{"took":250,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":19,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17505793","_score":18.284325,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX said : Absolutely heres your complete, polished narrative for the new CFPB complaint, ready to paste into the Describe what happened field. \nIt references the prior case, integrates all the new evidence, and reads like a professional submission. \n\nCFPB Complaint Narrative ( Final Version ) This complaint supplements CFPB Case XXXX XXXXXXXX, which was closed on XX/XX/year>. New evidence shows that Rossi Law Offices continued collection activity after receiving my written dispute and after being notified that the alleged debtor was deceased. \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, I sent a written dispute and validation request under 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) regarding a XXXX motor vehicle tax XXXX  claimed I owed. On XX/XX/XXXX, they responded only with a generic tax bill from the XXXX of XXXX identifying information, signature, or proof of my liability. The bill clearly fails to prove that I owed the debt. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I emailed XXXX stating the debt belonged to my late mother, who shared my name. Despite this notice, XXXX printed and mailed a new collection letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, which I received on XX/XX/XXXX ( confirmed by XXXX delivery record ). They admit they opened my XX/XX/XXXX email before printing the XX/XX/XXXX letter, meaning they knowingly continued collection activity after being told the debtor was deceased and the debt was disputed. \n\nThis violates 1692g ( b ) ( continued collection after dispute without validation ), 1692e ( 2 ) ( A ) and ( 10 ) ( false and misleading representation of a debt ), and 1692f ( unfair collection practice ). They also repeatedly misspelled my name ( XXXX, XXXX XXXX, showing negligent record handling and a pattern of mistaken identity. \n\nI request that the CFPB : Investigate Rossi Law for continuing collection after dispute and failing to validate the debt. \n\nRequire XXXX to confirm in writing that my information has been permanently removed from this account and that no reporting to credit bureaus will occur. \n\nNote that this case involves a pattern of identity errors by the City of XXXX XXXX Collector ( a separate complaint will be filed with the CT Attorney General ). \n\nAttachments : XX/XX/XXXX dispute letter, XXXX tax bill response, XX/XX/XXXX email to XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX letter, and XXXX proof of XX/XX/XXXX delivery. \n\nRespectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, CT XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-26T02:16:11.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"06405","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17505793","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Rossi Law Offices, Ltd","date_received":"2025-11-26T02:04:04.000Z","state":"CT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Note that this case <em>involves</em> a pattern of identity errors by the City of <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> Collector ( a separate <em>complaint</em> will be <em>filed</em> with the CT Attorney General ). \n\nAttachments : XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> dispute letter, <em>XXXX</em> tax bill response, XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> email to <em>XXXX</em>, XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> letter, and <em>XXXX</em> proof of XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> delivery. \n\nRespectfully, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, CT <em>XXXX</em>"]},"sort":[18.284325,"17505793"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16076500","_score":17.522633,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Unauthorized Accounts/ Identity Theft Concern Triggered by XX/XX/year> Data Breach Company : [ XXXX / Equifax XXXX XXXX Choose one per complaint ] Category : Credit reporting Incorrect information on your report Information belongs to someone else / identity theft Complaint Narrative : I am submitting this complaint in response to recent events involving a massive global data leak disclosed in XX/XX/year>. According to multiple reports, including XXXX and The XXXX, over XXXX XXXX login credentialsincluding usernames, passwords, and possible linked identifierswere discovered in a public breach compilation on June 2021, 2025. This breach was not due to a hack of XXXX, XXXX, or XXXX, but rather the result of malware infecting millions of personal devices and stealing data over time. \nAs a result of this exposure, I am deeply concerned that my personal identifying information ( PII ) may have been compromised and could be used to open fraudulent accounts, initiate hard inquiries, or modify my credit file without authorization. \nI have contacted [ XXXX / Equifax XXXX XXXX ] directly, submitted documentation, and requested that : A fraud alert be placed on my file ; My credit report be investigated for any unauthorized accounts or inquiries that may have occurred after XX/XX/year> ; I be provided with a full consumer disclosure and findings ; The bureau remove any inaccurate or fraudulent data that may appear. \nI am requesting the XXXX assistance in ensuring the credit bureau follows all steps outlined under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including the XXXX dispute investigation requirement under 15 U.S.C. 1681i, and that they respond promptly and in writing regarding the results of my dispute. \nAs of today, I have not received a satisfactory resolution from the credit bureau and remain at risk of harm due to this unprecedented credential exposure. I am proactively monitoring my report and need all relevant consumer protections enforced. \nRequested Resolution : XXXX investigation of my credit file Removal of any fraudulent or inaccurate data XXXX of a fraud alert Written confirmation of actions taken","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-22T21:52:59.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"631XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16076500","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-09-22T21:30:46.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Old information reappears or never goes away"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Subject : Unauthorized Accounts/ Identity Theft Concern Triggered by XX/XX/year> Data Breach Company : [ <em>XXXX</em> / Equifax <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> Choose one per <em>complaint</em> ] Category : Credit reporting Incorrect information on your report Information belongs to someone else / identity theft <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> : I am submitting this <em>complaint</em> in response to recent events <em>involving</em> a massive global data leak disclosed in XX/XX/year>."]},"sort":[17.522633,"16076500"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"9972027","_score":16.16158,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to file a formal complaint against Truist Bank and XXXX regarding the mishandling of my account closure, a substantial refund, and subsequent customer service issues. This situation has caused significant financial distress and appears to involve unfair and deceptive practices. Key issues : Truist Bank Account Closure : I requested that my Truist Bank account not be closed until I received a pending {$1800.00} refund from XXXX. \nDespite this request and a scheduled future appointment, a Truist employee closed my account prematurely. \nXXXX Refund Issues : XXXX attempted to refund {$1800.00} to my closed Truist account. \nXXXX 's customer service has provided inconsistent and potentially false information about the status of this refund. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX 's executive team confirmed receipt of the returned funds from Truist Bank and requested I choose a refund method, including XXXX XXXX. \nDespite this, XXXX continues to claim they've refunded the original form of payment, which is impossible due to the closed account. \nTruist Bank 's Handling of Returned Funds : Truist initially claimed they couldn't retrieve the funds from \" limbo '' and forced me to open a merchant dispute. \nAfter promising to provide the funds directly to me, Truist instead returned the money to XXXX. \nOngoing Dispute and Financial Distress : Both XXXX and Truist have ignored documented proof and facts, creating a false narrative. \nThis situation has caused significant financial distress and has potentially impacted my standing with other financial institutions. \nCustomer Service Issues : Both companies have provided poor customer service, with representatives ignoring facts and failing to resolve the issue. \nTruist 's executive team member, XXXX XXXX, has been particularly unhelpful and has ignored factual information. \n\n\n\nThis situation has caused significant financial hardship and stress. I am prepared to provide any additional documentation you may need to assist in your investigation. Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2024-09-01T05:55:35.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"328XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"9972027","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2024-09-01T05:38:35.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am <em>writing</em> to <em>file</em> a formal <em>complaint</em> against Truist Bank and <em>XXXX</em> <em>regarding</em> the mishandling of my account closure, a substantial refund, and subsequent customer service issues. This situation has caused significant financial distress and appears to <em>involve</em> unfair and deceptive practices. Key issues : Truist Bank Account Closure : I requested that my Truist Bank account not be closed until I received a pending {$1800.00} refund from <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[16.16158,"9972027"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18057635","_score":14.674251,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB Complaint Narrative Subject : Unfair Account Closure, Access Freeze Preventing Payment, and Incorrect Credit Reporting To the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau : I am writing to file a formal complaint against Wells Fargo regarding the mishandling of my checking and credit card accounts. This involves an unfair account closure, the freezing of my online access which prevented me from making credit card payments, and the subsequent incorrect reporting of delinquency. \n\nTimeline of Events and Facts : Address Update Issue : Earlier this year, I updated my address on file to a residential address in XXXX. Wells Fargo subsequently notified me that a XXXX residential address was required. \n\nXXXX XXXX : I attempted to comply immediately via the Wells Fargo mobile app. I successfully updated my mailing address ; however, the apps system limitations prevented me from updating my home/residential address. \n\nAccount Closure : Due to this address discrepancy, Wells Fargo involuntarily closed my checking account. At the time of closure, this account held a balance of approximately {$600.00}. To date, I have not received a check for these funds at my new mailing address. \n\nAccess Freeze and Inability to Pay : Upon closing my checking account, Wells Fargo simultaneously froze my online banking and mobile app access. This locked me out of my credit card account, which had a balance of approximately {$200.00}. \n\nUnjust Delinquency : Because I was locked out of the system, I was physically unable to make payments on the credit card. Now, Wells Fargo is claiming I am 4 months delinquent. \n\nThe Core Issue : It is unjust to penalize me for non-payment when Wells Fargo : Holds my funds ( approx. {$600.00} ) which far exceed my debt ( approx. {$200.00} ). \n\nRevoked the digital access required to make payments. \n\nFailed to send my remaining balance to the correct address. \n\nRequested Resolution : To resolve this matter, I request Wells Fargo take the following actions immediately : Offset the Balance : Use the funds from my closed checking account to pay off the outstanding credit card balance in full. \n\nRefund Remaining Funds : Issue a check for the remaining balance ( Checking Account Balance minus Credit Card Debt ) and mail it to my current reliable XXXX address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Correct Credit Reporting : Immediately retract the XXXX delinquency report to all credit bureaus ( XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) and remove any late fees or interest accrued, as the inability to pay was caused by Wells Fargo 's restriction of my account access. \n\nI appreciate the CFPB 's assistance in resolving this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-15T22:53:32.000Z","issue":"Closing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"062XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18057635","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2025-12-15T22:42:49.000Z","state":"CT","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Company closed your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CFPB <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> Subject : Unfair Account Closure, Access Freeze Preventing Payment, and Incorrect Credit Reporting To the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau : I am <em>writing</em> to <em>file</em> a formal <em>complaint</em> against Wells Fargo <em>regarding</em> the mishandling of my checking and credit card accounts. This <em>involves</em> an unfair account closure, the freezing of my online access which prevented me from making credit card payments, and the subsequent incorrect reporting of delinquency."]},"sort":[14.674251,"18057635"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19247860","_score":14.183064,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Product : Mortgage Company : Selene Finance LP Account : ending in XXXX Prior CFPB Case : XXXX Complaint Narrative I am filing a follow-up complaint regarding continued escrow mismanagement by Selene Finance LP after prior CFPB involvement and multiple written notices. \n\nThis issue was originally raised in XX/XX/XXXX and formally documented through CFPB XXXX XXXX. XXXX. XXXX acknowledged servicing errors at that time and provided a written response dated XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I received written confirmation from the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX exemption was approved and applied. This exemption legally eliminates my ad valorem property tax obligation for tax year XXXX and forward. I immediately forwarded this official documentation to Selene and requested a corrected escrow analysis reflecting {$0.00} property taxes. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, Selene acknowledged in writing that they had received my exemption documentation and forwarded it to their Escrow Department for handling, stating that the correction would be completed within fifteen ( XXXX ) business days. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I also submitted a formal written notice citing RESPA ( 12 U.S.C. 2605 ( e ) ) and Regulation X ( 12 C.F.R. 1024.35, 1024.36, and 1024.17 ), establishing a statutory resolution deadline of XX/XX/XXXX. I followed up again on XX/XX/XXXX, after receiving no substantive update. \n\nAs of XX/XX/XXXX, Selene has failed to perform a corrected escrow analysis, failed to remove property taxes from escrow projections, and failed to provide any meaningful response. Their own servicing portal currently reflects continued escrow collections toward a {$4600.00} property tax obligation that is legally {$0.00}. My escrow balance currently exceeds {$3500.00}, which is nearly sufficient to cover my annual homeowners insurance, yet Selene continues to collect inflated escrow payments for a nonexistent tax liability.\n\nThis constitutes continued improper escrow overcollection and failure to correct a known servicing error after receipt of a qualified written request, in violation of RESPA and Regulation X. Selene also failed to meet their own written resolution timeline.\n\nThis ongoing overcollection is causing material financial harm by unnecessarily restricting my cash flow and retaining my funds for obligations that do not legally exist.\n\nRequested Resolution 1. Immediate corrected escrow analysis reflecting {$0.00} property taxes.\n\n2. Immediate recalculation of my monthly mortgage payment.\n\n3. Refund or credit of all excess escrow collected for property taxes beginning XX/XX/XXXX. \nXXXX. Written confirmation of correction. \nXXXX. Correction of servicing records to prevent recurrence.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-02-04T18:48:12.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"VA mortgage","zip_code":"34761","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19247860","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Selene Holdings LLC","date_received":"2026-02-04T18:37:07.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Product : Mortgage Company : Selene Finance LP Account : ending in <em>XXXX</em> Prior CFPB Case : <em>XXXX</em> <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> I am <em>filing</em> a follow-up <em>complaint</em> <em>regarding</em> continued escrow mismanagement by Selene Finance LP after prior CFPB <em>involvement</em> and multiple written notices. \n\nThis issue was originally raised in XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> and formally documented through CFPB <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>. <em>XXXX</em>. <em>XXXX</em> acknowledged servicing errors at that time and provided a written response dated XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[14.183064,"19247860"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18450221","_score":12.226018,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB Complaint Narrative ( XXXX & XXXX to Submit ) I am filing a complaint regarding Sams Club Travel ( Members Deals ) and Synchrony Bank for their mishandling of a hotel reservation dispute involving false advertising, misrepresentation, and failure to conduct a proper investigation. \nOn XX/XX/year>, I booked a hotel stay at the XXXX XXXX in XXXX, Illinois, through XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX. The XXXX XXXX XXXX website advertised the room as a Double King room. During the booking call, the representative placed me on hold to confirm with a XXXX that the hotel offered a Double King room. Based on that confirmation, I completed the booking. \nImmediately after the call, I contacted the XXXX XXXX directly to verify the room type. The hotel informed me that no such room type exists at that location and that they have never offered a Double King room. Within XXXX minutes of booking, I called XXXX XXXX XXXX back to cancel the reservation due to the false and misleading information provided by their representative and their website. I was told the reservation was cancelled and was given a CARES cancellation number. I also clearly stated that the cancellation was due to false advertising. \nI have email documentation from XXXX XXXX XXXX showing the room type they advertised, which does not match the actual offerings of the XXXX XXXX in XXXX, Illinois. \nDespite cancelling immediately, Sams Club Travel has not resolved this matter. I have now filed XXXX disputes with Synchrony Bank ( the issuer of the XXXX XXXX credit card ). Each time, Sams Club Travel has submitted documents to Synchrony that are so small and illegible that neither Synchrony Bank nor I can read them. These unreadable documents are being used as justification to deny or delay my dispute. \nIn my most recent dispute, I specifically requested that Synchrony Bank obtain the recorded phone call between me ; the Sams Club Travel representative, as this call will clearly show the misrepresentation about the room type. I also requested readable documentation. To date, I have received no readable documents, no explanation, and no meaningful update on the investigation. \nI am requesting CFPB assistance because : Sams Club Travel engaged in false advertising and misrepresentation. \nI cancelled the reservation within XXXX minutes, yet the charge remains. \nSams Club Travel continues submitting unreadable documents to Synchrony Bank. \nSynchrony Bank has failed to conduct a proper investigation and has not obtained the call recording I requested. \nI have not received any clear communication or resolution from either party. \nI am seeking a full refund and a thorough investigation into the false advertising and unreadable documentation used to deny my dispute. \n\nI contacted Sam 's Club Travel Members Deals on XX/XX/year>, and a representative took the cancellation over the phone. The representative provided confirmation in writing to me on XX/XX/year>, which is the first correspondence from XXXXam 's Club Travel Members Deals. \nI received several email messages ( XX/XX/year>, XX/XX/year>, and XX/XX/year>, with an updated ( I can provide all email communication ). After Sam 's Club Travel refused to refund me my additional {$730.00}. I then went to Synchrony Bank to dispute the charge with the credit card company. I was refunded {$500.00}, but the {$730.00} is what Sam 's Club TraveXXXX is refusing to give me back. I have disputed the total charge of {$1200.00} on XX/XX/year>, claim # XXXX XXXX dispute with Synchrony Bank on XX/XX/year>, claim # XXXX. Synchrony is still accepting the illegible documents from Sam 's Club Travel. \n\nPlease help to resolve this issue with these XXXX companies, in which I feel that they are giving me the run around in hopes that I get tired and give up. I refuse to give in and let Sam 's Club TraveXXXX charge me for the XXXX rooms, and I cancelled the reservation due to their false advertising of the room.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-13T12:32:06.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"72113","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18450221","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","date_received":"2026-01-04T03:40:42.000Z","state":"AR","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CFPB <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> ( <em>XXXX</em> & <em>XXXX</em> to Submit ) I am <em>filing</em> a <em>complaint</em> <em>regarding</em> Sams Club Travel ( Members Deals ) and Synchrony Bank for their mishandling of a hotel reservation dispute <em>involving</em> false advertising, misrepresentation, and failure to conduct a proper investigation. \nOn XX/XX/year>, I booked a hotel stay at the <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> in <em>XXXX</em>, Illinois, through <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> ( <em>XXXX</em> ) <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>. The <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> website advertised the room as a Double King room."]},"sort":[12.226018,"18450221"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18922990","_score":11.451107,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally appeal the denial of Claim regarding an unauthorized XXXX transfer in the amount of {$3200.00}. This appeal includes new material evidence that was not reviewed during the initial determination and warrants a theft-based re-evaluation. \n\nOn Sunday, XX/XX/XXXX, at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX my mobile phone was stolen. Immediately following the theft, attempts to call the device went directly to voicemail and it was no longer locatable, confirming that I was no longer in physical possession of the phone. \n\nAt approximately XXXX XXXX  after arriving home and knowing that my phone had been stolen, I took immediate protective action by disabling my Wells Fargo debit card linked to my checking account. After securing my account to the extent I reasonably could at that time, I went to sleep for the night. Despite this action, at XXXXXXXX XXXX, an outgoing XXXX transfer of {$3200.00} was initiated from my Wells Fargo account. \n\nAt the time of the transfer, I was not in possession of my phone, did not authorize, did not intend, and did not initiate the XXXX payment. I did not approve the transfer in any manner and did not receive or benefit from the funds. \nAuthorization requires both intent and possession. Because my device had been stolen prior to the transaction, I lacked possession, and because I did not approve or initiate the payment, I lacked intent. A stolen device using stored credentials does not constitute authorization. \n\nThis transaction is entirely inconsistent with my account history. I have never initiated an outgoing XXXX transfer from my account. The disputed transaction is the only outgoing XXXX payment on record and is highly unusual in both amount and timing. My last legitimate XXXX activity occurred on XX/XX/XXXX and did not involve sending funds. \n\nAdditionally, no real-time push notification or urgent alert was received by me or by the joint account holder at the time of the transfer. An email notification was later received but did not provide immediate or time-sensitive notice of the transaction occurring at XXXXXXXX XXXX \n\nThe XXXX transfer was sent to an individual entirely unknown to me. I do not recognize the recipient and have no prior relationship, communication, or transaction history with this individual. The transaction record reflects an identifiable recipient name and associated XXXX address, which I am prepared to provide upon request to assist with Wells Fargos review and any recovery efforts. \n\nUpon discovering the unauthorized activity at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX I contacted Wells Fargo at XXXXXXXX XXXX  to report the transaction and take further protective action. \n\nA police report has been filed documenting the theft of my phone and the subsequent unauthorized financial activity : Police Report Number : XXXX Police Department Attached to this appeal are my sworn affidavit, proof of loss, and the police report, all of which establish that the XXXX transfer occurred after the theft of my device, without my knowledge, consent, possession, or intent. This transaction should be reviewed as a theft-based unauthorized XXXX transfer XXXX \n\n\nIf Wells Fargo maintains its denial after review of this new evidence, I will immediately escalate the matter through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and pursue all available remedies to address the improper classification of this theft-based transaction. \n\nMore Information : Complaint Narrative I am filing this complaint regarding Wells Fargos denial of a theft-based unauthorized XXXX transfer from my checking account in the amount of {$3200.00} ( Claim # XXXX ). \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX my mobile phone was stolen. I was no longer in physical possession of the device. At approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX  after arriving home and knowing my phone had been stolen, I took immediate protective action by disabling my Wells Fargo debit card linked to my checking account. Despite this action, at XXXXXXXX XXXX an outgoing XXXX transfer of {$3200.00} was initiated from my account. \n\nI did not authorize, intend, or initiate this transfer, did not have possession of my phone at the time, and did not receive or benefit from the funds. Authorization requires both intent and possession. A stolen device using stored credentials does not constitute authorization. \n\nThis transaction is entirely inconsistent with my account history. I have never initiated an outgoing XXXX transfer prior to this incident. The recipient was an individual unknown to me. \n\nI filed a police report documenting the theft and completed a sworn affidavit and proof of loss. I uploaded all supporting documentation on XX/XX/year> at approximately XXXXXXXX XXXX Wells Fargo denied my claim and later confirmed that the Claims Assistance XXXX did not receive or review the supporting documents before closing the claim. \n\nIn its denial letter dated XX/XX/year>, Wells Fargo stated that the activity occurred through a secure online banking session by you or someone who had your authority and closed the claim without evaluating theft, lack of possession, lack of intent, out-of-pattern behavior, or the submitted documentation. \n\nWells Fargo misclassified a theft-based unauthorized transaction as authorized solely based on device/session access and denied the claim without reviewing material evidence. \n\nI am requesting CFPB assistance to require Wells Fargo to properly review the submitted documentation, reclassify the transaction as unauthorized, and reimburse the disputed amount.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-22T15:33:54.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"19115","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18922990","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2026-01-22T15:15:58.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["More Information : <em>Complaint</em> <em>Narrative</em> I am <em>filing</em> this <em>complaint</em> <em>regarding</em> Wells Fargos denial of a theft-based unauthorized <em>XXXX</em> transfer from my checking account in the amount of {$3200.00} ( Claim # <em>XXXX</em> ). \n\nOn XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, at approximately XXXXXXXX <em>XXXX</em> my mobile phone was stolen. I was no longer in physical possession of the device."]