful negligence. I reserve all rights under FCRA 1681n and 1681o to pursue damages, including through private legal action and coordinated enforcement through CFPB. I also request confirmation that this dispute is now being escalated to XXXX  legal and executive dispute review teams for further handling due to the volume and seriousness of the legal claims asserted herein. This communication serves as both : 1. A Method of Verification ( MOV ) request under FCRA 1681i ( a ) 2. A formal complaint for filing with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 3. A record to be preserved for evidentiary purposes in any potential legal proceeding XXXX  is hereby placed on notice that future failure to meaningfully respond may be included in a pattern of disregard for federal consumer protection obligations. The burdens on your administrative staff are a natural consequence of systemic failure to provide adequate verification under law.\n\nIn addition to the above demands, I am requesting XXXX  full correspondence log for this dispute, including : Emails sent to or from LVNV Funding LLC regarding my file Notes entered by agents or automated systems Internal flags or status codes attached to my report Any comments, memos, or interdepartmental communications concerning this tradeline This information is necessary to evaluate whether XXXX  followed its own dispute-handling protocols, as well as those mandated by federal law and CFPB oversight.\n\nI am also requesting a statement of all policies, procedures, and training materials used by XXXX  personnel to evaluate disputes related to debt buyers such as LVNV Funding LLC. I request specific clarification on : 1. Whether XXXX  requires original creditor documentation to verify a debt 2. What constitutes sufficient documentation to validate a disputed item 3. Whether any reinvestigation took place beyond a single furnisher confirmation These elements go to the heart of whether XXXX  maintains reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). \n\n\n\nIn accordance with the burden XXXX  places on consumers to verify identity when initiating disputes, I now place a symmetrical burden on XXXX  : please provide legally adequate documentationcomparable in evidentiary weight to a signed affidavitthat proves the accuracy of the LVNV tradeline and the completeness of your reinvestigation process.This demand is rooted in basic fairness and the principle that no consumer reporting agency should expect consumers to bear more evidentiary burden than it imposes upon its own furnishers. I also request XXXX  definition of the term updated as it appears in my file. This term is overly vague and fails to meet the statutory clarity requirements under 15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ) ( 1 ). Please define : What does updated mean?\n\nWhat data fields were affected?\n\nWhat data values changed?\n\nWas any deletion or suppression involved?\n\nDid LVNV affirmatively initiate this update? \n\nIf XXXX  can not define updated with precision and evidence, then the label itself is misleading and potentially deceptive under FCRA and the Dodd-Frank Act. \n\n\nFurther, please confirm whether XXXX has ever received regulatory warnings, consent orders, or enforcement actions from the CFPB or other authorities related to its handling of LVNV Funding LLC data. If so, I request that you disclose the nature and outcome of such actions, along with documentation reflecting internal changes made in response.This is relevant because it speaks to whether XXXX  is operating under any compliance restrictions that may impact how it handles disputes involving debt buyers or third-party furnishers. In the interest of procedural transparency, I request the following additional data elements from your system : Dispute codes used internally ( numeric or alphanumeric ) Response codes returned by the furnisher The timestamp of each data transmission System used for the update ( e.g., e-OSCAR, XXXX  proprietary ) I also request any machine-readable XXXX  or XXXX  logs produced by your systems when processing my dispute. If XXXX  does not retain such logs, please confirm in writing and explain why such logs are not required or stored for audit purposes. \n\n\n\nXXXX continued reporting of unverifiable, unsupported data from debt buyers causes material harm. The presence of this tradeline adversely affects my creditworthiness and future access to housing, employment, and credit. In Cortez v. TransUnion, the court found that CRAs are liable for failing to go beyond automated confirmation when consumers raise detailed, fact-specific disputes. This is analogous to my case. Given this precedent, I assert that XXXX  decision to update the LVNV tradeline without full documentary verification and without providing me the MOV documentation constitutes a failure of due process and a legal injury. I reiterate that I am not merely requesting deletion on technical grounds, but rather on the basis that no lawful verification has occurred. The standard is not mere presence of a debt buyers data, but actual accuracy and verifiability of the content. XXXX  can not meet this standard unless it produces : A signed contract bearing my name Original creditor statements validating the amount Documentation of assignment to LVNV A complete accounting of fees, interest, and balances None of this has been provided in prior disputes. Therefore, the burden is on XXXX to either produce it now or cease reporting the entry. \n\n\nPlease also confirm whether XXXX  shares this LVNV tradeline with any affiliates, data aggregators, or scoring model providers ( e.g., XXXX, XXXX ). If so, what limitationsif anydoes XXXX  impose on how disputed data is shared during the reinvestigation period? I request