{"took":139,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":30,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16643846","_score":13.619214,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint Narrative ( paste into What happened ) Summary : This complaint concerns inaccurate credit reporting, failure to correct personal information, and inadequate investigations by national credit reporting agencies. I have repeatedly requested corrections and provided documentation. My files still show inaccurate personal identifiers, inconsistent account data across bureaus, and hard inquiries I did not authorize. I also requested the Method of Verification ( MOV ) for items verified after disputes and did not receive adequate responses. There are indicators of identity theft and mixed-file issues.\n\n1 ) Personal Information Errors ( Metro 2 Code 112 ) : My reports include incorrect and outdated addresses, name formatting variants, and employer/phone listings that are not current or are associated with identity-theft exposure.\n\nI requested deletion of all outdated addresses and non-current identifiers and asked that only my current legal name and current address remain. These corrections were not made consistently across all bureaus.\n\n2 ) Cross-Bureau Inconsistencies & Data Quality Defects : The same tradelines display conflicting information across TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax ( e.g., balance, payment status, high credit/limits, dates opened/last payment, and payment-history strings ).\n\nSome accounts show late-payment codes that do not align with the actual payment history or show OK strings paired with a charge-off/collection status, which is misleading.\n\n3 ) Unauthorized/Improper Hard Inquiries : My files list hard inquiries that I did not authorize. I asked for permissible-purpose details under FCRA 604 and for those inquiries to be deleted or re-coded as soft if authorization can not be shown. This remains unresolved.\n\n4 ) Identity-Theft / Mixed-File Indicators : Due to prior data-breach exposure ( e.g., large, widely reported breaches of major companies in recent years ), my personally identifiable information may have been compromised.\n\nI requested blocking of identity-theft related information under FCRA 605B, as well as freezes/opt-outs with specialty agencies when appropriate.\n\n5 ) Inadequate Investigations & Missing MOV : After submitting disputes, certain items were marked verified without the bureaus providing the Method of Verification I requested ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) ).\n\nI asked for the furnishers name/member code, documents reviewed, and whether verification was manual or e-OSCAR, but I did not receive a compliant response.\n\n6 ) Harm : These failures affect my creditworthiness, increase the risk of further identity theft, and have caused denial risk and higher pricing for credit or insurance. \n\nI have spent significant time preparing disputes, sending documentation, and following up without resolution.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-18T00:34:41.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"75024","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16643846","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-18T00:23:28.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> ( paste into What happened ) Summary : This <em>complaint</em> concerns inaccurate credit <em>reporting</em>, failure to correct personal information, and inadequate investigations by national credit <em>reporting</em> agencies. I have repeatedly requested corrections and provided documentation. My files still show inaccurate personal identifiers, inconsistent account <em>data</em> across bureaus, and hard inquiries I did not authorize."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[13.619214,"16643846"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16644030","_score":13.586779,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint Narrative ( paste into What happened ) Summary : This complaint concerns inaccurate credit reporting, failure to correct personal information, and inadequate investigations by national credit reporting agencies. I have repeatedly requested corrections and provided documentation. My files still show inaccurate personal identifiers, inconsistent account data across bureaus, and hard inquiries I did not authorize. I also requested the Method of Verification ( MOV ) for items verified after disputes and did not receive adequate responses. There are indicators of identity theft and mixed-file issues.\n\n1 ) Personal Information Errors ( Metro 2 Code 112 ) : My reports include incorrect and outdated addresses, name formatting variants, and employer/phone listings that are not current or are associated with identity-theft exposure.\n\nI requested deletion of all outdated addresses and non-current identifiers and asked that only my current legal name and current address remain. These corrections were not made consistently across all bureaus.\n\n2 ) Cross-Bureau Inconsistencies & Data Quality Defects : The same tradelines display conflicting information across TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax ( e.g., balance, payment status, high credit/limits, dates opened/last payment, and payment-history strings ).\n\nSome accounts show late-payment codes that do not align with the actual payment history or show OK strings paired with a charge-off/collection status, which is misleading.\n\n3 ) Unauthorized/Improper Hard Inquiries : My files list hard inquiries that I did not authorize. I asked for permissible-purpose details under FCRA 604 and for those inquiries to be deleted or re-coded as soft if authorization can not be shown. This remains unresolved.\n\n4 ) Identity-Theft / Mixed-File Indicators : Due to prior data-breach exposure ( e.g., large, widely reported breaches of major companies in recent years ), my personally identifiable information may have been compromised.\n\nI requested blocking of identity-theft related information under FCRA 605B, as well as freezes/opt-outs with specialty agencies when appropriate.\n\n5 ) Inadequate Investigations & Missing MOV : After submitting disputes, certain items were marked verified without the bureaus providing the Method of Verification I requested ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) ).\n\nI asked for the furnishers name/member code, documents reviewed, and whether verification was manual or e-OSCAR, but I did not receive a compliant response.\n\n6 ) Harm : These failures affect my creditworthiness, increase the risk of further identity theft, and have caused denial risk and higher pricing for credit or insurance. \n\nI have spent significant time preparing disputes, sending documentation, and following up without resolution.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-18T00:34:41.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"75024","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16644030","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-10-18T00:34:19.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> ( paste into What happened ) Summary : This <em>complaint</em> concerns inaccurate credit <em>reporting</em>, failure to correct personal information, and inadequate investigations by national credit <em>reporting</em> agencies. I have repeatedly requested corrections and provided documentation. My files still show inaccurate personal identifiers, inconsistent account <em>data</em> across bureaus, and hard inquiries I did not authorize."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[13.586779,"16644030"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16649137","_score":13.581517,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint Narrative ( paste into What happened ) Summary : This complaint concerns inaccurate credit reporting, failure to correct personal information, and inadequate investigations by national credit reporting agencies. I have repeatedly requested corrections and provided documentation. My files still show inaccurate personal identifiers, inconsistent account data across bureaus, and hard inquiries I did not authorize. I also requested the Method of Verification ( MOV ) for items verified after disputes and did not receive adequate responses. There are indicators of identity theft and mixed-file issues.\n\n1 ) Personal Information Errors ( Metro 2 Code 112 ) : My reports include incorrect and outdated addresses, name formatting variants, and employer/phone listings that are not current or are associated with identity-theft exposure.\n\nI requested deletion of all outdated addresses and non-current identifiers and asked that only my current legal name and current address remain. These corrections were not made consistently across all bureaus.\n\n2 ) Cross-Bureau Inconsistencies & Data Quality Defects : The same tradelines display conflicting information across TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax ( e.g., balance, payment status, high credit/limits, dates opened/last payment, and payment-history strings ).\n\nSome accounts show late-payment codes that do not align with the actual payment history or show OK strings paired with a charge-off/collection status, which is misleading.\n\n3 ) Unauthorized/Improper Hard Inquiries : My files list hard inquiries that I did not authorize. I asked for permissible-purpose details under FCRA 604 and for those inquiries to be deleted or re-coded as soft if authorization can not be shown. This remains unresolved.\n\n4 ) Identity-Theft / Mixed-File Indicators : Due to prior data-breach exposure ( e.g., large, widely reported breaches of major companies in recent years ), my personally identifiable information may have been compromised.\n\nI requested blocking of identity-theft related information under FCRA 605B, as well as freezes/opt-outs with specialty agencies when appropriate.\n\n5 ) Inadequate Investigations & Missing MOV : After submitting disputes, certain items were marked verified without the bureaus providing the Method of Verification I requested ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) ).\n\nI asked for the furnishers name/member code, documents reviewed, and whether verification was manual or e-OSCAR, but I did not receive a compliant response.\n\n6 ) Harm : These failures affect my creditworthiness, increase the risk of further identity theft, and have caused denial risk and higher pricing for credit or insurance. \n\nI have spent significant time preparing disputes, sending documentation, and following up without resolution.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-18T00:34:41.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"75024","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16649137","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-18T00:34:19.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> ( paste into What happened ) Summary : This <em>complaint</em> concerns inaccurate credit <em>reporting</em>, failure to correct personal information, and inadequate investigations by national credit <em>reporting</em> agencies. I have repeatedly requested corrections and provided documentation. My files still show inaccurate personal identifiers, inconsistent account <em>data</em> across bureaus, and hard inquiries I did not authorize."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[13.581517,"16649137"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14478671","_score":13.234113,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX GA XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Date : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Subject : Formal Complaint and Request for Immediate Removal of Inaccurate and Breached Credit Reporting Information To Whom It May Concern : My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX and I am submitting this letter in support of a formal complaint against XXXX XXXX and XXXX, XXXX XXXX and Experian for their mishandling, misreporting, and breach of my sensitive credit information. Over the last XXXX days, I have diligently attempted to resolve and dispute erroneous and derogatory marks that continue to appear on my credit reports. Despite multiple requests, formal disputes, and even phone calls with these institutions, my efforts have been met with little to no accountability, transparency, or corrective action. Concerning continues to report derogatory information that is not only unsubstantiated but also misaligned with facts Ive personally provided. I have requested documentation multiple times showing the accuracy of the dates and payment history they allege. Each time, theyve failed to provide proof. This lack of verification directly violates FCRA XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ), which requires furnishers to investigate disputed data and correct or remove inaccurate entries. Concerning XXXX : XXXX reported a late payment for XX/XX/XXXX, which has been proven false through their own records. I have submitted confirmation of timely payment and requested its immediate removal. XXXX also shared sensitive account information without sufficient safeguards, leaving my account vulnerable to further misuse. This is a clear breach under FCRA XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( a ), which mandates consumer information be protected and disclosed only with appropriate purpose and authorization. Concerning the Credit Bureaus XXXX Equifax, Experian ) : It is widely known that all XXXX of these bureaus have been subject to lawsuits for the breach and mishandling of consumer data. As recently as last year. legal action has been taken against them for failing to properly secure consumer information, resulting in massive exposure and identity theft concerns across the country. In addition, XXXX has reported the lowest score for my profile, which does not match the scoring across XXXX and creates a false and harmful narrative about my creditworthiness. My trust in the reporting system has been severely compromised. These entities are failing to uphold the basic principles of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which promises accuracy, fairness, and consumer privacy in credit reporting. My Request : I respectfully request the immediate removal of all negative and/or derogatory information reported by : XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and all related entries ) XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX and any further erroneous entries ) I also request a federal-level review of my complaint due to the unresolved nature of this case after multiple good-faith efforts on my part. Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal data be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my reports. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This complaint is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a larger pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to remove the payment then place it back. They have XXXX records for the late XXXX because XXXX merge with XXXX & XXXX and they messed up everybodys account and theyre not accepting capability","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-06T16:02:37.000Z","issue":"Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30082","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14478671","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-07-06T16:02:07.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem canceling credit monitoring or identify theft protection service"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal <em>data</em> be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my <em>reports</em>. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This <em>complaint</em> is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a <em>larger</em> pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"]},"sort":[13.234113,"14478671"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13863927","_score":13.234113,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Date : [ ] Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX Subject : Formal Complaint and Request for Immediate Removal of Inaccurate and Breached Credit Reporting Information To Whom It May Concern : My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX and I am submitting this letter in support of a formal complaint against Truist Bank XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX  for their mishandling, misreporting, and breach of my sensitive credit information. Over the last XXXX days, I have diligently attempted to resolve and dispute erroneous and derogatory marks that continue to appear on my credit reports. Despite multiple requests, formal disputes, and even phone calls with these institutions, my efforts have been met with little to no accountability, transparency, or corrective action. Concerning Truist Bank : Truist continues to report derogatory information that is not only unsubstantiated but also misaligned with facts Ive personally provided. I have requested documentation multiple times showing the accuracy of the dates and payment history they allege. Each time, theyve failed to provide proof. This lack of verification directly violates FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), which requires furnishers to investigate disputed data and correct or remove inaccurate entries. Concerning XXXX : XXXX reported a late payment for XX/XX/XXXX, which has been proven false through their own records. I have submitted confirmation of timely payment and requested its immediate removal. XXXX also shared sensitive account information without sufficient safeguards, leaving my account vulnerable to further misuse. This is a clear breach under FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ), which mandates consumer information be protected and disclosed only with appropriate purpose and authorization. Concerning the Credit Bureaus XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) : It is widely known that all XXXX of these bureaus have been subject to lawsuits for the breach and mishandling of consumer data. As recently as last year. legal action has been taken against them for failing to properly secure consumer information, resulting in massive exposure and identity theft concerns across the country. In addition, XXXX  has reported the lowest score for my profile, which does not match the scoring across XXXX, and creates a false and harmful narrative about my creditworthiness. My trust in the reporting system has been severely compromised. These entities are failing to uphold the basic principles of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which promises accuracy, fairness, and consumer privacy in credit reporting. My Request : I respectfully request the immediate removal of all negative and/or derogatory information reported by : Truist Bank XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and all related entries ) XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX and any further erroneous entries ) I also request a federal-level review of my complaint due to the unresolved nature of this case after multiple good-faith efforts on my part. Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal data be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my reports. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This complaint is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a larger pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX signature on file )","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-03T18:06:14.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30082","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13863927","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-06-03T18:05:48.000Z","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 information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal <em>data</em> be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my <em>reports</em>. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This <em>complaint</em> is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a <em>larger</em> pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX signature on file )"],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[13.234113,"13863927"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14116925","_score":13.226293,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX GA XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Date : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX D.CXXXX XXXX Subject : Formal Complaint and Request for Immediate Removal of Inaccurate and Breached Credit Reporting Information To Whom It May Concern : My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX and I am submitting this letter in support of a formal complaint against XXXX XXXX and XXXX, XXXX, TransUnion, and XXXX  for their mishandling, misreporting, and breach of my sensitive credit information. Over the last 90+ days, I have diligently attempted to resolve and dispute erroneous and derogatory marks that continue to appear on my credit reports. Despite multiple requests, formal disputes, and even phone calls with these institutions, my efforts have been met with little to no accountability, transparency, or corrective action. Concerning continues to report derogatory information that is not only unsubstantiated but also misaligned with facts Ive personally provided. I have requested documentation multiple times showing the accuracy of the dates and payment history they allege. Each time, theyve failed to provide proof. This lack of verification directly violates FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), which requires furnishers to investigate disputed data and correct or remove inaccurate entries. Concerning XXXX : XXXX reported a late payment for XX/XX/XXXX, which has been proven false through their own records. I have submitted confirmation of timely payment and requested its immediate removal. XXXX also shared sensitive account information without sufficient safeguards, leaving my account vulnerable to further misuse. This is a clear breach under FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ), which mandates consumer information be protected and disclosed only with appropriate purpose and authorization. Concerning the Credit Bureaus ( XXXX XXXX  ) : It is widely known that all two of these bureaus have been subject to lawsuits for the breach and mishandling of consumer data. As recently as last year. legal action has been taken against them for failing to properly secure consumer information, resulting in massive exposure and identity theft concerns across the country. In addition, TransUnion has reported the lowest score for my profile, which does not match the scoring across XXXX, and creates a false and harmful narrative about my creditworthiness. My trust in the reporting system has been severely compromised. These entities are failing to uphold the basic principles of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which promises accuracy, fairness, and consumer privacy in credit reporting. My Request : I respectfully request the immediate removal of all negative and/or derogatory information reported by : XXXX XXXX  XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and all related entries ) XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX and any further erroneous entries ) I also request a federal-level review of my complaint due to the unresolved nature of this case after multiple good-faith efforts on my part. Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal data be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my reports. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This complaint is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a larger pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-17T21:56:31.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30082","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14116925","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-17T21:55:55.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal <em>data</em> be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my <em>reports</em>. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This <em>complaint</em> is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a <em>larger</em> pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX"],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[13.226293,"14116925"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13328104","_score":13.226293,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX GA XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Date : [ Insert todays date ] Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Washington, XXXX XXXX Subject : Formal Complaint and Request for Immediate Removal of Inaccurate and Breached Credit Reporting Information To Whom It May Concern : My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX and I am submitting this letter in support of a formal complaint against XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX, Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian for their mishandling, misreporting, and breach of my sensitive credit information. \n\nOver the last 90+ days, I have diligently attempted to resolve and dispute erroneous and derogatory marks that continue to appear on my credit reports. Despite multiple requests, formal disputes, and even phone calls with these institutions, my efforts have been met with little to no accountability, transparency, or corrective action. \n\nConcerning XXXX Bank : XXXX continues to report derogatory information that is not only unsubstantiated but also misaligned with facts Ive personally provided. I have requested documentation multiple times showing the accuracy of the dates and payment history they allege. Each time, theyve failed to provide proof. This lack of verification directly violates FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), which requires furnishers to investigate disputed data and correct or remove inaccurate entries. \n\nConcerning XXXX : XXXX reported a late payment for XX/XX/XXXX, which has been proven false through their own records. I have submitted confirmation of timely payment and requested its immediate removal. XXXX also shared sensitive account information without sufficient safeguards, leaving my account vulnerable to further misuse. This is a clear breach under FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ), which mandates consumer information be protected and disclosed only with appropriate purpose and authorization. \n\nConcerning the Credit Bureaus XXXX Equifax, Experian ) : It is widely known that all XXXX of these bureaus have been subject to lawsuits for the breach and mishandling of consumer data. As recently as last year. legal action has been taken against them for failing to properly secure consumer information, resulting in massive exposure and identity theft concerns across the country. In addition, TransUnion has reported the lowest score for my profile, which does not match the scoring across Equifax, and creates a false and harmful narrative about my creditworthiness. \n\nMy trust in the reporting system has been severely compromised. These entities are failing to uphold the basic principles of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which promises accuracy, fairness, and consumer privacy in credit reporting. \n\nMy Request : I respectfully request the immediate removal of all negative and/or derogatory information reported by : XXXX Bank XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and all related entries ) XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX and any further erroneous entries ) I also request a federal-level review of my complaint due to the unresolved nature of this case after multiple good-faith efforts on my part. Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal data be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my reports. \n\nI will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This complaint is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a larger pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX signature on file )","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-04T22:24:24.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30082","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13328104","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-04T22:23:59.000Z","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":["Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal <em>data</em> be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my <em>reports</em>. \n\nI will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This <em>complaint</em> is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a <em>larger</em> pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX signature on file )"],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"sub_issue":["Their investigation did not fix an error on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[13.226293,"13328104"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14115987","_score":13.19551,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX GA XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Date : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, D.C. XXXX Subject : Formal Complaint and Request for Immediate Removal of Inaccurate and Breached Credit Reporting Information To Whom It May Concern : My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX and I am submitting this letter in support of a formal complaint against Navy Federal and XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for their mishandling, misreporting, and breach of my sensitive credit information. Over the last 90+ days, I have diligently attempted to resolve and dispute erroneous and derogatory marks that continue to appear on my credit reports. Despite multiple requests, formal disputes, and even phone calls with these institutions, my efforts have been met with little to no accountability, transparency, or corrective action. Concerning continues to report derogatory information that is not only unsubstantiated but also misaligned with facts Ive personally provided. I have requested documentation multiple times showing the accuracy of the dates and payment history they allege. Each time, theyve failed to provide proof. This lack of verification directly violates FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), which requires furnishers to investigate disputed data and correct or remove inaccurate entries. Concerning XXXX : XXXX reported a late payment for XX/XX/XXXX, which has been proven false through their own records. I have submitted confirmation of timely payment and requested its immediate removal. XXXX also shared sensitive account information without sufficient safeguards, leaving my account vulnerable to further misuse. This is a clear breach under FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ), which mandates consumer information be protected and disclosed only with appropriate purpose and authorization. Concerning the Credit Bureaus ( XXXX XXXX ) : It is widely known that all two of these bureaus have been subject to lawsuits for the breach and mishandling of consumer data. As recently as last year. legal action has been taken against them for failing to properly secure consumer information, resulting in massive exposure and identity theft concerns across the country. In addition, XXXX  has reported the lowest score for my profile, which does not match the scoring across XXXX, and creates a false and harmful narrative about my creditworthiness. My trust in the reporting system has been severely compromised. These entities are failing to uphold the basic principles of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which promises accuracy, fairness, and consumer privacy in credit reporting. My Request : I respectfully request the immediate removal of all negative and/or derogatory information reported by : XXXX XXXX  XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and all related entries ) XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX and any further erroneous entries ) I also request a federal-level review of my complaint due to the unresolved nature of this case after multiple good-faith efforts on my part. Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal data be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my reports. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This complaint is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a larger pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-17T21:56:21.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30082","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14115987","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2025-06-17T21:55:55.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal <em>data</em> be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my <em>reports</em>. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This <em>complaint</em> is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a <em>larger</em> pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX"],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[13.19551,"14115987"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13330284","_score":13.19551,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX GA XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Date : [ Insert todays date ] Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Washington, XXXX XXXX Subject : Formal Complaint and Request for Immediate Removal of Inaccurate and Breached Credit Reporting Information To Whom It May Concern : My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX and I am submitting this letter in support of a formal complaint against XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX, Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian for their mishandling, misreporting, and breach of my sensitive credit information. \n\nOver the last 90+ days, I have diligently attempted to resolve and dispute erroneous and derogatory marks that continue to appear on my credit reports. Despite multiple requests, formal disputes, and even phone calls with these institutions, my efforts have been met with little to no accountability, transparency, or corrective action. \n\nConcerning XXXX Bank : XXXX continues to report derogatory information that is not only unsubstantiated but also misaligned with facts Ive personally provided. I have requested documentation multiple times showing the accuracy of the dates and payment history they allege. Each time, theyve failed to provide proof. This lack of verification directly violates FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), which requires furnishers to investigate disputed data and correct or remove inaccurate entries. \n\nConcerning XXXX : XXXX reported a late payment for XX/XX/XXXX, which has been proven false through their own records. I have submitted confirmation of timely payment and requested its immediate removal. XXXX also shared sensitive account information without sufficient safeguards, leaving my account vulnerable to further misuse. This is a clear breach under FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ), which mandates consumer information be protected and disclosed only with appropriate purpose and authorization. \n\nConcerning the Credit Bureaus XXXX Equifax, Experian ) : It is widely known that all XXXX of these bureaus have been subject to lawsuits for the breach and mishandling of consumer data. As recently as last year. legal action has been taken against them for failing to properly secure consumer information, resulting in massive exposure and identity theft concerns across the country. In addition, TransUnion has reported the lowest score for my profile, which does not match the scoring across Equifax, and creates a false and harmful narrative about my creditworthiness. \n\nMy trust in the reporting system has been severely compromised. These entities are failing to uphold the basic principles of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which promises accuracy, fairness, and consumer privacy in credit reporting. \n\nMy Request : I respectfully request the immediate removal of all negative and/or derogatory information reported by : XXXX Bank XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and all related entries ) XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX and any further erroneous entries ) I also request a federal-level review of my complaint due to the unresolved nature of this case after multiple good-faith efforts on my part. Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal data be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my reports. \n\nI will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This complaint is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a larger pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX signature on file )","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-04T22:24:24.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30082","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13330284","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-05-04T22:11:01.000Z","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":["Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal <em>data</em> be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my <em>reports</em>. \n\nI will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This <em>complaint</em> is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a <em>larger</em> pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX signature on file )"],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"sub_issue":["Their investigation did not fix an error on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[13.19551,"13330284"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14116074","_score":13.192453,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX GA XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Date : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, D.C. XXXX Subject : Formal Complaint and Request for Immediate Removal of Inaccurate and Breached Credit Reporting Information To Whom It May Concern : My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX and I am submitting this letter in support of a formal complaint against XXXX XXXX and XXXX, XXXX, TransUnion, and XXXX  for their mishandling, misreporting, and breach of my sensitive credit information. Over the last 90+ days, I have diligently attempted to resolve and dispute erroneous and derogatory marks that continue to appear on my credit reports. Despite multiple requests, formal disputes, and even phone calls with these institutions, my efforts have been met with little to no accountability, transparency, or corrective action. Concerning continues to report derogatory information that is not only unsubstantiated but also misaligned with facts Ive personally provided. I have requested documentation multiple times showing the accuracy of the dates and payment history they allege. Each time, theyve failed to provide proof. This lack of verification directly violates FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), which requires furnishers to investigate disputed data and correct or remove inaccurate entries. Concerning XXXX : XXXX reported a late payment for XX/XX/XXXX, which has been proven false through their own records. I have submitted confirmation of timely payment and requested its immediate removal. XXXX also shared sensitive account information without sufficient safeguards, leaving my account vulnerable to further misuse. This is a clear breach under FCRA XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( a ), which mandates consumer information be protected and disclosed only with appropriate purpose and authorization. Concerning the Credit Bureaus ( XXXX XXXX ) : It is widely known that all two of these bureaus have been subject to lawsuits for the breach and mishandling of consumer data. As recently as last year. legal action has been taken against them for failing to properly secure consumer information, resulting in massive exposure and identity theft concerns across the country. In addition, TransUnion has reported the lowest score for my profile, which does not match the scoring across XXXX, and creates a false and harmful narrative about my creditworthiness. My trust in the reporting system has been severely compromised. These entities are failing to uphold the basic principles of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which promises accuracy, fairness, and consumer privacy in credit reporting. My Request : I respectfully request the immediate removal of all negative and/or derogatory information reported by : XXXX XXXX  XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and all related entries ) XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX and any further erroneous entries ) I also request a federal-level review of my complaint due to the unresolved nature of this case after multiple good-faith efforts on my part. Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal data be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my reports. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This complaint is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a larger pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-17T21:56:24.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30082","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14116074","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-17T21:55:55.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal <em>data</em> be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my <em>reports</em>. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This <em>complaint</em> is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a <em>larger</em> pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX"],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[13.192453,"14116074"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14478668","_score":12.716365,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Date : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Subject : Formal Complaint and Request for Immediate Removal of Inaccurate and Breached Credit Reporting Information To Whom It May Concern : My name is XXXX XXXX XXXX and I am submitting this letter in support of a formal complaint against XXXX XXXX and USAA, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for their mishandling, misreporting, and breach of my sensitive credit information. Over the last XXXX days, I have diligently attempted to resolve and dispute erroneous and derogatory marks that continue to appear on my credit reports. Despite multiple requests, formal disputes, and even phone calls with these institutions, my efforts have been met with little to no accountability, transparency, or corrective action. Concerning continues to report derogatory information that is not only unsubstantiated but also misaligned with facts Ive personally provided. I have requested documentation multiple times showing the accuracy of the dates and payment history they allege. Each time, theyve failed to provide proof. This lack of verification directly violates FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), which requires furnishers to investigate disputed data and correct or remove inaccurate entries. Concerning USAA : USAA reported a late payment for XX/XX/XXXX, which has been proven false through their own records. I have submitted confirmation of timely payment and requested its immediate removal. USAA also shared sensitive account information without sufficient safeguards, leaving my account vulnerable to further misuse. This is a clear breach under FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( a ), which mandates consumer information be protected and disclosed only with appropriate purpose and authorization. Concerning the Credit Bureaus XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) : It is widely known that all XXXX of these bureaus have been subject to lawsuits for the breach and mishandling of consumer data. As recently as last year. legal action has been taken against them for failing to properly secure consumer information, resulting in massive exposure and identity theft concerns across the country. In addition, XXXX  has reported the lowest score for my profile, which does not match the scoring across XXXX, and creates a false and harmful narrative about my creditworthiness. My trust in the reporting system has been severely compromised. These entities are failing to uphold the basic principles of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which promises accuracy, fairness, and consumer privacy in credit reporting. My Request : I respectfully request the immediate removal of all negative and/or derogatory information reported by : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX, and all related entries ) USAA ( XX/XX/XXXX and any further erroneous entries ) I also request a federal-level review of my complaint due to the unresolved nature of this case after multiple good-faith efforts on my part. Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal data be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my reports. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This complaint is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a larger pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX They proceeded to remove the payment then place it back. They have zero records for the late XXXX because XXXX merge with XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX and they messed up everybodys account and theyre not accepting capability","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-06T16:02:37.000Z","issue":"Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30082","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14478668","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2025-07-06T16:02:07.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem canceling credit monitoring or identify theft protection service"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Additionally, I ask that any breaches of my personal <em>data</em> be noted and used as supporting grounds for the removal and correction of all affected information on my <em>reports</em>. I will continue to follow up and escalate this matter if these records are not amended promptly. This <em>complaint</em> is being submitted with supporting documentation and is part of a <em>larger</em> pattern of negligence and noncompliance that I hope your agency will fully investigate."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"]},"sort":[12.716365,"14478668"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17204607","_score":11.056771,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this CFPB complaint because the credit reporting agencies ( Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax ) are reporting inaccurate, unverifiable, contradictory, and unauthorized information on my credit reports, including incorrect derogatory accounts, improper charge-off coding, contradictory payment histories, and numerous unauthorized hard inquiries that I did NOT consent to. \n\nThis has caused severe harm, credit denials, emotional distress, and ongoing financial damage. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX ILLEGAL CHARGE-OFF REPORTING / CONTRADICTORY DATA The Ally Financial auto account is being reported with : Conflicting charge-off dates Conflicting repossession descriptions Inconsistent balance reporting between bureaus Missing validation Contradictory merchandise taken back comments Incorrect Metro-2 coding ( wrong Account Status, wrong Payment Codes, wrong Special Comment Codes ) Reporting a balance that does not match the alleged activity This violates : FCRA 602 Failure to maintain maximum accuracy FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnisher reporting known false information FCRA 611 No proper reinvestigation FDCPA 807 False and misleading representation FACTA + Privacy Act Mishandling of personal identifying information I demand full deletion of this account because it can not be verified and is reported inaccurately across all three bureaus. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  FALSE LATE PAYMENTS/ DUPLICATED DELINQUENCIES XXXX  XXXX is reporting inconsistent late-payment data : TU shows Late XXXX EX shows Late XXXX EQ shows Late XXXX  Monthly late payments do NOT match the accounts activity Payment grids contradict one another Metro-2 coding is not aligned with actual payment behavior Several late payments appear duplicated or out of sequence This violates : FCRA 602 Maximum accuracy requirement FCRA 611 No validation of delinquency data Metro-2 CRRG Improper payment ratings and status codes FCRA 623 Continued reporting of knowingly false information I request immediate removal of all late payments or full deletion of this account. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  UNVERIFIED & CONTRADICTORY REPORTING XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  is illegally reported : Missing on Experian ( proving inconsistent data ) Missing contractual details No proof of debt No date of last payment Inconsistent reporting between TU and EQ Improper Metro-2 collection coding No validation provided upon dispute Violations : FCRA 611 No reasonable reinvestigation FCRA 623 Reporting information not verified FDCPA 809 ( b ) Failure to validate alleged debt Privacy Act Mishandling consumer data This account must be deleted immediately. \n\nXXXX. UNAUTHORIZED & IMPERMISSIBLE HARD INQUIRIES ( FULL LIST ) I did NOT authorize many of the following inquiries. Several are the result of dealer shotgun applications, which occur without consumer consent and violate FCRA 604.\n\nFULL LIST OF INQUIRIES BEING DISPUTED FOR LACK OF PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE : Experian Inquiries ( Unauthorized ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX TransUnion Inquiries ( Unauthorized ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Equifax Inquiries XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX FCRA Violations for ALL Inquiries Above : FCRA 604 No permissible purpose FCRA 615 Failure to notify adverse action FCRA 616617 Civil liability for willful/negligent noncompliance Privacy Act Improper access and data sharing I am demanding the removal of all unauthorized inquiries, as they were not initiated by me and were made without my informed consent.\n\n5. IDENTITY-THEFT ELEMENTS & DATA-BREACH RISKS The presence of large clusters of unauthorized auto inquiries strongly suggests : My data may have been compromised Auto dealerships submitted applications without permission Creditor systems accessed my file without permissible purpose Under FCRA 605B, these bureaus must block all identity-theft-related information within 4 business days.\n\n6. METRO-2 COMPLIANCE FAILURES ( ALL BUREAUS ) The following reporting defects violate the Consumer Data Industry Association ( CDIA ) Metro-2 Format : Wrong Account Status Codes Wrong Payment Rating Codes Inconsistent Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) Conflicting balance fields Duplicate late payments Wrong Special Comment Codes Inconsistent ECOA codes Monthly grids that contradict the account narrative Under FCRA 602 & 623, credit bureaus must ensure maximum possible accuracy. They failed to do so.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-12T20:42:50.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"89031","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17204607","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-11-12T20:06:52.000Z","state":"NV","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":["IDENTITY-THEFT ELEMENTS & <em>DATA</em>-BREACH RISKS The presence of <em>large</em> clusters of unauthorized auto inquiries strongly suggests : My <em>data</em> may have been compromised Auto dealerships submitted applications without permission Creditor systems accessed my file without permissible purpose Under FCRA 605B, these bureaus must block all identity-theft-related information within 4 business days.\n\n6."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_issue":["Reporting company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[11.056771,"17204607"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17191166","_score":11.05437,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this CFPB complaint because the credit reporting agencies ( Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax ) are reporting inaccurate, unverifiable, contradictory, and unauthorized information on my credit reports, including incorrect derogatory accounts, improper charge-off coding, contradictory payment histories, and numerous unauthorized hard inquiries that I did NOT consent to. \n\nThis has caused severe harm, credit denials, emotional distress, and ongoing financial damage. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX ILLEGAL CHARGE-OFF REPORTING / CONTRADICTORY DATA The Ally Financial auto account is being reported with : Conflicting charge-off dates Conflicting repossession descriptions Inconsistent balance reporting between bureaus Missing validation Contradictory merchandise taken back comments Incorrect Metro-2 coding ( wrong Account Status, wrong Payment Codes, wrong Special Comment Codes ) Reporting a balance that does not match the alleged activity This violates : FCRA 602 Failure to maintain maximum accuracy FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnisher reporting known false information FCRA 611 No proper reinvestigation FDCPA 807 False and misleading representation FACTA + Privacy Act Mishandling of personal identifying information I demand full deletion of this account because it can not be verified and is reported inaccurately across all three bureaus. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  FALSE LATE PAYMENTS/ DUPLICATED DELINQUENCIES XXXX  XXXX is reporting inconsistent late-payment data : TU shows Late XXXX EX shows Late XXXX EQ shows Late XXXX  Monthly late payments do NOT match the accounts activity Payment grids contradict one another Metro-2 coding is not aligned with actual payment behavior Several late payments appear duplicated or out of sequence This violates : FCRA 602 Maximum accuracy requirement FCRA 611 No validation of delinquency data Metro-2 CRRG Improper payment ratings and status codes FCRA 623 Continued reporting of knowingly false information I request immediate removal of all late payments or full deletion of this account. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  UNVERIFIED & CONTRADICTORY REPORTING XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  is illegally reported : Missing on Experian ( proving inconsistent data ) Missing contractual details No proof of debt No date of last payment Inconsistent reporting between TU and EQ Improper Metro-2 collection coding No validation provided upon dispute Violations : FCRA 611 No reasonable reinvestigation FCRA 623 Reporting information not verified FDCPA 809 ( b ) Failure to validate alleged debt Privacy Act Mishandling consumer data This account must be deleted immediately. \n\nXXXX. UNAUTHORIZED & IMPERMISSIBLE HARD INQUIRIES ( FULL LIST ) I did NOT authorize many of the following inquiries. Several are the result of dealer shotgun applications, which occur without consumer consent and violate FCRA 604.\n\nFULL LIST OF INQUIRIES BEING DISPUTED FOR LACK OF PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE : Experian Inquiries ( Unauthorized ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX TransUnion Inquiries ( Unauthorized ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Equifax Inquiries XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX FCRA Violations for ALL Inquiries Above : FCRA 604 No permissible purpose FCRA 615 Failure to notify adverse action FCRA 616617 Civil liability for willful/negligent noncompliance Privacy Act Improper access and data sharing I am demanding the removal of all unauthorized inquiries, as they were not initiated by me and were made without my informed consent.\n\n5. IDENTITY-THEFT ELEMENTS & DATA-BREACH RISKS The presence of large clusters of unauthorized auto inquiries strongly suggests : My data may have been compromised Auto dealerships submitted applications without permission Creditor systems accessed my file without permissible purpose Under FCRA 605B, these bureaus must block all identity-theft-related information within 4 business days.\n\n6. METRO-2 COMPLIANCE FAILURES ( ALL BUREAUS ) The following reporting defects violate the Consumer Data Industry Association ( CDIA ) Metro-2 Format : Wrong Account Status Codes Wrong Payment Rating Codes Inconsistent Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) Conflicting balance fields Duplicate late payments Wrong Special Comment Codes Inconsistent ECOA codes Monthly grids that contradict the account narrative Under FCRA 602 & 623, credit bureaus must ensure maximum possible accuracy. They failed to do so.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-12T20:42:50.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"89031","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17191166","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-12T20:42:25.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["IDENTITY-THEFT ELEMENTS & <em>DATA</em>-BREACH RISKS The presence of <em>large</em> clusters of unauthorized auto inquiries strongly suggests : My <em>data</em> may have been compromised Auto dealerships submitted applications without permission Creditor systems accessed my file without permissible purpose Under FCRA 605B, these bureaus must block all identity-theft-related information within 4 business days.\n\n6."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_issue":["Reporting company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[11.05437,"17191166"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17191014","_score":11.05437,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this CFPB complaint because the credit reporting agencies ( Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax ) are reporting inaccurate, unverifiable, contradictory, and unauthorized information on my credit reports, including incorrect derogatory accounts, improper charge-off coding, contradictory payment histories, and numerous unauthorized hard inquiries that I did NOT consent to. \n\nThis has caused severe harm, credit denials, emotional distress, and ongoing financial damage. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX ILLEGAL CHARGE-OFF REPORTING / CONTRADICTORY DATA The Ally Financial auto account is being reported with : Conflicting charge-off dates Conflicting repossession descriptions Inconsistent balance reporting between bureaus Missing validation Contradictory merchandise taken back comments Incorrect Metro-2 coding ( wrong Account Status, wrong Payment Codes, wrong Special Comment Codes ) Reporting a balance that does not match the alleged activity This violates : FCRA 602 Failure to maintain maximum accuracy FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnisher reporting known false information FCRA 611 No proper reinvestigation FDCPA 807 False and misleading representation FACTA + Privacy Act Mishandling of personal identifying information I demand full deletion of this account because it can not be verified and is reported inaccurately across all three bureaus. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  FALSE LATE PAYMENTS/ DUPLICATED DELINQUENCIES XXXX  XXXX is reporting inconsistent late-payment data : TU shows Late XXXX EX shows Late XXXX EQ shows Late XXXX  Monthly late payments do NOT match the accounts activity Payment grids contradict one another Metro-2 coding is not aligned with actual payment behavior Several late payments appear duplicated or out of sequence This violates : FCRA 602 Maximum accuracy requirement FCRA 611 No validation of delinquency data Metro-2 CRRG Improper payment ratings and status codes FCRA 623 Continued reporting of knowingly false information I request immediate removal of all late payments or full deletion of this account. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  UNVERIFIED & CONTRADICTORY REPORTING XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  is illegally reported : Missing on Experian ( proving inconsistent data ) Missing contractual details No proof of debt No date of last payment Inconsistent reporting between TU and EQ Improper Metro-2 collection coding No validation provided upon dispute Violations : FCRA 611 No reasonable reinvestigation FCRA 623 Reporting information not verified FDCPA 809 ( b ) Failure to validate alleged debt Privacy Act Mishandling consumer data This account must be deleted immediately. \n\nXXXX. UNAUTHORIZED & IMPERMISSIBLE HARD INQUIRIES ( FULL LIST ) I did NOT authorize many of the following inquiries. Several are the result of dealer shotgun applications, which occur without consumer consent and violate FCRA 604.\n\nFULL LIST OF INQUIRIES BEING DISPUTED FOR LACK OF PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE : Experian Inquiries ( Unauthorized ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX TransUnion Inquiries ( Unauthorized ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Equifax Inquiries XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX FCRA Violations for ALL Inquiries Above : FCRA 604 No permissible purpose FCRA 615 Failure to notify adverse action FCRA 616617 Civil liability for willful/negligent noncompliance Privacy Act Improper access and data sharing I am demanding the removal of all unauthorized inquiries, as they were not initiated by me and were made without my informed consent.\n\n5. IDENTITY-THEFT ELEMENTS & DATA-BREACH RISKS The presence of large clusters of unauthorized auto inquiries strongly suggests : My data may have been compromised Auto dealerships submitted applications without permission Creditor systems accessed my file without permissible purpose Under FCRA 605B, these bureaus must block all identity-theft-related information within 4 business days.\n\n6. METRO-2 COMPLIANCE FAILURES ( ALL BUREAUS ) The following reporting defects violate the Consumer Data Industry Association ( CDIA ) Metro-2 Format : Wrong Account Status Codes Wrong Payment Rating Codes Inconsistent Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) Conflicting balance fields Duplicate late payments Wrong Special Comment Codes Inconsistent ECOA codes Monthly grids that contradict the account narrative Under FCRA 602 & 623, credit bureaus must ensure maximum possible accuracy. They failed to do so.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-12T20:42:50.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"89031","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17191014","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-12T20:42:25.000Z","state":"NV","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":["IDENTITY-THEFT ELEMENTS & <em>DATA</em>-BREACH RISKS The presence of <em>large</em> clusters of unauthorized auto inquiries strongly suggests : My <em>data</em> may have been compromised Auto dealerships submitted applications without permission Creditor systems accessed my file without permissible purpose Under FCRA 605B, these bureaus must block all identity-theft-related information within 4 business days.\n\n6."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_issue":["Reporting company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[11.05437,"17191014"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15290313","_score":10.808505,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complainant : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX XXXX  MA XXXX XXXX XXXX Company Names : XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nSunnova Energy Corporation Product : Credit Reporting Incorrect information on credit report Problem : Improper reporting of late payments, missing required fields, and non-compliance with XXXX XXXX data standards. \nXXXX Complaint Narrative : On my XXXX  credit report dated XX/XX/year>, Sunnova Energy Corp is reporting an account ( Account No. XXXX ) with XXXX late payments and a balance of {$33000.00} ( original ), marked Paid Off. However, the reporting contains numerous material inaccuracies, omissions, and contradictions that violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and XXXX XXXX reporting standards. \nI have attached my direct dispute letter to Sunnova ( furnisher ) and my FCRA XXXX dispute letter to Experian. The specific issues include : XXXX. Missing Payment History & DOFD No month-by-month payment codes or Date of First Delinquency provided, making the late payments unverifiable. \nXXXX. Paid-Off Status Without Payoff Date The account is marked Paid Off but with no closure or payoff date. \nXXXX. Blank Balance Fields Current Balance shows as instead of {$0.00}, and Amount Past Due is not provided despite late payment claims. \nXXXX. Duplicate Entries Same incomplete Sunnova account appears multiple times in my Experian file. \nXXXX. Account Type Misclassification Listed as Utility despite the loan-like structure and large original balance. \nXXXX. Missing Update Dates Balance updated date is blank. \nXXXX. Missing Furnisher Contact Info No address or phone for Sunnova in the credit report. \nXXXX. Re-Aging Risk No DOFD or closure date means the account could be re-aged beyond the XXXX limit. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX Data Field Non-Compliance Multiple missing required fields under the XXXX XXXX format. \nXXXX. Failure to Assure Maximum Possible Accuracy Violates FCRA 1681e ( b ).\n\nImpact : This inaccurate reporting is damaging my credit score and misrepresenting my credit history. I have already sent disputes to both Experian and Sunnova under FCRA 611 and 623 ( a ) ( 8 ), but I am concerned about ongoing violations and the failure to follow industry reporting standards. \nRelief Sought : Immediate deletion of the Sunnova account from all credit reporting agencies, OR full correction to comply with XXXX XXXX standards and FCRA requirements. \nWritten confirmation from both XXXX  and Sunnova. \nAssurance that this account will not be re-aged or re-reported without full compliance. \nAttachments : XXXX  dispute letter ( FCRA 611 ) Sunnova dispute letter ( FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 8 ) ) Credit report excerpt showing inaccurate tradeline XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXt Sunnova Energy Corp XXXX Name / Number Exact Error XXXX XXXX Standard / FCRA Law Violated Why Violation ( Accuracy / Completeness / Consistency ) Payment History Profile ( Field XXXX ) No month-by-month payment codes provided despite claim of XXXX late payments XXXX XXXX Field XXXX XXXX FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ), 1681e ( b ) Prevents verification of delinquencies ; incomplete payment history violates XXXX XXXX Date of First Delinquency ( Field XXXX ) Missing DOFD entirely FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ; XXXX XXXX Field XXXX XXXX to determine XXXX reporting limit ; omission allows illegal re-aging Account Status ( Field XXXX ) / Date Closed ( Field XXXX ) Marked 'Paid off ' with no closure or payoff date XXXX XXXX Field XXXX & XXXX ; FCRA 1681e ( b ) Status/date mismatch prevents determining when delinquency ended Current Balance ( Field XXXX ) / Amount Past Due ( Field XXXX ) Current balance is \" instead of {$0.00} ; Amount Past Due missing XXXX XXXX Field XXXX & XXXX Blank balance fields are inaccurate ; past due must be {$0.00} if balance is {$0.00} Base Segment Creditor Contact Information No furnisher address or phone number listed FCRA 609 ( a ) ( XXXX ) ; XXXX XXXX Base Segment Consumers must be able to contact furnisher to dispute Account Type ( Field XXXX ) Reported as 'Utility ' despite large loan-like balance XXXX XXXX Field XXXX ; FCRA 1681e ( b ) Misclassification can mislead lenders and scoring models Date of Account Information ( Field XXXX ) 'Balance updated ' date blank Metro XXXX Field XXXX ; FCRA 1681e ( b ) Missing update date prevents determining currency of data Duplicate Tradeline Rule Same Sunnova account repeated multiple times without full details XXXX XXXX prohibition on duplicate tradelines ; FCRA 1681e ( b ) Misleads lenders into thinking there are multiple delinquent accounts FCRA Maximum Possible Accuracy Standard Multiple blank, contradictory, and incomplete fields FCRA 1681e ( b ) If data is unverifiable or incomplete, it must be deleted","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-14T16:55:58.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"02151","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15290313","timely":"No","company_response":"Untimely response","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Sunnova Energy Corporation","date_received":"2025-08-14T16:55:27.000Z","state":"MA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Sunnova Energy Corporation Product : Credit <em>Reporting</em> Incorrect information on credit <em>report</em> Problem : Improper <em>reporting</em> of late payments, missing required fields, and non-compliance with XXXX XXXX <em>data</em> standards. \nXXXX <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> : On my XXXX  credit <em>report</em> dated XX/XX/year>, Sunnova Energy Corp is <em>reporting</em> an account ( Account No. XXXX ) with XXXX late payments and a balance of {$33000.00} ( original ), marked Paid Off."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[10.808505,"15290313"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15290278","_score":10.808505,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complainant : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Company Names : Experian Information Solutions , Inc . \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : Credit Reporting Incorrect information on credit report Problem : Improper reporting of late payments, missing required fields, and non-compliance with Metro 2 data standards.\n\n________________________________________ Complaint Narrative : On my Experian credit report dated XX/XX/year>, XXXX XXXX XXXX is reporting an account ( Account No. XXXX ) with XXXX late payments and a balance of {$33000.00} ( original ), marked Paid Off. However, the reporting contains numerous material inaccuracies, omissions, and contradictions that violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and Metro 2 reporting standards. \nI have attached my direct dispute letter to XXXX ( furnisher ) and my FCRA 611 dispute letter to Experian. The specific issues include : 1. Missing Payment History & XXXX  No month-by-month payment codes or Date of First Delinquency provided, making the late payments unverifiable. \n2. Paid-Off Status Without Payoff Date The account is marked Paid Off but with no closure or payoff date. \n3. Blank Balance Fields Current Balance shows as instead of {$0.00}, and Amount Past Due is not provided despite late payment claims.\n\n4. Duplicate Entries Same incomplete XXXX account appears multiple times in my Experian file. \n5. Account Type Misclassification Listed as Utility despite the loan-like structure and large original balance.\n\n6. Missing Update Dates Balance updated date is blank.\n\n7. Missing Furnisher Contact Info No address or phone for XXXX in the credit report. \n8. Re-Aging Risk No XXXX or closure date means the account could be re-aged beyond the XXXX limit. \n9. Metro 2 Data Field Non-Compliance Multiple missing required fields under the Metro 2 format.\n\n10. Failure to Assure Maximum Possible Accuracy Violates FCRA 1681e ( b ).\n\nImpact : This inaccurate reporting is damaging my credit score and misrepresenting my credit history. I have already sent disputes to both Experian and XXXX under FCRA 611 and 623 ( a ) ( 8 ), but I am concerned about ongoing violations and the failure to follow industry reporting standards.\n\nRelief Sought : Immediate deletion of the XXXX account from all credit reporting agencies, OR full correction to comply with Metro 2 standards and FCRA requirements. \nWritten confirmation from both Experian and XXXX. \nXXXX that this account will not be re-aged or re-reported without full compliance. \nAttachments : Experian dispute letter ( FCRA 611 ) Sunnova dispute letter ( FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 8 ) ) Credit report excerpt showing inaccurate tradeline ________________________________________ Metro 2 Field Violation XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Name / Number Exact Error Metro 2 Standard / FCRA Law Violated Why Violation ( Accuracy / Completeness / Consistency ) Payment History Profile ( Field XXXX ) No month-by-month payment codes provided despite claim of XXXX late payments Metro 2 Field 28 ; FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ), 1681e ( b ) Prevents verification of delinquencies ; incomplete payment history violates Metro 2 Date of First Delinquency ( Field XXXX ) Missing XXXX  entirely FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) ; Metro 2 Field XXXX Required to determine XXXX reporting limit ; omission allows illegal re-aging Account Status ( Field XXXX ) / Date Closed ( Field XXXX ) Marked 'Paid off ' with no closure or payoff date Metro 2 Field XXXX & XXXX ; FCRA 1681e ( b ) Status/date mismatch prevents determining when delinquency ended Current Balance ( Field XXXX ) / Amount Past Due ( Field XXXX ) Current balance is \" instead of {$0.00} ; Amount Past Due missing Metro 2 Field XXXX & XXXX Blank balance fields XXXX inaccurate ; past due must be {$0.00} if balance is {$0.00} Base Segment Creditor Contact Information No furnisher address or phone number listed FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ; Metro 2 Base Segment Consumers must be able to XXXX furnisher to dispute Account Type ( Field XXXX ) Reported as 'Utility ' despite large loan-like balance Metro 2 Field XXXX ; FCRA 1681e ( b ) Misclassification can mislead lenders and scoring models Date of Account Information ( Field XXXX ) 'Balance updated ' date blank Metro XXXX Field XXXX ; FCRA 1681e ( b ) Missing update date prevents determining currency of data Duplicate Tradeline Rule Same Sunnova account repeated multiple times without full details Metro 2 prohibition on duplicate tradelines ; FCRA 1681e ( b ) Misleads lenders into thinking there are multiple delinquent accounts FCRA Maximum Possible Accuracy Standard Multiple blank, contradictory, and incomplete fields FCRA 1681e ( b ) If data is unverifiable or incomplete, it must be deleted","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-14T16:55:56.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"02151","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15290278","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-08-14T16:45:27.000Z","state":"MA","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 : Credit <em>Reporting</em> Incorrect information on credit <em>report</em> Problem : Improper <em>reporting</em> of late payments, missing required fields, and non-compliance with Metro 2 <em>data</em> standards.\n\n________________________________________ <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> : On my Experian credit <em>report</em> dated XX/XX/year>, XXXX XXXX XXXX is <em>reporting</em> an account ( Account No. XXXX ) with XXXX late payments and a balance of {$33000.00} ( original ), marked Paid Off."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[10.808505,"15290278"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15719668","_score":9.869383,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is being filed against the credit reporting agencies and furnishers of information who are knowingly reporting inaccurate, unverifiable, and unauthorized data on my consumer credit file. These actions are in direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692. The following accounts and inquiries are unlawful, misleading, and damaging to my financial standing. \nIncorrect Addresses Reported ( Identity/Privacy Violation ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, CA XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, CA XXXX The repeated listing of the same XXXX address XXXX times is evidence of data inaccuracy and poor record maintenance. The reporting of addresses not associated with me also raises identity theft concerns. The credit bureaus have a legal duty under FCRA XXXX ( b ) to assure maximum possible accuracy, yet they have failed to uphold this responsibility. \nAccounts in Dispute : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Balance : {$20000.00} | Reported Status : Collection This account is reported with a very large balance and labeled as a collection without the furnishers ever providing proper validation. I have never been given proof of an original contract, an itemized statement of charges, or clear documentation linking me to this alleged debt. Under FDCPA 809 ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ), I am entitled to full validation of any alleged debt. The reporting of such a large, unverified balance is not only misleading but damaging to my creditworthiness. I have disputed this account, but instead of conducting a proper investigation as required under FCRA 611, the bureaus simply verified the account with the furnisher without actual evidence. This is a common abusive practice where furnishers recycle unverifiable information, harming consumers. The financial impact is severe, as this false collection account misrepresents me as owing tens of thousands of dollars, leading to denial of credit and housing opportunities, higher interest rates, and humiliation when applying for financial products. This is a clear violation of both FCRA and FDCPA, and I demand its permanent removal. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Balance : {$580.00} | Reported Status : Collection This account is also listed as a collection, yet no proof of its validity has ever been provided. XXXX XXXX is a known debt buyer that frequently purchases old, unverified, or time-barred accounts and attempts to collect on them. Without producing a legally binding contract bearing my signature, proof of the original creditor, and a complete payment history, this account can not be legally reported. Reporting unverifiable information is a violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) and FDCPA XXXX, which prohibits false or misleading representations. I have disputed this account, but the credit bureaus continue to allow its presence without real investigation. The existence of this small but damaging collection account paints me as financially irresponsible when in reality the debt is questionable and unsupported. This directly affects my ability to maintain financial stability, creates stress, and unfairly limits my opportunities for credit and housing. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Balance : {$100.00} | Status : Collection This debt is being reported as a collection, but no validation has been provided. I have not received proof of contract, itemized billing, or any lawful documentation connecting me to this account. Under FDCPA XXXX and FCRA XXXX, furnishers can not legally report unverifiable debt. The amount reported is small, yet its presence on my file has an outsized negative effect, lowering my creditworthiness and labeling me as delinquent. The reporting of this unverifiable account without evidence of liability is misleading, inaccurate, and a violation of federal law. \nHard Inquiry Disputes : XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX These inquiries are being reported without my authorization. I did not XXXX permission for these companies to access my credit profile, and their repeated entries on the same dates show a pattern of abusive and negligent reporting. Under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ), a permissible purpose must exist for any inquiry. Without a signed application or consent from me, these inquiries are unauthorized and must be removed. Repeated inquiries from the same creditor on the same day artificially lower my XXXX XXXX, create the impression that I am applying for excessive credit, and misrepresent my financial behavior. This is damaging, misleading, and a direct violation of consumer protection laws. \nConsumer Harm & Narrative Because of these false collection accounts and unauthorized inquiries, I have been treated as financially irresponsible when in reality these reports are inaccurate and unverified. My XXXX XXXX has been unfairly lowered, I have faced denials for financial products, been forced to pay higher interest rates, and experienced embarrassment when questioned about these false entries. I exercised my rights by disputing these accounts and inquiries, yet the bureaus failed to reinvestigate properly as required under FCRA XXXX. The continued presence of unverifiable collections and unauthorized inquiries is unlawful, misleading, and harmful to me as a consumer. \nRelief Requested I respectfully request that the CFPB enforce compliance with the FCRA and FDCPA by : Deleting the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXllection entries in full. \nRemoving all unauthorized inquiries from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nTaking corrective action against the furnishers and credit reporting agencies who allowed inaccurate and unverifiable information to remain on my credit file. \nEnsuring that no deleted or unverifiable information is reinserted without proper legal certification.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-04T19:00:39.