},"sort":[11.451107,"18922990"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18032791","_score":11.408844,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX VIA CERTIFIED MAIL and CFPB PORTAL Equifax Information Service LLC XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX, Georgia XXXX Re : Formal FCRA dispute and demand for correction of inaccurate and fraudulent credit reporting To Whom It May Concern : This correspondence is a formal dispute of inaccurate and fraudulent information appearing in my consumer report and a demand for correction, deletion, and full compliance with federal consumer protection laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), XXXX U.S.C. XXXX et seq., its implementing Regulation V, the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) regulations and guidance, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) guidance governing the investigation of credit reporting disputes and identity theft. \n\nBackground And Nature Of Dispute My consumer report currently reflects XXXX or more accounts, tradelines, or derogatory items that do not belong to me and/or are the result of identity theft, as detailed in the attached list and documentation. I did not open, authorize, or benefit from these accounts or transactions, and I have already filed an identity theft report with the appropriate authorities and with the FTC, and I am providing copies of my FTC Identity Theft Report, police report ( if applicable ), and proof of identity. \n\nThese inaccurate entries are causing substantial harm, including damage to my credit reputation, denial or less favorable terms of credit, and other financial and personal injuries. You are now on notice that this information is disputed and that I assert my rights as an identity theft victim and as a consumer under federal law. \n\nFCRA Duties To Assure Accuracy And Conduct A Reasonable Investigation Under the FCRA, consumer reporting agencies must follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information they report about consumers, and must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of disputed information when notified by a consumer. This includes the duty to review all relevant information provided by the consumer, to communicate the dispute to the furnisher of the information, and to delete or correct information that can not be verified as accurate. \n\nCFPB supervisory guidance and circulars reiterate that both consumer reporting agencies and furnishers can face liability under the FCRA when they fail to conduct reasonable investigations of consumer disputes or create barriers to the submission of disputes. Federal regulators have emphasized that you must not ignore, summarily reject, or parrot verify disputed information without a genuine, reasonable investigation that considers the evidence submitted by the consumer. \n\nIdentity Theft and FCRA 605B Blocking Rights Because the disputed information results from identity theft, I am invoking my rights under FCRA 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c2 ), which provides that a consumer reporting agency must block the reporting of information that the consumer identifies as resulting from identity theft when the consumer submits : ( XXXX ) appropriate proof of identity, ( XXXX ) a copy of an identity theft report, and ( XXXX ) an identification of the fraudulent information. Section 605B requires the credit reporting agency to block this information within a short timeframe after receiving the required documentation and to notify the furnisher that the information has been blocked due to identity theft. \n\nYour failure to promptly block and remove these identitytheftrelated items after receiving proper documentation would constitute a violation of FCRA 605B and related FTC and CFPB guidance for identity theft victims. Courts have recognized that identity theft victims have a private right of action against furnishers and reporting agencies that fail to conduct a reasonable investigation and continue reporting fraudulent accounts, and regulators have supported consumers in such actions. \n\nCase Law Regarding Failure To Investigate And Identity Theft Federal courts have repeatedly held that when a consumer disputes items on a credit report, the FCRA requires furnishers and agencies to conduct a reasonable investigation, and failure to do so can give rise to liability for actual, statutory, and punitive damages. In recent appellate decisions involving allegations of identity theft, courts have focused on whether the furnisher and agencies reasonably investigated the consumers identity theft claim and whether they deleted or corrected information that could not be verified as belonging to the consumer. These decisions make clear that ignoring consumerprovided identity theft affidavits and supporting evidence, or simply confirming the debt with the original furnisher without deeper inquiry, is insufficient. \n\nBy persisting in reporting fraudulent information after clear notice of identity theft and a dispute, and by failing to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation, a credit reporting agency and any involved furnisher violate their statutory duties under 15 U.S.C. 1681i and 1681s2 and can be held liable in a private civil action. \n\nFraudulent, Unverified Accounts or Inaccurate XXXX XXXX Closed ( Unverified/Fraudulent ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX / Account type : Credit card ( revolving ) Charge Off / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX / Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : XXXX dollars ( credit limit ) Amount in default : chargeoff amount XXXX dollars ; current balance XXXX ; amount past due XXXX Status / notes : Charge Off ; date of XXXX delinquency XX/XX/XXXX ; consumer disputes this account ( code 166 ) ; narrative codes XXXX ( chargedoff ), XXXX ( credit card ), XXXX ( high credit is credit limit ). \n\nXXXX XXXX Closed ( Unverified/Fraudulent ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX Account type : Credit card ( revolving ) Charge Off / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX / Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : XXXX dollars ( credit limit ) Amount in default : chargeoff amount XXXX dollars ; current balance XXXX ; amount past due XXXX Status / notes : Charge Off ; date of XXXX delinquency XX/XX/XXXX ; date closed XX/XX/XXXX ; narrative codes XXXX ( chargedoff ), XXXX ( credit card ), XXXX ( high credit is credit limit ), XXXX ( high credit is original chargeoff amount ). \n\nXXXX XXXX Closed ( Unverified/Fraudulent ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX Account type : Credit card ( revolving ) Charge Off / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX / Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : XXXX dollars ( credit limit ) Amount in default : chargeoff amount XXXX dollars ; current balance XXXX ; amount past due XXXX Status / notes : Charge Off ; date of XXXX delinquency XX/XX/XXXX ; date closed XX/XX/XXXX ; activity designator Closed by credit grantor ; narrative codes XXXX ( chargedoff ), XXXX ( account closed by credit grantor ), XXXX ( fixed rate ). \n\nXXXX XXXX Co / Collection agency : CREDIT COLLECTIONS ( Unverified/Fraudulent ) Account type : Collection Insurance / Original creditor : XXXX SECURE CO XXXX Date assigned : XX/XX/XXXX Date last paid : None reported ( Last Payment Date : None ) Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX ( collection reported and status Unpaid as of that date ) Original limit / original amount : Not stated as original amount ; collection amount and balance are XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( unpaid collection balance ) Status / notes : Individual account ; creditor classification Insurance ; date of XXXX delinquency XX/XX/XXXX ; status Unpaid ; no additional narrative notes. \n\nXXXX OF XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : DEPT OF XXXX / Account type : Education Loan ( student loan ) / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX / Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars ( original principal ) Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; amount past due XXXX ; no chargeoff ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; narrative XXXX ( consumer disputes after resolution ), XXXX ( student loan payment deferred ), XXXX ( student loan ), XXXX ( previously in dispute and resolved ), XXXX ( affected by natural or declared disaster on certain months ). \n\nXXXX OF XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX / Account type : Education Loan / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX / Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; narrative XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX as above. \n\nXXXX OF XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX / Account type : Education Loan / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX / Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; same narrative pattern ( XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX ). \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : DEPT OF XXXX / Account type : Education Loan / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX / Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; narrative XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX. \n\nXXXX OF XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX / Account type : Education Loan / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX / Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; same narrative set. \n\nXXXX OF XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : DEPT OF XXXX / Account type : Education Loan / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX / Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; same narrative set. \n\nXXXX OF XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX / Account type : Education Loan / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX / Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; same narrative set ( including affected by natural or declared disaster for some months ). \n\nXXXX OF XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX / Account type : Education Loan / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX / Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; same narrative set. \n\n\nXXXX OF XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX / Account type : Education Loan / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX / Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; same narrative set. \n\nXXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account type : Education Loan / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX / Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; same narrative set. \n\nXXXX OF XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX / Account type : Education Loan / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX / Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; payment deferred; same narrative set. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Inaccurate/Never Late ) Creditor : XXXX XXXX  XXXX / Account type : Education Loan ( prior servicer ) / Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date last paid : XX/XX/XXXX / Date of most recent update : XX/XX/XXXX / Original limit : High credit XXXX dollars Amount in default : XXXX dollars ( balance XXXX ; past due XXXX ; no chargeoff ) Status / notes : Pays As Agreed ; transferred/sold XX/XX/XXXX ; narrative codes XXXX ( account transferred or sold ) and XXXX ( student loan ). \n\nViolations Alleged To the extent you have failed to : I. XXXX a reasonable reinvestigation of my dispute, XXXX. Review all relevant information that I have provided, XXXX. Communicate my dispute accurately to the furnisher ( XXXX ), XXXX. XXXX identitytheftrelated information after receiving the required documentation, and/or V. Delete or correct information that can not be verified as accurate, You are in violation of the FCRA, XXXX but not limited to XXXX U.S.C. XXXX ( b ), XXXX, and XXXX, as well as applicable CFPB and FTC regulations and guidance. Continued reporting of fraudulent and inaccurate information after notice of identity theft also constitutes willful or negligent noncompliance with the FCRA, exposing you to civil liability. \n\nDemands For Correction And Specific Relief Accordingly, I demand that you : I. XXXX a thorough, reasonable reinvestigation of each disputed item listed in my attached schedule, including review of all documents I have provided. \nXXXX. XXXX, delete, and permanently remove from my consumer report all tradelines, accounts, inquiries, or derogatory items that are the result of identity theft or can not be verified as accurate as to me. \nXXXX. Provide me with an updated copy of my consumer report showing the removal or correction of all disputed items. \nIV. Provide a written description of the procedures used in your reinvestigation, including the entities you contacted, information reviewed, and the basis for your conclusions, as permitted under XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) ( XXXX ). \nXXXX XXXX from reinserting any deleted items in my file unless you fully comply with the FCRAs reinsertion requirements, including proper notice. \n\nThese actions should be completed within the statutory reinvestigation period, generally 30 days from your receipt of this dispute ( or shorter blocking timelines as applicable under XXXX ), and you should provide written confirmation to me at the address above. \n\nNotice Of Potential Litigation And Damages Please treat this letter as both a dispute under the FCRA and a prelitigation demand. If you fail to comply with the obligations described above, continue to report inaccurate or identitytheftrelated information, or otherwise refuse to correct and block the disputed items, you XXXX be liable for : I. Actual damages, including but not limited to credit denials, higher interest rates, and emotional distress. \nXXXX. Statutory damages for willful violations under XXXX XXXX. XXXX. \nXXXX. XXXX fees and costs. \nIV. Punitive damages where appropriate, particularly for reckless or knowing disregard of consumer rights. \n\nFederal regulators, including the CFPB and FTC, have expressly warned that consumer reporting agencies and furnishers can face enforcement actions and civil liability for failure to reasonably investigate disputes and properly address identity theftrelated information. If you do not resolve this matter within the time provided by law, I reserve all rights to pursue legal remedies in court, including filing suit against you and any furnishers involved in these inaccuracies for violations of the FCRA and related consumer protection statutes. \n\nDocuments enclosed I am enclosing the following, and you must review each item as part of your investigation : Copy of governmentissued identification Proof of current address Copy of my FTC Identity Theft Report A list of each disputed tradeline, including creditor name, account number ( redacted ), and why the item is inaccurate or fraudulent Any additional supporting documentation showing that the accounts or transactions are not mine Please confirm in writing, at the address listed above, that you have received this dispute, initiated a reinvestigation, blocked and removed any identitytheftrelated information pursuant to FCRA XXXX, and corrected all inaccurate information. Retain this letter and all attachments in your files, as they will be used as evidence of your notice and your response in any future regulatory complaint or civil litigation. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-15T05:00:24.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30909","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18032791","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-15T04:53:20.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Retain this letter and all attachments in your <em>files</em>, as they will be used as evidence of your notice and your response in any future regulatory <em>complaint</em> or civil litigation. \n\nSincerely, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>"]},"sort":[11.408844,"18032791"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18437451","_score":9.063793,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"This is my third complaint regarding Fifth Third Bank. Their XX/XX/XXXX response to my second complaint introduces new contradictions, continues to ignore my Regulation X requests, and reflects a pattern of providing false or misleading information to the CFPB while my family continues to suffer the consequences. \nFifth Third has completely failed to respond to my Requests for Information and Notices of Error submitted under 12 C.F.R. 1024.36. I sent email requests on XXXX XXXX XXXX, followed by a XXXX hard copy on XX/XX/XXXX, which was delivered and signed for by XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. Fifth Third was required to acknowledge receipt within XXXX business days and to provide a substantive response within XXXX business days of receipt. I received nothing. The only communications I received were their CFPB response letters containing shifting explanations, which do not constitute Regulation X compliance. I am entitled to written, itemized responses to each issue raised in my XXXX XXXX Fifth Thirds continued failure to provide those responses is an ongoing violation of federal law. \nIn its XX/XX/XXXX response, Fifth Third now claims it does not have signed XXXX documents in its system. This directly contradicts the XX/XX/XXXX letter Fifth Third attached to its first CFPB response confirming me as successor-in-interest. It also contradicts the XX/XX/XXXX phone call in which Fifth Thirds representative confirmed my XXXX status, apologized for delays, updated my contact information, and instructed me to submit a loss-mitigation application using my grandmothers information. \nIf Fifth Third confirmed me as successor-in-interest in XX/XX/XXXX, why was I never sent written confirmation as required by 12 C.F.R. 1024.30 ( d )? I did not learn of this confirmation until the XX/XX/XXXX phone call, more than XXXX years later, and only because I contacted the bank about an unrelated issue. Had Fifth Third sent the required written confirmation in XXXX, I could have prevented XXXX foreclosure attempts, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX filings, severe credit damage, the medical crisis documented by my mental health provider on XX/XX/XXXX, and ultimately the loss of my grandmothers home. This entire catastrophe stems from Fifth Thirds failure to send one legally required letter. \nThis is an XXXX loan, which imposed additional obligations under XXXX XXXX. XXXX and FHA XXXX XXXX XXXX. FHA policy requires servicers to identify successors-in-interest, engage them, and evaluate them for loss-mitigation options before foreclosure. Fifth Third violated all of these requirements. You had my contact information the entire time. After my grandmother died, Fifth Third instructed me to file probate, proving direct contact and knowledge of my involvement. I was notated on her account and handled matters on her behalf even before her death. You can verify this in your own account notes. You now claim I was confirmed successor-in-interest in XX/XX/XXXX, yet you never sent written confirmation and never proactively engaged me regarding loss-mitigation options. You confirmed my XXXX status, failed to notify me in writing, accepted my loss-mitigation application, and then sold the house while that application was under review. That is a direct violation of FHA servicing standards, not a technical oversight. \nFifth Thirds timeline continues to change. In its XX/XX/XXXX response, the bank claimed I submitted documents in XX/XX/XXXX and that the property was sold on XX/XX/XXXX. In its XX/XX/XXXX response, Fifth Third now claims it received my hardship letter on XX/XX/XXXX and that the property was sold on XX/XX/XXXX, admitting the earlier date was misinformation. Fifth Third has now admitted it lied about the sale date, yet its revised narrative remains inaccurate. \nThe actual facts are documented in the portal logs and chat transcripts I submitted with my second complaint. I submitted a complete loss-mitigation application through the portal on XX/XX/XXXX. When a representative later claimed it was not received, I was emailed a blank hardship application on XX/XX/XXXX from XXXX and instructed to complete and submit it so the request could be opened. I followed those instructions and submitted the completed hardship application on XX/XX/XXXX. \nAfter I submitted the completed hardship application on XX/XX/XXXX, I retained access to the XXXX XXXX XXXX portal, but upload functionality and the ability to successfully complete new assistance submissions were blocked despite the application being treated as active and under review. This condition persisted through the XX/XX/XXXX sale and afterward, later appearing as a formal RFA Failed system entry on XX/XX/XXXX. \nThe sheriffs sale proceeded on XX/XX/XXXX while the application was still under review. \nPortal logs show the application was created on XX/XX/XXXX and reflect multiple document uploads. XXXX agent claimed via chat that no application existed on XX/XX/XXXX, directly contradicting the system records. Agents also stated the review period was approximately XXXX days. There were XXXX days between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. During XX/XX/XXXX, different agents gave contradictory statements about whether my application existed, what documents were required, and when it was received. I was repeatedly told to contact XXXX to stop the auction. My former probate attorney attempted to do so and could not reach them. \nDuring the XX/XX/XXXX call, Fifth Thirds representative specifically instructed me to submit the loss-mitigation application using my grandmothers information. I followed those instructions. Fifth Third can not now claim the application was improper when its own agent directed its submission that way. I also disclosed from the beginning that title remained in the XXXX of XXXX XXXX XXXX, that probate was ongoing, and that the probate judge directed the XXXX XXXX and me to resolve the mortgage issue. I was transparent throughout. \nFifth Third now claims my application was incomplete due to an allegedly expired drivers license, lack of insurance proof, and lack of proof of ownership in my name. My drivers license was not expired. Where is the written notice of missing items? Under 12 C.F.R. 1024.41 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( B ), an incomplete application requires written notice identifying specific deficiencies within XXXX days. I never received such a notice. There is no proof of mailing, no tracking, and no delivery confirmation. If Fifth Third claims it sent notices, prove it. You also failed to use the updated contact information recorded during the XX/XX/XXXX call. \nFifth Third now claims my application was incomplete due to title because the property was held in the estate rather than in my individual name. Cite the legal authority requiring title transfer for successor-in-interest loss-mitigation review. Regulation X defines successor-in-interest status independently of title ownership. I disclosed the probate status upfront. Your agents should have processed the application based on confirmed SII status. \nFifth Thirds XX/XX/XXXX response claims its system does not allow uploads or applications to be blocked. That statement is contradicted by the portals actual behavior and Fifth Thirds own activity logs. I retained access to the Loan Solution Center portal, but upload and submission functionality was blocked beginning after XX/XX/XXXX and continuing through and after the XX/XX/XXXX sale, later reflected as an RFA Failed system entry on XX/XX/XXXX. If Fifth Third disputes this, it should produce technical documentation and backend logs showing when upload and submission controls were XXXX on my account and why. \nI did everything by the book. I followed your agents instructions. I submitted what was requested. I disclosed everything upfront. I called repeatedly. I wrote letters. I sent XXXX mail. I filed proper Regulation X requests. I gave Fifth Third every opportunity to do the right thing. Instead, you stalled while my redemption period runs out on XX/XX/XXXX. While your executives were home with their families for XXXX, I was buried in legal filings trying to save my grandmothers home. You created this situation and then blamed me for not mitigating. That is offensive. The failure to mitigate is yours. \nMy grandmother was a Fifth Third customer since before XXXX, when it was XXXX XXXX Bank. This home was built new by ICCF for low-income families, and we are the only family who has ever lived here. I stayed behind to care for my grandmother when others left. XXXX XXXX documented that without my caregiving, she would have required XXXXXXXX XXXX placement. Had Fifth Third sent the required XXXX confirmation in XXXX, none of this would have happened. \nFifth Third is pursuing corporate mergers while failing to meet basic servicing obligations. You have resources for expansion but not for compliance. As my grandmother used to say, it starts at the head and spreads abroad. Your agents either do not know the rules or do not care. \nExplain how this is fair. Explain how you sleep at night treating long-term customers this way. You had the ability to prevent this by sending XXXX required letter. You chose not to. I am filing complaints with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Michigan Attorney General, and XXXX. I am making this public. I will not stop until Fifth Third takes responsibility. \nI demand written responses to each item in my XX/XX/XXXX XXXX within XXXX business days, production of proof of mailing for any alleged notices, proof of any letters you claim I signed, complete loss-mitigation workflow logs for XXXX XXXX XXXX and technical documentation regarding portal functionality and account lock status. Correct the record and admit the actual timeline. Identify who provided false information to the CFPB and what corrective action is being taken. \nI am not asking CFPB to decide my state court case. I am asking CFPB to require Fifth Third to comply with federal servicing law and to provide accurate, consistent information. \nFifth Thirds response is filled with polished language about first-class customer service and transparency, yet the bank refuses to produce the underlying records. If Fifth Third stands by its narrative, it should produce the evidence. \nI specifically demand production of the XX/XX/XXXX call audio at approximately XXXX XXXX  XXXX, including the call-detail record, interaction ID, agent identification, department, call duration, and all contemporaneous account notes. That call is dispositive. Fifth Third can not claim customer-service excellence while refusing to produce it. \nI also demand production of complete backend servicing and workflow data tied to my loss-mitigation submissions for XXXX XXXX XXXX. If Fifth Third claims documentation was missing, produce the system records proving those requests were actually made at the time. \nIgnoring Regulation X requests for months is not a customer-service issue. It is a compliance failure. \nEnough with the scripted language. This is about records. Fifth Third has had months and has offered nothing but revised timelines and excuses. That ends now. \nEnough with the XXXX. Enough with the shifting timelines and post-hoc explanations. If Fifth Third stands by its actions, it should produce the audio, the logs, and the workflow data and let the facts speak. Accountability begins when the talking stops and the evidence is produced.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-03T03:23:28.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"49503","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18437451","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"FIFTH THIRD FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2026-01-03T03:08:59.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["You had the ability to prevent this by sending <em>XXXX</em> required letter. You chose not to. I am <em>filing</em> <em>complaints</em> with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Michigan Attorney General, and <em>XXXX</em>. I am making this public. I will not stop until Fifth Third takes responsibility."]},"sort":[9.063793,"18437451"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17986590","_score":8.212739,"_source":{"product":"Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB Complaint Product / issue : Product : Buy Now, Pay Later ( Affirm, Inc. ) Problem : Billing dispute / charged for goods not agreed to / dispute handling What happened? ( Narrative to paste ) I am filing a complaint against Affirm , Inc. regarding a Buy Now, Pay Later ( BNPL ) transaction used to finance furniture from XXXX XXXX. Because of confusing split order confirmations showing {$0.00} balances and a mishandled dispute, I am now being billed for more furniture than I knowingly agreed to purchase. I believe this involves a billing error under Regulation Z / Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), as applied to BNPL, and raises concerns under the CFPBs UDAAP ( unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices ) authority. \n\nFacts and timeline XXXX. I purchased a Dante dining table and a Plinth coffee table from XXXX XXXX using Affirm financing under XXXX XXXX Order XXXX. \nXXXX. Interior Icons later notified me that the coffee table would not be delivered until late XXXX, which was too late for my design project. I responded that the date for the coffee table was too far away and that I wanted to cancel the coffee table and only proceed with the dining table. \nXXXX. Instead of clearly cancelling the coffee table, XXXX XXXX told me they would split the order. After that, I received XXXX separate split-order confirmations : Order XXXX XXXX dining table ( about {$3900.00} ) Order XXXX XXXX coffee table ( about {$1200.00} ) XXXX. Each of those confirmations shows : Subtotal equal to the full item price, An Order discount equal to the full price, labeled as a split from XXXX, and A Total of {$0.00}, plus a You saved [ full price ] message. \nIn other words, both the dining table and coffee table split orders show a full discount and a {$0.00} total. Given that I had just requested cancellation of the coffee table, this reasonably looked like the original charges for both items had been zeroed out or cancelled. \nXXXX. In reliance on those {$0.00} confirmations, I then placed a new order for the dining table only under a different order number ( XXXX ) with Affirm, because I believed the original order had been cancelled/credited and I still needed XXXX dining table. \nXXXX. In an email exchange with Interior Icons, I explained that the original dining table order was zeroed out just like the coffee table, and I asked them to push the canceled order to Affirm because I now appeared to have XXXX table orders. The XXXX XXXX representative later confirmed that there were XXXX table orders under XXXX and XXXX. I made clear that I only wanted and intended to purchase XXXX dining table and no coffee table. \nXXXX. Weeks later, the delivery company contacted me to schedule delivery for XXXX tables, even though I had only intended to buy XXXX table and had clearly rejected the delayed coffee table. \nXXXX. I then filed a dispute with Affirm and provided : My email where I asked to cancel the coffee table due to the XXXX delivery date ; The split-order confirmations for XXXX and XXXX showing full discounts and Total {$0.00} for both items ; and The email thread where I told XXXX XXXX that the original table was XXXX out like the coffee table and asked them to push the cancelled order to Affirm because I now had XXXX outstanding orders. \nXXXX. Affirm denied my dispute, stating that my proof was insufficient, without giving any meaningful explanation of how they evaluated the documents or why it is appropriate to bill me for what is effectively a duplicate furniture obligation created by confusing split-order communications and {$0.00} confirmations. \n\nWhy I believe this violates CFPB-administered law XXXX. Billing error under Regulation Z / Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) Under 12 C.F.R. 1026.13 ( Regulation Z Fair Credit Billing ), a billing error includes : ( a ) charges for goods or services not accepted or not delivered as agreed, and ( b ) charges that reflect an extension of credit not actually made to the consumer. \nBecause the CFPBs BNPL interpretive rule treats certain BNPL products ( like Affirms digital account ) as credit cards, these billing-error protections apply to my BNPL loan . \nIn my case, the duplicate table obligation and/or continued obligation on the split order is a billing error because : I did not intend to incur multiple financed obligations for the same furniture ; and The transaction is not delivered as agreed : I agreed to XXXX dining table and no coffee table after rejecting the delayed delivery date. \nAffirms response that my proof was insufficient, without a substantive explanation or clear consideration of the {$0.00} split-order confirmations and email trail, suggests that it did not conduct the reasonable investigation required by XXXX. \nXXXX. Unfair or deceptive acts or practices ( UDAAP ) under the Consumer Financial Protection Act The split-order confirmations are objectively misleading : each shows a full discount equal to the item price and a {$0.00} total, with You saved [ full price ]. In the context of my explicit cancellation request, a reasonable consumer would interpret this as the original charges being cancelled or credited. \nAffirms refusal to correct the account despite having copies of these {$0.00} confirmations and my emails asking to push the cancelled order to Affirm causes me substantial financial harm ( being billed for more furniture than I agreed to ), which I can not reasonably avoid. \nThis combination of misleading merchant documentation and Affirms dispute handling is, in my view, deceptive and unfair under the CFPBs UDAAP standard. \nXXXX. FCRA / Regulation V concerns ( if reported to credit bureaus ) If this disputed obligation is or will be reported to consumer reporting agencies, I am also disputing its accuracy. Under Regulation V ( FCRA ), furnishers must not continue reporting information they know or reasonably should know is inaccurate and must conduct a reasonable investigation of disputes. \nAffirm should not report, or should correct/delete, any information related to a duplicate furniture obligation it can not substantiate. \n\nWhat I want the company to do Correct my Affirm account so that I am responsible for only XXXX dining table ( the final replacement order ) and no coffee table, consistent with my clear intent and the {$0.00} split-order confirmations. \nCancel or remove any duplicate or cancelled/zeroed-out obligation tied to the original split order ( XXXX / XXXX ). \nConfirm in writing that there will be no late fees or negative consequences arising from the disputed amount and that any related credit reporting will be corrected or deleted. \n\nI have supporting documents, including the original Your order is being prepared email showing the late coffee table delivery date and my cancellation request, the split-order confirmations for XXXX and XXXX showing {$0.00} totals, and the email thread where I asked XXXX XXXX to push the cancelled order to Affirm and where XXXX XXXX confirms there are XXXX table orders. I will upload these as part of this complaint. To date I have only accepted delivery of XXXX table and refused the XXXX table.