a detailed accounting of all third-party access to my file since the LVNV Funding LLC account appeared, including : Date of access Entity name Permissible purpose Whether data was disputed at the time In closing this section, I again emphasize : the volume, specificity, and legal precision of this request are proportional to the failure of XXXX  to adequately explain or support its previous actions. If XXXX  can not or will not provide documentary verification as demanded under FCRA 1681i, then XXXX  must delete the LVNV tradeline immediately and notify all recipients of my file of this correction. I reserve the right to amend, supplement, or escalate this complaint, and I insist on written confirmation of XXXX actions in response to each enumerated demand. \nI now submit an expanded list of documents that XXXX  must furnish to fulfill its obligations under both the FCRA and general principles of fair consumer reporting. This list includes, but is not limited to : XXXX. All contracts, agreements, or records identifying LVNV Funding LLC as a data furnisher XXXX. All legal documents substantiating LVNVs ownership of the alleged debt XXXX. Any indemnification or liability disclaimers between XXXX and LVNV XXXX. A breakdown of how balances were calculated XXXX. Evidence of the date and method by which the account was charged off by the original creditor If XXXX  relies on summary data or generic confirmation templates to verify the account, this constitutes a failure under 15 U.S.C. 1681i.\n\nAdditionally, I demand copies of any internal quality control checklists or audit reports that reviewed this particular dispute. If no quality control was performed, I ask XXXX  to acknowledge this fact in writing. Further, I request confirmation of whether this tradeline has been subject to prior consumer disputes ( from other consumers ), regulatory inquiries, class action suits, or enforcement actions that would suggest a pattern of error or abuse related to LVNV Funding LLC data reporting. XXXX  should confirm whether it applied any suppression flags, fraud indicators, or dispute codes to this file at any point between the original reporting of the tradeline and the most recent update. If so, I demand the dates and reasons for such flags, and documentation of when they were removed or altered. If no suppression codes or dispute indicators were applied, despite my initiating a legally valid dispute, that raises questions about XXXX compliance with FCRAs reasonable procedures and dispute-handling obligations. To ensure XXXX  is acting in good faith and not systematically favoring furnishers over consumers, I request documentation of XXXX policies on : Dispute prioritization Reinvestigation timelines Conditions that trigger escalated manual review Definitions of terms like frivolous, duplicate, or verified Please also disclose whether LVNV Funding LLC has any preferred vendor, XXXX, or priority data transmission relationship with XXXX, and if so, how that affects dispute handling or verification. \n\n\nTo ensure transparency and accountability, I ask for a notarized attestation from an XXXX  compliance officer stating : That all verification procedures were followed That LVNV Funding LLC provided documentary evidence That no deletion was warranted under 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) That this verification complies with FCRA and CFPB regulations If no such sworn statement can be made, XXXX  must immediately delete the LVNV tradeline and notify all third parties who received it in the past 24 months. \n\n\nIf XXXX  fails to respond with full documentation, I will : File this entire complaint with the CFPB Forward a copy to the Pennsylvania Attorney Generals Office Report the issue to the FTC Request congressional oversight for systemic CRA noncompliance Share this burden-based template with other judgment-proof consumers These actions are intended to expose XXXX  reliance on superficial verification procedures and its disregard for the consumer protections built into federal credit reporting law.\n\nI further assert that the lack of adequate MOV documentation may constitute a deceptive act or practice under the Dodd-Frank Act and subject XXXX  to potential CFPB enforcement actions. Your continued reliance on auto-confirmation from debt buyers is not only lazyit is dangerous and legally vulnerable. As outlined in CFPB enforcement guidance, CRAs that repeatedly fail to verify data with original documentation are at risk for enhanced scrutiny and fines. I will do everything in my power to ensure this complaint contributes to that regulatory pressure. Please also acknowledge receipt of this MOV demand in writing. I expect your full responsecomplete with attachments, procedural documentation, and a narrative explanation of XXXX verification processwithin 30 days of receipt. Your response must be formatted to match the numbered requests in this document for transparency and auditability. Do not substitute vague answers, verified as accurate boilerplate, or e-OSCAR response codes for substantive evidence. To emphasize again : this complaint is not submitted frivolously or in haste. It is the product of extensive legal research, documentation review, and first-hand experience with XXXX  evasive responses to legitimate disputes. I am judgment-proof, highly informed, and prepared to escalate. Your legal and regulatory exposure grows every time you ignore MOV obligations or offload dispute handling to automated systems incapable of legal reasoning. \n\n\nThis is the final page of my complaint. XXXX  has a legal and ethical obligation to correct or delete unverifiable data and to stop hiding behind vague updates that obscure the truth. If you choose not to comply, I will take further actionrepeatedly and persistentlyuntil full deletion is secured. Your obligation under the FCRA is clear : verify with documentation or delete the item.