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"95219","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15719668","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-09-04T17:19:38.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This <em>complaint</em> is being filed against the credit <em>reporting</em> agencies and furnishers of information who are knowingly <em>reporting</em> inaccurate, unverifiable, and unauthorized <em>data</em> on my consumer credit file. These actions are in direct violation of the Fair Credit <em>Reporting</em> Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692. The following accounts and inquiries are unlawful, misleading, and damaging to my financial standing."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_issue":["Reporting company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[9.869383,"15719668"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15734237","_score":9.869311,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is being filed against the credit reporting agencies and furnishers of information who are knowingly reporting inaccurate, unverifiable, and unauthorized data on my consumer credit file. These actions are in direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692. The following accounts and inquiries are unlawful, misleading, and damaging to my financial standing.\n\nIncorrect Addresses Reported ( Identity/Privacy Violation ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX ( repeated multiple times ) The repeated listing of the same XXXX address multiple times is evidence of data inaccuracy and poor record maintenance. The reporting of addresses not associated with me also raises identity theft concerns. The credit bureaus have a legal duty under FCRA 607 ( b ) to assure maximum possible accuracy, yet they have failed to uphold this responsibility. \nAccounts in Dispute : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Balance : {$20000.00} | Reported Status : Collection This account is reported with a very large balance and labeled as a collection without the furnishers ever providing proper validation. I have never been given proof of an original contract, an itemized statement of charges, or clear documentation linking me to this alleged debt. Under FDCPA 809 ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ), I am entitled to full validation of any alleged debt. The reporting of such a large, unverified balance is not only misleading but damaging to my creditworthiness. I have disputed this account, but instead of conducting a proper investigation as required under FCRA 611, the bureaus simply verified the account with the furnisher without actual evidence. This is a common abusive practice where furnishers recycle unverifiable information, harming consumers. The financial impact is severe, as this false collection account misrepresents me as owing tens of thousands of dollars, leading to denial of credit and housing opportunities, higher interest rates, and humiliation when applying for financial products. This is a clear violation of both FCRA and FDCPA, and I demand its permanent removal. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Balance : {$580.00} | Reported Status : Collection This account is also listed as a collection, yet no proof of its validity has ever been provided. XXXX XXXX is a known debt buyer that frequently purchases old, unverified, or time-barred accounts and attempts to collect on them. Without producing a legally binding contract bearing my signature, proof of the original creditor, and a complete payment history, this account can not be legally reported. Reporting unverifiable information is a violation of FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and FDCPA 807, which prohibits false or misleading representations. I have disputed this account, but the credit bureaus continue to allow its presence without real investigation. The existence of this small but damaging collection account paints me as financially irresponsible when in reality the debt is questionable and unsupported. This directly affects my ability to maintain financial stability, creates stress, and unfairly limits my opportunities for credit and housing. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Opened : XX/XX/XXXX | High Balance : {$100.00} | Status : Collection This debt is being reported as a collection, but no validation has been provided. I have not received proof of contract, itemized billing, or any lawful documentation connecting me to this account. Under FDCPA 809 and FCRA 623, furnishers can not legally report unverifiable debt. The amount reported is small, yet its presence on my file has an outsized negative effect, lowering my creditworthiness and labeling me as delinquent. The reporting of this unverifiable account without evidence of liability is misleading, inaccurate, and a violation of federal law. \nHard Inquiry Disputes : XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX These inquiries are being reported without my authorization. I did not grant permission for these companies to access my credit profile, and their repeated entries on the same dates show a pattern of abusive and negligent reporting. Under FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ), a permissible purpose must exist for any inquiry. Without a signed application or consent from me, these inquiries are unauthorized and must be removed. Repeated inquiries from the same creditor on the same day artificially lower my credit score, create the impression that I am applying for excessive credit, and misrepresent my financial behavior. This is damaging, misleading, and a direct violation of consumer protection laws. \nConsumer Harm & Narrative Because of these false collection accounts and unauthorized inquiries, I have been treated as financially irresponsible when in reality these reports are inaccurate and unverified. My credit score has been unfairly lowered, I have faced denials for financial products, been forced to pay higher interest rates, and experienced embarrassment when questioned about these false entries. I exercised my rights by disputing these accounts and inquiries, yet the bureaus failed to reinvestigate properly as required under FCRA 611. The continued presence of unverifiable collections and unauthorized inquiries is unlawful, misleading, and harmful to me as a consumer.\n\nRelief Requested I respectfully request that the CFPB enforce compliance with the FCRA and FDCPA by : Deleting the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX and UNKNOWN ACCOUNT collection entries in full. \nRemoving all unauthorized inquiries from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and XXXX. \nTaking corrective action against the furnishers and credit reporting agencies who allowed inaccurate and unverifiable information to remain on my credit file. \nEnsuring that no deleted or unverifiable information is reinserted without proper legal certification.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-04T17:25:47.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"95219","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15734237","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-09-04T17:12:01.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This <em>complaint</em> is being filed against the credit <em>reporting</em> agencies and furnishers of information who are knowingly <em>reporting</em> inaccurate, unverifiable, and unauthorized <em>data</em> on my consumer credit file. These actions are in direct violation of the Fair Credit <em>Reporting</em> Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692. The following accounts and inquiries are unlawful, misleading, and damaging to my financial standing."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_issue":["Reporting company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[9.869311,"15734237"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15605836","_score":8.891867,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint because my credit report is showing inaccurate, incomplete, and unverified information that is causing me severe financial and personal harm. These accounts are being reported in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681, and in some cases also violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). The law requires credit reporting agencies and furnishers to report only accurate, verifiable, and complete information. The following items must be deleted or corrected immediately. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Wrong Address Issue : This address does not belong to me and has been incorrectly placed on my file. Law : FCRA 609 ( a ) requires consumer reporting agencies to report only accurate information. Story : This is not my residence, nor do I have any connection to it. The presence of this address on my report creates serious risks for me, including being linked to accounts or debts that are not mine. Such false reporting can also lead to credit denials because creditors may think I lived at multiple unstable addresses, which is not true. It is unfair and damaging to my character and financial stability. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX High Balance : {$720000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/year> Late Payment Issue : This account is reporting late payments without proper proof or validation. Law : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) prohibits furnishers from reporting inaccurate information. Story : The account balance reported is extremely large, yet no documents have been provided to show I was actually late. Reporting late payments on such a high balance account severely damages my credit score and falsely portrays me as financially irresponsible. This is extremely unfair because creditors and potential lenders view me as a high-risk borrower based on inaccurate information. This has already made it difficult for me to get fair interest rates, loan approvals, and has caused emotional distress knowing that false data is being used against me. \nXXXX XXXX High Balance : {$0.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/year> Charge Off Issue : A charge-off is listed even though the balance is reported as zero, which is contradictory and inaccurate. Law : FCRA 607 ( b ) requires maximum possible accuracy, and FDCPA prohibits reporting unverified debt. Story : This reporting makes it appear as though I defaulted on an account when there was no balance at all. It is unfair and harmful because it paints me as someone who walks away from obligations, which damages my credibility with lenders. This false entry has already created difficulties for me in accessing fair credit and creates a misleading narrative of my financial history. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX High Balance : {$11000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/year> Charge Off Issue : This account is reported as a charge-off without proper validation. Law : FCRA 611 requires that any disputed information must be verified within XXXX days, or it must be deleted. Story : This charge-off has been placed on my file without evidence. Such an entry has a heavy negative impact on my credit score and makes it extremely difficult for me to secure credit, rent housing, or even apply for certain jobs. This is unjust because no supporting documents have been provided to prove its accuracy. Instead, I am left with the stigma of being seen as someone who defaulted, which is not correct. \nXXXX XXXX High Balance : {$9000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/year> Charge Off Issue : This account is reported as a charge-off without any supporting documentation or validation. Law : FCRA 611 requires disputed information to be verified within XXXX days or removed, and FDCPA 809 requires debt validation. Story : A charge-off is one of the most serious derogatory marks and unfairly destroys my creditworthiness when it is not accurate. Without validation, this reporting is misleading, harmful, and unlawful. It portrays me as someone who abandoned financial responsibility, which is false, and it blocks me from accessing fair lending, housing opportunities, and employment. \nIn conclusion, these accounts are inaccurate, incomplete, duplicative, and unverified, in violation of the FCRA and FDCPA. They severely harm my credit score, misrepresent my financial history, and cause unjust denials of credit, housing, and other opportunities. I demand immediate deletion of these accounts, a full reinvestigation into their validity, and written confirmation of the results within the legally required timeframe under FCRA 611.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-29T02:40:39.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"92503","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15605836","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-08-29T02:38:48.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am submitting this <em>complaint</em> because my credit <em>report</em> is showing inaccurate, incomplete, and unverified information that is causing me severe financial and personal harm. These accounts are being <em>reported</em> in violation of the Fair Credit <em>Reporting</em> Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681, and in some cases also violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). The law requires credit <em>reporting</em> agencies and furnishers to <em>report</em> only accurate, verifiable, and complete information."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_issue":["Reporting company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[8.891867,"15605836"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19339380","_score":8.573852,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"1. Incoming Call Appearing as Wells Fargo Date : XX/XX/XXXX Incoming number : XXXX Call start time : XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Call duration : XXXX minutes ( ended at XXXXXX/XX/XXXXI received a call from XXXX, a number that appeared to belong to Wells Fargo Mortgage. \nThe call lasted XXXX minutes, ending at XXXXXX/XX/XXXX \nDuring the call, I was coached on what to say and instructed to tell the bank the withdrawal was for paying a contractor. \nI was under pressure and being directed throughout the call. \nI later reported this call as suspected fraud to Wells Fargo, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. {$18000.00} Cash Withdrawal While Under Duress Date : XX/XX/XXXX Withdrawal time : XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Amount : {$18000.00} Location : Wells Fargo branch on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, WY Teller : XXXX While still on the call from XXXX, I went to the XXXX XXXX Wells Fargo branch. \nXXXX XXXX processed a cash withdrawal of {$18000.00} at XX/XX/XXXX \nI was actively being coached during the withdrawal. \nI was instructed to give a scripted explanation ( contractor ).\n\nBecause the transaction was made under deception and pressure, it is not considered authorized under Regulation E, even though I physically made the withdrawal. \n\n\n-- - 2A. Prior Pershing Branch Deposit Error ( Context for Why the Scam Felt Plausible ) Date : Over 10 years prior Location : Same XXXX XXXX Wells Fargo branch Transaction : Insurance settlement deposit from XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Branch shorted the deposit by several XXXX dollars More than a decade earlier, the same XXXX XXXX branch shorted me several XXXX dollars when I deposited a large insurance check from XX/XX/XXXX for a totaled vehicle. \nI had to return to the branch with the check stub to get the deposit corrected. \nBecause of this real, documented past error at the same branch, the scammers claim that the XXXX branch was under FBI investigation felt plausible to me. \nThis prior experience directly influenced why the scammers narrative landed in a way that felt believable. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. Immediate Fraud Reporting to Wells Fargo Date : XX/XX/XXXX Time : XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Call duration : XXXX minutes Number dialed : XXXX At XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX minutes after the call ended, I called XXXX. \nI reported the fraud immediately. \n\n\nAdditional Wells Fargo Fraud Reporting Calls ( Same Night ) Later that evening, I also contacted : XXXX ( Wells Fargo Fraud Department ) XXXX ( Wells Fargo Customer Service ) I reported the fraud to multiple Wells Fargo departments on the night it occurred. \n\n-- - XXXX. Report Filed With the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Time : XX/XX/XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX number : XXXX After contacting Wells Fargos fraud department, I contacted the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX at XXXXXX/XX/XXXX. \nI filed an official report. \nI provided Wells Fargo with the case number XXXX that same night. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. IC3.gov Federal Complaint Filed Date : XX/XX/XXXX Time submitted : XXXXXX/XX/XXXXEST Submission ID : XXXX At XXXX XX/XX/XXXXEST, I filed a federal cybercrime complaint with IC3.gov. \nThis filing documented : The suspicious call from XXXX The coaching and pressure The fraudulent {$18000.00} withdrawal The timeline of events I informed Wells Fargo that an IC3 complaint had been filed. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. Large Cash Deposit at ApproximatelXX/XX/XXXXon XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Approximate time : XXXX XX/XX/XXXXAmount : {$17000.00} Location : Wells Fargo ATM on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, WY XXXX : None ATM deposit At approximately XX/XX/XXXX I made a {$17000.00} cash deposit at the Wells Fargo ATM on XXXX XXXX. \nThe ATM did not accept two old {$100.00} bills, which I attempted to deposit. \nThe remaining {$17000.00} was accepted by the ATM and recorded by Wells Fargos systems. \nThis sameday ATM deposit followed by a sameday inperson withdrawal at a different branch is a known fraud pattern that banks are required to detect. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. XXXX Visit on XX/XX/XXXX With Personal Banker XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Time : XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Location : Wells Fargo branch ( first business day after XXXX closure ) Staff : XXXX XXXX XXXX, Personal Banker Because the branch was closed on XX/XX/XXXX for XXXX, the earliest possible inperson visit was XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XX/XX/XXXXwhen the branch reopened. \nI arrived at XX/XX/XXXX, the moment the branch opened, and met with Personal Banker XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nThis appointment was the first available opportunity to address the fraud in person after the holiday closure. \nI informed him of the fraudulent withdrawal, the suspicious call, and the events of XX/XX/XXXX. \nThis demonstrates that I acted immediately and responsibly once the branch reopened. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. Wells Fargos Failure to Provide Required ATM Evidence Date Range : XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Wells Fargo failed to produce multiple forms of required ATM evidence, including : ATM video footage Cash cassette totals ATM cashhandling logs Electronic journals ( EJ logs ) Access logs Chainofcustody documentation Error codes or sensor data Reconciliation reports These records are standard, required, and routinely produced in ATMrelated investigations. \nWells Fargos inability or refusal to provide them is a major procedural failure. \n\n-- - XXXX. Wells Fargos Initial Investigation Failure Date : Late XXXX Early XX/XX/XXXX Wells Fargo closed the investigation without contacting me.\n\nI was not asked for evidence, clarification, or a rebuttal.\n\nRequired Regulation E disputehandling procedures were not followed. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. First CFPB Complaint Filed Date : XX/XX/XXXX I filed my first CFPB complaint due to Wells Fargos failure to investigate properly. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. First CFPB Complaint Closed Date : XX/XX/XXXX The CFPB marked the first complaint closed. \nI was not given an opportunity to provide consumer feedback or rebut Wells Fargos response. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. Search Warrant Issued and Served on Wells Fargo Date : XX/XX/XXXX Agency : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Detective : Detective Young Wells Fargo internal reference number : XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX, Detective XXXX from the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX served a search warrant on Wells Fargo. \nWells Fargo confirmed receipt of the warrant. \nWells Fargo provided XXXX XXXX with their internal reference number : XXXX. \nThis proves Wells Fargo was fully aware of the investigation and obligated to preserve and produce all relevant evidence. \nDespite this, Wells Fargo did not incorporate the warrant or its evidence requirements into their investigation. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. Second CFPB Complaint Filed Date : XX/XX/XXXX I filed a second CFPB complaint due to continued procedural failures and XXXX XXXX failure to consider involvement by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. Second CFPB Complaint Closed Date : XX/XX/XXXX The CFPB marked the second complaint closed. \nAgain, I was not given an opportunity to rebut Wells Fargos response. \nWells Fargo still did not address : The call from XXXX The duress The coaching The XXXX deposit + withdrawal The XX/XX/XXXX warrant The missing ATM evidence Regulation XXXX requirements -- - XXXX. Third CFPB Complaint Filed ( Current Active Case ) Date : XX/XX/XXXX I filed a third CFPB complaint due to : XXXX premature closures Contradictory statements Failure to request evidence Failure to consider involvement by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to follow riskmitigation procedures Failure to follow Regulation XXXX requirements Failure to provide required ATM evidence XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX contacted me, indicating elevated review. \nI am currently awaiting their XXXX response. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. Ongoing Harm Date Range : XX/XX/XXXX XXXX * * Financial loss totaling {$17000.00} remains unresolved. \nMy automatically deposited paychecks did not reach my new Wells Fargo account, despite being told they would transfer correctly. \nAs a result, I had no access to my paycheck during the XXXX holiday, causing significant financial hardship. \nWells Fargos premature account closures created an additional risk : if my closed accounts do not remain open and accessible, I will not be able to retrieve the transaction records I need for tax filing, despite informing Wells Fargo that I require access for this purpose. \nContinued financial instability due to Wells Fargos failure to correct the error.\n\nSignificant time spent documenting the issue and filing multiple CFPB complaints.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-02-08T13:37:14.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"82009","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19339380","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2026-02-08T13:21:33.000Z","state":"WY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Deposits and withdrawals"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This prior experience directly influenced why the scammers <em>narrative</em> landed in a way that felt believable. \n\n\n-- - XXXX. Immediate Fraud <em>Reporting</em> to Wells Fargo Date : XX/XX/XXXX Time : XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Call duration : XXXX minutes Number dialed : XXXX At XXXXXX/XX/XXXXXXXX minutes after the call ended, I called XXXX. \nI <em>reported</em> the fraud immediately."]},"sort":[8.573852,"19339380"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13321378","_score":7.164677,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am formally disputing the accuracy of the payment history being reported on my XXXX XXXX auto loan account # XXXX. My credit reports from Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion reflect XXXX, XXXX and XXXX late payments across several years. However, XXXX XXXX own payment records show I only missed XXXX actual payments. These isolated instances do not constitute three consecutive years of sustained delinquency especially when each of these payments were resolved within 30 days, either by a subsequent full payment or a series of large catch-up payments. The payment history provided directly by XXXX XXXX is proof of this. \n\nDespite this, XXXX XXXX has repeatedly re-aged the account, reporting it as XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX  days late including during months when payments were made and balances were reduced. This type of reporting is misleading and violates FCRA XXXX ( b ), which mandates that all furnished data be complete and accurate. \n\nEquifax, Experian, and TransUnion have continued to publish these inaccurate and inflated delinquency statuses, even after being provided with factual evidence contradicting them. Their ongoing publication of false data along with XXXX XXXX refusal to correct it suggests not just negligence, but active collusion between the furnisher and all three credit bureaus. \n\nI reject any forthcoming statement from the credit bureaus claiming they are not responsible for the way XXXX XXXX furnishes data. Similarly, I reject XXXX XXXX assertion that it bears no responsibility for how the bureaus report its submissions. Under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) and XXXX, both the furnisher and the consumer reporting agencies are independently and jointly obligated to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of any information reported. \n\nThis pattern of blame-shifting, delay, and collusion has created a coordinated failure to honor federal law and protect consumer rights. All four parties XXXX XXXX, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion are responsible for the continued reporting of inaccurate, aged, and misleading information, and I will hold each of them fully accountable for the damage this has caused. I have made every attempt for them to correct these errors. \n\nIt is beyond frustrating and frankly unacceptable that XXXX XXXX continues to deflect from the actual issue by attempting to force a phone conversation instead of correcting the false and damaging information they have furnished to the credit bureaus. This is not a customer service issue this is a legal violation. I dont need a phone call. I need the lies removed from my credit report. You do not get to drag my credit down for years, re-age missed payments that were clearly resolved, and then pretend a conversation will make it go away. This is a calculated pattern of avoidance and its part of the reason your company continues to face lawsuits and consumer protection investigations. You are willfully reporting false data, and that is a direct violation of the law. \n\nThe credit bureaus are just as complicit. Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion have failed in their legal obligation to conduct proper investigations. Instead of thoroughly reviewing my disputes they simply regurgitate the inaccurate information and mark it as verified. That is not a reinvestigation. That is negligence. \n\nThis entire process has made it painfully clear that neither the furnisher nor the bureaus are interested in accuracy or fairness only in protecting each other. Meanwhile, Im left to suffer the financial and emotional consequences of their indifference. It should not take months of fighting and regulatory complaints just to get the truth reflected on my credit. You are playing with peoples livelihoods and you are doing it without integrity, without accountability, and without any regard for the law. \n\nFix the reporting. Stop hiding. And stop pretending a phone call is an acceptable substitute for the truth. \n\nContradictions in Credit Acceptances XX/XX/XXXX Letter In its XX/XX/XXXX response to CFPB Complaint No. XXXX, XXXX XXXX asserts that its reporting has been accurate and consistent with my account activity. However, a review of their own attached payment history directly contradicts this claim. \n\nSpecifically, XXXX XXXX identifies 11 months with no recorded payments ( the year XXXX is no longer visible on my credit reports and should remain that way. Any adverse reporting from that year is now obsolete under the XXXX XXXX XXXX Acts limitations on negative information ). XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX. - That aligns with my records and confirms that : Their own records show that my account was repeatedly brought back into good standing, and yet they continued to report it as XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX days late with the credit bureaus publishing those inflated statuses unchallenged. \n\nIn XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX response, they assert that my account was most recently furnished to the credit bureaus as Current in XX/XX/XXXX, implying that this reflects accurate and compliant reporting. However, this claim is both misleading and strategically deceptive. \n\nThe account was only marked as Current in XX/XX/XXXX because I submitted a formal dispute and complaint to the CFPB. The Current status was a system-generated response to my consumer dispute not a proactive update or correction initiated by XXXX XXXX or the credit bureaus. \n\nMore importantly, my account should have been reported as current far earlier, for multiple reasons : From XXXX through XXXX, I made consistent catch-up payments that cured delinquencies well within 30 days, yet the account was repeatedly re-aged. \nIn XX/XX/XXXX, I paid off the account in full with a final payment of {$2400.00}, covering all remaining principal, interest, and fees. At that point, the account was fully satisfied and should have immediately reflected a Paid or Current status across all three credit bureaus. \nDespite this, XXXX XXXX, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion continued to report the account as negative and severely delinquent well into XXXX. \n\nThis not only demonstrates negligence, but reinforces the pattern of delayed corrections, avoidance of responsibility, and coordinated inaction among all parties XXXX XXXX and the credit bureaus alike. \n\nDelinquency Dispute with proven Evidence XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX full payments ) Reported Status : 90 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : A payment made within 30 days of the due date and another within XXXX should have prevented the account from aging beyond 60 days delinquent. Reporting 90 days late contradicts standard aging logic. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 60 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : XXXX payments were made prior to the XXXX due date and a third shortly after. These payments addressed the delinquency. Reporting 60 days late does not accurately reflect the accounts status. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 90 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : Over {$900.00} in payments were made within 45 days of the missed due date. This activity cured the delinquency, yet the account continued to be aged as 90 days past due. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 90 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : Over {$1000.00} was paid in XXXX, nearly XXXX times the monthly payment. This should have brought the account current, and reporting 90 days late is not consistent with this level of repayment. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 120 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : A single month was missed and an {$800.00} payment was made within 60 days. XXXX the account to 120 days delinquent does not reflect the actual payment activity. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 120 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : Payment was made within 60 days of the missed due date. The status should have been no more than XXXX or 60 days late, not XXXX. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 150 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : XXXX payments totaling over {$3000.00} were made within 75 days of the due date. This level of repayment is inconsistent with a XXXX delinquency designation and should have updated the status accordingly. \n\nRebuttal to Credit Acceptances XX/XX/XXXX Response Regarding CFPB Complaint No. XXXX XXXX. Claim : Partial payments do not reset the delinquency timeline. \nThat logic is flawed when full or cumulative catch-up payments have been made. For example, in XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX full payments were madecovering the missed XXXX payment in full. Yet, XXXX XXXX still reported the account as 90 days delinquent. \nContract Evidence : Nowhere in the agreement does it define how delinquency aging should be handled with consecutive or catch-up payments. \nXXXX XXXX : Under the FCRA and XXXX XXXX guidelines, when a consumer cures past-due status, the account must not continue aging in delinquency. Re-aging it without basis is materially misleading and reportable to regulators. \n\nThis XXXX be true for minor partialsbut I did not just make partial payments ; I made full catch-up payments and in many cases multiple payments within a single month. For example : In XX/XX/XXXX, I made XXXX full payments ( {$390.00} each on XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ), covering the missed XXXX obligation. \nDespite this, XXXX was reported as 90 days late, and XXXX and XXXX were also marked late, even though further payments were made. \nThat is not delinquency. That is re-aging. \n\nSupporting Evidence : XXXX XXXX own payment history attached to their XX/XX/XXXX response shows these payments clearly. Yet the credit report shows aged delinquencies that contradict the data they provided. This shows they either never reviewed their own data or deliberately ignored it. \n\nXXXX. Claim : The delinquency timeline for XXXX is accurate. \nAbsolutely false. Below is a breakdown using XXXX XXXX own XX/XX/XXXX records : XX/XX/XXXX : Missed XXXX : Paid {$800.00} XXXX : Missed XXXX : Paid {$600.00} XXXX : Missed XXXX : Paid {$600.00} XXXX : Paid {$2400.00} Yet from XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, the account is reported as 90150 days late across all three bureaus. That is blatant re-aging and manufactured delinquency, directly contradicted by the data they submitted themselves. \n\nIt is not enough to say the account was reported correctly based on system entries. You must reconcile : The payment due dates The actual funds received and applied And the delinquency age reported to the credit bureaus I mapped the payment history directly against standard delinquency aging thresholds. In multiple instances including XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and the entire second half of XXXX payments were made that should have stopped delinquency from aging, yet the account was carried forward as if no payments were made. \n\nXXXX. Claim : We furnished the same information to all three credit bureaus. \nThen why is each bureau showing? \nA different number of late payments ( TransUnion : XXXX, Experian : XXXX, Equifax : XXXX ) Different statuses in the same month Either Credit Acceptance is : Sending inconsistent or ambiguous data, or The credit bureaus are failing to properly interpret and apply the information. \n\nBoth scenarios violate the FCRAs mandate for maximum possible accuracy. \n\nRebuttal to Excuses in Credit Acceptances XX/XX/XXXX Letter Preemptive Defense Based on XX/XX/XXXX Payment History In its XX/XX/XXXX response, XXXX XXXX attempted to justify the continued reporting of XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX delinquencies. However, these excuses directly contradict the detailed payment history XXXX XXXX themselves provided on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nBelow is a point-by-point rebuttal to anticipated and stated defenses none of which withstand scrutiny when weighed against their own documentation and obligations under federal law. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : Catch-up payments were applied to older balances and did not bring the account current Payment allocation can not be used to justify extended delinquency. The XX/XX/XXXX payment history clearly shows full and multiple payments including {$800.00}, $ XXXX, and $ XXXX made shortly after missed months. XXXX XXXX XXXX and FCRA XXXX ( b ), once the delinquency is cured, it can not legally be carried forward or re-aged. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : Our system does not automatically recalculate delinquency That is not a legal defense its an admission of noncompliance. If internal systems do not allow delinquency aging to reset after payments are made, then the system is furnishing misleading and damaging data in violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ). \n\nXXXX. Excuse : The account was never fully brought current The XX/XX/XXXX letter shows that I made multiple full payments in key months, often back-to-back, and clearly enough to resolve any past-due balance. Continuing to report the account as XXXX or XXXX days late while receiving those payments is factually inaccurate and abusive. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : XXXX is valid based on days past due Even if a payment was late, the aging must reflect how many days past the contractual due date. Payments made within 3060 days can not be reported as 90150 days late. The XX/XX/XXXX payment record disproves the reported aging. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : The credit bureaus verified the data The bureaus rely on e-OSCAR, an automated dispute system that does not perform a manual review. Your XX/XX/XXXX letter, which contains the payment timeline, was not reconciled by any human reviewer at Experian, Equifax, or TransUnion. That means verification is incomplete and legally insufficient under FCRA XXXX. \n\nBottom line : The XX/XX/XXXX excuses are contradicted by the XX/XX/XXXX evidence XXXX XXXX itself submitted. These explanations are not only false they are a coordinated effort between the furnisher and credit bureaus to shift blame, delay correction, and continue furnishing false, damaging, and unlawful information about my account. \n\nProof That Missed Payments Were Cured and Re-Aging Is Improper Credit Acceptance has inaccurately reported extended delinquency ( 60150 days late ) by ignoring substantial catch-up payments that fully cured missed payments from XXXX. Below is a detailed breakdown of when payments were missed, how they were resolved, and why ongoing derogatory reporting is legally unjustified. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Missed Payment Proof of Cure : {$800.00} paid on XX/XX/XXXX Covered both XXXX and XXXX payments in full. \nEvidence : XXXX XXXX own records confirm this large payment. \nConclusion : No basis to report delinquency beyond 30 days. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Missed Payment Proof of Cure : Full payments made in : XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Evidence : Consecutive full monthly payments following XXXX resolve the delinquency. \nConclusion : Account was brought current and stayed current no justification for ongoing derogatory reporting. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Missed Payments Proof of Cure : XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} ( full payment ) XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} ( full payment ) XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} XX/XX/XXXX : {$300.00} XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} Total Paid in 90 Days : Over {$1400.00} Evidence : Payment history from XX/XX/XXXX Credit Acceptance letter Conclusion : XXXX and XXXX delinquencies were fully cured within 60 days account should have been marked current. \n\nAnd lets be clear your companys mishandling of XXXX hardship protections makes your reporting even more egregious. In your own XX/XX/XXXX letter, you confirmed that my account was removed from COVID Protected Status on XX/XX/XXXX despite the fact that I made XXXX full payments in XXXX, on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. Yet instead of acknowledging that I resumed payment in good faith, you immediately marked my account as 90 days late, as if no effort had been made at all. \n\nYou have no valid justification for removing me from XXXX relief in the first place even if I missed payments in XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, I was in constant communication with your customer service team, notifying your company of my ongoing hardship and intent to resolve the balance. That communication alone should have preserved my protection status or at the very least prevented the account from being harshly penalized. But instead, you weaponized the removal by re-aging my account and resuming aggressive negative reporting and immediately marked my account as 90 days late in XXXX, as if no payments had been made at all. \n\nUnder the CARES Act and updated FCRA guidance, consumers granted COVID accommodations were not to be penalized with delinquent reporting during or immediately after the relief period, especially when payments resumed in good faith. Your decision to end my protection XXXX day before a full payment and then backdate a XXXX delinquency is not just inaccurate, its abusive and intentionally deceptive. It contradicts your stated policies, violates federal law, and shows a clear intent to punish rather than support consumers during a national crisis. \n\nYou had the power and the documentation to report this account accurately but you chose to weaponize the end of XXXX relief to re-age delinquencies and damage my credit. \n\nXXXX XXXX & Legal Implications These payments clearly cured each delinquency within the XXXX thresholds ( 3060 days ). \nContinuing to report these periods as XXXX, XXXX, or 150 days late is a violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) and XXXX XXXX standards. \nThis pattern constitutes improper re-aging and furnishes a materially misleading credit profile. \n\nAll supporting payment records were disclosed in XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX response, confirming the timeline above. Any attempt to link XXXX delinquencies to these resolved periods is both factually unsupported and legally indefensible. \n\nAdditional Violations and Concerns : Retaliation : XXXX XXXX restricted my online access to payment records after I filed complaints. I was unable to view my remaining balance, payment activity, or due dates. Thats retaliatory and unethical. \nDismissiveness : Instead of properly investigating, XXXX XXXX legal team simply repeats generic responses and pushes me to call themrather than correcting documented, proven errors. \nMisleading the CFPB : By refusing to address payment-by-payment discrepancies and brushing off full settlement activity, XXXX XXXX is submitting XXXX XXXX responses to a federal agency. \nImpact : This has sabotaged my XXXX XXXX for XXXX years, damaged my credibility with lenders, and blocked me from refinancing and auto purchases. My account has XXXX payment leftyet my report looks worse than someone in active default. \nCall for XXXX : As a consumer, I should not have to fight this hard to correct obvious reporting failures. The credit bureaus should not allow auto-aging to persist for years unchecked. Every year from XXXX to XXXX should be manually reviewed and corrected immediately. \n\nPreemptive Rebuttal : We Do Not Recalculate Delinquency Is Not a Legal Defense Should Credit Acceptance attempt to claim that they do not recalculate balances or delinquency aging once a payment is missed, I want to make it clear that such a policy if true would not absolve them of responsibility under federal law. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX Standards Require Accurate, Updated Reporting : The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX guidelines make clear that when a consumer cures a delinquency even through staggered or large catch-up payments furnishers are obligated to adjust the delinquency status accordingly. Continuing to report an account as XXXX, XXXX, or 150 days late after such payments is materially misleading and violates data furnishing standards. \n\nXXXX. Not Recalculating Is a Breach of FCRA Obligations : Even if XXXX XXXX has an internal policy of not recalculating once delinquency begins, that policy does not override FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ), which requires the furnishing of accurate and complete information. XXXX prolonged delinquency while ignoring substantial payments that resolved the delinquent amount is both deceptive and damaging. \n\nXXXX. Internal Policies Can not Override Legal Requirements : A companys refusal to update or recalculate based on new payments is not a defense it is noncompliance. The Fair Credit Reporting Act mandates accurate and fair credit reporting, regardless of internal system limitations or preferences. \n\nXXXX. Harm from Failure to Recalculate : This type of rigid, one-directional reporting has falsely inflated the severity of my credit history, suppressed my score, and caused real-world harm in the form of loan denials and unfavorable financing terms despite regular and significant payments. \n\nIf XXXX XXXX or the credit bureaus assert this reasoning as a defense, I will treat it as a willful violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and pursue additional complaints with federal and state regulators accordingly. \n\nFinal Demand for Full Reinvestigation ( XXXX ) I am formally requesting a full and manual reinvestigation of my XXXX XXXX tradeline covering the period from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. This investigation must include : 1. A month-by-month reconciliation of reported delinquency status against actual payments made, using the payment history provided by XXXX XXXX. \n2. Correction or deletion of all inaccurately re-aged delinquencies where payments were made or delinquencies were cured within 30 days. \n3. Removal of all excessive XXXX delinquency entries that contradict both the factual payment activity and XXXX XXXX standards. \n4. Confirmation that this investigation was conducted outside of e-OSCAR and involved manual human review, as required under FCRA XXXX. \n\nAt this point, I only have XXXX payment left on this account, yet my credit reports reflect over XXXX years of inflated, false derogatory status. This is not an oversight this is systemic, intentional, and damaging. \n\nCollective Failure and Collusion by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has made it clear in its written response that it disclaims responsibility for how this data appears on my reports, placing blame on the credit bureaus. In turn, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion claim to simply report what is furnished. \n\nThis finger-pointing is unacceptable. \nUnder FCRA XXXX and XXXX, both furnishers and CRAs are independently responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the data they report or publish. This means : XXXX XXXX is responsible for what it submits. \nThe credit bureaus are responsible for verifying, reviewing, and publishing that data accurately. \n\nBy allowing these inaccuracies to persist knowingly all parties are complicit. \n\nThis is no longer a matter of mere error. This is a coordinated failure to correct false reporting, despite documentation, disputes, and federal complaints. And in that, XXXX XXXX, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion are colluding knowingly and willfully to maintain a damaging, false credit narrative that is unsupported by the actual payment history. \n\nWhat This Has Cost Me Financial, Personal, and Long-Term Harm The ongoing false reporting and failure to correct inaccurate delinquency data has had a profound and devastating impact on nearly every aspect of my financial stability and personal life. This is not just a matter of numbers on a report this has been a sustained attack on my ability to function financially, and it has come with measurable, lasting harm. \nI have been flagged as a credit risk across multiple platforms and lender systems due to the inflated number of severe delinquencies reported by XXXX XXXX and published by Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion. \nI have been denied financing for housing, including rejection from rental properties and credit-based apartment applications, despite having stable income and the means to pay. \nI have been denied auto loans and refinancing, even after making over XXXX payments on time and ultimately paying the account in full. \nI have had to accept higher interest rates, larger security deposits, and unfavorable contract terms for basic financial services due to the false impression created by this reporting. \nI have spent over {$3000.00} out-of-pocket covering inflated security deposits, upfront insurance costs, and denied credit-based offers that would have otherwise reduced my financial burden. \nI have had to delay life plans including seeking new housing and upgrading my vehicle due to credit-related denials and hesitations from lenders. \nIve experienced emotional distress, humiliation, and exhaustion from having to explain these errors repeatedly to landlords, lenders, and financial institutions and from having to fight so hard just to have my truthful history reflected. \n\nAll of this has occurred despite my continued good faith efforts to maintain the account, including making full payments, catch-up payments, and ultimately paying off the loan entirely. \n\nThis is not only negligent it is punitive, abusive, and predatory. \n\nIt is a direct violation of : The Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) for the repeated furnishing and publication of inaccurate, outdated, and misleading information. \nXXXX XXXX standards for failing to recalculate or update delinquency aging after payments. \nUDAAP under the Consumer Financial XXXX XXXX for engaging in deceptive and abusive practices that trap consumers in falsely negative credit positions. \n\nI am not seeking special treatment I am demanding lawful, accurate treatment. And I will hold each party accountable for the personal, financial, and emotional damage this has caused. You can not continue to profit from inaccurate reporting, destroy my financial standing, and shift blame while refusing to act. This is my final demand for full resolution and correction. \n\nThe record is clear. The data is yours. The error is deliberate. The harm is real.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-03T22:15:34.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"483XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13321378","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-05-03T22:15:06.000Z","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":["This is a coordinated failure to correct false <em>reporting</em>, despite documentation, disputes, and federal <em>complaints</em>. And in that, XXXX XXXX, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion are colluding knowingly and willfully to maintain a damaging, false credit <em>narrative</em> that is unsupported by the actual payment history."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[7.164677,"13321378"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13318699","_score":7.164677,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am formally disputing the accuracy of the payment history being reported on my XXXX XXXX auto loan account # XXXX. My credit reports from Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion reflect XXXX, XXXX and XXXX late payments across several years. However, XXXX XXXX own payment records show I only missed XXXX actual payments. These isolated instances do not constitute three consecutive years of sustained delinquency especially when each of these payments were resolved within 30 days, either by a subsequent full payment or a series of large catch-up payments. The payment history provided directly by XXXX XXXX is proof of this. \n\nDespite this, XXXX XXXX has repeatedly re-aged the account, reporting it as XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX  days late including during months when payments were made and balances were reduced. This type of reporting is misleading and violates FCRA XXXX ( b ), which mandates that all furnished data be complete and accurate. \n\nEquifax, Experian, and TransUnion have continued to publish these inaccurate and inflated delinquency statuses, even after being provided with factual evidence contradicting them. Their ongoing publication of false data along with XXXX XXXX refusal to correct it suggests not just negligence, but active collusion between the furnisher and all three credit bureaus. \n\nI reject any forthcoming statement from the credit bureaus claiming they are not responsible for the way XXXX XXXX furnishes data. Similarly, I reject XXXX XXXX assertion that it bears no responsibility for how the bureaus report its submissions. Under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) and XXXX, both the furnisher and the consumer reporting agencies are independently and jointly obligated to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of any information reported. \n\nThis pattern of blame-shifting, delay, and collusion has created a coordinated failure to honor federal law and protect consumer rights. All four parties XXXX XXXX, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion are responsible for the continued reporting of inaccurate, aged, and misleading information, and I will hold each of them fully accountable for the damage this has caused. I have made every attempt for them to correct these errors. \n\nIt is beyond frustrating and frankly unacceptable that XXXX XXXX continues to deflect from the actual issue by attempting to force a phone conversation instead of correcting the false and damaging information they have furnished to the credit bureaus. This is not a customer service issue this is a legal violation. I dont need a phone call. I need the lies removed from my credit report. You do not get to drag my credit down for years, re-age missed payments that were clearly resolved, and then pretend a conversation will make it go away. This is a calculated pattern of avoidance and its part of the reason your company continues to face lawsuits and consumer protection investigations. You are willfully reporting false data, and that is a direct violation of the law. \n\nThe credit bureaus are just as complicit. Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion have failed in their legal obligation to conduct proper investigations. Instead of thoroughly reviewing my disputes they simply regurgitate the inaccurate information and mark it as verified. That is not a reinvestigation. That is negligence. \n\nThis entire process has made it painfully clear that neither the furnisher nor the bureaus are interested in accuracy or fairness only in protecting each other. Meanwhile, Im left to suffer the financial and emotional consequences of their indifference. It should not take months of fighting and regulatory complaints just to get the truth reflected on my credit. You are playing with peoples livelihoods and you are doing it without integrity, without accountability, and without any regard for the law. \n\nFix the reporting. Stop hiding. And stop pretending a phone call is an acceptable substitute for the truth. \n\nContradictions in Credit Acceptances XX/XX/XXXX Letter In its XX/XX/XXXX response to CFPB Complaint No. XXXX, XXXX XXXX asserts that its reporting has been accurate and consistent with my account activity. However, a review of their own attached payment history directly contradicts this claim. \n\nSpecifically, XXXX XXXX identifies 11 months with no recorded payments ( the year XXXX is no longer visible on my credit reports and should remain that way. Any adverse reporting from that year is now obsolete under the XXXX XXXX XXXX Acts limitations on negative information ). XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX. - That aligns with my records and confirms that : Their own records show that my account was repeatedly brought back into good standing, and yet they continued to report it as XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX days late with the credit bureaus publishing those inflated statuses unchallenged. \n\nIn XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX response, they assert that my account was most recently furnished to the credit bureaus as Current in XX/XX/XXXX, implying that this reflects accurate and compliant reporting. However, this claim is both misleading and strategically deceptive. \n\nThe account was only marked as Current in XX/XX/XXXX because I submitted a formal dispute and complaint to the CFPB. The Current status was a system-generated response to my consumer dispute not a proactive update or correction initiated by XXXX XXXX or the credit bureaus. \n\nMore importantly, my account should have been reported as current far earlier, for multiple reasons : From XXXX through XXXX, I made consistent catch-up payments that cured delinquencies well within 30 days, yet the account was repeatedly re-aged. \nIn XX/XX/XXXX, I paid off the account in full with a final payment of {$2400.00}, covering all remaining principal, interest, and fees. At that point, the account was fully satisfied and should have immediately reflected a Paid or Current status across all three credit bureaus. \nDespite this, XXXX XXXX, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion continued to report the account as negative and severely delinquent well into XXXX. \n\nThis not only demonstrates negligence, but reinforces the pattern of delayed corrections, avoidance of responsibility, and coordinated inaction among all parties XXXX XXXX and the credit bureaus alike. \n\nDelinquency Dispute with proven Evidence XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX full payments ) Reported Status : 90 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : A payment made within 30 days of the due date and another within XXXX should have prevented the account from aging beyond 60 days delinquent. Reporting 90 days late contradicts standard aging logic. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 60 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : XXXX payments were made prior to the XXXX due date and a third shortly after. These payments addressed the delinquency. Reporting 60 days late does not accurately reflect the accounts status. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 90 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : Over {$900.00} in payments were made within 45 days of the missed due date. This activity cured the delinquency, yet the account continued to be aged as 90 days past due. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 90 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : Over {$1000.00} was paid in XXXX, nearly XXXX times the monthly payment. This should have brought the account current, and reporting 90 days late is not consistent with this level of repayment. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 120 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : A single month was missed and an {$800.00} payment was made within 60 days. XXXX the account to 120 days delinquent does not reflect the actual payment activity. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 120 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : Payment was made within 60 days of the missed due date. The status should have been no more than XXXX or 60 days late, not XXXX. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 150 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : XXXX payments totaling over {$3000.00} were made within 75 days of the due date. This level of repayment is inconsistent with a XXXX delinquency designation and should have updated the status accordingly. \n\nRebuttal to Credit Acceptances XX/XX/XXXX Response Regarding CFPB Complaint No. XXXX XXXX. Claim : Partial payments do not reset the delinquency timeline. \nThat logic is flawed when full or cumulative catch-up payments have been made. For example, in XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX full payments were madecovering the missed XXXX payment in full. Yet, XXXX XXXX still reported the account as 90 days delinquent. \nContract Evidence : Nowhere in the agreement does it define how delinquency aging should be handled with consecutive or catch-up payments. \nXXXX XXXX : Under the FCRA and XXXX XXXX guidelines, when a consumer cures past-due status, the account must not continue aging in delinquency. Re-aging it without basis is materially misleading and reportable to regulators. \n\nThis XXXX be true for minor partialsbut I did not just make partial payments ; I made full catch-up payments and in many cases multiple payments within a single month. For example : In XX/XX/XXXX, I made XXXX full payments ( {$390.00} each on XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ), covering the missed XXXX obligation. \nDespite this, XXXX was reported as 90 days late, and XXXX and XXXX were also marked late, even though further payments were made. \nThat is not delinquency. That is re-aging. \n\nSupporting Evidence : XXXX XXXX own payment history attached to their XX/XX/XXXX response shows these payments clearly. Yet the credit report shows aged delinquencies that contradict the data they provided. This shows they either never reviewed their own data or deliberately ignored it. \n\nXXXX. Claim : The delinquency timeline for XXXX is accurate. \nAbsolutely false. Below is a breakdown using XXXX XXXX own XX/XX/XXXX records : XX/XX/XXXX : Missed XXXX : Paid {$800.00} XXXX : Missed XXXX : Paid {$600.00} XXXX : Missed XXXX : Paid {$600.00} XXXX : Paid {$2400.00} Yet from XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, the account is reported as 90150 days late across all three bureaus. That is blatant re-aging and manufactured delinquency, directly contradicted by the data they submitted themselves. \n\nIt is not enough to say the account was reported correctly based on system entries. You must reconcile : The payment due dates The actual funds received and applied And the delinquency age reported to the credit bureaus I mapped the payment history directly against standard delinquency aging thresholds. In multiple instances including XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and the entire second half of XXXX payments were made that should have stopped delinquency from aging, yet the account was carried forward as if no payments were made. \n\nXXXX. Claim : We furnished the same information to all three credit bureaus. \nThen why is each bureau showing? \nA different number of late payments ( TransUnion : XXXX, Experian : XXXX, Equifax : XXXX ) Different statuses in the same month Either Credit Acceptance is : Sending inconsistent or ambiguous data, or The credit bureaus are failing to properly interpret and apply the information. \n\nBoth scenarios violate the FCRAs mandate for maximum possible accuracy. \n\nRebuttal to Excuses in Credit Acceptances XX/XX/XXXX Letter Preemptive Defense Based on XX/XX/XXXX Payment History In its XX/XX/XXXX response, XXXX XXXX attempted to justify the continued reporting of XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX delinquencies. However, these excuses directly contradict the detailed payment history XXXX XXXX themselves provided on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nBelow is a point-by-point rebuttal to anticipated and stated defenses none of which withstand scrutiny when weighed against their own documentation and obligations under federal law. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : Catch-up payments were applied to older balances and did not bring the account current Payment allocation can not be used to justify extended delinquency. The XX/XX/XXXX payment history clearly shows full and multiple payments including {$800.00}, $ XXXX, and $ XXXX made shortly after missed months. XXXX XXXX XXXX and FCRA XXXX ( b ), once the delinquency is cured, it can not legally be carried forward or re-aged. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : Our system does not automatically recalculate delinquency That is not a legal defense its an admission of noncompliance. If internal systems do not allow delinquency aging to reset after payments are made, then the system is furnishing misleading and damaging data in violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ). \n\nXXXX. Excuse : The account was never fully brought current The XX/XX/XXXX letter shows that I made multiple full payments in key months, often back-to-back, and clearly enough to resolve any past-due balance. Continuing to report the account as XXXX or XXXX days late while receiving those payments is factually inaccurate and abusive. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : XXXX is valid based on days past due Even if a payment was late, the aging must reflect how many days past the contractual due date. Payments made within 3060 days can not be reported as 90150 days late. The XX/XX/XXXX payment record disproves the reported aging. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : The credit bureaus verified the data The bureaus rely on e-OSCAR, an automated dispute system that does not perform a manual review. Your XX/XX/XXXX letter, which contains the payment timeline, was not reconciled by any human reviewer at Experian, Equifax, or TransUnion. That means verification is incomplete and legally insufficient under FCRA XXXX. \n\nBottom line : The XX/XX/XXXX excuses are contradicted by the XX/XX/XXXX evidence XXXX XXXX itself submitted. These explanations are not only false they are a coordinated effort between the furnisher and credit bureaus to shift blame, delay correction, and continue furnishing false, damaging, and unlawful information about my account. \n\nProof That Missed Payments Were Cured and Re-Aging Is Improper Credit Acceptance has inaccurately reported extended delinquency ( 60150 days late ) by ignoring substantial catch-up payments that fully cured missed payments from XXXX. Below is a detailed breakdown of when payments were missed, how they were resolved, and why ongoing derogatory reporting is legally unjustified. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Missed Payment Proof of Cure : {$800.00} paid on XX/XX/XXXX Covered both XXXX and XXXX payments in full. \nEvidence : XXXX XXXX own records confirm this large payment. \nConclusion : No basis to report delinquency beyond 30 days. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Missed Payment Proof of Cure : Full payments made in : XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Evidence : Consecutive full monthly payments following XXXX resolve the delinquency. \nConclusion : Account was brought current and stayed current no justification for ongoing derogatory reporting. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Missed Payments Proof of Cure : XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} ( full payment ) XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} ( full payment ) XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} XX/XX/XXXX : {$300.00} XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} Total Paid in 90 Days : Over {$1400.00} Evidence : Payment history from XX/XX/XXXX Credit Acceptance letter Conclusion : XXXX and XXXX delinquencies were fully cured within 60 days account should have been marked current. \n\nAnd lets be clear your companys mishandling of XXXX hardship protections makes your reporting even more egregious. In your own XX/XX/XXXX letter, you confirmed that my account was removed from COVID Protected Status on XX/XX/XXXX despite the fact that I made XXXX full payments in XXXX, on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. Yet instead of acknowledging that I resumed payment in good faith, you immediately marked my account as 90 days late, as if no effort had been made at all. \n\nYou have no valid justification for removing me from XXXX relief in the first place even if I missed payments in XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, I was in constant communication with your customer service team, notifying your company of my ongoing hardship and intent to resolve the balance. That communication alone should have preserved my protection status or at the very least prevented the account from being harshly penalized. But instead, you weaponized the removal by re-aging my account and resuming aggressive negative reporting and immediately marked my account as 90 days late in XXXX, as if no payments had been made at all. \n\nUnder the CARES Act and updated FCRA guidance, consumers granted COVID accommodations were not to be penalized with delinquent reporting during or immediately after the relief period, especially when payments resumed in good faith. Your decision to end my protection XXXX day before a full payment and then backdate a XXXX delinquency is not just inaccurate, its abusive and intentionally deceptive. It contradicts your stated policies, violates federal law, and shows a clear intent to punish rather than support consumers during a national crisis. \n\nYou had the power and the documentation to report this account accurately but you chose to weaponize the end of XXXX relief to re-age delinquencies and damage my credit. \n\nXXXX XXXX & Legal Implications These payments clearly cured each delinquency within the XXXX thresholds ( 3060 days ). \nContinuing to report these periods as XXXX, XXXX, or 150 days late is a violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) and XXXX XXXX standards. \nThis pattern constitutes improper re-aging and furnishes a materially misleading credit profile. \n\nAll supporting payment records were disclosed in XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX response, confirming the timeline above. Any attempt to link XXXX delinquencies to these resolved periods is both factually unsupported and legally indefensible. \n\nAdditional Violations and Concerns : Retaliation : XXXX XXXX restricted my online access to payment records after I filed complaints. I was unable to view my remaining balance, payment activity, or due dates. Thats retaliatory and unethical. \nDismissiveness : Instead of properly investigating, XXXX XXXX legal team simply repeats generic responses and pushes me to call themrather than correcting documented, proven errors. \nMisleading the CFPB : By refusing to address payment-by-payment discrepancies and brushing off full settlement activity, XXXX XXXX is submitting XXXX XXXX responses to a federal agency. \nImpact : This has sabotaged my XXXX XXXX for XXXX years, damaged my credibility with lenders, and blocked me from refinancing and auto purchases. My account has XXXX payment leftyet my report looks worse than someone in active default. \nCall for XXXX : As a consumer, I should not have to fight this hard to correct obvious reporting failures. The credit bureaus should not allow auto-aging to persist for years unchecked. Every year from XXXX to XXXX should be manually reviewed and corrected immediately. \n\nPreemptive Rebuttal : We Do Not Recalculate Delinquency Is Not a Legal Defense Should Credit Acceptance attempt to claim that they do not recalculate balances or delinquency aging once a payment is missed, I want to make it clear that such a policy if true would not absolve them of responsibility under federal law. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX Standards Require Accurate, Updated Reporting : The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX guidelines make clear that when a consumer cures a delinquency even through staggered or large catch-up payments furnishers are obligated to adjust the delinquency status accordingly. Continuing to report an account as XXXX, XXXX, or 150 days late after such payments is materially misleading and violates data furnishing standards. \n\nXXXX. Not Recalculating Is a Breach of FCRA Obligations : Even if XXXX XXXX has an internal policy of not recalculating once delinquency begins, that policy does not override FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ), which requires the furnishing of accurate and complete information. XXXX prolonged delinquency while ignoring substantial payments that resolved the delinquent amount is both deceptive and damaging. \n\nXXXX. Internal Policies Can not Override Legal Requirements : A companys refusal to update or recalculate based on new payments is not a defense it is noncompliance. The Fair Credit Reporting Act mandates accurate and fair credit reporting, regardless of internal system limitations or preferences. \n\nXXXX. Harm from Failure to Recalculate : This type of rigid, one-directional reporting has falsely inflated the severity of my credit history, suppressed my score, and caused real-world harm in the form of loan denials and unfavorable financing terms despite regular and significant payments. \n\nIf XXXX XXXX or the credit bureaus assert this reasoning as a defense, I will treat it as a willful violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and pursue additional complaints with federal and state regulators accordingly. \n\nFinal Demand for Full Reinvestigation ( XXXX ) I am formally requesting a full and manual reinvestigation of my XXXX XXXX tradeline covering the period from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. This investigation must include : 1. A month-by-month reconciliation of reported delinquency status against actual payments made, using the payment history provided by XXXX XXXX. \n2. Correction or deletion of all inaccurately re-aged delinquencies where payments were made or delinquencies were cured within 30 days. \n3. Removal of all excessive XXXX delinquency entries that contradict both the factual payment activity and XXXX XXXX standards. \n4. Confirmation that this investigation was conducted outside of e-OSCAR and involved manual human review, as required under FCRA XXXX. \n\nAt this point, I only have XXXX payment left on this account, yet my credit reports reflect over XXXX years of inflated, false derogatory status. This is not an oversight this is systemic, intentional, and damaging. \n\nCollective Failure and Collusion by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has made it clear in its written response that it disclaims responsibility for how this data appears on my reports, placing blame on the credit bureaus. In turn, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion claim to simply report what is furnished. \n\nThis finger-pointing is unacceptable. \nUnder FCRA XXXX and XXXX, both furnishers and CRAs are independently responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the data they report or publish. This means : XXXX XXXX is responsible for what it submits. \nThe credit bureaus are responsible for verifying, reviewing, and publishing that data accurately. \n\nBy allowing these inaccuracies to persist knowingly all parties are complicit. \n\nThis is no longer a matter of mere error. This is a coordinated failure to correct false reporting, despite documentation, disputes, and federal complaints. And in that, XXXX XXXX, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion are colluding knowingly and willfully to maintain a damaging, false credit narrative that is unsupported by the actual payment history. \n\nWhat This Has Cost Me Financial, Personal, and Long-Term Harm The ongoing false reporting and failure to correct inaccurate delinquency data has had a profound and devastating impact on nearly every aspect of my financial stability and personal life. This is not just a matter of numbers on a report this has been a sustained attack on my ability to function financially, and it has come with measurable, lasting harm. \nI have been flagged as a credit risk across multiple platforms and lender systems due to the inflated number of severe delinquencies reported by XXXX XXXX and published by Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion. \nI have been denied financing for housing, including rejection from rental properties and credit-based apartment applications, despite having stable income and the means to pay. \nI have been denied auto loans and refinancing, even after making over XXXX payments on time and ultimately paying the account in full. \nI have had to accept higher interest rates, larger security deposits, and unfavorable contract terms for basic financial services due to the false impression created by this reporting. \nI have spent over {$3000.00} out-of-pocket covering inflated security deposits, upfront insurance costs, and denied credit-based offers that would have otherwise reduced my financial burden. \nI have had to delay life plans including seeking new housing and upgrading my vehicle due to credit-related denials and hesitations from lenders. \nIve experienced emotional distress, humiliation, and exhaustion from having to explain these errors repeatedly to landlords, lenders, and financial institutions and from having to fight so hard just to have my truthful history reflected. \n\nAll of this has occurred despite my continued good faith efforts to maintain the account, including making full payments, catch-up payments, and ultimately paying off the loan entirely. \n\nThis is not only negligent it is punitive, abusive, and predatory. \n\nIt is a direct violation of : The Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) for the repeated furnishing and publication of inaccurate, outdated, and misleading information. \nXXXX XXXX standards for failing to recalculate or update delinquency aging after payments. \nUDAAP under the Consumer Financial XXXX XXXX for engaging in deceptive and abusive practices that trap consumers in falsely negative credit positions. \n\nI am not seeking special treatment I am demanding lawful, accurate treatment. And I will hold each party accountable for the personal, financial, and emotional damage this has caused. You can not continue to profit from inaccurate reporting, destroy my financial standing, and shift blame while refusing to act. This is my final demand for full resolution and correction. \n\nThe record is clear. The data is yours. The error is deliberate. The harm is real.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-03T22:15:30.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"483XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13318699","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-03T22:15:06.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This is a coordinated failure to correct false <em>reporting</em>, despite documentation, disputes, and federal <em>complaints</em>. And in that, XXXX XXXX, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion are colluding knowingly and willfully to maintain a damaging, false credit <em>narrative</em> that is unsupported by the actual payment history."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[7.164677,"13318699"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13321520","_score":7.1556835,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am formally disputing the accuracy of the payment history being reported on my XXXX XXXX auto loan account # XXXX. My credit reports from Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion reflect XXXX, XXXX and XXXX late payments across several years. However, XXXX XXXX own payment records show I only missed XXXX actual payments. These isolated instances do not constitute three consecutive years of sustained delinquency especially when each of these payments were resolved within 30 days, either by a subsequent full payment or a series of large catch-up payments. The payment history provided directly by XXXX XXXX is proof of this. \n\nDespite this, XXXX XXXX has repeatedly re-aged the account, reporting it as XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX  days late including during months when payments were made and balances were reduced. This type of reporting is misleading and violates FCRA XXXX ( b ), which mandates that all furnished data be complete and accurate. \n\nEquifax, Experian, and TransUnion have continued to publish these inaccurate and inflated delinquency statuses, even after being provided with factual evidence contradicting them. Their ongoing publication of false data along with XXXX XXXX refusal to correct it suggests not just negligence, but active collusion between the furnisher and all three credit bureaus. \n\nI reject any forthcoming statement from the credit bureaus claiming they are not responsible for the way XXXX XXXX furnishes data. Similarly, I reject XXXX XXXX assertion that it bears no responsibility for how the bureaus report its submissions. Under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) and XXXX, both the furnisher and the consumer reporting agencies are independently and jointly obligated to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of any information reported. \n\nThis pattern of blame-shifting, delay, and collusion has created a coordinated failure to honor federal law and protect consumer rights. All four parties XXXX XXXX, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion are responsible for the continued reporting of inaccurate, aged, and misleading information, and I will hold each of them fully accountable for the damage this has caused. I have made every attempt for them to correct these errors. \n\nIt is beyond frustrating and frankly unacceptable that XXXX XXXX continues to deflect from the actual issue by attempting to force a phone conversation instead of correcting the false and damaging information they have furnished to the credit bureaus. This is not a customer service issue this is a legal violation. I dont need a phone call. I need the lies removed from my credit report. You do not get to drag my credit down for years, re-age missed payments that were clearly resolved, and then pretend a conversation will make it go away. This is a calculated pattern of avoidance and its part of the reason your company continues to face lawsuits and consumer protection investigations. You are willfully reporting false data, and that is a direct violation of the law. \n\nThe credit bureaus are just as complicit. Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion have failed in their legal obligation to conduct proper investigations. Instead of thoroughly reviewing my disputes they simply regurgitate the inaccurate information and mark it as verified. That is not a reinvestigation. That is negligence. \n\nThis entire process has made it painfully clear that neither the furnisher nor the bureaus are interested in accuracy or fairness only in protecting each other. Meanwhile, Im left to suffer the financial and emotional consequences of their indifference. It should not take months of fighting and regulatory complaints just to get the truth reflected on my credit. You are playing with peoples livelihoods and you are doing it without integrity, without accountability, and without any regard for the law. \n\nFix the reporting. Stop hiding. And stop pretending a phone call is an acceptable substitute for the truth. \n\nContradictions in Credit Acceptances XX/XX/XXXX Letter In its XX/XX/XXXX response to CFPB Complaint No. XXXX, XXXX XXXX asserts that its reporting has been accurate and consistent with my account activity. However, a review of their own attached payment history directly contradicts this claim. \n\nSpecifically, XXXX XXXX identifies 11 months with no recorded payments ( the year XXXX is no longer visible on my credit reports and should remain that way. Any adverse reporting from that year is now obsolete under the XXXX XXXX XXXX Acts limitations on negative information ). XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX. - That aligns with my records and confirms that : Their own records show that my account was repeatedly brought back into good standing, and yet they continued to report it as XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX days late with the credit bureaus publishing those inflated statuses unchallenged. \n\nIn XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX response, they assert that my account was most recently furnished to the credit bureaus as Current in XX/XX/XXXX, implying that this reflects accurate and compliant reporting. However, this claim is both misleading and strategically deceptive. \n\nThe account was only marked as Current in XX/XX/XXXX because I submitted a formal dispute and complaint to the CFPB. The Current status was a system-generated response to my consumer dispute not a proactive update or correction initiated by XXXX XXXX or the credit bureaus. \n\nMore importantly, my account should have been reported as current far earlier, for multiple reasons : From XXXX through XXXX, I made consistent catch-up payments that cured delinquencies well within 30 days, yet the account was repeatedly re-aged. \nIn XX/XX/XXXX, I paid off the account in full with a final payment of {$2400.00}, covering all remaining principal, interest, and fees. At that point, the account was fully satisfied and should have immediately reflected a Paid or Current status across all three credit bureaus. \nDespite this, XXXX XXXX, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion continued to report the account as negative and severely delinquent well into XXXX. \n\nThis not only demonstrates negligence, but reinforces the pattern of delayed corrections, avoidance of responsibility, and coordinated inaction among all parties XXXX XXXX and the credit bureaus alike. \n\nDelinquency Dispute with proven Evidence XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ( XXXX full payments ) Reported Status : 90 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : A payment made within 30 days of the due date and another within XXXX should have prevented the account from aging beyond 60 days delinquent. Reporting 90 days late contradicts standard aging logic. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 60 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : XXXX payments were made prior to the XXXX due date and a third shortly after. These payments addressed the delinquency. Reporting 60 days late does not accurately reflect the accounts status. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 90 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : Over {$900.00} in payments were made within 45 days of the missed due date. This activity cured the delinquency, yet the account continued to be aged as 90 days past due. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX ; and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 90 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : Over {$1000.00} was paid in XXXX, nearly XXXX times the monthly payment. This should have brought the account current, and reporting 90 days late is not consistent with this level of repayment. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 120 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : A single month was missed and an {$800.00} payment was made within 60 days. XXXX the account to 120 days delinquent does not reflect the actual payment activity. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 120 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : Payment was made within 60 days of the missed due date. The status should have been no more than XXXX or 60 days late, not XXXX. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Due Date : XX/XX/XXXX Payments Made : XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Reported Status : 150 days late Why This Is Inaccurate : XXXX payments totaling over {$3000.00} were made within 75 days of the due date. This level of repayment is inconsistent with a XXXX delinquency designation and should have updated the status accordingly. \n\nRebuttal to Credit Acceptances XX/XX/XXXX Response Regarding CFPB Complaint No. XXXX XXXX. Claim : Partial payments do not reset the delinquency timeline. \nThat logic is flawed when full or cumulative catch-up payments have been made. For example, in XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX full payments were madecovering the missed XXXX payment in full. Yet, XXXX XXXX still reported the account as 90 days delinquent. \nContract Evidence : Nowhere in the agreement does it define how delinquency aging should be handled with consecutive or catch-up payments. \nXXXX XXXX : Under the FCRA and XXXX XXXX guidelines, when a consumer cures past-due status, the account must not continue aging in delinquency. Re-aging it without basis is materially misleading and reportable to regulators. \n\nThis XXXX be true for minor partialsbut I did not just make partial payments ; I made full catch-up payments and in many cases multiple payments within a single month. For example : In XX/XX/XXXX, I made XXXX full payments ( {$390.00} each on XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ), covering the missed XXXX obligation. \nDespite this, XXXX was reported as 90 days late, and XXXX and XXXX were also marked late, even though further payments were made. \nThat is not delinquency. That is re-aging. \n\nSupporting Evidence : XXXX XXXX own payment history attached to their XX/XX/XXXX response shows these payments clearly. Yet the credit report shows aged delinquencies that contradict the data they provided. This shows they either never reviewed their own data or deliberately ignored it. \n\nXXXX. Claim : The delinquency timeline for XXXX is accurate. \nAbsolutely false. Below is a breakdown using XXXX XXXX own XX/XX/XXXX records : XX/XX/XXXX : Missed XXXX : Paid {$800.00} XXXX : Missed XXXX : Paid {$600.00} XXXX : Missed XXXX : Paid {$600.00} XXXX : Paid {$2400.00} Yet from XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, the account is reported as 90150 days late across all three bureaus. That is blatant re-aging and manufactured delinquency, directly contradicted by the data they submitted themselves. \n\nIt is not enough to say the account was reported correctly based on system entries. You must reconcile : The payment due dates The actual funds received and applied And the delinquency age reported to the credit bureaus I mapped the payment history directly against standard delinquency aging thresholds. In multiple instances including XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and the entire second half of XXXX payments were made that should have stopped delinquency from aging, yet the account was carried forward as if no payments were made. \n\nXXXX. Claim : We furnished the same information to all three credit bureaus. \nThen why is each bureau showing? \nA different number of late payments ( TransUnion : XXXX, Experian : XXXX, Equifax : XXXX ) Different statuses in the same month Either Credit Acceptance is : Sending inconsistent or ambiguous data, or The credit bureaus are failing to properly interpret and apply the information. \n\nBoth scenarios violate the FCRAs mandate for maximum possible accuracy. \n\nRebuttal to Excuses in Credit Acceptances XX/XX/XXXX Letter Preemptive Defense Based on XX/XX/XXXX Payment History In its XX/XX/XXXX response, XXXX XXXX attempted to justify the continued reporting of XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX delinquencies. However, these excuses directly contradict the detailed payment history XXXX XXXX themselves provided on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nBelow is a point-by-point rebuttal to anticipated and stated defenses none of which withstand scrutiny when weighed against their own documentation and obligations under federal law. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : Catch-up payments were applied to older balances and did not bring the account current Payment allocation can not be used to justify extended delinquency. The XX/XX/XXXX payment history clearly shows full and multiple payments including {$800.00}, $ XXXX, and $ XXXX made shortly after missed months. XXXX XXXX XXXX and FCRA XXXX ( b ), once the delinquency is cured, it can not legally be carried forward or re-aged. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : Our system does not automatically recalculate delinquency That is not a legal defense its an admission of noncompliance. If internal systems do not allow delinquency aging to reset after payments are made, then the system is furnishing misleading and damaging data in violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ). \n\nXXXX. Excuse : The account was never fully brought current The XX/XX/XXXX letter shows that I made multiple full payments in key months, often back-to-back, and clearly enough to resolve any past-due balance. Continuing to report the account as XXXX or XXXX days late while receiving those payments is factually inaccurate and abusive. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : XXXX is valid based on days past due Even if a payment was late, the aging must reflect how many days past the contractual due date. Payments made within 3060 days can not be reported as 90150 days late. The XX/XX/XXXX payment record disproves the reported aging. \n\nXXXX. Excuse : The credit bureaus verified the data The bureaus rely on e-OSCAR, an automated dispute system that does not perform a manual review. Your XX/XX/XXXX letter, which contains the payment timeline, was not reconciled by any human reviewer at Experian, Equifax, or TransUnion. That means verification is incomplete and legally insufficient under FCRA XXXX. \n\nBottom line : The XX/XX/XXXX excuses are contradicted by the XX/XX/XXXX evidence XXXX XXXX itself submitted. These explanations are not only false they are a coordinated effort between the furnisher and credit bureaus to shift blame, delay correction, and continue furnishing false, damaging, and unlawful information about my account. \n\nProof That Missed Payments Were Cured and Re-Aging Is Improper Credit Acceptance has inaccurately reported extended delinquency ( 60150 days late ) by ignoring substantial catch-up payments that fully cured missed payments from XXXX. Below is a detailed breakdown of when payments were missed, how they were resolved, and why ongoing derogatory reporting is legally unjustified. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Missed Payment Proof of Cure : {$800.00} paid on XX/XX/XXXX Covered both XXXX and XXXX payments in full. \nEvidence : XXXX XXXX own records confirm this large payment. \nConclusion : No basis to report delinquency beyond 30 days. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Missed Payment Proof of Cure : Full payments made in : XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Evidence : Consecutive full monthly payments following XXXX resolve the delinquency. \nConclusion : Account was brought current and stayed current no justification for ongoing derogatory reporting. \n\nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Missed Payments Proof of Cure : XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} ( full payment ) XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} ( full payment ) XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} XX/XX/XXXX : {$300.00} XX/XX/XXXX : {$390.00} Total Paid in 90 Days : Over {$1400.00} Evidence : Payment history from XX/XX/XXXX Credit Acceptance letter Conclusion : XXXX and XXXX delinquencies were fully cured within 60 days account should have been marked current. \n\nAnd lets be clear your companys mishandling of XXXX hardship protections makes your reporting even more egregious. In your own XX/XX/XXXX letter, you confirmed that my account was removed from COVID Protected Status on XX/XX/XXXX despite the fact that I made XXXX full payments in XXXX, on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. Yet instead of acknowledging that I resumed payment in good faith, you immediately marked my account as 90 days late, as if no effort had been made at all. \n\nYou have no valid justification for removing me from XXXX relief in the first place even if I missed payments in XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, I was in constant communication with your customer service team, notifying your company of my ongoing hardship and intent to resolve the balance. That communication alone should have preserved my protection status or at the very least prevented the account from being harshly penalized. But instead, you weaponized the removal by re-aging my account and resuming aggressive negative reporting and immediately marked my account as 90 days late in XXXX, as if no payments had been made at all. \n\nUnder the CARES Act and updated FCRA guidance, consumers granted COVID accommodations were not to be penalized with delinquent reporting during or immediately after the relief period, especially when payments resumed in good faith. Your decision to end my protection XXXX day before a full payment and then backdate a XXXX delinquency is not just inaccurate, its abusive and intentionally deceptive. It contradicts your stated policies, violates federal law, and shows a clear intent to punish rather than support consumers during a national crisis. \n\nYou had the power and the documentation to report this account accurately but you chose to weaponize the end of XXXX relief to re-age delinquencies and damage my credit. \n\nXXXX XXXX & Legal Implications These payments clearly cured each delinquency within the XXXX thresholds ( 3060 days ). \nContinuing to report these periods as XXXX, XXXX, or 150 days late is a violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) and XXXX XXXX standards. \nThis pattern constitutes improper re-aging and furnishes a materially misleading credit profile. \n\nAll supporting payment records were disclosed in XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX response, confirming the timeline above. Any attempt to link XXXX delinquencies to these resolved periods is both factually unsupported and legally indefensible. \n\nAdditional Violations and Concerns : Retaliation : XXXX XXXX restricted my online access to payment records after I filed complaints. I was unable to view my remaining balance, payment activity, or due dates. Thats retaliatory and unethical. \nDismissiveness : Instead of properly investigating, XXXX XXXX legal team simply repeats generic responses and pushes me to call themrather than correcting documented, proven errors. \nMisleading the CFPB : By refusing to address payment-by-payment discrepancies and brushing off full settlement activity, XXXX XXXX is submitting XXXX XXXX responses to a federal agency. \nImpact : This has sabotaged my XXXX XXXX for XXXX years, damaged my credibility with lenders, and blocked me from refinancing and auto purchases. My account has XXXX payment leftyet my report looks worse than someone in active default. \nCall for XXXX : As a consumer, I should not have to fight this hard to correct obvious reporting failures. The credit bureaus should not allow auto-aging to persist for years unchecked. Every year from XXXX to XXXX should be manually reviewed and corrected immediately. \n\nPreemptive Rebuttal : We Do Not Recalculate Delinquency Is Not a Legal Defense Should Credit Acceptance attempt to claim that they do not recalculate balances or delinquency aging once a payment is missed, I want to make it clear that such a policy if true would not absolve them of responsibility under federal law. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX Standards Require Accurate, Updated Reporting : The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX guidelines make clear that when a consumer cures a delinquency even through staggered or large catch-up payments furnishers are obligated to adjust the delinquency status accordingly. Continuing to report an account as XXXX, XXXX, or 150 days late after such payments is materially misleading and violates data furnishing standards. \n\nXXXX. Not Recalculating Is a Breach of FCRA Obligations : Even if XXXX XXXX has an internal policy of not recalculating once delinquency begins, that policy does not override FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ), which requires the furnishing of accurate and complete information. XXXX prolonged delinquency while ignoring substantial payments that resolved the delinquent amount is both deceptive and damaging. \n\nXXXX. Internal Policies Can not Override Legal Requirements : A companys refusal to update or recalculate based on new payments is not a defense it is noncompliance. The Fair Credit Reporting Act mandates accurate and fair credit reporting, regardless of internal system limitations or preferences. \n\nXXXX. Harm from Failure to Recalculate : This type of rigid, one-directional reporting has falsely inflated the severity of my credit history, suppressed my score, and caused real-world harm in the form of loan denials and unfavorable financing terms despite regular and significant payments. \n\nIf XXXX XXXX or the credit bureaus assert this reasoning as a defense, I will treat it as a willful violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and pursue additional complaints with federal and state regulators accordingly. \n\nFinal Demand for Full Reinvestigation ( XXXX ) I am formally requesting a full and manual reinvestigation of my XXXX XXXX tradeline covering the period from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. This investigation must include : 1. A month-by-month reconciliation of reported delinquency status against actual payments made, using the payment history provided by XXXX XXXX. \n2. Correction or deletion of all inaccurately re-aged delinquencies where payments were made or delinquencies were cured within 30 days. \n3. Removal of all excessive XXXX delinquency entries that contradict both the factual payment activity and XXXX XXXX standards. \n4. Confirmation that this investigation was conducted outside of e-OSCAR and involved manual human review, as required under FCRA XXXX. \n\nAt this point, I only have XXXX payment left on this account, yet my credit reports reflect over XXXX years of inflated, false derogatory status. This is not an oversight this is systemic, intentional, and damaging. \n\nCollective Failure and Collusion by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has made it clear in its written response that it disclaims responsibility for how this data appears on my reports, placing blame on the credit bureaus. In turn, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion claim to simply report what is furnished. \n\nThis finger-pointing is unacceptable. \nUnder FCRA XXXX and XXXX, both furnishers and CRAs are independently responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the data they report or publish. This means : XXXX XXXX is responsible for what it submits. \nThe credit bureaus are responsible for verifying, reviewing, and publishing that data accurately. \n\nBy allowing these inaccuracies to persist knowingly all parties are complicit. \n\nThis is no longer a matter of mere error. This is a coordinated failure to correct false reporting, despite documentation, disputes, and federal complaints. And in that, XXXX XXXX, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion are colluding knowingly and willfully to maintain a damaging, false credit narrative that is unsupported by the actual payment history. \n\nWhat This Has Cost Me Financial, Personal, and Long-Term Harm The ongoing false reporting and failure to correct inaccurate delinquency data has had a profound and devastating impact on nearly every aspect of my financial stability and personal life. This is not just a matter of numbers on a report this has been a sustained attack on my ability to function financially, and it has come with measurable, lasting harm. \nI have been flagged as a credit risk across multiple platforms and lender systems due to the inflated number of severe delinquencies reported by XXXX XXXX and published by Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion. \nI have been denied financing for housing, including rejection from rental properties and credit-based apartment applications, despite having stable income and the means to pay. \nI have been denied auto loans and refinancing, even after making over XXXX payments on time and ultimately paying the account in full. \nI have had to accept higher interest rates, larger security deposits, and unfavorable contract terms for basic financial services due to the false impression created by this reporting. \nI have spent over {$3000.00} out-of-pocket covering inflated security deposits, upfront insurance costs, and denied credit-based offers that would have otherwise reduced my financial burden. \nI have had to delay life plans including seeking new housing and upgrading my vehicle due to credit-related denials and hesitations from lenders. \nIve experienced emotional distress, humiliation, and exhaustion from having to explain these errors repeatedly to landlords, lenders, and financial institutions and from having to fight so hard just to have my truthful history reflected. \n\nAll of this has occurred despite my continued good faith efforts to maintain the account, including making full payments, catch-up payments, and ultimately paying off the loan entirely. \n\nThis is not only negligent it is punitive, abusive, and predatory. \n\nIt is a direct violation of : The Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) for the repeated furnishing and publication of inaccurate, outdated, and misleading information. \nXXXX XXXX standards for failing to recalculate or update delinquency aging after payments. \nUDAAP under the Consumer Financial XXXX XXXX for engaging in deceptive and abusive practices that trap consumers in falsely negative credit positions. \n\nI am not seeking special treatment I am demanding lawful, accurate treatment. And I will hold each party accountable for the personal, financial, and emotional damage this has caused. You can not continue to profit from inaccurate reporting, destroy my financial standing, and shift blame while refusing to act. This is my final demand for full resolution and correction. \n\nThe record is clear. The data is yours. The error is deliberate. The harm is real.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-03T22:15:32.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"483XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13321520","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-03T20:55:45.000Z","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":["This is a coordinated failure to correct false <em>reporting</em>, despite documentation, disputes, and federal <em>complaints</em>. And in that, XXXX XXXX, Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion are colluding knowingly and willfully to maintain a damaging, false credit <em>narrative</em> that is unsupported by the actual payment history."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[7.1556835,"13321520"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17214024","_score":6.7939086,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint concerns a long-standing and unresolved issue involving the reporting of an account furnished by Navy Federal Credit Union ( Navy FCU ) that continues to appear on my consumer credit files as a charge-off or collection account despite being reported as paid. I have made repeated and lawful efforts under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) to obtain full validation and procedural verification of this account. To date, neither the credit bureaus nor Navy FCU have produced documentation demonstrating that the information being furnished is accurate, current, or lawfully verifiable.\n\nThe purpose of this complaint is to document what occurred, outline the actions I have taken to resolve the matter, describe how the company and the credit reporting agencies have responded, and request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) ensure compliance with federal consumer-protection statutes.