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-01T19:10:01.000Z","issue":"Problem with additional add-on products or services","sub_product":"Installment loan","zip_code":"07631","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17986590","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Affirm Holdings, Inc","date_received":"2025-12-01T18:41:31.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CFPB <em>Complaint</em> Product / issue : Product : Buy Now, Pay Later ( Affirm, Inc. ) Problem : Billing dispute / charged for goods not agreed to / dispute handling What happened? ( <em>Narrative</em> to paste ) I am <em>filing</em> a <em>complaint</em> against Affirm , Inc. <em>regarding</em> a Buy Now, Pay Later ( BNPL ) transaction used to finance furniture from <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[8.212739,"17986590"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16333446","_score":8.21233,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX : Formal Complaint and Immediate Enforcement Demand Concerning Sham and Incomplete Reinvestigation by Equifax Regarding Inaccurate Reporting of XXXX Installment Loan Account # XXXX To the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau : I submit this formal complaint against Equifax Information Services LLC ( Equifax ) for its gross and continuing failure to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681i, regarding my dispute involving inaccurate derogatory reporting on my XXXX installment loan account ( # XXXX ). \nEquifax produced a reinvestigation response dated XX/XX/XXXX ; however that response is incomplete and substantively deficient Equifax made limited file edits but failed to supply verifiable documentation, furnisher contact details, confirmation of human review, suppression of derogatory reporting during reinvestigation, its internal policies/procedures, and the full written verification procedures required by the FCRA. These outstanding deficiencies demonstrate a sham or inadequate reinvestigation and warrant immediate CFPB enforcement intervention. \n( For the CFPB record : my original dispute was submitted via the CFPB XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX ( CFPB XXXX ID : XXXX ). The CFPB XXXX shows Equifax responded on XX/XX/XXXX with a summary stating the item was verified and that Past Due, Balance, and Account History fields were modified. XXXX XXXX and mailed communications did not include the substantive verification documentation or furnisher contact details required under FCRA. ) Summary of Hardship I am a XXXX parent with an XXXX son, currently living in a hotel due to the financial strain caused by MOHELAs actions compounded by the Department of Education 's inaction. My income of {$960.00} per month is dramatically insufficient to meet my living expenses, particularly with hotel rates exceeding {$1100.00} biweekly. The derogatory marks placed on my credit report by XXXX directly prevent me from obtaining necessary funding and housing stability. This ongoing predicament has led to severe emotional distress and places me and my child at risk of eviction. \nDetailed Background and Points of Noncompliance Account : XXXX installment loan ending in XXXX Date opened : XX/XX/XXXX ; Report dates observed : XX/XX/XXXX ( updated as of XX/XX/XXXX ) Reported status : XXXX, 180 DAYS OR MORE PAST DUE, with narrative codes XXXX, XXXX, XXXX reported in inconsistent order. \nReported balance in Equifax file : {$2100.00} ( discrepancies with other records ; original dispute cited {$2100.00} ). \nFirst reported delinquency date on file : XX/XX/XXXX ( disputed sequence of delinquency reporting and chronology ). \nMy dispute and requested actions ( CFPB submission XX/XX/XXXX ) : Reinvestigate account under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ).\n\nDelete or correct inaccurate/unverifiable information.\n\nProvide reinvestigation results and a description of the verification procedure used, plus furnisher name and contact information per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). \nTemporarily suppress the negative/delinquent status during reinvestigation. \nEnclosed supporting documents ( ID, proof of address, credit reports, other evidence ). \nEquifax responses and what they reported : Equifax acknowledged receipt and indicated a reinvestigation completed ( response dated XX/XX/XXXX ; CFPB portal shows company response on XX/XX/XXXX ). \nEquifaxs summary : MISSOURI HIGHER EDUCATION LOAN EQUIFAX VERIFIED THAT THIS ITEM IS REPORTED CORRECTLY. \nEquifax states the following fields were modified : XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Account XXXX. \nEquifax provided a boilerplate description of its general investigation process and stated that furnisher contact details are shown under the resultson the cover letter accompanying a revised credit file. \nComprehensive list of deficiencies, incomplete items, and inaccurate/missing responses from Equifax ( XXXX item below references my original requests and FCRA requirements ; XXXX responses are contrasted with what was required or requested. ) Reinvesitgation completeness XXXX from Equifax : XXXX claimed complete ( XX/XX/XXXX ). \nXXXX : XXXX completion notice is conclusory and unsupported by substantive evidence. The reinvestigation appears limited to electronic exchange with the furnisher and resulted only in limited field edits. \nDeletion or full correction of inaccurate tradeline Requested : Delete or correct unverifiable/inaccurate reporting ( e.g., Over 120 days past due, inconsistent narrative codes ). \nEquifax response : Item verified as reported correctly ; only XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Account XXXX fields were modified. \nXXXX : Equifax did not delete the tradeline nor fully correct the reported delinquency status ; derogatory status remains. \nWritten reinvestigation results and verification procedure details ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) ( iii ) ) Requested : Provide written notice describing procedures used to verify the information and furnishers contacted ( name, address, phone ). \nEquifax response : Boilerplate process description ; no casespecific verification documentation, no stepbystep account of records checked, and no specific verification procedure for this dispute. Equifax referenced a cover letter for furnisher contact info but did not provide the underlying verification records. \nXXXX : Failure to provide the specific verification procedures and supporting documentation used to verify this particular account. \nFurnisher contact details and communications log Requested : Furnisher name, address, phone number, and nature of communications during reinvestigation. \nEquifax response : Generic statement that such details appear on a cover letter accompanying a revised file. \nXXXX : No furnisher contact details or communication log were provided in the materials I received ; absent concrete contact information, I can not verify how the furnisher investigated or what source documents were used. \nXXXX XXXX vs. automated/computer verification ; identity and declaration of human reviewer Requested : Confirmation whether reinvestigation was completed solely by automated means ; if automated, proof that a qualified human XXXX reviewed and validated results INCLUDING name, title, signed declaration ; if not, perform humanled reinvestigation. \nEquifax response : No casespecific statement confirming human review or identification of any human reviewer for this dispute. Only a generic description of transmitting disputes to furnishers and receiving electronic results. \nXXXX : No assurance that a human XXXX reviewed or validated any automated outcome ; no human reviewer identification or signed statement provided. \nSuppression of derogatory reporting during reinvestigation Requested : Temporarily suppress the negative/delinquent status of the disputed tradeline during reinvestigation to prevent ongoing consumer harm ( CFPB guidance ). \nEquifax response : No indication that suppression occurred. \nXXXX : Equifax did not confirm suppression ; derogatory reporting continued. \nTimeliness and documentation of statutory timeframe compliance Requested : Evidence of receipt and completion dates to verify reinvestigation completed within 30 days per FCRA. \nEquifax response : Listed completion date ( XX/XX/XXXX ) but provided no evidence of receipt date, transmission to furnisher date, or timeline documentation. CFPB portal shows company response on XX/XX/XXXX, creating ambiguity about the dates and timeliness. \nXXXX : No clear evidence demonstrating compliance with the XXXX statutory window. \nInternal policies, procedures, quality control, and compliance with prior CFPB enforcement Requested : Provide internal policies and procedures governing FCRA reinvestigations, quality control/supervisory review protocols, and evidence of compliance with CFPB XX/XX/XXXX order. \nEquifax response : None ; no internal policies or QC documentation provided. \nXXXX : Equifax withheld internal documentation necessary to assess whether company procedures comport with FCRA obligations and the CFPB enforcement order. \nDelivery of reinvestigation documentation via portal and mailed correspondence Requested : Provide all reinvestigation documentation through the Equifax portal and by mail ( so I can review what verification was performed ). \nEquifax response : XXXX that a copy of dispute results has been mailed XXXX have been asserted generically ; in practice I have not received substantive mailed documentation or uploaded portal documentation containing verification records. \nXXXX : No supporting documents ( verification records, furnisher responses, communications logs ) were delivered to me via portal or mail. \nSpecific inaccuracies in data still present on file Chronology errors : XXXX shows jump to XXXX days delinquent in XX/XX/XXXX despite apparent activity in XX/XX/XXXX Equifax XXXX not resolve or provide explanation. \nNarrative code inconsistencies : Codes XXXX ( deferment ), XXXX ( 150 days ), XXXX ( XXXX days ) reported in an inconsistent sequence Equifax XXXX not correct or explain sequencing. \nBalance discrepancy : My dispute cited {$2100.00} ; Equifax file shows {$2100.00} ; Equifax modified balance field but did not provide source documentation validating the new amount. \nDelinquency coding ( XXXX, XXXX ) and XXXX 120 days past due remain reported for XXXX XXXX Equifax did not delete or meaningfully correct these codes. \nXXXX characterization of the response as verified Equifax response : Declared the item verified as reported correctly. \nXXXX : Without the verification evidence or furnisher communications, the claim of verification is unsubstantiated and effectively a conclusory assertion rather than meaningful verification. \nAdditional Allegations Willful Noncompliance and Stall Tactics Equifaxs pattern in this XXXX a conclusory verified finding with only limited field edits while refusing to provide supporting documentation and furnisher contact detailsconstitutes willful noncompliance, evasive behavior, and possible stall tactics to avoid transparency and accountability required under FCRA. The failure to provide internal policies and humanreview confirmation exacerbates concerns about adequacy of the reinvestigation. \nRequest for Equifax XXXX XXXX and HumanReview Confirmation ( explicit demand ) I request that Equifax immediately provide, at minimum : A complete copy of its internal written policies and procedures governing FCRA reinvestigations, including any automated matching/verification rules, quality control, and supervisory review procedures. \nA detailed, itemspecific reinvestigation report for account XXXX showing : ( a ) the exact records searched or reviewed ; ( b ) the furnisher ( XXXX ) contacted ; ( c ) copies of all communications exchanged with furnishers and any records furnished by them ; ( d ) the dates and times of all transmissions and receipts ; ( XXXX ) the specific reason ( XXXX ) for each field modification ; ( f ) the identity ( name, title ) and signed statement of any human reviewer who validated the result. \nA clear statement whether any portion of the reinvestigation or verification was completed solely by automated processes. If so, produce documentary proof that a qualified human XXXX reviewed and validated the automated result for this dispute ( name, title, signed declaration ). If human validation did not occur, Equifax must perform and complete a humanled reinvestigation and provide complete supporting documentation. \nProof that any derogatory status was suppressed during the reinvestigation ( if it was not suppressed, an explanation for nonsuppression and the legal basis ). \nSpecific Demands for Immediate CFPB Enforcement I urgently request that the CFPB require Equifax to : Provide a full, substantive reinvestigation of the disputed XXXX account, correcting or deleting any inaccurate data consistent with statutory accuracy standards within XXXX calendar days of this complaint acceptance. \nImmediately provide me with : A complete reinvestigation report and documentation detailing the verification and validation procedures employed ( casespecific ). \nWritten disclosure of furnishers contacted and copies of the communications/exhibits provided to or received from those furnishers. \nXXXX to all reinvestigation outcomes, supporting documentation, and any cover letters via the Equifax consumer portal and in mailed written form. \nTemporarily suppress the disputed derogatory status of the XXXX account during the reinvestigation, in accordance with CFPB recommendations. \nDisclose to the CFPB and me Equifaxs internal policies, procedures, quality control measures, and evidence of compliance with the CFPB XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX. \nProvide a direct update to the CFPB and to me ; do not close this complaint until full compliance and correction are documented and communicated effectively. \nAdditionally and explicitly : Confirm in writing whether the reinvestigation at issue was completed solely via automated/computerized processes. If any automated processes were used, produce documentation demonstrating a human reinvestigator reviewed and validated the automated result for this dispute, including the human reviewers name, title, and a signed statement of review. If such human validation did not occur, Equifax must undertake and complete a humanled reinvestigation and provide the complete results and supporting documentation. \nDamages & Financial Exposure Calculations Statutory Damages XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Demand : {$1500.00} per violation Violation Amount Failure to conduct reasonable reinvestigation {$1500.00} Failure to disclose verification procedure {$1500.00} Failure to delete unverifiable info {$1500.00} Failure to maintain maximum accuracy {$1500.00} Continuing to report knowingly inaccurate data {$1500.00} Repeated monthly reporting ( 24 months ) {$36000.00} Subtotal Statutory Damages : {$43000.00} Actual & Emotional Distress Damages XXXX & XXXX Denials of credit/loans ( documented ) {$5000.00} Pain, suffering, reputational harm, emotional distress {$15000.00} Subtotal Actual Damages : {$20000.00} Punitive Damages XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) For willful misconduct postNorman settlement {$25000.00} Attorneys Fees & Costs XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ), XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) $ XXXX XXXX hours {$32000.00} Filing/service/expert costs {$5000.00} Subtotal Fees/Costs : {$37000.00} Total Minimum Exposure if Litigated : {$120000.00} ( exclusive of interest & ongoing harm ) Relevant Legal and Regulatory Authorities XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) : reasonable reinvestigation within 30 days, including furnisher notification. \nXXXX XXXX. XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) ( iii ) : written notice of reinvestigation results, verification procedures, and furnisher contact information. \nXXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ) : reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy. \nCFPB XXXX Supervisory Highlights and prior CFPB/FTC guidance XXXX dispute handling and suppression of disputed derogatory items. \nCFPB XXXX to Equifax dated XX/XX/XXXX ( civil penalties for systemic reinvestigation failures ). \nConclusion Equifaxs failure to provide reinvestigation documentation, furnisher contact details, a humanreview confirmation, internal policies/procedures, and the specific verification evidence required by the FCRA despite asserting completion of an investigation and making limited field edits severely undermines consumer rights and the integrity of consumer reporting. The conclusory verified finding without supporting documentation is inadequate and unacceptable under the FCRA. If this matter is not resolved promptly and fully, I will pursue statutory damages and all remedies available under XXXX XXXX. XXXX and XXXX, including attorneys fees and costs. \nXXXX I attest under penalty of perjury to the accuracy and truthfulness of this complaint submitted in good faith to protect my consumer financial rights under federal law. \nRespectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, DE XXXX Phone : XXXX Email : XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Requested immediate actions summary Produce all requested documentation and internal policies within XXXX calendar days. \nSuppress derogatory reporting during reinvestigation. \nXXXX humanled reinvestigation if human validation did not occur and provide signed reviewer statement. \nProvide full written verification records, furnishers contact details, and communications logs. \nConfirm corrections or deletions and provide proof that all CRAs have received corrected updates. \nEmail : XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-02T03:50:47.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"19702","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16333446","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-02T03:36:17.000Z","state":"DE","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Consumer Financial Protection Bureau <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> : Formal <em>Complaint</em> and Immediate Enforcement Demand Concerning Sham and Incomplete Reinvestigation by Equifax <em>Regarding</em> Inaccurate Reporting of <em>XXXX</em> Installment Loan Account # <em>XXXX</em> To the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau : I submit this formal <em>complaint</em> against Equifax Information Services LLC ( Equifax ) for its gross and continuing failure to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681i, <em>regarding</em> my dispute <em>involving</em> inaccurate"]},"sort":[8.21233,"16333446"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3512981","_score":7.9777336,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"On Tue, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote : OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF FINANCIAL REGULATION CONSUMER SERVICES UNIT CONSUMER COMPLAINT FORM Licensing Board is responsible for supervising collection agencies ( Board Licensees ).\n\nBefore you begin : If your complaint involves one of the above listed entities, it is recommended that you contact the entity ( s ) to resolve the matter prior to submitting a complaint. When contacting the entity, please make every effort to ensure contact that the person with whom you communicate is authorized to resolve your dispute.\n\nIf you are unable to resolve the complaint directly with the entity, the second step is to determine if the financial entity is supervised by the Commissioner ( see our licensing search pages ).\n\nThe Commissioner of Financial Regulation ( Commissioner ) is responsible for supervising Maryland State-chartered banks, credit unions, and non-deposit trust companies ( collectively Institutions ) and for supervising entities providing the following financial services to Maryland consumers, including, consumer and installment lenders ( including payday lenders ), sales finance companies, mortgage brokers, lenders, servicers, and loan originators, check cashing services, money transmitters, debt management businesses, credit reporting agencies, credit services businesses ( collectively Licensees ). The XXXX XXXX XXXX NOTE : If you believe that the party who is the subject of your complaint should be licensed by the Commissioner, and is not licensed, you should file a complaint. \nComplaint Form XX/XX/XXXX Page 1 of 6 Instructions : This is a fillable PDF form which means you may complete and sign this form electronically. If you decide to complete the form manually, please print the form, print your information clearly and sign your name. Use black or blue ink, only.\n\nThis is NOT an online form ; you must submit your complaint by one of the means listed below. Please enclose copies ( NOT ORIGINALS ) of documents ( contracts, account statements, letters, bills, receipts, checks, etc., ) that relate to your complaint, and be sure to sign ( electronically or manually ) and date your complaint.\n\nDeliver your completed complaint form and relating documents by one of the following methods : BY E-MAIL : Please send as attachments to XXXX BY MAIL : Commissioner of Financial Regulation XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, Maryland XXXX Attention : Consumer Services Unit IN-PERSON : You can also walk in to the Commissioners office at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, MD, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Note : walk-in Hours are : XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX  ) BY FACSIMILE ( FAX ) : at the following fax number XXXX ( Note : please mark your fax to the attention of the Consumer Services Unit ) Note : Your complaint will be assigned to an Examiner who will handle your complaint and who will reach out to you shortly after being assigned your complaint. \nBe advised any information that you provide may be forwarded to an Institution, Licensee, Board Licensee, or any other individual against whom you have complained. \nFree at ( XXXX ) XXXX or visit the Commissioners webpage at http : //www.dllr.maryland.gov/finance/. \nBefore you submit or mail your complaint : Proof read the information you have provided and make any necessary corrections. \nEnclose copies ( NOT ORIGINALS ) of documents that relate to your complaint. \nPlease make sure to sign and date the form. \nFinally, before sending make a complete copy of all information submitted by you. \nShould you have any questions regarding the Commissioners complaint resolution process or a complaint you have filed with the Commissioner, do not hesitate to contact the Consumer Services Unit at ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX or Toll Complaint Form XX/XX/XXXX Page 2 of 6 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION Your Name The Office of the Commissioner of Financial Regulation complies with all applicable federal and State laws regarding discrimination. The Commissioner does not base findings concerning complaints on a persons age, ancestry, color, gender identity and expression, marital status, race, or any other protected status. However, in an effort to ascertain trends regarding complaint data, we ask that you voluntarily provide the following demographic information. Demographic information will not be shared with the person or entity who is the subject of your complaint. \nWhat category best describes you? \nXXXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX   origin XXXX XXXX  or XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX or Other XXXX XXXX XXXX or XXXX   Other race, ethnicity or origin Decline to answer Gender Identity : Female Male Other gender Decline to Answer Age : 18-25 26-35 36-45 x 46-55 56-65 Over 65 Decline to Answer Veteran/ Military Status : Are you eligible to declare veteran or military status? Yes x No If yes which best describes your status? Veteran Active Duty or Reserve Active Duty or Reserve/ deployed Complaint Form XX/XX/XXXX Page 3 of 6 CONSUMER INFORMATION Your Name : Mr. XMs. \nHome # : Cell # : ( XXXX ) XXXX Work # : Fax # : Street Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX, City/Town/State : XXXX XXXX MD Zip Code : XXXX E-mail Address : XXXX Account Number ( s ) involved in this complaint : Complaint Form XX/XX/XXXX Page 4 of 6 CONSUMER ATTORNEY OR REPRESENTATIVE AGENT Do you have an attorney or representative agent assisting you with this complaint? Yes x No If so, do you authorize the release of information to the below listed individual? Yes No Representative Name : Work # : Cell # : Fax # : Representative Street Address : Representative City/Town/State : Zip Code : Representative E-mail Address : WHAT IS YOUR COMPLAINT ABOUT?