\n\nRespectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-30T18:14:52.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"179XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14973488","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","date_received":"2025-07-30T18:14:21.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Suspend reporting during any extended reinvestigation period <em>Failure</em> to do so constitutes willful noncompliance under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and subjects XXXX  to potential statutory and punitive damages.\n\nI now <em>formally</em> reiterate that any continued reporting of the LVNV Funding LLC tradeline, without verifiable documentary support and a <em>complete</em> MOV response, will be treated as willful negligence."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[10.558999,"14973488"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14768101","_score":10.063387,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"b\"XXXX XXXX \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX  \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n Date: \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n XXXX XXXX\\n SSN\\n : XXXX\\n DOB\\n : XXXX XXXX XXXX7 ( XXXX )\\n EQUIFAX \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n Pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and other relevant United States privacy statutes, I DIRECTLY AND EXCLUSIVELY AUTHORIZE the use of my\\n Personal Identifiable Information (PII) solely for mandated credit reporting objectives. Any alternative use, whether for marketing, data analytics, or inter-organizational sharing,\\n is strictly forbidden and will be considered a direct violation of my privacy rights. Compliance must be verifiable upon audit, ensuring complete transparency in all data handling\\n practices.\\n My 18-digit Personal Tracking Number is: \\XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n Re:/Subject: Please investigate completely and thoroughly each and every aspect of any item I have contested your supposed reporting privilege(s) to and have here within\\n challenged any and all involved parties of any derogatoriness accused against me to demonstrate incontestable evidence of the applicably certifiable compliant reporting\\n practices, procedures, and processed of which must be of a maximum possible fairness, reasonableness, truth, accuracy, completeness, timeliness, proven cogency and\\n relevance, and verifiability and is without data integrity injuring report deviations that are infractions of mandates, mentioned here or not!\\n To the Designated Legal Representative;\\n I contest the validity and accuracy of information currently listed on my credit report. This inaccurate data is harming my credit score and financial opportunities. I demand an\\n immediate investigation and correction as required by the FCRA.\\n Reporting agencies are expected to cooperate fully with investigations by providing truthful information and furnishing records as necessary. So, Have you fully satisfied\\n every strictly enforced legal mandate, ensuring that you have lawfully obtained, retained, or regained the privilege to report any derogatory information against me\\n without violating federally protected consumer rights?\\n The lacking-authentication defamatory declaration(s) asserted within should be reviewed as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstrated\\n certifiably compliant as maintained as first stated by the data provider accentuating derogatoriness(es) against me , so expunge from report history the incorrectly labeled\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   presenting   Primary Consumer Account Number as alleged by  TransUnion \\n(T)  declared to be  XXXX\\n The under-supported defamatory representation(s) herein displayed are mandated to be lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably conforming to\\n required standards as transcribed from the original entry by the submitting source focusing on condemnatory narratives involving me so eliminate from credit filing the\\n compromised entries\\n XXXX   displaying   consumer account number supposed by  TransUnion \\n(T),EXperian and E\\n Quifax  formulated to be  XXXX\\n The unverified condemning classification(s) Listed beneath must be finalized as critically evaluated, systematically reconfirmed, and affirmed as meeting rigorous compliance\\n standards as initially reported by the responsible data contributor expanding harmful narratives directed at me so expunge from documented records the now-documented\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   associating   Base/*7 * Primary Consumer Account Number (*PCAN) as submitted by  TransUnion \\n(T),EXperian and E\\n Quifax  outlined to be  XXXX\\n The inaccurately labeled negative assessment(s) Pointed out underneath are designated to be comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance\\n with established guidelines as filed at the moment of declaration by the alleging party sharing unfavorable evaluations of me , so wipe from accessible reports the immediately\\n listed\\n XXXX XXXX   carrying   Base/7 Account Number as indicated by  TransUnion \\n(T),EXperian and E\\n Quifax  described to be  XXXX\\n The unsupported adverse notation(s) Expressed further down must be undertaken as extensively audited, validated beyond doubt, and determined to be aligned with statutory\\n obligations as preserved in its initial entry reflecting discrediting remarks about me , so remove from the record the erroneously