\n\n1. Background and Discovery of the Issue When reviewing my credit reports in XXXX and again in XXXX, I discovered that Navy FCU was furnishing an account listed as a charge-off or collection with a XXXX balance. The account was shown as paid but still categorized under derogatory status. This classification misleads lenders and affects my creditworthiness because it implies ongoing delinquency or loss to the creditor even though no debt remains outstanding. \n\nThe first instance of discovery occurred in XXXX, when I noticed inconsistent reporting among the three credit bureaus. One bureau showed the account as a collection/charge-off paid, another as closed derogatory, and the third as paid/closed. The reporting dates also varied by several months, suggesting that the information may have been transmitted through automated systems rather than verified manually. \n\nBecause the FCRA requires credit reporting agencies to maintain procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy, I immediately began the formal dispute process to determine how Navy FCUs information had been verified. \n\nXXXX. Steps I Took to Resolve the Issue Between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted multiple written disputes to each of the major credit bureausXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Each dispute requested a full procedural investigation and validation of the Navy FCU account pursuant to FCRA 609 ( a ) and 611 ( a ). Specifically, I asked for : A description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information. \n\nThe name, address, and telephone number of the furnisher ( Navy FCU ) that provided or verified the data. \n\nCopies of all documents Navy FCU supplied during the reinvestigation process. \n\nThe method used to verify the informationmanual review, electronic verification via XXXX, or third-party submission. \n\nThe date of the last verification and the data source consulted. \n\nI also sent a direct validation request to Navy FCU under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) and FDCPA 809 ( b ), asking the institution to provide documentary evidence showing : The original signed credit agreement or contract.\n\nComplete payment history demonstrating the alleged delinquency or charge-off event. \n\nWritten authorization or policy permitting continued reporting of a paid charge-off. \n\nEvidence that the information transmitted to the credit bureaus was verified by a responsible employee rather than through automated batch processing.\n\nEach letter was sent via certified mail with proof of delivery to preserve an audit trail.\n\n3. Responses from Credit Bureaus and Navy FCU The credit bureaus each replied with standard form letters stating that the information had been verified as accurate. None provided any description of the verification procedure as required by FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). When I requested the specific documentation used to confirm the Navy FCU account, I received no documentsonly generic statements claiming that the furnisher confirmed the data.\n\nNavy FCU did not provide copies of a signed agreement, charge-off notice, or payment ledger. Instead, the institution issued a brief correspondence stating that the account was reported accurately. The response did not include the original contract or payment history demonstrating the legitimacy of the charge-off notation. \n\nAt no point was I given access to the documentation that would confirm how the account was validated or what evidence supported the continued derogatory reporting. \n\n4. Why This Reporting Is Inaccurate and Misleading The disputed Navy FCU account presents multiple compliance problems under federal law : Contradictory Reporting : The account is marked paid yet still coded as a charge-off or collection. A paid account can not simultaneously represent an unpaid loss. This dual coding misleads creditors and violates FCRA 607 ( b ), which requires maximum possible accuracy. \n\nLack of Current Balance Verification : Since the account shows a XXXX balance, continued derogatory classification implies an ongoing default without factual basis. \n\nFailure to Verify Documentation : No original account documents or payment records have been produced. Without such verification, the information is legally unverifiable under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) and must be deleted.\n\nImproper Furnishing After Settlement or Charge-Off : If Navy FCU no longer owns the account or has closed it as paid, continued reporting as a charge-off violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), which prohibits furnishers from reporting information they knowor should knowto be inaccurate. \n\nProcedural Negligence by Credit Bureaus : The bureaus reliance on automated electronic responses through the XXXX system constitutes a failure to perform a reasonable reinvestigation, as required by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ), where the court ruled that a bureau can not rely blindly on a furnishers response. \n\nViolation of FDCPA 807 ( 8 ) : If any collection notation remains, it falsely represents the legal status of the debt.\n\nIn essence, the current reporting conveys a misleading narrative to creditors : that I once defaulted and that the account remains derogatory, when in fact it has been resolved and carries no outstanding balance.\n\n5. How This Situation Has Affected Me The inaccurate reporting by Navy FCU and the failure of the bureaus to correct it have caused ongoing harm, including : Lower credit scores across all three bureaus.\n\nDenial or less favorable terms on credit applications.\n\nDifficulty obtaining housing and insurance at fair rates.\n\nReputational harm through dissemination of misleading financial data.\n\nEmotional distress from repeated disputes yielding no transparency.\n\nEach month the erroneous derogatory entry remains, it is re-published to lenders and third parties, compounding the damage.\n\n6. Lack of Compliance with FCRA Timelines and Obligations Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), a credit bureau must complete a reinvestigation within 30 days. All three bureaus closed their investigations within approximately 10 days of receiving my disputean interval too short for meaningful document reviewsuggesting that only an automated verification occurred.\n\nMoreover, FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) requires that, upon completion of a reinvestigation, the bureau provide a description of the procedure used to determine accuracy. None of the bureaus complied with this obligation.\n\nUnder FCRA 623 ( b ), a furnisher like Navy FCU must conduct its own investigation upon receiving notice of a dispute from a bureau, review relevant information, and report back accurately. The absence of supporting documents implies that no substantive investigation occurred. \n\nXXXX. The Evidence Gap and Procedural Deficiencies The heart of this issue is the complete absence of an evidence trail. Neither Navy FCU nor the credit bureaus have provided : A copy of the original credit application or loan agreement.\n\nAccount statements or transaction history verifying the alleged default.\n\nDocumentation of the charge-off decision or date.\n\nA record showing that the account remains within the statute of limitations for reporting.\n\nAny correspondence demonstrating consumer notification of the charge-off.\n\nWithout this information, no party can claim that the data is accurate or verifiable. Continuing to publish the information without proof constitutes reckless disregard for truth and violates FCRA 616 and 617, which impose civil liability for willful or negligent noncompliance.\n\n8. Applicable Statutes and Legal Precedents Several provisions of federal law govern this dispute : FCRA 602 ( a ) : Establishes Congresss intent to ensure fairness, accuracy, and privacy in credit reporting.\n\nFCRA 607 ( b ) : Mandates reasonable procedures for maximum possible accuracy.\n\nFCRA 611 ( a ) : Requires reinvestigation and correction or deletion of inaccurate data.\n\nFCRA 623 ( a ) : Imposes a duty on furnishers to provide accurate information.\n\nFCRA 623 ( b ) : Requires furnishers to investigate upon receiving disputes.\n\nFDCPA 809 ( b ) : Requires debt collectors to validate debts before continuing collection or reporting. \n\nIn addition, court decisions such as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank affirm that cursory or automated verification procedures fail to satisfy the FCRAs standard of reasonable investigation. \n\nXXXX. Pattern of Systemic Deficiency This dispute highlights a broader systemic problem affecting consumers : the over-reliance on automated dispute resolution systems by both furnishers and credit bureaus. When a consumer submits a dispute, the credit bureau typically assigns a two-digit code through e-OSCAR, which is sent electronically to the furnisher. The furnisher often responds with a one-word status such as verified without attaching documentation. The bureau then updates the consumers file as verified.\n\nIn this case, Navy FCU appears to have confirmed the account electronically without providing evidence, and the bureaus accepted that response without scrutiny. This process fails the reasonableness test required under federal law and effectively denies consumers a genuine reinvestigation.\n\n10. Continued Harm and Attempts to Resolve After receiving unsatisfactory responses, I again disputed the account in early 2025, enclosing copies of prior correspondence and highlighting the contradictory reporting. The results were identical : each bureau marked the item as verified.\n\nI also attempted to reach Navy FCUs credit reporting department directly by phone and through written correspondence. My requests for documentation went unanswered or were redirected to the bureaus. As of this filing, no party has provided validation or evidence.\n\nBecause all internal remedies have been exhausted, I am submitting this complaint to the CFPB to request oversight and enforcement.\n\n11. Why the Current Situation Violates Federal Standards The current handling of this dispute violates multiple federal standards : Failure to provide procedural details as required by FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ).\n\nFailure to delete unverifiable data as required by FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ).\n\nFailure to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure accuracy under FCRA 607 ( b ).\n\nFailure of the furnisher to conduct a meaningful investigation under FCRA 623 ( b ) ( 1 ).\n\nFailure to provide validation prior to continued reporting under FDCPA 809 ( b ).\n\nThese combined failures represent systemic non-compliance rather than an isolated clerical error.\n\n12. Requested CFPB Involvement I am asking the CFPB to ensure that Navy FCU and the credit bureaus : Conduct a full reinvestigation with documentation.\n\nProvide the consumer with copies of all verification records.\n\nRemove or correct any unverifiable or inaccurate data.\n\nReview internal dispute procedures for compliance with federal law.\n\nImplement policy changes preventing similar failures in the future.\n\nThis oversight is necessary because individual consumers lack access to the internal records and technical systems that would reveal how the disputed information was verified.\n\n13. Broader Impact and Policy Considerations The Navy FCU case illustrates a larger issue within the credit-reporting ecosystem : consumers bear the burden of proof while furnishers and bureaus rely on automated confirmation loops that lack transparency. The CFPB has documented this problem in multiple bulletins, emphasizing that furnishers must provide substantive documentation when responding to disputes.\n\nEnsuring that this case receives a thorough, documented reinvestigation will help reinforce best practices across the industry and protect other consumers from similar procedural negligence.\n\n14. Expected Corrective Actions Based on the facts and the law, the following corrective actions would constitute a fair resolution : Immediate deletion of the Navy FCU charge-off or collection entry if documentation can not be produced.\n\nWritten certification from Navy FCU affirming that any remaining information is complete and accurate.\n\nDelivery of the procedural description and evidence used during reinvestigation.\n\nUpdated credit reports reflecting correction or deletion within 30 days.\n\nNotification to all recent credit report recipients under FCRA 611 ( d ) that corrections have been made.\n\n15. Ongoing Monitoring and Prevention To prevent recurrence, Navy FCU and the credit bureaus should : Train staff to distinguish between paid accounts and true charge-offs.\n\nRequire original documentation for verification rather than accepting automated confirmations.\n\nAudit furnishers with high dispute rates.\n\nProvide consumers with online access to reinvestigation logs and supporting files.\n\nThese actions would bring the institutions into full compliance with federal law and rebuild consumer trust.\n\n16. Summary In summary, this complaint arises because Navy FCU continues to furnish an account that is reported inconsistently and inaccurately across multiple credit bureaus, with contradictory coding that simultaneously labels it paid and derogatory. Despite numerous disputes and validation requests, neither the bureaus nor Navy FCU have produced evidence proving that the data is accurate or verifiable. \n\nThe FCRA and FDCPA require transparency, documentation, and fairness in credit reporting. Those standards have not been met. The ongoing dissemination of unverifiable information constitutes a violation of federal law and has caused tangible harm. \n\n17. Conclusion I am requesting CFPB assistance to ensure that Navy FCU and the credit bureaus fulfill their legal duties to investigate thoroughly, validate with documentation, and correct or delete any information that can not be verified. I also ask that the CFPB monitor their compliance to prevent future recurrence.\n\nConsumers have a right to accurate, complete, and verifiable information in their credit files. That right has been denied in this case. A fair resolution requires a transparent reinvestigation, production of supporting records, and correction or deletion of the disputed entry.\n\nI appreciate the Bureaus attention to this matter and its continued efforts to enforce consumer-protection laws.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-14T01:42:20.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"631XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17214024","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2025-11-14T01:36:31.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Summary In summary, this <em>complaint</em> arises because Navy FCU continues to furnish an account that is <em>reported</em> inconsistently and inaccurately across multiple credit bureaus, with contradictory coding that simultaneously labels it paid and derogatory. Despite numerous disputes and validation requests, neither the bureaus nor Navy FCU have produced evidence proving that the <em>data</em> is accurate or verifiable. \n\nThe FCRA and FDCPA require transparency, documentation, and fairness in credit <em>reporting</em>."]},"sort":[6.7939086,"17214024"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15238675","_score":6.4912376,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this formal complaint against the credit reporting agencies and the listed furnishers for multiple and severe violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) including but not limited to XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. My consumer report contains wrong addresses, duplicate entries, inaccurate late payments, charge-offs, collections, and accounts that do not belong to me. These inaccuracies have damaged my creditworthiness, denied me access to fair credit opportunities, and caused emotional and financial harm. \nI am demanding an immediate investigation, deletion of all inaccurate information, and full compliance with federal law. Below are the disputed items : Under FCRA 602, 607 ( b ), and 611, you are required to maintain maximum accuracy and conduct a reasonable reinvestigation within 30 days. A \" reasonable investigation '' requires you to obtain original source documentation ( not just data from an automated system ) directly from the original creditor. If you can not produce such verification, the disputed entry must be deleted immediately. \n\nBelow are all disputed items, with details of the Issue, applicable Law, and the expanded Story about how each item is inaccurate and harmful : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Issue : Never resided XXXX address. \nXXXX : FCRA 607 ( b ). \nStory : I have never rented, owned, or received any form of mail at this location. Associating me with this address can cause lenders, insurers, and businesses to believe I have a residency history that does not exist, potentially linking me to debts, judgments, or even criminal matters associated with a different individual. This false linkage can also be the result of a mixed credit file, which directly violates your duty to maintain maximum accuracy. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$270000.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Late payment inaccurately reported. \nXXXX : FCRA 607 ( b ), 611 ( a ).\n\nStory : My payment receipts contradict the late payment details on file. Incorrect payment history on a high-balance mortgage seriously impacts my creditworthiness, raises mortgage rates, and can even affect insurance premiums. The bureau must obtain signed, date-stamped billing records directly from the lender or delete this entry. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX {$2000.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Charge-off unverifiable. \nXXXX : FCRA 611 ( a ), FDCPA 807. \nStory : Without an original signed contract and complete payment history from the creditor, this charge-off is unverified. An unverifiable negative account harms my credit score while depriving me of the opportunity to obtain fair credit terms. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$300.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Late payment inaccurate. \nLaw : FCRA 607 ( b ). \nStory : My bank statements show payments were made within agreed timelines. Mislabeling them as late creates a false narrative of financial irresponsibility, which is particularly harmful for future credit approvals. \n\nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Balance {$840.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Charge-off inaccurate. \nLaw : FCRA 611, FDCPA 807. \nXXXX : This account included payment arrangements that were not reflected in the reporting. Failure to update status while reporting a charge-off is misleading to potential lenders and a violation of your obligation to report accurate, complete data. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX {$1100.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Unverified charge-off. \nLaw : FCRA 611 ( a ). \nStory : Without original creditor validation, this listing must be removed. Retaining unverifiable debt is a form of negligent reporting. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX {$330.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Charge-off inaccurate. \nLaw : FCRA 607 ( b ). \nXXXX : This supposed charge-off lacks any legitimate proof in my possession or from the creditor. It unjustly harms my ability to obtain revolving credit. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX {$780.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Duplicate charge-off. \nLaw : FCRA 607 ( b ). \nStory : Multiple listings for the same creditor violate accuracy rules and mislead creditors. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$3800.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Charge-off unsubstantiated. \nLaw : FCRA 611 ( a ). \nStory : Without documentation that includes original agreements, billing records, and payment histories, this charge-off status is unverifiable. \n\nXXXX XXXX TX XXXX Balance {$32000.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Issue : Late payment inaccurate. \nLaw : FCRA 607 ( b ). \nStory : With timely mortgage-style payment history documented by bank transfers, showing late payments here is a false and damaging statement. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$620.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX : Inaccurate and unverified utility-related charge-off. \nLaw : FCRA 607 ( b ), 611 ( a ). \nStory : Utility debts require precise meter readings, consumption data, billing cycles, and proof of unpaid balances. None of this documentation has been provided. Basing a serious derogatory mark on incomplete info is a violation of your duty for maximum accuracy, and has an undue negative impact on my credit standing. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$5000.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX : Unverified high-balance charge-off. \nLaw : FCRA 611 ( a ). \nXXXX : This substantial amount wrongly suggests I defaulted on a major loan. As required, you must retrieve the original promissory note, itemized payment history, and delinquency notice sent to me. Absent this, the claim is unverifiable and unlawfully damaging to my credit profile. \n\nTRUIST XXXX XXXX {$30000.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : Late payment inaccurately reported. \nLaw : FCRA 607 ( b ), 611 ( a ). \nStory : My own documented bank transfer records reflect timely payments, so portraying this as late paints a false picture. Since this is a large loan, the penalty on my credit profile is severe, affecting mortgage terms and overall credit ratings. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance {$1100.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Collection Issue : Duplicate listing. \nLaw : FCRA 607 ( b ). \nXXXX : This appears identical to other XXXX entries with the same balance. Multiplying a single debt into multiple tradelines creates an inaccurate picture of my financial responsibility. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance {$1600.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Collection Issue : Unverified collection. \nLaw : FCRA 611 ( a ). \nStory : No proof has been provided showing I ever agreed to or owed this balance. Without a contract, payment history, and assignment documents from original creditor, it must be removed. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX {$630.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX buyer unverifed account. \nLaw : FDCPA 807, FCRA 611 ( a ). \nStory : XXXX must produce account-level details showing this is my obligation, including original creditor records. Simply repeating database info is insufficient and unlawful. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX {$500.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX entry. \nLaw : FCRA 607 ( b ). \nStory : Appears to be the same debt as above, just with a slightly altered balance, suggesting inaccurate duplicate reporting. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX {$1100.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX : Unverified buy now, pay later debt. \nXXXX : FCRA XXXX ( a ). \nStory : No transaction log, installment history, or signed agreement has been produced. Without exact proof, this entry is unverified and misleading. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX Balance {$740.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX Collection Issue : No proof of debt. \nLaw : FCRA 611 ( a ). \nStory : Without evidence from original creditor showing contractual agreement and default, this must be deleted under federal accuracy requirements. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$540.00} Opened XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX : No verifiable documentation. \nLaw : FCRA 611 ( a ).\n\nStory : Debt collection reporting is only permissible with proof directly from original creditor showing the debt was validly assigned to XXXX XXXX and remains due. This has not been provided. \n\nRELIEF REQUESTED : XXXX. XXXX deletion of all inaccurate addresses. \nXXXX. Permanent removal or correction of all disputed accounts. \nXXXX. Written confirmation from all CRAs and furnishers of compliance. \nXXXX. Compensation for damages caused by negligent and willful reporting violations under FCRA 616 and 617.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-12T04:35:48.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77346","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15238675","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-08-12T04:29:48.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am filing this formal <em>complaint</em> against the credit <em>reporting</em> agencies and the listed furnishers for multiple and severe violations of the Fair Credit <em>Reporting</em> Act ( FCRA ) including but not limited to XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. My consumer <em>report</em> contains wrong addresses, duplicate entries, inaccurate late payments, charge-offs, collections, and accounts that do not belong to me."],"product":["Credit reporting or other personal consumer <em>reports</em>"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_issue":["Reporting company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[6.4912376,"15238675"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":30,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":30}]}},"product":{"doc_count":30,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":27,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":27}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Federal student loan servicing","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":30,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":12,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":6},{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":6}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":11,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":11}]}},{"key":"Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem canceling credit monitoring or identify theft protection service","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Deposits and withdrawals","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to repay your loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with forgiveness, cancellation, or discharge","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":30,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":29},{"key":"No","doc_count":1}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":30,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":18},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":11},{"key":"Untimely response","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":30,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":30}]}},"company":{"doc_count":30,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":10},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":8},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":5},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":2},{"key":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Sunnova Energy Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":30,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"GA","doc_count":8},{"key":"TX","doc_count":6},{"key":"CA","doc_count":4},{"key":"MI","doc_count":4},{"key":"NV","doc_count":3},{"key":"MA","doc_count":2},{"key":"MO","doc_count":1},{"key":"NH","doc_count":1},{"key":"WY","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":30,"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":21},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":2}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":30,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":5}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[6.491346,"15238675"]}}}