\n\n( Check all that apply ) ATM or Money Wiring Services Auto or Car Title Loan Auto Repossession Bank or Credit Union Check Casher Consumer Loan Credit Denial Credit Reporting Agency x Debt Collection - General Debt Collection Harassment Debt Management Services xDebt Settlement Services x Dispute of Credit Information XDispute Debt Owed X Foreclosure Related X Foreclosure Prevention Services Identity Theft Land Installment Loan X Lending or Credit Fraud Money Transmission X Mortgage Fraud X Mortgage Loan X Mortgage Modification Mortgage Refinance X Mortgage Servicer Personal Property Repossession Property Management or HOA Fees Reverse Mortgage Short Sale or Deed in Lieu Student Loan Questionable Fee Charges Unauthorized Charges Virtual or Cryptocurrency XOther : __________fruadlent propertys sale___unfair practices of the attorneys office and the mortgage companies to_____breaking the law ___ THE NAME OF THE PERSON OR ENTITY THAT I AM COMPLAINING ABOUT : Ocwen loan servicing llc / PHH mortgage/ XXXX XXXX mortgage and attorneys and trustee office XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX ( If more than one , use separate Complaint Form for each complainant ) Name : Work # : Cell # : Fax # : Street Address : City/Town/State : Zip Code : E-mail Address : Complaint Form XX/XX/XXXX Page 5 of 6 Complaint Narrative : Did you contact the person or entity about your complaint? Yes Person Contacted : ocwen loan services llc Did they respond? Yes Date Contacted : XX/XX/XXXX Date of Response : If so, nature of response : call the attorneys office Complaint Form XX/XX/XXXX Page 6 of 7 Is Court Action Pending on this complaint? Yes, but the already sale my property Proposed Resolution what would be an acceptable resolution to your complaint : Remove them form serving customer and dismissed and give my home back with full payment because they break the law or evidence and be fair as well as lawful Check here if you are filing this complaint for informational purposes ONLY. \n( By checking this box the office will not reach out to the person or entity you are complaining about ) **Please read carefully, before signing and submitting your complaint. ** XXXX XXXX  By signing this complaint, I certify that all the information supplied in this complaint form is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I also authorize the Office of the Commissioner of Financial Regulation to speak on my behalf regarding my loan or account with the person ( s ) or entity ( ies ) listed in this complaint ( unless this complaint is filed for information purposes only ). I further have no objection to the contents of this complaint being forwarded to the person ( s ) or entity ( ies ) listed in this complaint. Further, in filing this complaint, I understand that the Commissioner of Financial Regulation can neither guarantee any certain resolution to this complaint nor provide me with legal advice. Should I have questions concerning my legal rights and responsibilities, I will contact an appropriate legal services provider. \nSignature : XXXX XXXX Date:XX/XX/XXXXComplaint Form XX/XX/XXXX Page 7 of 7 The attorney/ Trustee company ( XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX et al ) ( Ocwen loan Services ) employees and ( PHH moragt. ) ( XXXX XXXX ) please excuse me bacise as for today I dont no who who. But the say they all the same but all dont have me account correctly ) have submitted false information and paperwork. Conduct and engage in dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation the prejudice sell in my property disobey court order, filing a default sale wit out get the court to rule on it not following The Maryland state rule by file announcement of the property in public papers not send the notices to the ( Regular Mail ) On fair time never send me what was to be collect to demand my property before sale when call the mortgage company the say call the attorney s not file the true not we never had our time in court because we been in Bankruptcy ( My husband mother past away in XXXX she put a lot of things in his name he was her only child and we had business as will we was waiting to have our day in court but you cant go throw any other court when in court with BK they not it as will they no they did have rights to foreclosure as well as the other didnt because the found the payment and the other case was closed as well as the began in this case ) never send us anything until it over and that was not to pay ocwen because they was receiving payment form us by side the bk case never got the number of account we was in bankruptcy and we request a line and the send in Faust document and read the attachment and I have so much evidence on their fraudulent and the keep have to escape Their actions because of the people they no. I have never received a notes of default on this case but the conduct a sale and waiting for a RAF. Sale for 15 days I received the sale notice Thursday XX/XX/XXXXthat evening I call all Friday the 11th to get the understanding with the court talk to the judge chamber on the docket XXXX informed me that they mean judge sign the order no long work in foreclosure and I had to call the majesty XXXX on that and all say it nothing on case very say Im in bk and I told them I was not and I was waiting to go to court they say come and file something so I was sick Monday had a doctor appointment and on XX/XX/XXXX I walk in the foreclosure office received a payed for copy of the documents with there information and a receipt on case and file and report I was no long on bankruptcy case we had it lifted I was call that day by Ocwen I told I thought I wan na with PHH and XXXX XXXX he informed me the the same people I told him where o was and Im about to file he start get upset I have to pay all to stay and I wa going be evident and he still did no for sho what I need to bring it up to date I need to call the attorney but I say I give my money to you all and that when he said I call the attorney to get a buy back I ask that what that and he say call then I file my paperwork and when I got home I call the foreclosure office where the paperwork why not on file the next day I see they file something after me and that when I see the attorney ask to be put on hold until XX/XX/XXXX for judge make a judgement on the case that to hold them and get a raffle sale completed but also they still had no right to sale see attachments and still not follow the law I was told to not file with any of these officials or they going really get a sheff evidence for the 15 days when it was to be no soon the 30days they are above the law and they dont follow no ruling orders and have no respect for the law. They not turstworthy and the paperwork is so poor fraued documents they dont even try no more they follow the law if need any more proof the use fraudulent things as well as i -- -- -- -- -- Forwarded message -- -- -- -- - From : XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : Tue, XX/XX/XXXXat XXXX XXXX  Subject : Fwd : Next Steps - FTC Complaint Assistant To : XXXX XXXX XXXX Circuit Court of Maryland Go Back Now Case Information Court System : Circuit Court for XXXX XXXX XXXX County - Civil System Case Number : XXXX Case Description : XXXX vs XXXX Case Type : Property Filing Date:XX/XX/XXXX Case Status : Inactive Defendant/Respondent Information Party Type : DefendantParty No. :2 Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXXState : MDZip Code:XXXX Party Type : DefendantParty No. :3 Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX City : XXXX XXXXState : MDZip Code:XXXX Attorney Information Name : XXXX XXXX Attorney Type : Attorney Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX City : XXXXState : MDZip Code:XXXX Other Party Information Party Type : Substitute TrusteeParty No. :1 Name : XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX Court Scheduling Information Event Type : Status Hearing Event Date : XX/XX/XXXXStart Time:XXXX Result : Status Conference HeldResult Date:XX/XX/XXXX Event Type : Status Hearing Event Date : Start Time : Result : Result Date : Event Type : Status Hearing Event Date : Start Time : Result : Result Date : Event Type : Status Hearing Event Date : Start Time : Result : Result Date : Event Type : Status Hearing Event Date : Start Time : Result : Result Date : Dockets ( Each Document listed. Documents are listed in Document No./Sequence No. order ) Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : CaseType : Foreclos of Deed Tr Docket Text : Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Forclsure Eligible for Mediatn Docket Text : Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Order To Docket Foreclosure Fd Docket Text : 001 proceeding to forc d/t on XXXX XXXX with attachments fd/rja e XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Forclsure/Prel Loss Mitgtn Aff Docket Text : 002 fd/rja e XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Affidavit of Service, fd Docket Text : 003 As to XXXX XXXX XXXX F.D./EJ E ; XX/XX/XXXXDate : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Affidavit of Service, fd Docket Text : 004 As to XXXX XXXX XXXX F.D./EJ E ; XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Affidavit, Fd. \nDocket Text : 005 Affidavit of Mailing - As to All Occupants F.D./EJ E ; XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Deed of Appt/Appt of Sub Tr Fd Docket Text : 006 fd. kbp e XX/XX/XXXXDate : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Forclsure/Finl Loss Mitgtn Aff Docket Text : 007 fd.ksr eXX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Bond Approved and Filed. \nDocket Text : 008 Bonds XXXX with attachments fd.ksr eXX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Not To Pty Contemp Dis Case Fd Docket Text : 009 fd.md Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Motion to Defer or Suspend, fd Docket Text : 010 No attachments, fd.md ( Tagged for XXXX ) e XX/XX/XXXXDate : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Order of Court, filed Docket Text : 011 Order of Court dated XX/XX/XXXX, Judge XXXX, ORDERED that the motion is granted and ORDERED that dismissal of this action be and hereby is DEFERRED for 90 days, thereafter the case will be dismissed unless further deferral is granted or there is documented activity filed in the case, fd.md cc : XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Motion to Defer or Suspend, fd Docket Text : 012 fd, amk ( tagged for XXXX ) Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Order of Court, filed Docket Text : 013 Order of Court dated XX/XX/XXXX,  Judge XXXX, ORDERED, that the motion is GRANTED and dismissal of this action be, and hereby is, DEFERRED for 90 DAYS, thereafter the case will be dismissed unless further deferral is granted or there is documented activity filed in the case. FD.LT Copies mailed to : XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Motion to Defer or Suspend, fd Docket Text : 014 fd/rja e XX/XX/XXXX Motion to Defer Dismissal ( tagged for Judge XXXX ) Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Suggestion of Bankruptcy, Fd. \nDocket Text : 015 fd.mdm e XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Notice of Hearing, filed Docket Text : 016 Notice of Hearing XX/XX/XXXX Status Hearing XXXX e.keh XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Order of Court, filed Docket Text : 017 Order of Court signed by Judge XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX ORDERED that Plaintiffs XXXX Motion to Defer Dismissal is deemed MOOT ; and it is further ORDERED that this proceeding be and hereby is automatically STAYED pending bankruptcy ; and it is further ORDERED that the Substitute Trustees ' shall forthwith advise the court in writing when the automatic stay is lifted ; and it is further ORDERED that this matter be set in on XX/XX/XXXXat XXXX for a status hearing to determine the status of Defendant 's bankruptcy cc : XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX by XXXX e.keh XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Status Conference Held Docket Text : Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Civil Daily Sheet, Filed Docket Text : 018 fd/db Judge XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Judge XXXX ; XXXX XXXX Status hearing held Case stayed-bankrutpcy pending Other : bankruptcy case summary filed e XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXXDocument Name : Order Stay Pending Bank, fd Docket Text : case stayed pending bankrupcty per daily sheet Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Order Stay Pending Bank, fd Docket Text : 019 Order of court dated XX/XX/XXXX  Judge XXXX, Ordered, that this proceeding be and hereby is automatically Stayed pending bankruptcy, and it is further, Ordered, that the plaintiffs ' counsel shall file a written status update with the court regarding the status of defendant 's bankruptcy three months after the date of this order and every three months  thereafter until the stay is lifted, and it is further, Ordered, that the substitute Trustees shall forthwith advise the court, in writing, when the automatic stay is lifted, and it is further Ordered, that failure of plaintiffs to advise the court as to when the automatic stay is lifted may result in the dismissal of this matter without prejudice fd.kss eXX/XX/XXXX copies mailed from chambers Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Bankruptcy Lifted Docket Text : 020 line to withdraw suggestion of bankruptcy, fd.tng e XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Suggestion of Bankruptcy, Fd. \nDocket Text : 021 Case No. XXXX fd, aj eXX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Bankruptcy Lifted Docket Text : 022 case no. XXXX fd.aj e.XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Bankruptcy Lifted Docket Text : 023 fd ; tb e. XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Suggestion of Bankruptcy, Fd. \nDocket Text : 024 fd ; tb e. XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Motion to Defer or Suspend, fd Docket Text : 025 motion to defer dismissal fd.kss eXX/XX/XXXX ( tagged for XXXX XXXX With hold until XX/XX/XXXX ) Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Motion To Stay, Fd. \nDocket Text : 027 Defendant 's motion for temporary stay of the foreclosure sale pending a full hearing on defendant 's motion to stay and dismiss foreclosure action fd.kss eXX/XX/XXXX ( Tagged for XXXX XXXX ) Date : XX/XX/XXXX Document Name : Motion To Dismiss, Fd. \nDocket Text : 026 defendant motion to dismiss with attachments fd.kss eXX/XX/XXXX ( Tagged for XXXX. XXXX ) This is an electronic case record. Full case information can not be made available either because of legal restrictions on access to case records found in Maryland Rules, or because of the practical difficulties inherent in reducing a case record into an electronic format. \n\n\n-- -- -- -- -- Forwarded message -- -- -- -- - From : XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : Tue, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX  Subject : Next Steps - FTC Complaint Assistant To : XXXX Next Steps - FTC Complaint Assistant Print FTC Report FTC Report Number : XXXX The FTC can not resolve individual complaints, but we can provide information about next steps to take. We share your report with local, state, federal, and foreign law enforcement partners. Your report might be used to investigate cases in a legal proceeding. Please read our Privacy Policy to learn how we protect your personal information, and when we share it ocwen filed a  forclouse on my home in XXXX and about XXXX the case was to be closed but i was also in bankruty at the same time and my home trustee ( XXXX XXXX ) work for XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX as well as the attorney XXXX XXXX the company is also a debit collect agency the file and keep going with the paperwork and had a hearing when we was in bankrupty court they have file the flase deed of trust i call the office and told them i was pay my bk and send ocwen money so the can use that case the need to refile with tha correct acount and the stop take my payment sen back as well as i talk to Ms XXXX and i told it was the woronge paperwork she say she dont have to file that corrct paper work as will as i will get a credit after the home would be stoled and that XX/XX/XXXX i receied a substitue trustee sale for XX/XX/XXXX bevcaue of a default for XX/XX/XXXX and my home was a prime loan i was pay XXXX a moth first. until we recvie a mod i file a consumer compaltint and the have been file false paprrwork we had only one and the made me pay a down payment and the was to file some thing incourt but the court did recevie nothing until the same date i file XX/XX/XXXX and the file the same and adk to hold my motion and my edvince and they paperwork until XX/XX/XXXX after the sale would be raf. and they have majesty o that some day im in court the morgat. company call me and was on the for with me for two hour acting threating we going sell your home you have to pay. all now never tell me what to pay because the have receid payment and they dont really no when i say i was in the court the then say i can redemybit but i have to call the lawyer office about that money okay when i call it no redem. and it other things to How It Started Date fraud began : Amount I was asked for : Amount I paid : XX/XX/XXXX XXXX Payment Used : How I was contacted : Money Order Mobile : Text/E-Mail/IM Who Is Your Complaint About Company/Individual 1 Name : Ocwen loan services/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Address : Apt/PO Box : City : State : Zip : Email Address : Phone : Website : Representative : https : //www.ftccomplaintassistant","date_sent_to_company":"2020-02-18T14:13:23.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"20747","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3512981","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","date_received":"2020-01-29T04:49:11.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Should you have any questions <em>regarding</em> the Commissioners <em>complaint</em> resolution process or a <em>complaint</em> you have <em>filed</em> with the Commissioner, do not hesitate to contact the Consumer Services Unit at ( <em>XXXX</em> ) <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> or Toll <em>Complaint</em> Form XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> Page 2 of 6 DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION Your Name The Office of the Commissioner of Financial Regulation complies with all applicable federal and State laws <em>regarding</em> discrimination."]},"sort":[7.9777336,"3512981"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18215800","_score":7.6250653,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, California Email : XXXX -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SUMMARY OF ONGOING ACCOUNT ISSUES AND RELATED STRESS National Credit Direct ( NCD / NCDF Financial ) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- PURPOSE OF THIS FILE This file is prepared for record-keeping, professional review, XXXX  sharing as needed. It summarizes an ongoing issue with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX also known as XXXX or XXXX XXXX ) involving inaccurate account records, repeated automated communications, XXXX  the resulting prolonged stress. \n\nThe information below is factual XXXX  based on screenshots, emails, XXXX  written correspondence in my possession. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- BACKGROUND -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- I maintained a consumer merchandise credit account with XXXX XXXX XXXX, accessed through the companys website at XXXX The account relates to a merchandise purchase made in or around XX/XX/year>. \n\nWhile reviewing my account online, I discovered that XXXX XXXX Directs own account records contain internal contradictions XXXX  inconsistencies regarding my payment history XXXX  account status. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ACCOUNT RECORD INCONSISTENCIES -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Based on screenshots taken directly from National Credit Directs account portal, the following issues appear : The account status is listed as Current. \nMultiple monthly payments are simultaneously marked as XXXX. \nA Last Payment Date is shown for a transaction that is also labeled XXXX. \nNo explanation is provided for why certain payments are labeled unpaid. \nThere are no visible notices of returned payments, declined payments, late fees, default notices, or account acceleration. \n\nThese contradictions are confusing and distressing because : A payment can not logically be both made and unpaid. \nAn account can not accurately be described as XXXX while reflecting unpaid payments unless those payments were waived, deferred, or corrected, none of which is disclosed. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- REPEATED EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Despite the unresolved inconsistencies described above, National Credit Direct continues XXXX  send repeated automated emails stating that my account statement is available and encouraging me to log in. \n\nCharacteristics of these emails include : Sent over multiple months ( XXXX through XXXX ) Sent from XXXX XXXX ( NO REPLY ) Continued even after I indicated I did not wish XXXX  log in or continue contact No meaningful way XXXX  dispute or resolve the inaccuracies through the email These emails rely on the same disputed account data XXXX  contribute XXXX  ongoing stress by repeatedly signaling unresolved obligations without offering resolution. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- FORMAL ACTION TAKEN -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- In response XXXX  the ongoing stress and unresolved inaccuracies, I took the following steps : I documented the inconsistencies using screenshots from the National Credit Direct account portal. \nI sent a formal written Demand for Deletion XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, requesting deletion of inaccurate XXXX  unverifiable account information. \nI prepared XXXX  submitted a complaint XXXX  the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), referencing both the account inconsistencies XXXX  the prior deletion demand. \n\nAs of this writing, the matter remains unresolved. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- IMPACT ON WELL-BEING -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- This situation has caused prolonged XXXX  cumulative stress due XXXX  : Repeated communications without resolution Conflicting XXXX  confusing account records Time XXXX  energy spent documenting, disputing, XXXX  tracking the issue Concern about potential financial or credit consequences caused by inaccurate information The stress is ongoing rather than isolated XXXX  has required continued attention over an extended period. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SUPPORTING MATERIALS ON FILE -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- The following materials are available XXXX  can be provided if needed : Screenshots of National Credit Direct account pages Copies of repeated account statement available emails Copy of the formal deletion demand sent to National Credit Direct Copy of the CFPB complaint narrative -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- REQUESTED RESOLUTION -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Due XXXX  the internal contradictions XXXX  inaccuracies in National Credit Directs own account records, I am requesting a definitive resolution rather than continued statements or account maintenance. \n\nMy requested resolution is as follows : PRIMARY REQUEST : Complete deletion of the National Credit Direct account from the companys records XXXX from any consumer reporting agencies, on the basis that the account information is inaccurate XXXX  unverifiable. \n\nALTERNATE REQUEST ( if deletion is refused ) : The account must be updated XXXX  reflect PAID IN FULL with a {$0.00} balance. \nAll payment entries labeled XXXX must be removed. \nThe account must reflect no delinquency, no past-due amount, and no ongoing obligation. \nAll recurring account statement available emails XXXX  communications must cease. \n\nContinued maintenance of contradictory account records without deletion or correction XXXX  a paid status is not an acceptable resolution. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- STATEMENT OF ACCURACY -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- The information contained in this file is true XXXX  accurate XXXX  the best of my knowledge XXXX is based on records in my possession. \n\nSigned : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-02-17T18:11:12.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"94110","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18215800","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NCD Financial, LLC","date_received":"2025-12-22T11:23:35.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt was paid"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It summarizes an ongoing issue with <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> also known as <em>XXXX</em> or <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> ) <em>involving</em> inaccurate account records, repeated automated communications, <em>XXXX</em>  the resulting prolonged stress."]},"sort":[7.6250653,"18215800"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18212021","_score":7.4660425,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, California Email : XXXX -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SUMMARY OF ONGOING ACCOUNT ISSUES AND RELATED STRESS National Credit Direct ( NCD / NCDF Financial ) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- PURPOSE OF THIS FILE This file is prepared for record-keeping, professional review, and sharing as needed. It summarizes an ongoing issue with National Credit Direct ( also known as NCD or NCDF Financial ) involving inaccurate account records, repeated automated communications, and the resulting prolonged stress. \n\nThe information below is factual and based on screenshots, emails, and written correspondence in my possession. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- BACKGROUND -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- I maintained a consumer merchandise credit account with National Credit Direct, accessed through the companys website at www.nationalcreditdirect.com. The account relates to a merchandise purchase made in or around XX/XX/year>. \n\nWhile reviewing my account online, I discovered that National Credit Directs own account records contain internal contradictions and inconsistencies regarding my payment history and account status. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ACCOUNT RECORD INCONSISTENCIES -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Based on screenshots taken directly from National Credit Directs account portal, the following issues appear : The account status is listed as Current. \nMultiple monthly payments are simultaneously marked as Unpaid.\n\nA Last Payment Date is shown for a transaction that is also labeled Unpaid. \nNo explanation is provided for why certain payments are labeled unpaid. \nThere are no visible notices of returned payments, declined payments, late fees, default notices, or account acceleration. \n\nThese contradictions are confusing and distressing because : A payment can not logically be both made and unpaid. \nAn account can not accurately be described as Current while reflecting unpaid payments unless those payments were waived, deferred, or corrected, none of which is disclosed. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- REPEATED EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Despite the unresolved inconsistencies described above, National Credit Direct continues to send repeated automated emails stating that my account statement is available and encouraging me to log in. \n\nCharacteristics of these emails include : Sent over multiple months ( XXXX through XXXX ) Sent from NCD Financial ( NO REPLY ) Continued even after I indicated I did not wish to log in or continue contact No meaningful way to dispute or resolve the inaccuracies through the email These emails rely on the same disputed account data and contribute to ongoing stress by repeatedly signaling unresolved obligations without offering resolution. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- FORMAL ACTION TAKEN -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- In response to the ongoing stress and unresolved inaccuracies, I took the following steps : I documented the inconsistencies using screenshots from the National Credit Direct account portal. \nI sent a formal written Demand for Deletion to National Credit Direct, requesting deletion of inaccurate and unverifiable account information. \nI prepared and submitted a complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), referencing both the account inconsistencies and the prior deletion demand. \n\nAs of this writing, the matter remains unresolved. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- IMPACT ON WELL-BEING -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- This situation has caused prolonged and cumulative stress due to : Repeated communications without resolution Conflicting and confusing account records Time and energy spent documenting, disputing, and tracking the issue Concern about potential financial or credit consequences caused by inaccurate information The stress is ongoing rather than isolated and has required continued attention over an extended period. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SUPPORTING MATERIALS ON FILE -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- The following materials are available and can be provided if needed : Screenshots of National Credit Direct account pages Copies of repeated account statement available emails Copy of the formal deletion demand sent to National Credit Direct Copy of the CFPB complaint narrative -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- REQUESTED RESOLUTION -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Due to the internal contradictions and inaccuracies in National Credit Directs own account records, I am requesting a definitive resolution rather than continued statements or account maintenance. \n\nMy requested resolution is as follows : PRIMARY REQUEST : Complete deletion of the National Credit Direct account from the companys records and from any consumer reporting agencies, on the basis that the account information is inaccurate and unverifiable. \n\nALTERNATE REQUEST ( if deletion is refused ) : The account must be updated to reflect PAID IN FULL with a {$0.00} balance. \nAll payment entries labeled Unpaid must be removed. \nThe account must reflect no delinquency, no past-due amount, and no ongoing obligation. \nAll recurring account statement available emails and communications must cease. \n\nContinued maintenance of contradictory account records without deletion or correction to a paid status is not an acceptable resolution. \n\n-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- STATEMENT OF ACCURACY -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- The information contained in this file is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and is based on records in my possession. \n\nSigned : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-29T18:15:19.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"94110","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18212021","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NCD Financial, LLC","date_received":"2025-12-22T04:34:22.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt was paid"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, California Email : <em>XXXX</em> -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SUMMARY OF ONGOING ACCOUNT ISSUES AND RELATED STRESS National Credit Direct ( NCD / NCDF Financial ) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- PURPOSE OF THIS <em>FILE</em> This <em>file</em> is prepared for record-keeping, professional review, and sharing as needed."]},"sort":[7.4660425,"18212021"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14975692","_score":6.874825,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This request is made pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), specifically 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), which requires that Experian conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of any disputed item on a consumers credit report. I am requesting, in accordance with federal law and pursuant to obligations enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), a full and complete Method of Verification ( MOV ) for the tradeline reported by XXXX XXXX XXXX under account number XXXX Furthermore, Experian is obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) to provide me with the business name and address of the furnisher, the telephone number if reasonably available, and a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information, including the name of the person or entity that verified it. I assert that Experian failed to provide a legally adequate response, and I request immediate correction and full compliance with disclosure. In addition, Experians update notification dated XX/XX/XXXX, indicates changes made to this tradeline following a dispute initiated by me. However, the outcome remains opaque, inadequately explained, and devoid of any MOV documentation. This constitutes a breach of my rights under both the FCRA and the standards outlined in CFPB Supervision and Examination Manual guidelines for CRAs. Experian is further required to retain all internal documentation pertaining to this dispute under the FCRAs reasonable procedures requirement. I hereby demand a certified copy of the dispute file and internal notes concerning this tradelines reinvestigation. This includes any e-OSCAR communication sent or received, any documents provided by the furnisher, and any Experian notes regarding the legitimacy, legality, or accuracy of the XXXX XXXX XXXX entry. I also request the names and job titles of all personnel involved in processing, adjudicating, or responding to the dispute, whether automated or human, along with a breakdown of how the decision to update was reached, what specific changes were made, and what information formed the basis of the final outcome. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ), I assert that Experian failed to notify me in writing of the nature of the information provided by XXXX XXXX XXXX during the reinvestigation process. The law mandates that if information is disputed, and a reinvestigation occurs, the CRA must inform the consumer of the procedure used, which includes the name, address, and contact number of any furnisher of information. No such detail was provided in this case. Furthermore, I formally object to Experians use of automated reinvestigation systems, such as e-OSCAR, without human verification or contextual review. This violates the reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy standard of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), as machine-generated responses are categorically incapable of considering nuanced dispute context, such as identity theft indicators, evidentiary documents, or consumer affirmations. This complaint also emphasizes Experians systemic failure to maintain robust audit trails of dispute resolution. I demand a full log of the disputes lifecycle, including timestamps for when it was received, processed, transmitted to the furnisher, and when any data was updated. If no such timestamp exists, Experian is in violation of data retention best practices outlined in CFPB Examination Procedures for Consumer Reporting. Moreover, I challenge the integrity of Experians updated status. What exactly was updated? What data points were changed, corrected, or removed? If the dispute concluded without deletion, what evidence did Experian find persuasive in favor of the furnisher? Please itemize the alleged balance, date of delinquency, charge-off details, and date of last activity as they appeared before and after the update. Under the CFPBs Bulletin 2014-01, consumer reporting agencies are explicitly warned against superficial reinvestigations that merely confirm the presence of data from a furnisher. The bureau reiterates that furnisher confirmation alone is insufficient when a dispute presents documentary evidence. My dispute contained sufficient detail to demand a deeper review, and yet I received no indication that Experian engaged in anything more than a basic ping to the furnisher. I am demanding that Experian provide copies of all documents obtained from XXXX XXXX XXXX in response to this dispute, including validation records, billing statements, account origination data, chain of title documentation, and any signed agreements bearing my name. If no such documentation exists, Experian is required under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) to delete the item. Additionally, Experians report formatting obfuscates the actual status of the account. Terms such as updated do not convey legal meaning and fail to fulfill Experians disclosure obligations under 15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ). I request a plain-language explanation of the current account status, balance, historical updates, and whether the data was ever suppressed, temporarily removed, or flagged for review. Furthermore, I assert that XXXX XXXX XXXX has no lawful basis to report this debt, as they have not furnished evidence of legal ownership, nor have they shown that the debt was incurred through a signed contract. If Experian possesses documentation attesting to the legal chain of custody of the debt ( e.g., bills of sale, assignment documents ), I demand immediate access to such materials. In summary, this multi-part complaint requires the following action : XXXX. A full Method of Verification disclosure consistent with 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ).\n\n2. Certified copies of all reinvestigation records including internal Experian communications, e-OSCAR dispute tickets, and vendor interactions. \nXXXX. Names, titles, and roles of Experian agents involved in this case. \nXXXX. All documentation obtained from XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nXXXX. A plain-language breakdown of the post-update data on my file. \nXXXX. Immediate deletion of this tradeline if Experian can not supply full evidence of verification as mandated by law.\n\nFailure to comply with this request will be reported directly to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Trade Commission, and any relevant state Attorney General.\n\nExperians reliance on automated dispute handling not only undermines the integrity of the reinvestigation process but also erodes public trust in the accuracy of credit reporting. According to the CFPBs XXXX Annual Report on the Fair Credit Reporting Act, a significant portion of consumer complaints stem from Experians unwillingness or failure to provide meaningful responses to dispute inquiries. This case exemplifies that failure. I further assert that Experian has not complied with its statutory obligation to notify third parties who received the inaccurate information, per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( d ), once a dispute results in a change or deletion. Please confirm in writing whether any such third-party notifications were made, and if so, to whom and when. The definition of a reasonable reinvestigation under federal law has evolved. The XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and the XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX XXXX made it clear that mere passive forwarding of information does not meet the XXXX XXXX XXXX. By failing to investigate the context and merit of my dispute, Experian is violating judicial precedent as well as statutory duty. Moreover, I request written assurance that Experian has implemented the procedural safeguards outlined in 12 C.F.R. 1022, including quality control standards for automated dispute resolution, training protocols for dispute agents, and periodic review of furnisher reliability. I am also demanding full metadata for the tradeline in question. This includes : Date account first reported by XXXX XXXX XXXX Date of last update Any suppressions or soft deletions Internal dispute flags or annotations Data-sharing history for this tradeline with third parties These metadata elements form part of the information that a consumer reporting agency is required to provide under 15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ) ( 1 ).\n\nExperians failure to supply a detailed and meaningful MOV places this account in violation of the maximum possible accuracy clause in 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). As such, I demand deletion of the XXXX tradeline until and unless you can provide : Documentary proof of account origination with my signature A complete chain of title, including assignments Full account history and billing cycle documentation Contact logs showing interactions between XXXX and Experian regarding my dispute Without such documentation, this entry is unverifiable and legally defective. \n\n\n\nI also assert potential violations of state-level consumer protection laws. For example, under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law ( UTPCPL ), a CRAs failure to correct false information after reasonable notice may constitute an unfair or deceptive act. Experians pattern of generic, opaque dispute outcomes may violate this provision. In accordance with my rights, I intend to forward this complaint to the Pennsylvania Attorney Generals Bureau of Consumer Protection. Please consider this a formal notification of my intention to escalate unless remedial steps are taken within 30 days. Additionally, I am requesting that Experian clarify whether the XX/XX/XXXX update to this account included changes to : Balance Account status Payment history Date of last activity XXXX opened Creditor name For each field, I request both the previous value and the new value. This data is essential to assess whether the update constituted a meaningful correction or simply a cosmetic adjustment with no effect on my creditworthiness. \n\n\n\nPlease also explain whether Experian attempted to verify the legitimacy of the underlying debt contract with the original creditor before updating the XXXX account. If the debt is alleged to originate with a now-defunct lender, or a creditor who no longer maintains original records, Experian is under heightened obligation to scrutinize the data before republishing it. If you are unable to obtain these original records, then the account should be deleted, not updated. The continued reporting of unverifiable, unvalidated information is a direct violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ). If XXXX records reflect that the XXXX tradeline was simply confirmed by the furnisher through an automated system, then this is legally insufficient. Experian must : XXXX. Independently verify the claim through documentation XXXX. Provide a full written MOV with named contacts XXXX. Suspend reporting during any extended reinvestigation period Failure to do so constitutes willful noncompliance under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and subjects Experian to potential statutory and punitive damages. \n\n\n\nI now formally reiterate that any continued reporting of the XXXX XXXX XXXX tradeline, without verifiable documentary support and a complete MOV response, will be treated as willful negligence. I reserve all rights under FCRA 1681n and 1681o to pursue damages, including through private legal action and coordinated enforcement through CFPB. I also request confirmation that this dispute is now being escalated to Experians legal and executive dispute review teams for further handling due to the volume and seriousness of the legal claims asserted herein. This communication serves as both : XXXX. A Method of Verification ( MOV ) request under FCRA 1681i ( a ) 2. A formal complaint for filing with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX. A record to be preserved for evidentiary purposes in any potential legal proceeding Experian is hereby placed on notice that future failure to meaningfully respond XXXX be included in a pattern of disregard for federal consumer protection obligations. The burdens on your administrative staff are a natural consequence of systemic failure to provide adequate verification under law. \n\n\n\nIn addition to the above demands, I am requesting Experians full correspondence log for this dispute, including : Emails sent to or from XXXX XXXX XXXX regarding my file Notes entered by agents or automated systems Internal flags or status codes attached to my report Any comments, memos, or interdepartmental communications concerning this tradeline This information is necessary to evaluate whether Experian followed its own dispute-handling protocols, as well as those mandated by federal law and CFPB XXXX. \n\n\n\nI am also requesting a statement of all policies, procedures, and training materials used by Experian personnel to evaluate disputes related to debt buyers such as XXXX XXXX XXXX. I request specific clarification on : XXXX. XXXX Experian requires original creditor documentation to verify a debt XXXX. What constitutes sufficient documentation to validate a disputed item XXXX. Whether any reinvestigation took place beyond a single furnisher confirmation These elements go to the heart of whether Experian maintains reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). \n\n\n\nIn accordance with the burden Experian places on consumers to verify identity when initiating disputes, I now place a symmetrical burden on Experian : please provide legally adequate documentationcomparable in evidentiary weight to a signed affidavitthat proves the accuracy of the XXXX tradeline and the completeness of your reinvestigation process.This demand is rooted in basic fairness and the principle that no consumer reporting agency should expect consumers to bear more evidentiary burden than it imposes upon its own furnishers. I also request Experians definition of the term updated as it appears in my file. This term is overly vague and fails to meet the statutory clarity requirements under 15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ) ( XXXX ). Please define : What does updated mean? \nWhat data fields were affected? \nWhat data values changed? \nWas any deletion or suppression involved? \nDid XXXX affirmatively initiate this update? \n\nIf Experian can not define updated with precision and evidence, then the label itself is misleading and potentially deceptive under FCRA and the Dodd-Frank Act. \n\n\nFurther, please confirm whether Experian has ever received regulatory warnings, consent orders, or enforcement actions from the CFPB or other authorities related to its handling of XXXX XXXX XXXX data. If so, I request that you disclose the nature and outcome of such actions, along with documentation reflecting internal changes made in response.This is relevant because it speaks to whether Experian is operating under any compliance restrictions that may impact how it handles disputes involving debt buyers or third-party furnishers. In the interest of procedural transparency, I request the following additional data elements from your system : Dispute codes used internally ( numeric or alphanumeric ) Response codes returned by the furnisher The timestamp of each data transmission System used for the update ( e.g., e-OSCAR, Experian proprietary ) I also request any machine-readable XML or JSON logs produced by your systems when processing my dispute. If Experian does not retain such logs, please confirm in writing and explain why such logs are not required or stored for audit purposes. \n\n\n\nExperians continued reporting of unverifiable, unsupported data from debt buyers causes material harm. The presence of this tradeline adversely affects my creditworthiness and future access to housing, employment, and credit. In XXXX XXXX XXXX  the court found that CRAs are liable for failing to go beyond automated confirmation when consumers raise detailed, fact-specific disputes. This is analogous to my case. Given this precedent, I assert that Experians decision to update the LVNV tradeline without full documentary verification and without providing me the MOV documentation constitutes a failure of due process and a legal injury. I reiterate that I am not merely requesting deletion on technical grounds, but rather on the basis that no lawful verification has occurred. The standard is not mere presence of a debt buyers data, but actual accuracy and verifiability of the content. Experian can not meet this standard unless it produces : A signed contract bearing my name Original creditor statements validating the amount Documentation of assignment to XXXX A complete accounting of fees, interest, and balances None of this has been provided in prior disputes. Therefore, the burden is on Experian to either produce it now or cease reporting the entry. \n\n\nPlease also confirm whether Experian shares this XXXX tradeline with any affiliates, data aggregators, or scoring model providers ( e.g., FICO, VantageScore ). If so, what limitationsif anydoes Experian impose on how disputed data is shared during the reinvestigation period? I request a detailed accounting of all third-party access to my file since the XXXX XXXX XXXX account appeared, including : Date of access Entity name Permissible purpose Whether data was disputed at the time In closing this section, I again emphasize : the volume, specificity, and legal precision of this request are proportional to the failure of Experian to adequately explain or support its previous actions. If Experian can not or will not provide documentary verification as demanded under FCRA 1681i, then Experian must delete the XXXX tradeline immediately and notify all recipients of my file of this correction. I reserve the right to amend, supplement, or escalate this complaint, and I insist on written confirmation of Experians actions in response to each enumerated demand. \nI now submit an expanded list of documents that Experian must furnish to fulfill its obligations under both the FCRA and general principles of fair consumer reporting. This list includes, but is not limited to : XXXX. All contracts, agreements, or records identifying XXXX XXXX XXXX as a data furnisher XXXX. All legal documents substantiating LVNVs ownership of the alleged debt XXXX. Any indemnification or liability disclaimers between Experian and XXXX XXXX. A breakdown of how balances were calculated XXXX. Evidence of the date and method by which the account was charged off by the original creditor If Experian relies on summary data or generic confirmation templates to verify the account, this constitutes a failure under 15 U.S.C. 1681i. \n\n\nAdditionally, I demand copies of any internal quality control checklists or audit reports that reviewed this particular dispute. If no quality control was performed, I ask Experian to acknowledge this fact in writing. Further, I request confirmation of whether this tradeline has been subject to prior consumer disputes ( from other consumers ), regulatory inquiries, class action suits, or enforcement actions that would suggest a pattern of error or abuse related to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reporting. Experian should confirm whether it applied any suppression flags, fraud indicators, or dispute codes to this file at any point between the original reporting of the tradeline and the most recent update. If so, I demand the dates and reasons for such flags, and documentation of when they were removed or altered. If no suppression codes or dispute indicators were applied, despite my initiating a legally valid dispute, that raises questions about Experians compliance with FCRAs reasonable procedures and dispute-handling obligations. To ensure Experian is acting in good faith and not systematically favoring furnishers over consumers, I request documentation of Experians policies on : Dispute prioritization Reinvestigation timelines Conditions that trigger escalated manual review Definitions of terms like frivolous, duplicate, or verified Please also disclose whether XXXX XXXX XXXX has any preferred vendor, VIP, or priority data transmission relationship with Experian, and if so, how that affects dispute handling or verification. \n\n\nTo ensure transparency and accountability, I ask for a notarized attestation from an Experian compliance officer stating : That all verification procedures were followed That XXXX XXXX XXXX provided documentary evidence That no deletion was warranted under 1681i ( a ) ( XXXX ) That this verification complies with FCRA and CFPB regulations If no such sworn statement can be made, Experian must immediately delete the LVNV tradeline and notify all third parties who received it in the past 24 months. \n\n\nIf Experian fails to respond with full documentation, I will : File this entire complaint with the CFPB Forward a copy to the Pennsylvania Attorney Generals Office Report the issue to the FTC Request congressional oversight for systemic CRA noncompliance Share this burden-based template with other judgment-proof consumers These actions are intended to expose Experians reliance on superficial verification procedures and its disregard for the consumer protections built into federal credit reporting law. \n\n\n\nI further assert that the lack of adequate MOV documentation may constitute a deceptive act or practice under the Dodd-Frank Act and subject Experian to potential CFPB enforcement actions. Your continued reliance on auto-confirmation from debt buyers is not only lazyit is dangerous and legally vulnerable. As outlined in CFPB enforcement guidance, CRAs that repeatedly fail to verify data with original documentation are at risk for enhanced scrutiny and fines. I will do everything in my power to ensure this complaint contributes to that regulatory pressure. Please also acknowledge receipt of this MOV demand in writing. I expect your full responsecomplete with attachments, procedural documentation, and a narrative explanation of Experians verification processwithin 30 days of receipt. Your response must be formatted to match the numbered requests in this document for transparency and auditability. Do not substitute vague answers, verified as accurate boilerplate, or e-OSCAR response codes for substantive evidence. To emphasize again : this complaint is not submitted frivolously or in haste. It is the product of extensive legal research, documentation review, and first-hand experience with Experians evasive responses to legitimate disputes. I am judgment-proof, highly informed, and prepared to escalate. Your legal and regulatory exposure grows every time you ignore MOV obligations or offload dispute handling to automated systems incapable of legal reasoning. \n\n\nThis is the final page of my complaint. Experian has a legal and ethical obligation to correct or delete unverifiable data and to stop hiding behind vague updates that obscure the truth. If you choose not to comply, I will take further actionrepeatedly and persistentlyuntil full deletion is secured. Your obligation under the FCRA is clear : verify with documentation or delete the item. \n\nRespectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-30T18:14:51.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"179XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14975692","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-07-30T18:11:03.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I hereby demand a certified copy of the dispute <em>file</em> and internal notes concerning this tradelines reinvestigation. This includes any e-OSCAR communication sent or received, any documents provided by the furnisher, and any Experian notes <em>regarding</em> the legitimacy, legality, or accuracy of the <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> entry."]},"sort":[6.874825,"14975692"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14973488","_score":6.867372,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This request is made pursuant to my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), specifically 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ), which requires that XXXX  conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of any disputed item on a consumers credit report. I am requesting, in accordance with federal law and pursuant to obligations enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), a full and complete Method of Verification ( MOV ) for the tradeline reported by LVNV Funding LLC under account number XXXX Furthermore, XXXX  is obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) ( iii ) to provide me with the business name and address of the furnisher, the telephone number if reasonably available, and a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information, including the name of the person or entity that verified it. I assert that XXXX  failed to provide a legally adequate response, and I request immediate correction and full compliance with disclosure. In addition, XXXX update notification dated XX/XX/XXXX, indicates changes made to this tradeline following a dispute initiated by me. However, the outcome remains opaque, inadequately explained, and devoid of any MOV documentation. This constitutes a breach of my rights under both the FCRA and the standards outlined in CFPB Supervision and Examination Manual guidelines for CRAs. XXXX  is further required to retain all internal documentation pertaining to this dispute under the FCRAs reasonable procedures requirement. I hereby demand a certified copy of the dispute file and internal notes concerning this tradelines reinvestigation. This includes any e-OSCAR communication sent or received, any documents provided by the furnisher, and any XXXX  notes regarding the legitimacy, legality, or accuracy of the LVNV Funding LLC entry. I also request the names and job titles of all personnel involved in processing, adjudicating, or responding to the dispute, whether automated or human, along with a breakdown of how the decision to update was reached, what specific changes were made, and what information formed the basis of the final outcome. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ), I assert that XXXX failed to notify me in writing of the nature of the information provided by LVNV Funding LLC during the reinvestigation process. The law mandates that if information is disputed, and a reinvestigation occurs, the CRA must inform the consumer of the procedure used, which includes the name, address, and contact number of any furnisher of information. No such detail was provided in this case. Furthermore, I formally object to XXXX  use of automated reinvestigation systems, such as e-OSCAR, without human verification or contextual review. This violates the reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy standard of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), as machine-generated responses are categorically incapable of considering nuanced dispute context, such as identity theft indicators, evidentiary documents, or consumer affirmations. This complaint also emphasizes XXXX systemic failure to maintain robust audit trails of dispute resolution. I demand a full log of the disputes lifecycle, including timestamps for when it was received, processed, transmitted to the furnisher, and when any data was updated. If no such timestamp exists, XXXX  is in violation of data retention best practices outlined in CFPB Examination Procedures for Consumer Reporting. Moreover, I challenge the integrity of XXXX  updated status. What exactly was updated? What data points were changed, corrected, or removed? If the dispute concluded without deletion, what evidence did XXXX  find persuasive in favor of the furnisher? Please itemize the alleged balance, date of delinquency, charge-off details, and date of last activity as they appeared before and after the update. Under the CFPBs Bulletin XXXX, consumer reporting agencies are explicitly warned against superficial reinvestigations that merely confirm the presence of data from a furnisher. The bureau reiterates that furnisher confirmation alone is insufficient when a dispute presents documentary evidence. My dispute contained sufficient detail to demand a deeper review, and yet I received no indication that XXXX  engaged in anything more than a basic ping to the furnisher. I am demanding that XXXX  provide copies of all documents obtained from LVNV Funding LLC in response to this dispute, including validation records, billing statements, account origination data, chain of title documentation, and any signed agreements bearing my name. If no such documentation exists, XXXX  is required under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) to delete the item. Additionally, XXXX  report formatting obfuscates the actual status of the account. Terms such as updated do not convey legal meaning and fail to fulfill XXXX  disclosure obligations under 15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ). I request a plain-language explanation of the current account status, balance, historical updates, and whether the data was ever suppressed, temporarily removed, or flagged for review. Furthermore, I assert that LVNV Funding LLC has no lawful basis to report this debt, as they have not furnished evidence of legal ownership, nor have they shown that the debt was incurred through a signed contract. If XXXX  possesses documentation attesting to the legal chain of custody of the debt ( e.g., bills of sale, assignment documents ), I demand immediate access to such materials. In summary, this multi-part complaint requires the following action : 1. A full Method of Verification disclosure consistent with 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ).\n\n2. Certified copies of all reinvestigation records including internal XXXX communications, e-OSCAR dispute tickets, and vendor interactions. \n3. Names, titles, and roles of XXXX  agents involved in this case. \n4. All documentation obtained from LVNV Funding LLC. \n5. A plain-language breakdown of the post-update data on my file. \n6. Immediate deletion of this tradeline if XXXX  can not supply full evidence of verification as mandated by law.\n\nFailure to comply with this request will be reported directly to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Trade Commission, and any relevant state Attorney General. \n\n\n\nXXXX  reliance on automated dispute handling not only undermines the integrity of the reinvestigation process but also erodes public trust in the accuracy of credit reporting. According to the CFPBs XXXX Annual Report on the Fair Credit Reporting Act, a significant portion of consumer complaints stem from XXXX  unwillingness or failure to provide meaningful responses to dispute inquiries. This case exemplifies that failure. I further assert that XXXX  has not complied with its statutory obligation to notify third parties who received the inaccurate information, per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( d ), once a dispute results in a change or deletion. Please confirm in writing whether any such third-party notifications were made, and if so, to whom and when. The definition of a reasonable reinvestigation under federal law has evolved. The Seventh Circuit in Henson v. CSC Credit Services and the Ninth Circuit in Dennis v. BEH-1 made it clear that mere passive forwarding of information does not meet the FCRAs reinvestigation standard. By failing to investigate the context and merit of my dispute, XXXX  is violating judicial precedent as well as statutory duty. Moreover, I request written assurance that XXXX  has implemented the procedural safeguards outlined in 12 C.F.R. 1022, including quality control standards for automated dispute resolution, training protocols for dispute agents, and periodic review of furnisher reliability. I am also demanding full metadata for the tradeline in question. This includes : Date account first reported by LVNV Funding LLC Date of last update Any suppressions or soft deletions Internal dispute flags or annotations Data-sharing history for this tradeline with third parties These metadata elements form part of the information that a consumer reporting agency is required to provide under 15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ) ( 1 ). \n\n\n\nXXXX  failure to supply a detailed and meaningful MOV places this account in violation of the maximum possible accuracy clause in 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). As such, I demand deletion of the LVNV tradeline until and unless you can provide : Documentary proof of account origination with my signature A complete chain of title, including assignments Full account history and billing cycle documentation Contact logs showing interactions between LVNV and XXXX  regarding my dispute Without such documentation, this entry is unverifiable and legally defective.\n\nI also assert potential violations of state-level consumer protection laws. For example, under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law ( UTPCPL ), a CRAs failure to correct false information after reasonable notice may constitute an unfair or deceptive act. XXXX pattern of generic, opaque dispute outcomes may violate this provision. In accordance with my rights, I intend to forward this complaint to the Pennsylvania Attorney Generals Bureau of Consumer Protection. Please consider this a formal notification of my intention to escalate unless remedial steps are taken within 30 days. Additionally, I am requesting that XXXX  clarify whether the XX/XX/XXXX update to this account included changes to : Balance Account status Payment history Date of last activity Date opened Creditor name For each field, I request both the previous value and the new value. This data is essential to assess whether the update constituted a meaningful correction or simply a cosmetic adjustment with no effect on my creditworthiness.\n\nPlease also explain whether XXXX  attempted to verify the legitimacy of the underlying debt contract with the original creditor before updating the LVNV account. If the debt is alleged to originate with a now-defunct lender, or a creditor who no longer maintains original records, XXXX  is under heightened obligation to scrutinize the data before republishing it. If you are unable to obtain these original records, then the account should be deleted, not updated. The continued reporting of unverifiable, unvalidated information is a direct violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). If XXXX records reflect that the LVNV tradeline was simply confirmed by the furnisher through an automated system, then this is legally insufficient. XXXX  must : 1. Independently verify the claim through documentation 2. Provide a full written MOV with named contacts 3. Suspend reporting during any extended reinvestigation period Failure to do so constitutes willful noncompliance under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and subjects XXXX  to potential statutory and punitive damages.\n\nI now formally reiterate that any continued reporting of the LVNV Funding LLC tradeline, without verifiable documentary support and a complete MOV response, will be treated as willful negligence. I reserve all rights under FCRA 1681n and 1681o to pursue damages, including through private legal action and coordinated enforcement through CFPB. I also request confirmation that this dispute is now being escalated to XXXX  legal and executive dispute review teams for further handling due to the volume and seriousness of the legal claims asserted herein. This communication serves as both : 1. A Method of Verification ( MOV ) request under FCRA 1681i ( a ) 2. A formal complaint for filing with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 3. A record to be preserved for evidentiary purposes in any potential legal proceeding XXXX  is hereby placed on notice that future failure to meaningfully respond may be included in a pattern of disregard for federal consumer protection obligations. The burdens on your administrative staff are a natural consequence of systemic failure to provide adequate verification under law.