transmitted\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX    exhibiting   Inquiry Date as broadcasted by  EXperian  determined to be  XXXX\\n The still not yet proven derogatory claim(s) Articulated beneath should be scrutinized as thoroughly examined, reassessed, conclusively validated, and unmistakably\\n established as compliant as registered at the moment of its first reporting reiterating unfavorable presumptions regarding me , so delete from reporting the incorrectly labeled\\n XXXX XXXX   portraying   date of hard inquiry as revealed by  EXperian  to be  XXXX\\n The challengeable but asserted critical record(s) Characterized underneath must undergo revalidated under scrutiny, found unerring in its correctness, and maintained within\\n lawful reporting frameworks as officially transmitted in its first iteration continuing adverse commentary against me , so halt from any further records the inaccurately conveyed\\n XXXX XXXX    showing   inquiry date as issued by  EXperian  said to be  XXXX\\n The unresolved harmful report(s) As captured below must be resolved as verified, subjected to enhanced scrutiny, and justified through independent confirmation procedures\\n as upheld in its original statement by the contributor positioning reproachful declarations about me , so retract from consumer files the unfounded portrayals\\n XXXX XXXX   encapsulating   HARD Inquiry Date (DOI) as testified by  TransUnion \\n(T)  projected to be  XXXX\\n The unsubstantiated adverse allegation(s) within described demand evaluation as properly reviewed, reinforced through supplementary verification, and assured as meeting\\n the highest data integrity principles as reported at time of being reported by the alleging data reporter implying adverse claims regarding me so halt its inclusion in reports the\\n inconsistently stated\\n XXXX XXXX   enlisting   Date of HARD Inquiry as announced by  TransUnion \\n(T)  To Be  XXXX\\n The questionably attributed harmful depiction(s) Specified underneath need to be considered subjected to extensive review, revalidation, authenticated as accurate, and\\n shown to meet all compliance criteria as written when written by author identifying alleged liabilities tied to me so delete from reporting the falsely attributed\\n XXXX XXXX   comprising   hard inquiry date as depicted by  TransUnion \\n(T)  marked to be  XXXX\\n The challenged unfavorable assumption(s) below described must be addressed as analyzed, verified through independent assessment, deemed legally sound, and upheld as\\n conforming to reporting regulations as relayed without modification by the provider at reporting time articulating deprecatory descriptions about me so please eradicate from\\n reporting the forthcoming\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   offering   hard inquiry date (DOI) as maintained by  TransUnion \\n(T)  listed to be  XXXX\\n The undetermined damaging declaration(s) herein asserted need to be examined as rigorously inspected, accuracy substantiated, and reported with full adherence to\\n governing mandates as detailed in the original submission conveying slanderous associations against me so revoke its documentation entirely the misguided descriptions\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   manifesting   date of inquiry (DOI) as officially recorded by  EXperian  recorded to be  XXXX\\n The still-disputed derogatory reference(s) alleged herein are expected to be assessed for factual legitimacy, methodically authenticated, and upheld as verifiably accurate as\\n archived from the first declaration presenting harmful assertions against me , so block from reporting the underneath-referenced\\n XXXX   demonstrating   Date of HARD Inquiry (DOI) as submitted formally by  EQuifax  designated to be  XXXX\\n The refutable detrimental charge(s) Documented below are obligated to be Reinvestigated or investigated, validly proven verifiable, and demonstrative of certifiably compliant\\n reporting adequacy(ies) as recorded by the data provider in its initial reported form attaching harmful insinuations to me , so revoke its appearance in public records the falsely\\n implied\\n Page 1 of 9\\nXXXX XXXX XXXXI   attaching   HARD Inquiry Date as itemized by  EXperian  declared to be  XXXX\\n The still-contested defaming statement(s) below alleged are necessary to be exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict adherence to\\n legal reporting provisions as originally entered in consumer reporting records integrating disparaging beliefs associated with me so suppress the disclosure of the carelessly\\n reported\\n XXXX    revealing   Date of Inquiry (DOI) as conveyed officially by  E\\n Quifax  recorded to be  XXXX\\n The lacking-confirmation harmful characterization(s) herein described need adjustment as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstrated\\n certifiably compliant as verified from the initial source documentation accentuating defamatory discussions of me so delete the wrongly presented\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   with   Date of Inquiry as claimed by  EXperian  indicated to be  XXXX\\n The hypothetical but unproven defaming remark(s) below asserted require resolution as lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably conforming to\\n required standards as captured by the recording entity when first logged reporting distressing implications concerning me , so please eradicate from reporting the presently\\n stated\\n XXXX   having   date of inquiry as submitted by  TransUnion \\n(T)  described to be  XXXX\\n The still-challenged accusatory classification(s) Presented further down are due for action as critically evaluated, systematically reconfirmed, and affirmed as meeting rigorous\\n compliance standards as originally issued by the reporting party referencing disadvantageous assumptions against me so wipe from any stored databases the misclassified\\n disclosures\\n XXXX XXXX   composed of   Inquiry Date (DOI) as shown by  TransUnion \\n(T)  determined to be  XXXX\\n The unverifiable adverse pronouncement(s) within alleged warrant action as comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with established\\n guidelines as formally stated by the furnishing entity upon first disclosure upholding defamatory accounts involving me so extract from all repositories the distorted statements\\n XXXX XXXX   holding   date of hard inquiry (DOI) as stated by  TransUnion \\n(T)  proposed to be  XXXX\\n The insufficiently evidenced harmful indictment(s) described below need rectification as extensively audited, validated beyond doubt, and determined to be aligned with\\n statutory obligations as expressed verbatim by the original data source illustrating distressing claims about me , so extract from displayed credit details the misrepresented\\n details\\n XXXX   illustrating   inquiry date (DOI) as pronounced by  E\\n Quifax  defined to be  XXXX\\n The not-yet-confirmed damaging assertion(s) Indicated beneath are vital to be thoroughly examined, reassessed, conclusively validated, and unmistakably established as\\n compliant as formally recorded by the responsible entity pointing out negativity(ies) attributed to me , so suppress its existence in credit databases the unreliably declared\\n XXXX XXXX   arranging   Inquiry Date as defined by  TransUnion \\n(T)  conveyed to be  XXXX\\n The insubstantial adverse conclusion(s) displayed below are imperative to be revalidated under scrutiny, found unerring in its correctness, and maintained within lawful\\n reporting frameworks as conveyed in its exact phrasing by the originating source highlighting unfavorable details regarding me so block the reporting of the inaccurately\\n attributed\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   narrating   date of hard inquiry as displayed by  EXperian  listed to be  XXXX\\n The unverifiable unfavorable entry(s) asserted below must be resolved as verified, subjected to enhanced scrutiny, and justified through independent confirmation procedures\\n by the condemning data furnisher at time purported exactly as reported suggesting negativity versus me so nullify any recorded traces the flawed narratives\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX I   listing   inquiry date as outlined by  EXperian  asserted to be  XXXX\\n The unproven disparaging commentary Marked underneath are due for action as properly reviewed, reinforced through supplementary verification, and assured as meeting\\n the highest data integrity principles as originally documented by its author maintaining harmful implications against me , so eliminate from disclosed data the deceptively\\n characterized\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   possessing   HARD Inquiry Date (DOI) as broadcasted by  TransUnion \\n(T)  designated to be  XXXX\\n The inadequately justified unfavorable reference(s) Expounded beneath are critical to be subjected to extensive review, revalidation, authenticated as accurate, and shown to\\n meet all compliance criteria as presented in its primary submission by the originating reporter formalizing derogatory notions concerning me , so cease the reporting of the\\n further-listed\\n XXXX    giving   Date of HARD Inquiry as conveyed officially by  EQuifax  formulated to be  XXXX\\n The debated yet reported harmful remark(s) below displayed are vital to be analyzed, verified through independent assessment, deemed legally sound, and upheld as\\n conforming to reporting regulations as initially reported by the responsible data contributor reflecting discrediting remarks about me so block from reporting the inaccurately\\n referenced\\n XXXX   that has   hard inquiry date as declared by  EQuifax  referenced to be  XXXX\\n The weakly founded critical accusation(s) purported below are intended to be rigorously inspected, accuracy substantiated, and reported with full adherence to governing\\n mandates as submitted in its unchanged form recounting unfavorable incidents linked to me so retract from all listed entries the manipulated accounts\\n XXXX   articulating   hard inquiry date (DOI) as depicted by  E\\n Quifax  said to be  XXXX\\n The baseless negative accusation(s) As referenced beneath are expected to undergo assessed for factual legitimacy, methodically authenticated, and upheld as verifiably\\n accurate as shown in compliance with the initial filing standards attributing unfavorable qualities to me so cease the distribution of the defectively described\\n XXXX    signifying   date of inquiry (DOI) as noted by  TransUnion \\n(T)  to be  XXXX\\n The insufficiently corroborated damaging statement(s) Positioned beneath are expected to be Reinvestigated or investigated, validly proven verifiable, and demonstrative of\\n certifiably compliant reporting adequacy(ies) as reported at time of being reported by the alleging data reporter focusing on condemnatory narratives involving me so block the\\n reporting of the described herein\\n XXXX    integrating   Date of HARD Inquiry (DOI) as displayed by  TransUnion \\n(T)  expressed to be  XXXX\\n The questionable defamatory assertion(s) described within are necessary to be exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict adherence\\n to legal reporting provisions as archived from the first declaration emphasizing unfavorable assessments of me , so halt from any further records the falsely reported claims\\n XXXX    unfolding   HARD Inquiry Date as expressed by  TransUnion \\n(T)  marked to be  XXXX\\n The wrongly suggested harmful commentary herein