\n\nIn addition to the above demands, I am requesting XXXX  full correspondence log for this dispute, including : Emails sent to or from LVNV Funding LLC regarding my file Notes entered by agents or automated systems Internal flags or status codes attached to my report Any comments, memos, or interdepartmental communications concerning this tradeline This information is necessary to evaluate whether XXXX  followed its own dispute-handling protocols, as well as those mandated by federal law and CFPB oversight.\n\nI am also requesting a statement of all policies, procedures, and training materials used by XXXX  personnel to evaluate disputes related to debt buyers such as LVNV Funding LLC. I request specific clarification on : 1. Whether XXXX  requires original creditor documentation to verify a debt 2. What constitutes sufficient documentation to validate a disputed item 3. Whether any reinvestigation took place beyond a single furnisher confirmation These elements go to the heart of whether XXXX  maintains reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). \n\n\n\nIn accordance with the burden XXXX  places on consumers to verify identity when initiating disputes, I now place a symmetrical burden on XXXX  : please provide legally adequate documentationcomparable in evidentiary weight to a signed affidavitthat proves the accuracy of the LVNV tradeline and the completeness of your reinvestigation process.This demand is rooted in basic fairness and the principle that no consumer reporting agency should expect consumers to bear more evidentiary burden than it imposes upon its own furnishers. I also request XXXX  definition of the term updated as it appears in my file. This term is overly vague and fails to meet the statutory clarity requirements under 15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ) ( 1 ). Please define : What does updated mean?\n\nWhat data fields were affected?\n\nWhat data values changed?\n\nWas any deletion or suppression involved?\n\nDid LVNV affirmatively initiate this update? \n\nIf XXXX  can not define updated with precision and evidence, then the label itself is misleading and potentially deceptive under FCRA and the Dodd-Frank Act. \n\n\nFurther, please confirm whether XXXX has ever received regulatory warnings, consent orders, or enforcement actions from the CFPB or other authorities related to its handling of LVNV Funding LLC data. If so, I request that you disclose the nature and outcome of such actions, along with documentation reflecting internal changes made in response.This is relevant because it speaks to whether XXXX  is operating under any compliance restrictions that may impact how it handles disputes involving debt buyers or third-party furnishers. In the interest of procedural transparency, I request the following additional data elements from your system : Dispute codes used internally ( numeric or alphanumeric ) Response codes returned by the furnisher The timestamp of each data transmission System used for the update ( e.g., e-OSCAR, XXXX  proprietary ) I also request any machine-readable XXXX  or XXXX  logs produced by your systems when processing my dispute. If XXXX  does not retain such logs, please confirm in writing and explain why such logs are not required or stored for audit purposes. \n\n\n\nXXXX continued reporting of unverifiable, unsupported data from debt buyers causes material harm. The presence of this tradeline adversely affects my creditworthiness and future access to housing, employment, and credit. In Cortez v. TransUnion, the court found that CRAs are liable for failing to go beyond automated confirmation when consumers raise detailed, fact-specific disputes. This is analogous to my case. Given this precedent, I assert that XXXX  decision to update the LVNV tradeline without full documentary verification and without providing me the MOV documentation constitutes a failure of due process and a legal injury. I reiterate that I am not merely requesting deletion on technical grounds, but rather on the basis that no lawful verification has occurred. The standard is not mere presence of a debt buyers data, but actual accuracy and verifiability of the content. XXXX  can not meet this standard unless it produces : A signed contract bearing my name Original creditor statements validating the amount Documentation of assignment to LVNV A complete accounting of fees, interest, and balances None of this has been provided in prior disputes. Therefore, the burden is on XXXX to either produce it now or cease reporting the entry. \n\n\nPlease also confirm whether XXXX  shares this LVNV tradeline with any affiliates, data aggregators, or scoring model providers ( e.g., XXXX, XXXX ). If so, what limitationsif anydoes XXXX  impose on how disputed data is shared during the reinvestigation period? I request a detailed accounting of all third-party access to my file since the LVNV Funding LLC account appeared, including : Date of access Entity name Permissible purpose Whether data was disputed at the time In closing this section, I again emphasize : the volume, specificity, and legal precision of this request are proportional to the failure of XXXX  to adequately explain or support its previous actions. If XXXX  can not or will not provide documentary verification as demanded under FCRA 1681i, then XXXX  must delete the LVNV tradeline immediately and notify all recipients of my file of this correction. I reserve the right to amend, supplement, or escalate this complaint, and I insist on written confirmation of XXXX actions in response to each enumerated demand. \nI now submit an expanded list of documents that XXXX  must furnish to fulfill its obligations under both the FCRA and general principles of fair consumer reporting. This list includes, but is not limited to : XXXX. All contracts, agreements, or records identifying LVNV Funding LLC as a data furnisher XXXX. All legal documents substantiating LVNVs ownership of the alleged debt XXXX. Any indemnification or liability disclaimers between XXXX and LVNV XXXX. A breakdown of how balances were calculated XXXX. Evidence of the date and method by which the account was charged off by the original creditor If XXXX  relies on summary data or generic confirmation templates to verify the account, this constitutes a failure under 15 U.S.C. 1681i.\n\nAdditionally, I demand copies of any internal quality control checklists or audit reports that reviewed this particular dispute. If no quality control was performed, I ask XXXX  to acknowledge this fact in writing. Further, I request confirmation of whether this tradeline has been subject to prior consumer disputes ( from other consumers ), regulatory inquiries, class action suits, or enforcement actions that would suggest a pattern of error or abuse related to LVNV Funding LLC data reporting. XXXX  should confirm whether it applied any suppression flags, fraud indicators, or dispute codes to this file at any point between the original reporting of the tradeline and the most recent update. If so, I demand the dates and reasons for such flags, and documentation of when they were removed or altered. If no suppression codes or dispute indicators were applied, despite my initiating a legally valid dispute, that raises questions about XXXX compliance with FCRAs reasonable procedures and dispute-handling obligations. To ensure XXXX  is acting in good faith and not systematically favoring furnishers over consumers, I request documentation of XXXX policies on : Dispute prioritization Reinvestigation timelines Conditions that trigger escalated manual review Definitions of terms like frivolous, duplicate, or verified Please also disclose whether LVNV Funding LLC has any preferred vendor, XXXX, or priority data transmission relationship with XXXX, and if so, how that affects dispute handling or verification. \n\n\nTo ensure transparency and accountability, I ask for a notarized attestation from an XXXX  compliance officer stating : That all verification procedures were followed That LVNV Funding LLC provided documentary evidence That no deletion was warranted under 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) That this verification complies with FCRA and CFPB regulations If no such sworn statement can be made, XXXX  must immediately delete the LVNV tradeline and notify all third parties who received it in the past 24 months. \n\n\nIf XXXX  fails to respond with full documentation, I will : File this entire complaint with the CFPB Forward a copy to the Pennsylvania Attorney Generals Office Report the issue to the FTC Request congressional oversight for systemic CRA noncompliance Share this burden-based template with other judgment-proof consumers These actions are intended to expose XXXX  reliance on superficial verification procedures and its disregard for the consumer protections built into federal credit reporting law.\n\nI further assert that the lack of adequate MOV documentation may constitute a deceptive act or practice under the Dodd-Frank Act and subject XXXX  to potential CFPB enforcement actions. Your continued reliance on auto-confirmation from debt buyers is not only lazyit is dangerous and legally vulnerable. As outlined in CFPB enforcement guidance, CRAs that repeatedly fail to verify data with original documentation are at risk for enhanced scrutiny and fines. I will do everything in my power to ensure this complaint contributes to that regulatory pressure. Please also acknowledge receipt of this MOV demand in writing. I expect your full responsecomplete with attachments, procedural documentation, and a narrative explanation of XXXX verification processwithin 30 days of receipt. Your response must be formatted to match the numbered requests in this document for transparency and auditability. Do not substitute vague answers, verified as accurate boilerplate, or e-OSCAR response codes for substantive evidence. To emphasize again : this complaint is not submitted frivolously or in haste. It is the product of extensive legal research, documentation review, and first-hand experience with XXXX  evasive responses to legitimate disputes. I am judgment-proof, highly informed, and prepared to escalate. Your legal and regulatory exposure grows every time you ignore MOV obligations or offload dispute handling to automated systems incapable of legal reasoning. \n\n\nThis is the final page of my complaint. XXXX  has a legal and ethical obligation to correct or delete unverifiable data and to stop hiding behind vague updates that obscure the truth. If you choose not to comply, I will take further actionrepeatedly and persistentlyuntil full deletion is secured. Your obligation under the FCRA is clear : verify with documentation or delete the item.\n\nRespectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-30T18:14:52.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"179XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14973488","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","date_received":"2025-07-30T18:14:21.000Z","state":"PA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I will do everything in my power to ensure this <em>complaint</em> contributes to that regulatory pressure. Please also acknowledge receipt of this MOV demand in <em>writing</em>. I expect your full responsecomplete with attachments, procedural documentation, and a <em>narrative</em> explanation of <em>XXXX</em> verification processwithin 30 days of receipt. Your response must be formatted to match the numbered requests in this document for transparency and auditability."]},"sort":[6.867372,"14973488"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5163245","_score":5.689847,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"Summary of ponzi schemes through liquidity mining pools. \nI.Transaction details : 1.On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX of XXXX were stolen-transferred, without my consent or authorisation from my US based Coinbase wallet to another another wallet address : XXXX. \nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX My Coinbase, Coinbase pro Coinbase wallet accounts are American based and connected to a XXXX XXXX.I purchased USDT through XXXX, Coinbase pro exchanges. \nII.Description of actions Leading to this event : I started researching Cryptocurrency Liquidity Mining pools sometimes in XXXX XXXX the middle of XXXX I was by told about USDT/ETH Liquidity Mining pool which I accessed through my Coinbase wallet.The name of the person who told me about the pool was XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX information about her is included in the end of this narrative.She insisted that the best way to join the XXXX Liquidity mining pool was through the Coinbase Wallet. \nInitially I was suspicious and called friends with financial background and their opinion was that if the pool is associated with my Coinbase Wallet it its most likely legitimate.I red the XXXX section available in the Coinbase wallet and also what is required to join the liquidity mining pool and the information was completely identical.I also learned that to participate in the XXXXXXXX XXXX process I do not need to move or pledge funds into the poll, all the funds - USDT will remain in my wallet during the liquidity mining process. \nWhen I was joining the pool I never received any message or warning from Coinbase /Coinbase Wallet , that trough joining the liquidity mining pool I actually give the pool uncontrolled access to the USDT in my wallet.Later on I learned that a lot of other wallets such as XXXX and others warn their customers about this very important detail.Also I was never presented with the pool rules, terms and conditions, but at the time that didnt raise a suspicion. Now I am certain that the pool in question is a fraud. \nI paid the pools joining fee ( around {$100.00} in EETH which I transferred to my wallet from my Coinbase Pro account. Later I purchased more USDT and trough Coinbase pro account which I transferred to my Coinbase wallet. \nInitially I was accessing the pool through my Coinbase wallet using the domain XXXX. Later on the domain was changed to XXXX. I was made aware about the domain change via email. \nStar conversation Stored with zero-access encryption CC Address options XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Inbox XX/XX/XXXX To : XXXX Show details XXXX  message Dear users, XXXX XXXX XXXX revenue is over, now please enter the new mine pool to profit XXXX Approximately 2 week after I Joined the XXXX XXXX I received the following offer : If the amount of the USDT in my Coinbase wallet reaches XXXX XXXX I will get XXXX ETH ( EtH ) reward. \nBecause I did not have money in my XXXX XXXX  account to purchase more USDT and my XXXX bank ( XXXX ) does not support direct wires to cryptocurrency exchanges I contacted the customer service of XXXX through a life chat and was given the option to wire money to their XXXX bank account and they would deposit USDT enemy Coinbase wallet. Please see attached : [ XXXX ] Remittance details XXXX conversation From : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Replied to To : XXXX XXXX Hide details Stored with zero-access encryption Stored with zero-access encryption Date : Friday, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX Inbox Inbox Size : XXXX XXXX  Bank Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Bank Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number : XXXX Beneficiary Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX company phone : XXXX XXXX There is no need to fill in any information about the purpose of remittance. Please take a photo and send the remittance certificate after remittance Stored with zero-access encryption Inbox On XX/XX/XXXX I first wired {$500000.00} following the instructions of the email above and on XX/XX/XXXX approximately 5000 USDT was deposited in my Coinbase wallet. See attachment 5. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Communications with XXXX  life chat and emails available upon request ) I gave the customer service my wallet USDT deposit address. Before I shared the address I confirmed with a friend that this is a safe practice. \nAfter the first wire/deposit went through my confidence in the process increased and wired additional {$210.00} XXXX and again without any issues a total of 210 500.00 USDT were deposited in Coinbase wallet XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. \nSee attached file # XXXX. XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX D Address options XXXX XXXX Sent XX/XX/XXXX The total amount of all four transfers ( XXXX ) above equals the amount of XXXX XXXX transfers of XXXX to my Coinbase wallet came from the same wallet address : XXXX XXXX XXXX After receiving the second wire the mining pool sends a third remittance request. I was surprised to see that this time I was supposed to wire money to a different corporate account in the same XXXX XXXX, and than made me very suspicious.Please see attached : To : D Address options XXXX XXXX Hide details Stored with zero-access encryption Stored with zero-access encryption Date : XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX Inbox Inbox Size : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Bank Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXr : XXXX Account Number : XXXX Beneficiary Name : XXXX XXXX XXXX limited company address XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX company phone : XXXX Dear investor, the account sent to you yesterday is full now because you did not remit it. We will provide you with a new remittance account. Please provide your name, the wallet address transferred from USDT and your remittance voucher after remittance. \n... \nI questioned if this is correct place to wire the money and was reassured that is completely ok to do so. ( Communications available upon request ) This increased my suspicion and I decided not to wire money and do more investigation through friends who are in groups related to cryptocurrency. He contacted people and did some additional investigation and told me there is a high chance for fraud, because he was able to trace funds exiting the liquidity pool wallet and entering different wallets. \nIn the meantime the customer service of the liquidity mining pool sensed sensed my hesitation and started to send me emails pressuring me to send more money which confirmed my fears.Please see attached : From : CC Address options XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX To : Star message D Address options XXXX XXXX Hide details Stored with zero-access encryption Stored with zero-access encryption Date : Friday, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX Inbox Inbox Size : XXXX KB XXXX embedded image Has 1 attachment Have you made the remittance, Sir? Because the international public isolation collection account opened for you is only reserved for investors for 48 hours, if there is no remittance within 48 hours, the remittance channel will be closed, if the remittance has been kept unblocked. \n... \nXXXX KB 1 embedded image Download all XXXX XXXX ( XXXX KB ) First contact with Coinbase customer service : Based on the new information I became very concerned about the security of my wallet and contacted Coinbase Customer Service on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX AM XXXX XXXX XXXX and spoke with XXXX XXXX ( or XXXX ), XXXX XXXX was able to see my wallet activities.I informed her that I have serious concerns regarding my wallet security, because of the high probability that the liquidity mining pool I joined is a fraud, and my wallet could be somehow linked to the poolXXXX XXXX assured me in that the security of my wallet is not compromised because the 2 step verification process is intact and no-one can access my wallet without my permission.I specifically told her that joined the Liquidity pool trough my Coinbase wallet and inquired if the pool was now linked to my wallet and able to access my funds without my permission and again she assured me that this is not possible. I also told her that the pools bank was depositing funds in my wallet which she was also able to confirm.The conversation took 48 min and 21 seconds. Coinbase claims that their customer service calls are recorded and if thats the case the recording can confirm my statements here. \nBecause of XXXX strong reassurance I did not create another wallet and did not transfer all my funds out of my current one which turned out to be a capital mistake. After my phone call with Coinbase I was able to convert mined Ethereum to USDT, but when I tried to transfer it back to my wallet the system did not let me do so. \nFrom close to XXXX mined USDT I was only able to transfer {$100.00} to my wallet which is XXXX USDT. See attached : https : XXXX XXXX. \nI tried to reach the customer service of the liquidity pool but at that point no-one responded. \nIn the afternoon of the XXXX XXXX while I was flying From XXXX XXXX XXXX the following email was sent to me.Please see attached : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX Stored with zero-access encryption Inbox XX/XX/XXXX To : XXXX Show details XXXX  message Dear investor, because you participated in the smart contract activity and completed the wallet fund 780000USDT within seven days and got XXXX ETH XXXXewards, you twice required the system to delay the activity receiving time. After delaying the activity receiving time, you repeatedly incorrectly operated withdrawal requests on the page of XXXX liquidity mining system. The smart contract detects that you do not meet the activity reward criteria, so you now trigger the smart contract pledge activity, which will pledge all USDT in your wallet to XXXX liquidity mining to generate the maximum profit. Now you need to meet the next pledge standard activity reward. The standard fund of the activity should reach 1 million USDT and get 180 ETH awards. The pledge time of the activity is 7 days. Failure to complete the activity within seven days will result in a breach of contract XXXX :... \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXmbedded image Download all c be t h XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX KB ) There are big problems associated with this email : 1.The participation of the event described voluntary, so is any form of pledging of funds, if one does not reach the required amount no there is no reward- ( provided that the pool is legitimate.Now I know a lot more to connive me that it's a fraud ) 2.I was told that as long as the USDT stays in my wallet they do not need to be pledged.The only thing I did was that I converted mined ETH to USDT and tried to transfer it to my wallet which would increase the amount of the USDT ( Tether ) available to the pool, but their system didnt not let me do so. \n2.I never wanted to participate in the event described below- 1million USDT for 180 ETH, prior to this email, I didnt even know that such an event existed. \nIn the afternoon of XX/XX/XXXX someone was able to get into my wallet and transfer all my USDT to different wallet address : XXXX. \nPlease see transaction details in the beginning of this report. \nThe 2 step Verification of the transaction was never activated, which means that whoever did this had opened the back door or was linked to my wallet, something XXXX XXXX assured me was impossible. Up to this day I do not know how this was achieved and hope that your experts can figure this out. My multiple conversations with Coinbase did not bring any explanation at allI.In fact Coinbase is still denying that this can happen.They also claimed that they never knew about existing fraudulent activity trough/or related to their wallet which now I know for a fact is a lie. \nThe IP dress of XXXX is XXXX. \nSecond Contact with Coinbase : As soon as I noticed that the funds were taken out of my wallet in the afternoon of XX/XX/XXXX I called Coinbase at XXXX XXXX XXXX Time and spoke with XXXX who claimed that he could not see any activity in my Coinbase wallet after XX/XX/XXXX which I knew was false because all recent activity in my wallet were confirmed during the phone call with XXXX XXXX at XXXX AM on XXXX the end of the phone call XXXX claimed that he is not a Coinbase wallet specialist and could not help me but refused to address the issue with his superiors despite my rigorous demands. He only opened a regular investigation. The call time was 1hr and 16 minutes ( screenshot available upon request ) I considered the call a complete waist of time and if anything was a delay of the investigation by Coinbase . \nThird contact with Coinbase : Around XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX Time on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and I called Coinbase customer service again.The call was initiated from XXXX XXXX phone from the US and I was conferenced in and we spoke with XXXX XXXX. We refused to get off the phone before she consulted with her superiors and was able to initiate as per her words an escalated investigation. During the phone Call XXXX was able to see the notes from my first call and that I called with security concerns. Unfortunately, their examination was of no help to me.Couple off days later I received the following email : [ Reply ] Case # XXXX - Call for US Coinbase Support from XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX Coinbase Support XXXX to me Hello XXXX, Thanks for reaching out to Coinbase Support. If you did not authorize any outgoing transactions from your Coinbase Wallet, it means that your recovery phrase has been compromised.\n\nBecause your Coinbase Wallet is a user-controlled and non-custodial product, which means that only you have full control/access to your wallet ( including the recovery phrase ), we can not provide any further details about how it was compromised nor can we help recover these funds. \nDue to the irreversible nature of cryptocurrency protocols, transactions can neither be canceled or reversed once confirmed on the blockchain. If you still hold any funds, we recommend that you immediately send them to a secure address. You can create a new Coinbase Wallet and then transfer those funds to your new Wallet. Note that we can not generate a new key for your new Wallet. For more information, please visit the Coinbase Wallet FAQ page : https : //wallet.coinbase.com/faq/ If you have not already done so, its very important that you report this incident to law enforcement agencies in your jurisdiction as well as the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center ( IC3 ) : https : //www.ic3.gov/complaint/default.aspx/ Coinbase is willing to offer full cooperation with all law enforcement investigations pertaining to your account 's compromise. Please dont hesitate to reach out. \nKind regards, Coinbase Support Sun, XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX PM ( 9 days ago ) Forth contact with Coinbase : On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX I called Coinbase at XXXX Eastern XXXX Time again and Spoke with XXXXAgain during the call I received Zero assistance, but well structured statements claiming Coinbase innocence.The call took 43 minutes and 45 seconds ( screenshot available upon request ). \nAfter the USDT was transferred to another wallet I could no longer log in through my Coinbase wallet in the liquidity mining pool with XXXX. Later on the connection was reestablished.I guess this was done on purpose to create confusion and give them time to transfer my funds to many different wallets as the XXXX later showed ( my interpretation ) I am sure that your review of the XXXX will provide a lot more accurate information. \nContacts with other companies dealing with XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX I approach a company called XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX company dealing with cryptocurrency scams.Mr XXXX XXXX informed that there many cases very similar to mine involving Coinbase wallet, and that Coinbase is not doing anything to help their customers and avoids responsibility in 100 % of the cases.XXXX XXXX  send me email regarding his company credentials.Bellow is XXXX XXXX Contact info : Contact us : XXXX XXXX XXXX Email : XXXX Toll Free : XXXX Office : XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX IL EXT - XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX- XXXX XXXX also told me that to initiate the process I have to make Initial payment of {$30.00} XXXX, and sign the contract with them to pay them 10 % of the collected amount if they are successful.He also said that, the fact that I went through XXXX XXXX XXXX account increases my chances for collection.My research about the company so far is not encouraging and I have not engaged them as I write this summary. \nXXXX also joined a social group with the following domain : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX? XXXX & XXXX & XXXX In the group I saw many stories similar to mine involving USDT/ETH scams associated with the Coinbase wallet. \nIn summary : my contacts with Coinbase Customer Service have brought me nothing but delay of my future actions. \nSince the XX/XX/XXXX I have been in touch with the customer service of the CB-ETH liquidity mining pool.They relentlessly attempted to make me send additional {$510.00} XXXX to complete the smart contact and get the pledged funds back to my wallet plus 180 ETH ( electronic copies available upon request ). \nMy request to exit the pool and get my pledged funds back are denied.Initially the funds are supposed to be pledged for 3-6 months or until the mined amount of ETH reaches 180.Shortly after I received a message informing me that the funds will be pledged for 365 days.My question weather the smart contact will automatically be terminated after 365 days remained unanswered.Please see attached : [ 2 ] CB-ETH responded to your XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Address options LiveChat Notification XXXX XXXX Forwarded Stored with zero-access encryption Inbox XX/XX/XXXX To : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX message This message contains remote content. \nLoad CB-ETH responded to your message! \nSir, there is one more day until you complete the pledge activity, and if you do not complete the activity by tomorrow then your financial reward will be released 365 days longer Thu, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX CB-ET H Send a message to CB-ETH by replying to this email or Go to chat I have numerous documents of emails and seen shots of life chats with the liquidity mining pool XXXX confirming my statements.These are available upon request. \nInformation about XXXX XXXX XXXX Information about XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  The link to her XXXX page is : XXXX? XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX ) I am very certain that she is the initiator or part of the scam for the following reasons : 1.Her comments/answers are similar to the Life chat of XXXX. So is the writing style.She claims that she consults with her wall street friends, and they have invested millions of dollars in XXXX. She insisted that the only and most secure wallet to join the liquidity mining pool is Coinbase. \n2. Before XXXX and especially after the funds got pledged she has been relentlessly trying to convince me to deposit more money in the Liquidity mining pool through messages, phone calls, pictures and video content ( identical to the notices received form the life chat of the liquidity pool ) .That didnt stop even after I asked her not to do so.Her messages continue as I am writing this report. \n3.She send me pictures with screen shots of her wallet and mined ETH, also recent photos showing her USDT also been pledged and released after she completed the smart contract ( available upon a request ) XXXX XX/XX/XXXX I was convinced that she is part of the scam 5.She claims to reside in New York  ( XXXX XXXX area XXXX XXXX \n6.She claims that she is flying back to XXXX from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXShe did not send a copy of her airplane ticket.She describes similar plans on XXXX. Recently she told me that she will stay in New York and wait for me and help me to complete the event and put 200 000 USDT in my Coinbase wallet if I send another 310 000, USDT to my Coinbase wallet Extensive record of all XXXX  conversations with exception of the phone calls is available upon request. \nSummary of approximate loses : 1.Stolen USDT= {$490000.00} ( XXXX USDT ) XXXX fees ( ETH network transactions Fees ) Approximately {$560.00} XXXXWire transfer fees XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX approximately $ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nPS : Extensive amounts of electronic copies of emails, screenshots and others, not included here are available upon request. \n\nIII.This what I have done so far to recover my funds : 1.On XX/XX/XXXX a second complimentary report was filed with the FBI on https : //www.ic3.gov/.