purported are in accordance to be investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstrated\\n certifiably compliant as formally stated by the furnishing entity upon first disclosure circulating disparaging perspectives regarding me so extract from all repositories the\\n misunderstood records\\n XXXX XXXX   specifying   Date of Inquiry (DOI) as detailed by  TransUnion \\n(T)  outlined to be  XXXX\\n The suspect adverse depiction(s) Represented underneath require implementation as lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably conforming to\\n required standards as relayed without modification by the provider at reporting time spotlighting accusatory content related to me so block the reporting of the below-itemized\\n XXXX XXXX   consisting of   Date of Inquiry as revealed by  TransUnion \\n(T)  projected to be  XXXXn The unverified derogatory assertion(s) Stated further down are essential to be critically evaluated, systematically reconfirmed, and affirmed as meeting rigorous compliance\\n standards as verified from the initial source documentation forwarding negative allegations about me so retract from all listed entries the questionably documented\\n XXXX XXXX   attaching   date of inquiry as provided by  TransUnion \\n(T)  maintained to be  XXXX\\n Under 15 U.S.C.  1681s-2(a)(1)(A) and Metro 2's standards for Compliant Reporting, furnishers must implement procedures ensuring reporting of only fully substantiated\\n data elements. Documented here are violations including: unmapped payment histories exceeding 24-month Metro 2 windows, non-compliant creditor identifiers, and failure\\n Page 2 of 9\\n COFF -T   \\n COFF -TXQ   \\nto report voluntary closure codes - errors that contrapute ECOA-compliant decisioning matrices used by credit grantors.\\n The Symbol Keys used in this Letters images are as follows :\\n rT = Transunion             rX = Experian             rQ = Equifax\\n rNT = Non-TEE CRA(s)\\n D = Data Furnishing Reporter #1 (or Creditor listed in a PRE = Public Records Event )\\n D = Data Furnishing Reporter #2 (The Original Creditor if a Coff, a Coll, and or a Coff /Coll)\\n  = Likely RROR(s) are detected related to this Data Field Point\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Factual Actual Undeniably Disputable RROR(s) (FAUD)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Discrepancy RROR(s) of Non-Compliant Inconsistency(ies) (DNCI)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Metro 2 Code Exactness RROR(s) (M2CE)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Metro 2 Code Description exactness RROR(s) (M2CD)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Pretermitted RROR(s) by possible Willful Omission (PWO)\\n PRE = Public Records Event\\n PII = Personal Identifier Information\\n COFF = Charge-off(s)\\n COLL = Collection(s)\\n COFF/COLL = Charge-off(s)/Collection(s)\\n DrgL = Derogatory Lates\\n DlqL = Delinquency Late(s)\\n INQ = Inquiry(ies)\\n UON = Unknown or Other Negativity\\n CCI = Creditor Contact Information\\n Consistent with the concerns raised earlier in this complaint, I reiterate that the specific items of misinformation listed below demand immediate attention. Each entry must be\\n either expunged from your records, amended to ensure compliance with all relevant legal standards, or supported by definitive evidence confirming its accuracy,\\n completeness, timeliness, fairness, and legitimacy as asserted by the responsible party. Neglecting to take these actions may amount to a violation of federal and state\\n reporting laws, with direct and detrimental consequences to my financial and legal interests.\\n Delete right now XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  that gives unproven or false information  Consumer Account Number:  with being  XXXX  on my   XXXX   credit\\n report.    As mal-accused,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  the BSCF-7 Primary Consumer Account Numbers value is NOT EACH of being with\\n UNIQUENESS, NON-INCLUSIVE of SSN values, with AT LEAST 5 but NO MORE than 32 characters, of EXACTLY 4 Redacted and or Truncated characters, consistently\\n reported across all reporting agencies, and or is elsewise in deviation from that of required reporting adequacy per the CDIAs authored and self-governed CRRG-outlined and\\n defined Metro 2 Standards for certifiably Compliant reporting that satisfies the federal mandates for FAIR and REASONABLE reporting practices, procedures and processes\\n that best assures any and all claims are in fact of a maximum possible accuracy, completeness, timeliness, truthfulness, validity and verifiability, hence my DEMAND to delete\\n HERE and NOW! ;\\n Plus  Portfolio Type Code:  is without compliance  skewing of facts  as  --  on my   T     As mal-stated,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting competence\\n because  the *BSCF-8 Portfolio Type Code (PTC)s value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value as\\n should be per 2023 CRRG mandates.;\\n TransUnion Experian Equifax\\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX----\\n *Portfolio Type Code:------\\n *Account Current Balance:------\\n *Account Terms Duration:-- ----\\n Delete Right Now XXXX XXXX  that distorts the facts  ECOA Code:  to being  Paid  to inside my   Transunion   credit report,  to be  Paid  within my  \\nExperian   credit report,  and as well as  as being  Derogatory  upon my   Equifax   credit report too.  As dis-purported,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting\\n competence since  the Base/37 Primary ECOA Code (PECOA)\\n In addition  Portfolio Type Code:  is non-compliantly  inexplicably inaccurately assumed  to be  Credit Card  within my   Transunion       deceitfully asserted  to being\\n  Credit Card  upon my   Experian         Credit Card  inside my   Equifax     As mis-alleged,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  the Base/8\\n Portfolio Type Codes value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value as should be per 2023 CRRG\\n mandates.;\\n Additionally  High Credit/ Original Loan Amount:  is lacking compliance   NOT REPORTING  as being  $XXXX   in my   Transunion       Absent from reporting  as  --  on my  \\nExperian         $XXXX   within my   Equifax     As dis-stated,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting competence because  the Base/12 High Credit Original Loan\\n Amount (HCOLA)s value is\\n 1\\n 2\\n Page 3 of 9\\n DLQL -TXQ   \\n DLQL -TXQ   \\nTransUnion Experian Equifax\\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX\\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Portfolio Type Code: Credit Card Credit Card Credit Card\\n *High Credit/ Original Loan Amount: $XXXX-- $XXXX\\n Account Rating: Paid Paid Derogatory\\n *ECOA Code: Paid Paid Derogatory\\n DELETE Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  that contains errors  Portfolio Type Code:  with being  Flexible spending credit card  on my   Transunion\\n  credit report,  to being  Credit Card  to inside my   Experian   credit report,  and as well as  to be  Flexible spending credit card  within my   Equifax   credit report\\n too.  As misreported,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting competence since  the Portfolio Type Codes value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of\\n Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value as should be per 2023 CRRG mandates.;\\n Plus  Consumer Account Number:  is without compliance  MISREPORTED  to be  XXXX  upon my   Transunion       distorting of facts  to being\\n  XXXX   inside my   Experian         XXXX   in my   Equifax     As alleged,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  the Account Numbers\\n alleged values are NOT EACH of being (i) UNIQUE, (ii) NON-INCLUSIVE of SSN values, (iii) with AT LEAST 5 but NO MORE than 32 alphanumeric characters, (iv) of\\n EXACTLY four (4) Redacted and or Truncated characters, (v) consistently reported across all reporting agencies, and or (vi) is elsewise unproven and is in deviation from that\\n of required reporting adequacy(ies) per the CDIAs own authored and self-governed CRRG-outlined and defined Metro 2 Standards for certifiably Compliant reporting ( of\\n which ANY DEVIATION from these standards jeopardizes the INTEGRITY of the data ) that satisfies the federal mandates for FAIR & REASONABLE reporting practices,\\n procedures and processes that best assures any and all claims are in fact of a maximum possible accuracy, completeness, timeliness, truthfulness, validity and verifiability,\\n hence my DEMAND to delete HERE and NOW! ;\\n In addition  Date of Account Information:  is non-compliantly  distorting of facts  as being  XXXX  on my   Transunion       inexplicably inaccurately\\n assumed  as XXXX     Experian         XXXX     Equifax     As accused,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting competence because  \\nthe Base/24 Date of Account Information (DOAI) is not EACH of being (i) displayed as MMDDYYYY or MM/DD/YYYY or MM-DD-YYYY such that the 8 numeral characters are\\n in fact properly and accurately representive of a Metro 2 compliant format , (ii) displayed exactly same as that of the mandatorily always reported Header/8 Last Updated\\n Activity Date (LUAD) value, (iii) is NOT precisely aligned with latest purported DOACBal (aka Date of Base/21 Account Current Balance) value (if any) , (iv) is NOT exactly\\n aligned with the latest reported DOASC (aka Date of Account Status Code) , (v) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest reported DOPRC (aka Date of Payment Rating Code) ,\\n (vi) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest verified reporting of the OCOA (aka Base/23 Original Charge-off Amount), (vii) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest reported DLV\\n (aka Date Last Verified) , and/or (viii) elsewise is NOT displayed in full compliance with mandated maximum appropriateness!\\n TransUnion Experian Equifax\\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Date of Account Information: XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Portfolio Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *Account Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *Account Current Balance:------\\n Date of Account Current Balance: XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n Delete Right NOW  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that is flawed in its reporting  Creditor Type:  as being  Bank Credit Cards  upon my   Transunion   credit report,  with\\n being  Bank Credit Cards  on my   Experian   credit report,  and as well as  to being  All Banks   to inside my   Equifax   credit report too.  As purported,  the mis-claim stands\\n in nonconformity of reporting competence since  it fails to adhere to Metro 2 specifications and FCRA regulations.\\n Additionally  Account Type Code:  is lacking compliance   MISREPORTED  to be  Flexible spending credit card     Transunion       misreported  to being   Credit Card    \\nExperian         Flexible spending credit card     Equifax     As mal-alleged,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  the BSCF-8 Portfolio Type Code\\n (PTC)s value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value as should be per 2023 CRRG mandates.;\\n TransUnion Experian Equifax\\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Portfolio Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *Account Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *High Credit/ Original Loan Amount: $XXXX $XXXX--\\n Creditor Type: Bank Credit Cards Bank Credit Cards All Banks \\n Date Last Verified(DLV): XXXX----\\n Delete right now  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX   that misreports  Date of Inquiry  to be  XXXX  within my   XXXX   credit report.    