\n\n2.First report with FBI was filed through the same Link as above on XX/XX/XXXX. ( Copies of the reports available upon request ) XXXX. I have spoken to Coinbase customer service on XXXX occasions as follows : XXXX ). XX/XX/XXXX XXXX at XXXX AM XXXX XXXX time ( EET ) .Call duration 48min and 21sec. \nXXXX ) XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX PM XXXX, call duration 1hr and 36 sec. \nXXXX ) XX/XX/XXXX at around XXXX PM. \nXXXX ) XX/XX/XXXX at XXXXXXXX XXXX  call duration 43min and 45 sec. \nSo far Coin base customer service has done nothing to help me or provide an explanation. ( Proof of phone calls available upon request ) XXXX. I contacted XXXX XXXX ; XX/XX/XXXX. \nEmail communications available upon request.I chose not to retain them because of poor customer reviews. \nXXXX joined a social group with the following domain XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX And learn more about USTD/ETH base liquidity mining pool scams and the role of Coinbase in those scams. \nXXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX first report was filed with Investor Protection Bureau Complaint Form, New York State Office of Attorney General Submitted on Thursday, XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX Submission ID XXXX. \n\nXXXX. Second report with Investor Protection Bureau Complaint Form, New York State Office of Attorney General was filed on XX/XX/XXXX, please see attached : This is a complementary information to the first complaint submitted to you on Thursday, XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX Submission ID XXXX : XXXX Tether is capable of tracing and reversing USDT-Tethers related digital currency transaction even when USDT-Tethers are used to further purchase Ethereum  and other crypto currenciesXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, the same narrative as in Submission ID XXXX was sent to Tether customer support - XXXX, with the request to reverse the fraudulent transactions and recover my stolen USDT-Tethers . \nThese are the Tether customer service responses : XXXX. Automatic response and Support Ticket Opened [ # XXXX ] Tether XXXX XXXX Forwarded Stored with zero-access encryption Inbox XX/XX/XXXX To : dr.davidev Show details This message is automatically generated as a response to a previous message. \nLearn more Thank you for contacting Tether This is an automatic email just to let you know we've received your support inquiry. A request for support has been created and assigned ticket number : # XXXX. \n2. First actual response for Tether Cutover Service [ XXXX ] Re : Stollen funds Tether USDT Form my Coin base wallet [ # XXXX ] Tether Support XXXX Stored with zero-access encryption Inbox XX/XX/XXXX To : XXXX Show details Hello XXXX Thank you for contacting Tether support. \nWe are sorry to hear this. \nWe would kindly like to remind you that we are not involved. \nWe highly suggest you file a police report with your local police immediately or the cybercrime department in your area and if needed have them contact us directly at XXXX and communicate with our legal team there. \nThank you for understanding 3.Third Email form Tether : Tether Support XXXX Replied to XXXX XXXX Hide details Stored with zero-access encryption Stored with zero-access encryption Date : Monday, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX Inbox Inbox Size : XXXX KB Hello XXXX  Thank you for contacting Support. Should we not receive any further updates in the next 24 hours, your ticket XXXX. XXXX, \" Stolen funds Tether USDT Form my Coin base wallet '' will be closed. \nWe hope this response has sufficiently answered your questions. If not, please do not send another email. Instead, reply to this email. \nXXXX XX/XX/XXXX, I emailed Tether customer support please see attached : From : XXXX XXXX Tether Support XXXX XXXX XXXX Hide details Stored with zero-access encryption Stored with zero-access encryption Date : Monday, XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX Complaint was filed wit the following institutions : 1.Investor Protection Bureau Complaint Form Submitted on Thursday, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ID XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. \nThe Attorney General offices in California and Massachusetts also made aware. \nPlease await to be contacted bo one or more of their institutions and do not close the case. On the another note : can you reverse transactions if if Tether USDT is used to buy Etherium. \nSent with XXXX Secure Email. \nXXXX. All correspondence with Tether customer service was shared with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and General Counsel ( XXXX ) XXXX ( desk ) ( XXXX ) XXXX ( mobile ) I have no retained XXXX yet but during preliminary discussions I learned that XXXX has discussed the case with the DOJs in Massachusetts and California. \nIt is obvious that Tether customer support is capable of reversing the fraudulent transactions but it will not get involved until asked to do so by law enforcement agency.In the mean time the fraudulent liquidity mining pool continues to function and more people are getting hurt every day. \nPlease advice if someone can further assist me with this and stop the ongoing fraud. Original copies of the email included here together with other information available upon request. \n8.I am actively looked for a legal support and contacted XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX 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 \nXXXX XXXX Confirm that that Coinbase is well aware of the ongoing fraud and trying to avoid class action law suits. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX, complaint was filed with Tether customer support with request to reverse the transactions ( very similar to this report, copy viable upon request ). Most of the communications with Tether customer support are included above under paragraph 7. This is the last email I received form Tether customer support : Stored with zero-access encryption TS Address options Tether Support XXXX Inbox XX/XX/XXXX To : dr.davidev Show details XXXX  message Dear XXXX Your Ticket No. XXXX, \" Stollen funds Tether USDT Form my Coin base wallet '' has already been closed. This means that you will need to open up a new ticket in order to receive a reply. \nKind regards, Tether.to Support Team XXXX KB XXXX statement can be supported by the following individuals : XXXX XXXX Email : XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX, Email : XXXX XXXX am considered XXXX resident for tax purpose until the end of XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-01-31T19:04:09.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"Virtual currency","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5163245","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Coinbase, Inc.","date_received":"2022-01-29T09:28:04.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, I emailed Tether customer support please see attached : From : <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> Tether Support <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> Hide details Stored with zero-access encryption Stored with zero-access encryption Date : Monday, XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> at <em>XXXX</em> <em>Complaint</em> was <em>filed</em> wit the following institutions : 1.Investor Protection Bureau <em>Complaint</em> Form Submitted on Thursday, XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> ID <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> on XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> and XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[5.689847,"5163245"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14768395","_score":3.7618096,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"b\"XXXX XXXX \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n Date: XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXXn XXXX XXXX\\n SSN: XXXX\\n DOB: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n\\n EXPERIAN \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX \\nXXXX, XXXX XXXX\\n\\n Please disassociate any and all purported personal identifier information attributed to my consumer credit report related to your organization that is not exactly aligned with the\\n incontestable personal identifying information I have indicated within this consumer complaint notification. This includes ANY and ALL names, addresses, date(s) of birth,\\n social security numbers, employer(s), occupation(s), phone number(s), email address(es), associated borrowers, and or elsewise supposed information contrasting in ANY\\n manner that of which is fully and precisely same as is included by me herein!\\n My 18-digit Personal Tracking Number is: \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n Subject: Please investigate completely and thoroughly each and every aspect of any item I have contested your supposed reporting privilege(s) to and have here within\\n challenged any and all involved parties of any derogatoriness accused against me to demonstrate incontestable evidence of the applicably certifiable compliant reporting\\n practices, procedures, and processed of which must be of a maximum possible fairness, reasonableness, truth, accuracy, completeness, timeliness, proven cogency and\\n relevance, and verifiability and is without data integrity injuring report deviations that are infractions of mandates, mentioned here or not!\\n To the Appropriate Authority:\\n I am writing to contest information appearing on my consumer credit report that appears to violate multiple provisions of federal consumer protection laws. This dispute\\n requires your immediate attention and thorough investigation. Your response must address all aspects of this challenge to ensure full compliance with the FCRA.\\n The duty of care owed by data furnishers involves not only accuracy but also a commitment to continual review and correction of consumer data. Can you prove full\\n compliance with all strict regulatory mandates, justifying that you have lawfully obtained, retained, or reinstated the privilege to issue derogatory reports against me?\\n The unjustifiably upheld negative charge(s) purported below must be addressed as extensively audited, validated beyond doubt, and determined to be aligned with statutory\\n obligations as formally stated by the furnishing entity upon first disclosure upholding defamatory accounts involving me , so please eradicate from reporting the misclassified\\n disclosures\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   comprising   Base/XXXX XXXXAccount Number (PCAN) as shown by  TransUnion \\n(T)  conveyed to be  XXXX\\n The unsupported adverse notation(s) Listed beneath are deemed essential to be lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably conforming to\\n required standards as initially reported by the responsible data contributor attaching harmful insinuations to me , so retract from consumer files the improperly categorized\\n XXXX   associating   XXXX XXXXAccount Number (PCAN) as affirmed by  TransUnion \\n(T),EXperian and E\\n Quifax  presented to be  XXXX\\n The questionable denunciation(s) herein asserted are obligated for completion as analyzed, verified through independent assessment, deemed legally sound, and upheld as\\n conforming to reporting regulations as submitted in its unchanged form referencing disadvantageous assumptions against me so block from reporting the unverified assertions\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   attaching   XXXX XXXX Primary Consumer Account Number (*PCAN) precisely as reported by  TransUnion \\n(T),EXperian and E\\n Quifax  proposed to be  XXXX\\n The inaccurately framed condemning assessment(s) Depicted underneath must be resolved as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise\\n demonstrated certifiably compliant as entered at the time of submission by the reporting entity spotlighting accusatory content related to me so halt its inclusion in reports the\\n underneath-referenced\\n XXXX XXXX    revealing   Consumer Account Number as processed by  TransUnion \\n(T),EXperian and E\\n Quifax  determined to be  XXXX\\n The still-challenged accusatory classification(s) asserted herein must be executed as exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict\\n adherence to legal reporting provisions as preserved in its initial entry spotlighting accusatory content related to me , so wipe from accessible reports the now-documented\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   narrating   hard inquiry date (DOI) as filed by  EXperian  designated to be  XXXX\\n The unsound unfavorable categorization(s) displayed herein are obligated to be comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with established\\n guidelines as kept in its original reporting status emphasizing unfavorable assessments of me , so revoke its appearance in public records the below-indicated\\n XXXX XXXX   manifesting   date of inquiry as relayed by  EXperian  recorded to be  XXXX\\n The unconvincing accusatory comment(s) Clarified below are mandated to be comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with established\\n guidelines as maintained as first stated by the data provider broadcasting unsupportive assessments of me so extract from all repositories the unjustifiably stated\\n XXXX XXXX   consisting of   inquiry date as communicated by  EXperian  maintained to be  XXXX\\n The doubtful unfavorable classification(s) Set forth underneath require implementation as properly reviewed, reinforced through supplementary verification, and assured as\\n meeting the highest data integrity principles as verified from the initial source documentation revisiting discrediting circumstances affecting me so eliminate from credit filing the\\n distorted statements\\n XXXX XXXX   that has   Inquiry Date (DOI) as referenced by  TransUnion \\n(T)  denoted to be XXXX\\n The misinterpreted unfavorable charge(s) Further detailed beneath need to be considered critically evaluated, systematically reconfirmed, and affirmed as meeting rigorous\\n compliance standards as attested in its first official report projecting negative portrayals of me so retract from all listed entries the improperly documented\\n XXXX XXXX   enlisting   HARD Inquiry Date (DOI) as illustrated by  TransUnion \\n(T)  defined to be  XXXX\\n The lacking-verification injurious claim(s) Stated further down are critical to be rigorously inspected, accuracy substantiated, and reported with full adherence to governing\\n mandates as officially transmitted in its first iteration publicizing unfavorable opinions concerning me , so block the now-displayed\\n XXXX XXXX   amplifying   date of hard inquiry as noted by  TransUnion \\n(T)  indicated to be  XXXX\\n The unverified derogatory assertion(s) herein purported must be performed as Reinvestigated or investigated, validly proven verifiable, and demonstrative of certifiably\\n compliant reporting adequacy(ies) as detailed in the original submission maintaining harmful implications against me , so nullify its presence in reporting systems the\\n unfounded portrayals\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   integrating   HARD Inquiry Date as delivered by  TransUnion \\n(T)  asserted to be  XXXX\\n The lacking-authentication defamatory declaration(s) described below must be fulfilled as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstrated\\n certifiably compliant as originally issued by the reporting party generating pessimistic conclusions about me so suppress the disclosure of the flawed narratives\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   signifying   Date of HARD Inquiry (DOI) as described by  EXperian  to be  XXXX\\n The debated yet reported harmful remark(s) Located below demand evaluation as lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably conforming to\\n required standards as extracted exactly from the first documented entry reinforcing detrimental judgments about me so remove from reporting the unduly emphasized\\n XXXX   with   date of inquiry (DOI) as conveyed by  EQuifax  described to be  XXXX\\n The unproven disparaging commentary Positioned beneath are in accordance to be analyzed, verified through independent assessment, deemed legally sound, and upheld as\\n conforming to reporting regulations by the condemning data furnisher at time purported exactly as reported circulating disparaging perspectives regarding me , so delete the\\n next-detailed\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   articulating   Date of Inquiry (DOI) precisely as reported by  EXperian  referenced to be  XXXX\\n Page 1 of \\nThe suspect adverse depiction(s) Delimited below are imperative to be thoroughly examined, reassessed, conclusively validated, and unmistakably established as compliant\\n as filed at the moment of declaration by the alleging party portraying me in a critical light so expunge from documented records the defectively described\\n XXXX    unfolding   Date of HARD Inquiry as included by  EQuifax  marked to be  XXXX\\n The baseless negative accusation(s)\\n As Documented Below\\n are expected to undergo extensively audited, validated beyond doubt, and determined to be aligned with statutory obligations as shown in compliance with the initial filing\\n standards forwarding negative allegations about me , so expunge from report history the described herein\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   listing   Date of Inquiry as acknowledged by  EXperian  outlined to be  XXXX\\n The weakly founded critical accusation(s) As captured below are deemed essential to be verified, subjected to enhanced scrutiny, and justified through independent\\n confirmation procedures as attested in its first official report attributing unfavorable qualities to me so cease the distribution of the inaccurately referenced\\n XXXX    encapsulating   inquiry date (DOI) as declared by  TransUnion \\n(T)  To Be  XXXX\\n The refutable detrimental charge(s) Following this statement are required to be exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict adherence\\n to legal reporting provisions as referenced in its primary filing replicating defaming suppositions against me , so cease the reporting of the falsely implied\\n XXXX XXXX  giving   HARD Inquiry Date (DOI) as forwarded by  TransUnion \\n(T)  formulated to be  XXXX\\n The unresolved harmful report(s) purported herein are intended to be revalidated under scrutiny, found unerring in its correctness, and maintained within lawful reporting\\n frameworks as submitted in its unchanged form underscoring demeaning representations of me so delete the compromised entries\\n XXXX XXXX    describing   hard inquiry date (DOI) as shared by  TransUnion \\n(T)  declared to be  XXXX\\n The undetermined damaging declaration(s) Presented further down are essential to be subjected to extensive review, revalidation, authenticated as accurate, and shown to\\n meet all compliance criteria as presented in its primary submission by the originating reporter sustaining adverse opinions related to me so delete from reporting the\\n miscommunicated details\\n XXXX    exhibiting   Inquiry Date (DOI) as portrayed by  EQuifax  projected to be  XXXX\\n The still-contested defaming statement(s) Specified further down should be handled as assessed for factual legitimacy, methodically authenticated, and upheld as verifiably\\n accurate as provided in its first official record demonstrating unfavorable biases toward me , so delete from reporting the presently outlined\\n XXXX XXXX   incorporating   HARD Inquiry Date as expressed by  TransUnion \\n(T)  expressed to be  XXXX\\n The insufficiently evidenced harmful indictment(s) herein indicated must be performed as extensively audited, validated beyond doubt, and determined to be aligned with\\n statutory obligations as originally documented by its author describing unfavorable insinuations directed at me so block the reporting of the incorrectly logged\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   possessing   Date of HARD Inquiry as specified by  EXperian  proposed to be  XXXX\\n The potentially inaccurate condemning entry(s) below asserted are obligated for completion as lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably\\n conforming to required standards as entered at the time of submission by the reporting entity exposing purported deficiencies associated with me so block the immediately\\n listed\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX I   featuring   date of hard inquiry as detailed by  EXperian  conveyed to be  XXXX\\n The alleged but unverified critical statement(s) Highlighted downwards must be fulfilled as analyzed, verified through independent assessment, deemed legally sound, and\\n upheld as conforming to reporting regulations by the condemning data furnisher at time purported exactly as reported embedding misleading impressions about me so please\\n eradicate from reporting the mistakenly communicated\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   including   Inquiry Date as reported by  TransUnion \\n(T)  asserted to be  XXXX\\n The indefensibly alleged injurious portrayal(s) Laid out beneath must be complied with as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstrated\\n certifiably compliant as incorporated in its unaltered credit profile recounting unfavorable incidents linked to me , so extract from displayed credit details the misguided\\n descriptions\\n ONEMAIN   incorporating   Date of Inquiry (DOI) as represented by  E\\n Quifax  maintained to be  XXXX\\n The wrongly suggested harmful commentary asserted below must receive attention as exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict\\n adherence to legal reporting provisions as stated upon initial documentation conveying defamatory perspectives about me , so block from reporting the undermentioned\\n XXXX    accentuating   date of hard inquiry (DOI) as verified by  E\\n Quifax  denoted to be XXXX\\n The unverifiable adverse pronouncement(s) Displayed further down are critical to be comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with\\n established guidelines as compiled by the reporting entity without alterations formalizing derogatory notions concerning me so revoke its documentation entirely the successive\\n data\\n XXXX    producing   date of inquiry (DOI) as disclosed by  EQuifax  indicated to be  XXXX\\n The under-supported defamatory representation(s) indicated below must be executed as comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with\\n established guidelines as displayed in the original credit reporting record reinforcing disapproving labels directed at me , so block the soon-mentioned\\n XXXX    rendering   date of inquiry exactly as reported by  TransUnion \\n(T)  expressed to be  XXXX\\n The unjustifiably upheld negative charge(s) below reported are in accordance to be properly reviewed, reinforced through supplementary verification, and assured as meeting\\n the highest data integrity principles as disclosed by the reporting entity in its unaltered wording highlighting unfavorable details regarding me so remove from reporting the\\n inconsistently stated\\n XXXX    amplifying   inquiry date as presented by  TransUnion \\n(T)  proposed to be  XXXX\\n The lacking-substantiation harmful portrayal(s) Summarized beneath require implementation as critically evaluated, systematically reconfirmed, and affirmed as meeting\\n rigorous compliance standards as affirmed in its first transmission by the data furnisher developing injurious descriptions concerning me so block the reporting of the fabricated\\n entries\\n XXXX    structured with   Date of HARD Inquiry (DOI) as provided by  TransUnion \\n(T)  referenced to be  XXXX\\n The indefensible negative assertion(s) As itemized below should be processed as rigorously inspected, accuracy substantiated, and reported with full adherence to governing\\n mandates as reflected in the initial report exactly as declared suggesting negativity versus me so block the falsely attributed\\n XXXX XXXX    plus   hard inquiry date as documented by  TransUnion \\n(T)  defined to be  XXXX\\n The inaccurately framed condemning assessment(s) Discussed further down are subject to be Reinvestigated or investigated, validly proven verifiable, and demonstrative of\\n certifiably compliant reporting adequacy(ies) as extracted exactly from the first documented entry featuring pejorative classifications of me , so delete the further-listed\\n XXXX XXXX   describing   hard inquiry date (DOI) as characterized by  TransUnion \\n(T)  outlined to be  XXXX\\n The not-confirmed negative labeling(s) Labeled beneath demand attention as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstrated certifiably\\n compliant as kept in its original reporting status asserting damaging conclusions against me , so nullify its presence in reporting systems the forthcoming\\n XXXX XXXX   supplying   date of inquiry as asserted by  TransUnion \\n(T)  presented to be XXXX\\n The FCRA, Metro 2 standards, and applicable state and federal statutes mandate the absolute accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and verifiability of all reported credit data.\\n This requires precise reporting of all essential data, the absence of duplicate or conflicting entries across bureaus, and the prompt correction or removal of any inaccurate,\\n unverifiable, or legally obsolete information. Failure to meet these legal and industry obligations carries significant consequences. The following section provides specific\\n Page 2 of 9\\nevidence of each disputed item's deficiencies, clearly outlining data errors and including supporting documentation that demonstrates their direct and negative impact on my\\n creditworthiness and legal rights, necessitating immediate and comprehensive correction.\\n The Symbol Keys used in this Letters images \\nare \\nas follows :\\n rT = \\nTransunion             rX = \\nExperian             rQ = \\n1\\n 2\\n Equifax\\n rNT = Non-TEE CRA(s)\\n D = Data Furnishing Reporter #1 (or Creditor listed in a PRE = Public Records Event )\\n D = Data Furnishing Reporter #2 (The Original Creditor if a Coff, a Coll, and or a Coff /Coll)\\n  = Likely RROR(s) are detected related to this Data Field Point\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Factual Actual Undeniably Disputable RROR(s) (FAUD)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Discrepancy RROR(s) of Non-Compliant Inconsistency(ies) (DNCI)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Metro 2 Code Exactness RROR(s) (M2CE)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Metro 2 Code Description exactness RROR(s) (M2CD)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Pretermitted RROR(s) by possible Willful Omission (PWO)\\n PRE = Public Records Event\\n PII = Personal Identifier Information\\n COFF = Charge-off(s)\\n COLL = Collection(s)\\n COFF/COLL = Charge-off(s)/Collection(s)\\n DrgL = Derogatory Lates\\n DlqL = Delinquency Late(s)\\n INQ = Inquiry(ies)\\n UON = Unknown or Other Negativity\\n CCI = Creditor Contact Information\\n As previously indicated within this written consumer complaint the following items of misinformation must be removed from reporting, modified to an appropriate reporting\\n status, proven applicably true correct complete timely fair and reasonable as asserted when asserted by whom asserts it, else potential unlawful reporting violations injurious\\n to me likely exist.\\n DELETE Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  that presents a skewed picture  Account Current Balance:  as being  --  on my   T\\n reported,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  the Base/21  Accounts Current Balance (ACBal)s value is\\n In addition  Consumer Account Number:  is non-compliantly  inexplicably inaccurately assumed  as being  XXXX   upon my   T\\n credit report.    \\nAs dis\\nAs misleadingly disreported,  the allegation\\n stands in nonconformity of reporting competence because  the BASE/7 Primary Consumer Account Number (PCAN) appears deficient: (a) its purported value lacks\\n uniqueness, (b) includes my SSN in part or full, (c) falls outside the 5-32 alphanumeric character range allowed reported, (d) fails to use exactly four (4) redacted and or\\n truncated characters, and/or (e) is inconsistently reported across agencies. Such deviations from the CDIAs CRRG-outlined Metro 2 Standards jeopardize data integrity and\\n fail to meet federal mandates for fair, reasonable, accurate, complete, timely, truthful, valid, and verifiable reporting by furnishers (creditors, collectors, debt buyers, etc.) and\\n CRAs ( TransUnion, Experian, Equifax, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  etc. as applies). THEREFORE, I DEMAND its\\n IMMEDIATE and COMPLETE DELETION ;\\n Plus  Portfolio Type Code:  is lacking compliance   deceitfully asserted  to being   --  in my   T\\n As dis-stated,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting\\n competence since  the BSCF-8 Portfolio Type Codes value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value\\n as should be per 2023  CRRG mandates.;\\n In addition  Account Type Code:  is non-compliantly  inaccurately reported  to be  --  on my   T\\n As stated,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  the\\n Portfolio Type Codes value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value as should be per 2023 CRRG\\n mandates.;\\n Additionally  Account Terms Duration:  is without compliance  UNSTATED  as  --   within my   T\\n As mis-stated,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting\\n competence because  it is neither certified for Metro 2 compliance nor adequacy under the FCRA regulations.-T\\n COFF\\n TransUnion\\n *Data Reporter Name \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX\\n *Portfolio Type Code:--\\n *Account Current Balance:--\\n Experian--\\n Equifax------\\n *Account Terms Duration:-- --------\\n Delete right now  XXXX XXXX  that misleads  High Credit/ Original Loan Amount:  with being  $XXXX   upon my   Transunion\\n   within my   Experian\\n credit report,  and as well as  to being  $XXXX   to inside my   Equifax\\n credit report,  to be  --\\n credit report too.  