As misleadingly\\n misreported,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting competence because  it is not proven suitable under neither Metro 2 or FCRA guidelines, each of which\\n MUST be satisfied for applicable privilege to report to be retained.\\n Inquiries\\n Page 4 of 9\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1Q\\n INQ -D1X\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Auto Financing Experian\\n Delete Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that deceives with its disreporting  Date of Inquiry  as being  XXXX  upon my   XXXX   credit report.    As mis-accused,  the\\n mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting competence since  it is neither certified for Metro 2 compliance nor adequacy under the FCRA regulations.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   Bank Credit Cards Experian\\n DELETE Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that provides erroneous data  Date of Inquiry  with being  XXXX  on my   XXXX   credit report.    As dis-alleged,  the claim is\\n in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  it falls short of Metro 2 and FCRA standards.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX  Bank Credit Cards Experian\\n Delete Right NOW  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that inaccurately reports  Date of Inquiry  to being  XXXX  to inside my   XXXX   credit report.    As mis-purported,  the\\n allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting competence because  it fails to satisfy BOTH the CDIAs Metro 2 certification of compliant reporting and applicable FCRA\\n regulations.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   Bank Credit Cards TransUnion\\n Delete right now  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that gets the facts wrong  Date of Inquiry  to be  XXXX  within my XXXX    credit report.    As mal-reported,  the mis-claim\\n stands in nonconformity of reporting competence since  it is neither Metro 2 certifiable nor FCRA compliant.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Bank Credit Cards TransUnion\\n Delete Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that misleads  Date of Inquiry  as being  XXXX   upon my   XXXX    credit report.    As mis-stated,  the claim is in deviation of\\n reporting adequacy(ies) because  it lacks the necessary Metro 2 compliance certifiability and any evidence of even being FCRA abiding.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nD\"","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-21T22:34:08.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"10468","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14768101","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-21T22:26:02.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Compliance must be verifiable upon audit, ensuring <em>complete</em> transparency in all data handling\\n practices."]},"sort":[10.063387,"14768101"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":31,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":31}]}},"product":{"doc_count":31,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":26,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":26}]}},{"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":4},{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":31,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":13,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":9},{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":3},{"key":"Personal information incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":7}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":5,"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":4},{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":2,"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":"Unable to get your credit report or credit score","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other problem getting your report or credit score","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":31,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":31}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":31,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":21},{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":10}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":31,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":31}]}},"company":{"doc_count":31,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":18},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":4},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":3},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"CL Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","doc_count":1},{"key":"SOFI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"SUNRISE CREDIT SERVICES, INC","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":31,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"NY","doc_count":9},{"key":"MI","doc_count":5},{"key":"FL","doc_count":4},{"key":"TX","doc_count":4},{"key":"GA","doc_count":3},{"key":"PA","doc_count":3},{"key":"IL","doc_count":1},{"key":"MO","doc_count":1},{"key":"OR","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":31,"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":22}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":31,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":1}]}}},"_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":[10.0642,"14768101"]}}}