As mal-accused,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of\\n reporting competence since  the Base/12 High Credit Original Loan Amount (HCOLA)s value is-TXQ\\n COFF\\n Page 3 of 9\\n DLQL -TXQ   \\n DLQL -TXQ   \\nTransUnion Experian Equifax\\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX\\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Portfolio Type Code: Credit Card Credit Card Credit Card\\n *High Credit/ Original Loan Amount: $XXXX-- $XXXX\\n Account Rating: Paid Paid Derogatory\\n *ECOA Code: Paid Paid Derogatory\\n Delete Right NOW  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   that reports incorrectly  Account Current Balance:  as being  --  on my   Transunion   credit report,  with\\n being  --  upon my   Experian   credit report,  and as well as  to be  --  within my   Equifax   credit report too.  As dis-purported,  the claim is in deviation of reporting\\n adequacy(ies) because  the Base/21 Accounts Current Balance (ACBal)s value is\\n In addition  Consumer Account Number:  is non-compliantly  wrongly purported  as being  XXXX  inside my   Transunion       erroneously alleged  to being\\n  XXXX  upon my   Experian         XXXX  in my   Equifax     As misleadingly misreported,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting competence\\n because  the Primary Consumer Account Numbers purported value is NOT EACH of being (i) with UNIQUENESS, (ii) NON-INCLUSIVE of SSN values, (iii) with AT LEAST 5\\n but NO MORE than 32 alphanumeric characters, (iv) of EXACTLY four (4) Redacted and or Truncated characters, (v) consistently reported across all reporting agencies, and\\n or (vi) is elsewise unproven to not be in deviation from that of required reporting adequacy(ies) per the CDIAs own authored and self-governed CRRG-outlined and defined\\n Metro 2 Standards for certifiably Compliant reporting ( of which ANY DEVIATION from these standards jeopardizes the INTEGRITY of the data ) that satisfies the federal\\n mandates for FAIR & REASONABLE reporting practices, procedures and processes that best assures any and all claims are in fact of a maximum possible accuracy,\\n completeness, timeliness, truthfulness, validity and verifiability, hence my DEMAND to delete HERE and NOW! ;\\n Plus  Portfolio Type Code:  is lacking compliance   inaccurately reported  to be  Flexible spending credit card  on my   Transunion       INACCURATELY\\n reported  as  Credit Card  within my   Experian         Flexible spending credit card  inside my   Equifax     As alleged,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of\\n reporting competence since  the BSCF-8 Portfolio Type Codes value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or\\n Revolving value as should be per 2023 CRRG mandates.;\\n In addition  Account Type Code:  is non-compliantly  misreported  as being  Flexible spending credit card  upon my   Transunion       misrepresenting of facts  to being   Credit\\n Card  in my   Experian         Flexible spending credit card  on my   Equifax     As dis-accused,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  the Base/8\\n Portfolio Type Code (PTC)s value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value as should be per 2023\\n CRRG mandates.;\\n TransUnion Experian Equifax\\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXXn *Date of Account Information: XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Portfolio Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *Account Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *Account Current Balance:------\\n Date of Account Current Balance: XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n Delete Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX   that is flawed in its reporting  Date Last Verified(DLV):  to being  XXXX  to inside my   Transunion   credit report,  as\\n being  --  on my   Experian   credit report,  and as well as  with being  --  upon my   Equifax   credit report too.  As mis-reported,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of\\n reporting competence because  \\nthe Date Last Verified (DLV) is not EACH of being (i) displayed as MMDDYYYY or MM/DD/YYYY or MM-DD-YYYY such that the 8 numeral characters are in fact properly and\\n accurately representive of a Metro 2 compliant format , (ii) displayed exactly same as that of the mandatorily always reported Header/8 Last Updated Activity Date (LUAD)\\n value, (iii) is NOT precisely aligned with latest purported DOACBal (aka Date of Base/21 Account Current Balance) value (if any) , (iv) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest\\n reported DOASC (aka Date of Account Status Code) , (v) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest reported DOPRC (aka Date of Payment Rating Code) , (vi) is NOT exactly\\n aligned with the latest verified reporting of the OCOA (aka Base/23 Original Charge-off Amount) , (vii) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest reported DOAI (aka Date of\\n Account Information) , and/or (viii) elsewise is NOT displayed in full compliance with mandated maximum appropriateness!\\n Additionally  Creditor Type:  is without compliance    to be  Bank Credit Cards  within my   Transunion         as  Bank Credit Cards     Experian         All Banks      Equifax\\n    As mal-stated,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting competence since  it can not be verified as Metro 2 compliant or proven acceptable under FCRA\\n requirements either.\\n TransUnion Experian Equifax\\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX\\n *Portfolio Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *Account Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *High Credit/ Original Loan Amount: $XXXX $XXXX--\\n Creditor Type: Bank Credit Cards Bank Credit Cards All Banks \\n Date Last Verified(DLV): XXXX----\\n Page 4 of 9\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1Q\\n DELETE Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  that gives unproven or false information  Date of Inquiry  to be  XXXX  within my   XXXX   credit report.    As\\n mal-purported,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  it can not be verified as Metro 2 compliant or proven acceptable under FCRA requirements either.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12  \\nDR Address\\n XXXXHRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n XXXXHRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n XXXXBSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Auto Financing Experian\\n Delete right now  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that contains errors  Date of Inquiry  to being  XXXX  to inside my   XXXX    credit report.    As purported,  the allegation stands\\n in nonconformity of reporting competence because  it does NOT meet Metro 2 certification or FCRA requirements.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Bank Credit Cards Experian\\n Delete Right NOW  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that misreports  Date of Inquiry  as being  XXXX  on my   XXXX    credit report.    As dis-alleged,  the mis-claim stands in\\n nonconformity of reporting competence since  it lacks Metro 2 certification and FCRA competence.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   Bank Credit Cards Experian\\n Delete Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that is incorrect  Date of Inquiry  with being  XXXX  upon my   XXXX   credit report.    As deceptively misreported,  the claim is\\n in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  it lacks the necessary Metro 2 compliance certifiability and any evidence of even being FCRA abiding.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Bank Credit Cards TransUnion\\n DELETE Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX   that distorts the facts  Date of Inquiry  to be  XXXX  within my XXXX   credit report.    As mal-alleged,  the allegation stands\\n in nonconformity of reporting competence because  it fails to be certifiably Metro 2 compliant nor FCRA adequate.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   Bank Credit Cards TransUnion\\n Delete right now  XXXX\"","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-21T22:25:51.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"10468","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14768395","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-07-21T22:11:56.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["b\"<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> \\n<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> \\n<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>\\n Date: <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, XXXXn <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>\\n SSN: <em>XXXX</em>\\n DOB: <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>\\n\\n EXPERIAN \\n<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> \\n<em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>\\n\\n Please disassociate any and all purported personal identifier information attributed to my consumer credit report related to your organization that is not exactly aligned with the\\n incontestable personal identifying information I have indicated within this consumer <em>complaint</em> notification."]},"sort":[3.7618096,"14768395"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14767850","_score":3.165107,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX SSN\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  As a consumer protected under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), XXXX Trans Union XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and\\n related U.S. consumer protection statutes, I hereby deliver formal and unequivocal notice of revocation of any past, present, or future consent for the unauthorized use of my\\n Personal Identifiable Information (PII). This revocation expressly prohibits any sharing, selling, trading, or other form of commercial exploitation of my PII beyond the strictly\\n limited scope of credit reporting activities as defined by U.S. federal law. Furthermore, I demand immediate cessation of all non-compliant processing of my PII and require\\n written confirmation of compliance with this directive, encompassing a comprehensive audit trail demonstrating adherence to the FCRA and other relevant U.S. privacy\\n regulations.\\n My 18-digit Personal Tracking Number isXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Ensure full adherence to legal data verification protocols, demanding that all inaccuracies be corrected transparently and promptly, with proof of compliance provided.\\n To Whosoever It ConcernsXXXX  In examining my credit report, I've identified some information that I believe has been reported inaccurately. I am writing to dispute these entries and request a prompt reviewXXXX  and correction. It is imperative that the data preserved in my credit report be accurate, complete, and fair.\\n It is imperative for data reporters to maintain rigorous internal controls to safeguard consumer information against unauthorized access and misuse. Have you unquestionably\\n met every strict legal requirement to ensure that your derogatory reporting against me is fully substantiated, legally permissible, and free from procedural violations?\\n The unsupported defamatory statement(s) Enumerated below should be processed as verified, subjected to enhanced scrutiny, and justified through independent confirmation\\n procedures as disclosed by the reporting entity in its unaltered wording portraying me in a critical light so block the incorrectly loggedXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   producing   *Base/7 *Account Number as outlined by  TransUnion XXXX  presented to be  XXXX The falsely presumed adverse allegation(s) Depicted underneath need adjustment as exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict\\n adherence to legal reporting provisions as preserved in its initial entry embedding misleading impressions about me , so delete the unverified assertionsXXXX XXXX   presenting XXXX XXXX Primary Consumer Account Number XXXX  as testified by  TransUnion XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  The unfounded disparaging statement(s) Following this statement must be finalized as assessed for factual legitimacy, methodically authenticated, and upheld as verifiably\\n accurate as referenced in its primary filing articulating deprecatory descriptions about me , so block the improperly documented\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Consumer Account Number as portrayed by  TransUnion XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   conveyed to be  XXXX XXXX XXXX The unsound unfavorable categorization(s) Shown further down need rectification as comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with\\n established guidelines as originally entered in consumer reporting records describing unfavorable insinuations directed at me so nullify any recorded traces the below\\nindicatedXXXX XXXX XXXX   signifying XXXX Primary Consumer Account Number as maintained by  TransUnion XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  The indefensibly alleged injurious portrayal(s) Further detailed beneath are imperative to be extensively audited, validated beyond doubt, and determined to be aligned with\\n statutory obligations as kept in its original reporting status underscoring demeaning representations of me , so revoke its appearance in public records the undermentioned\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX    articulating   Date of Inquiry as officially recorded by  XXXX   listed to be  XXXX  The alleged but unverified critical statement(s) Delimited below must undergo lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably conforming to required\\n standards as officially transmitted in its first iteration conveying defamatory perspectives about me , so please eradicate from reporting the improperly categorizedXXXX XXXX XXXX    specifying   hard inquiry date (DOI) as shared by  EXperian  outlined to be  XXXX  The provisionally upheld but weak adverse claim(s) indicated herein are obligated to be investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstratedXXXX certifiably compliant as displayed in the original credit reporting record revisiting discrediting circumstances affecting me , so nullify its presence in reporting systems theXXXX misleading content\\n XXXX  XXXX    including   inquiry date as acknowledged by  EXperian  marked to be  XXXX  The falsifiable(y) attributed harmful assertion(s) within displayed demand evaluation as critically evaluated, systematically reconfirmed, and affirmed as meeting rigorous\\n compliance standards as conveyed in its exact phrasing by the originating source continuing adverse commentary against me so please eradicate from reporting the\\n fabricated entriesXXXX XXXX XXXX   revealing   HARD Inquiry Date (DOI) as forwarded by  TransUnion XXXX   presented to be XXXX The unproven derogatory claim(s) Laid out beneath are designated to be rigorously inspected, accuracy substantiated, and reported with full adherence to governing\\n mandates as affirmed in its first transmission by the data furnisher reinforcing disapproving labels directed at me so revoke its documentation entirely the now-displayed\\n XXXX  XXXX    showing   date of inquiry (DOI) as affirmed by  TransUnion XXXX  described to be  XXXX The deficiently substantiated adverse report(s) displayed herein are subject to be properly reviewed, reinforced through supplementary verification, and assured as meeting\\n the highest data integrity principles as originally issued by the reporting party reinforcing detrimental judgments about me so remove from reporting the successive dataXXXX XXXX XXXX   listing   Date of HARD Inquiry (DOI) as portrayed by  TransUnion XXXX   said to be  XXXX  The weakly validated critical depiction(s) asserted herein must receive attention as subjected to extensive review, revalidation, authenticated as accurate, and shown to meet\\n all compliance criteria as formally recorded by the responsible entity featuring pejorative classifications of me so wipe from any stored databases the wrongly assertedXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX    consisting of   hard inquiry date as verified by  TransUnion \\n(T)  indicated to be  XXXX The misinterpreted unfavorable charge(s) described herein need to be examined as analyzed, verified through independent assessment, deemed legally sound, and upheld as\\n conforming to reporting regulations as filed at the moment of declaration by the alleging party illustrating distressing claims about me so expunge from documented records the\\n unduly emphasizedXXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX    possessing   date of inquiry as conveyed by  XXXX   proposed to be  XXXX The uncorroborated harmful notation(s) within asserted should be reviewed as thoroughly examined, reassessed, conclusively validated, and unmistakably established as\\n compliant as recorded by the data provider in its initial reported form referencing disadvantageous assumptions against me so cease the distribution of the presently outlined\\n XXXX    encapsulating   Date of Inquiry (DOI) as indicated by XXXX XXXX  recorded to be  XXXX The inconclusive accusatory declaration(s) Highlighted downwards are required to be revalidated under scrutiny, found unerring in its correctness, and maintained within lawful\\n reporting frameworks as registered at the moment of its first reporting reiterating unfavorable presumptions regarding me so halt its inclusion in reports the mistakenly\\n communicated\\XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX    portraying   inquiry date (DOI) supposed by  XXXX   maintained to be XXXX The lacking-verification injurious claim(s) herein indicated must be fulfilled as Reinvestigated or investigated, validly proven verifiable, and demonstrative of certifiably\\n Page 1 of 9\\ncompliant reporting adequacy(ies) as incorporated in its unaltered credit profile positioning reproachful declarations about me so delete from reporting the unjustifiably statedXXXX XXXX   offering   date of hard inquiry as submitted formally by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  The under-examined adverse record(s) alleged within demand attention as verified, subjected to enhanced scrutiny, and justified through independent confirmation procedures\\n as extracted exactly from the first documented entry exposing purported deficiencies associated with me so eliminate from credit filing the baseless allegations\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   describing   Inquiry Date (DOI) as described by  XXXX   declared to be XXXX The doubtful unfavorable classification(s) Outlined below must be complied with as exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict\\n adherence to legal reporting provisions as stated upon initial documentation integrating disparaging beliefs associated with me , so cease the reporting of the\\n miscommunicated detailsXXXX XXXX   plus   date of hard inquiry (DOI) as defined by  TransUnion \\n(T)  defined to be  XXXX  The unconvincing accusatory comment(s) Set forth underneath are mandated to be assessed for factual legitimacy, methodically authenticated, and upheld as verifiably\\n accurate as transcribed from the original entry by the submitting source asserting damaging conclusions against me , so suppress its existence in credit databases the\\n negligently reported\\XXXX XXXX XXXX   demonstrating   HARD Inquiry Date as delivered by  TransUnion \\n(T)  asserted to be  07/24/2024\\n The potentially inaccurate condemning entry(s) As noted beneath need to be considered comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with\\n established guidelines as captured by the recording entity when first logged accentuating derogatoriness(es) against me so suppress the disclosure of the soon-mentionedXXXX XXXX XXXX   displaying   Inquiry Date as issued by  TransUnion \\n(T)  designated to be  XXXX  The inadequately evidenced harmful claim(s) Illustrated below should be handled as extensively audited, validated beyond doubt, and determined to be aligned with statutory\\n obligations as compiled by the reporting entity without alterations identifying alleged liabilities tied to me so block from reporting the next-detailed\\n XXXX    supplying   Date of HARD Inquiry as claimed by  XXXX   denoted to be  XXXX  The questionable disparaging remark(s) displayed within warrant action as lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably conforming to required\\n standards as provided in its first official record demonstrating unfavorable biases toward me , so remove from the record the now-documented\\n XXXX XXXX   featuring   Date of Inquiry as submitted by  TransUnion \\n(T)  expressed to be  XXXXXXXX The questionable denunciation(s) Clarified below must be executed as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstrated certifiably compliant as\\n upheld in its original statement by the contributor developing injurious descriptions concerning me , so retract from consumer files the inaccurately attributed\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   rendering   hard inquiry date (DOI) as filed by  XXXX   formulated to be  XXXX The unjustified unfavorable commentary herein alleged must be performed as critically evaluated, systematically reconfirmed, and affirmed as meeting rigorous compliance\\n standards as written when written by author broadcasting unsupportive assessments of me , so extract from displayed credit details the presently outlinedXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I   structured with   inquiry date as processed by  XXXX   to be XXXX The unjustified unfavorable commentary below indicated must be undertaken as rigorously inspected, accuracy substantiated, and reported with full adherence to governing\\n mandates as expressed verbatim by the original data source projecting negative portrayals of me , so delete from reporting the undermentionedXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX    composed of   HARD Inquiry Date (DOI) as pronounced by  TransUnion \\n(T)  referenced to be  XXXX  The unsound unfavorable categorization(s) Cited underneath are obligated for completion as properly reviewed, reinforced through supplementary verification, and assured as\\n meeting the highest data integrity principles as maintained as first stated by the data provider upholding defamatory accounts involving me , so expunge from report history the\\n falsely reported claims\\n XXXX    amplifying   date of inquiry (DOI) as included by  XXXX  determined to be  XXXX  The unsubstantiated adverse allegation(s) purported herein require resolution as subjected to extensive review, revalidation, authenticated as accurate, and shown to meet all\\n compliance criteria as entered at the time of submission by the reporting entity conveying slanderous associations against me so delete the wrongly presented\\n XXXX    comprising   Date of HARD Inquiry (DOI) as shown by  XXXX   projected to be  XXXX The lacking-substantiation harmful portrayal(s)\\n As Documented Below\\n are deemed essential to be analyzed, verified through independent assessment, deemed legally sound, and upheld as conforming to reporting regulations as reflected in the\\n initial report exactly as declared expanding harmful narratives directed at me , so wipe from accessible reports the below-indicated\\n XXXX    exhibiting   hard inquiry date as disclosed by XXXX XXXX   conveyed to be  XXXX  The insufficiently evidenced harmful indictment(s) alleged below must be addressed as thoroughly examined, reassessed, conclusively validated, and unmistakably\\n established as compliant as attested in its first official report reporting distressing implications concerning me , so eliminate from disclosed data the further-listed\\n XXXX    incorporating   date of inquiry as announced by  TransUnion \\n(T)  presented to be XXXX  The challenged unfavorable assumption(s) Located below should be scrutinized as revalidated under scrutiny, found unerring in its correctness, and maintained within lawful\\n reporting frameworks as detailed in the original submission sharing unfavorable evaluations of me , so block from reporting the unverified assertions\\n XXXX    accentuating   Date of Inquiry (DOI) as stated by  TransUnion \\n(T)  To Be XXXX  The falsifiable(y) attributed harmful assertion(s) As detailed below must be executed as Reinvestigated or investigated, validly proven verifiable, and demonstrative of\\n certifiably compliant reporting adequacy(ies) as affirmed in its first transmission by the data furnisher publicizing unfavorable opinions concerning me , so suppress its\\n existence in credit databases the misguided descriptions\\n XXXX   holding   inquiry date (DOI) as presented by  TransUnion \\n(T)  denoted to be  XXXX The undetermined damaging declaration(s) Specified further down are deemed essential to be verified, subjected to enhanced scrutiny, and justified through independent\\n confirmation procedures as provided in its first official record implying adverse claims regarding me , so please eradicate from reporting the carelessly reported\\n XXXX FI   unfolding   date of hard inquiry exactly as reported by  TransUnion \\n(T)  listed to be XXXX  The unsupported defamatory statement(s) below purported are vital to be exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict adherence to\\n legal reporting provisions as initially reported by the responsible data contributor replicating defaming suppositions against me , so remove from the record the wrongly\\n assertedXXXX XXXX XXXX   arranging   Inquiry Date (DOI) as relayed by  TransUnion \\n(T)  outlined to be XXXX  The inaccurately labeled negative assessment(s) herein reported must be resolved as assessed for factual legitimacy, methodically authenticated, and upheld as verifiably\\n accurate as incorporated in its unaltered credit profile pointing out negativity(ies) attributed to me so block the reporting of the misunderstood records\\n XXXX XXXX   with   date of hard inquiry (DOI) as characterized by  TransUnion \\n(T)  marked to be  XXXX Federal law (15 U.S.C.  1681) and Metro 2 reporting guidelines require complete alignment between reported data and verifiable creditor records. This demands elimination\\n of conflicting bureau entries, removal of unsubstantiated claims, and strict adherence to 7-year reporting limitations for negative items. The documented discrepancies below\\n demonstrate clear violations of 15 U.S.C.  1681c(a) and CDIA Metro 2 Chapter 3 standards, complete with third-party validation of errors that directly impair my financial\\n opportunities.\\n The Symbol Keys used in this Letters images \\nare \\nas follows :\\n Page 2 of 9\\nr\\n 1\\n T = \\nTransunion XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Data Furnishing Reporter #1 (or Creditor listed in a PRE = Public Records Event )\\n D = Data Furnishing Reporter #2 (The Original Creditor if a Coff, a Coll, and or a Coff /Coll)\\n  = Likely XXXX(s) are detected related to this Data Field Point\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Factual Actual Undeniably Disputable XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX value reported is detected to likely have Discrepancy RROR(s) of Non-Compliant Inconsistency(ies) (DNCI)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Metro 2 Code Exactness RROR(s) (M2CE)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Metro 2 Code Description exactness RROR(s) (M2CD)\\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Pretermitted RROR(s) by possible Willful Omission (PWO)\\n PRE = Public Records Event\\n PII = Personal Identifier Information\\n COFF = Charge-off(s)\\n COLL = Collection(s)\\n COFF/COLL = Charge-off(s)/Collection(s)\\n DrgL = Derogatory Lates\\n DlqL = Delinquency Late(s)\\n INQ = Inquiry(ies)\\n UON = Unknown or Other Negativity\\n CCI = Creditor Contact Information\\n As thoroughly outlined in this complaint, the erroneous information identified herein requires urgent and decisive remediation. You are obligated to either remove these items\\n from all reporting, amend them to reflect a lawful and accurate status, or provide incontrovertible documentation verifying that each entry is true, correct, complete, timely, fair,\\n and reasonable as claimed by the reporting entity. Any failure to fulfill these obligations not only jeopardizes my rights as a consumer but may also constitute a serious breach\\n of statutory reporting requirements, resulting in substantial harm and potential legal repercussions for continued noncompliance.\\n Delete Right NOW  ALDOUS AND ASSOCIATES  320****  that inaccurately reports  Account Terms Duration:  to be  --   upon my   T\\n credit report.    As misreported,  the\\n claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  it is neither certified for Metro 2 compliance nor adequacy under the FCRA regulations.\\n Additionally  Consumer Account Number:  is non-compliantly  inaccurately reported  as  320****  upon my   T\\n As dis-alleged,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of\\n reporting competence because  the BASE/7 Primary Consumer Account Number (PCAN) appears deficient: (a) its purported value lacks uniqueness, (b) includes my SSN in\\n part or full, (c) falls outside the 5-32 alphanumeric character range allowed reported, (d) fails to use exactly four (4) redacted and or truncated characters, and/or (e) is\\n inconsistently reported across agencies. Such deviations from the CDIAs CRRG-outlined Metro 2 Standards jeopardize data integrity and fail to meet federal mandates for\\n fair, reasonable, accurate, complete, timely, truthful, valid, and verifiable reporting by furnishers (creditors, collectors, debt buyers, etc.) and CRAs ( TransUnion, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as applies). THEREFORE, I DEMAND its IMMEDIATE and COMPLETE\\n DELETION ;\\n In addition  Portfolio Type Code:  is lacking compliance   misrepresenting of facts  to being   --  within my   T\\n As misleadingly misreported,  the mis-claim stands in\\n nonconformity of reporting competence since  the XXXX XXXX Type Codes value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage,\\n Open, or Revolving value as should be per XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  TransUnion\\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXConsumer Account Number: XXXX XXXXPortfolio Type Code:--\\n *Account Current Balance:--XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXAccount Terms Duration:-- --\\n Delete Right Now  XXXX XXXX   that contains errors  Account Rating:  to being  Paid  on my   TransunionXXXX XXXX  credit report,  and as well as  with being  Derogatory  within my   XXXX------\\n credit report,  as being  Paid  to inside my  \\ncredit report too.  As mal-accused,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies)\\n because  it falls short of Metro 2 and FCRA standards.-TXQ\\n COFF\\n TransUnion\\n *Data Reporter Name \\n*Consumer Account Number:\\n 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  that is flawed in its reporting  Date of Account Current Balance:  to be  XXXX  upon my   Transunion\\n  credit report,  to being  XXXX  on my   XXXX   credit report,  and as well as  as being  03/01/2025  to inside my   XXXX    credit report too.  As dis-reported,  the\\n allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting competence because  it is not proven suitable under neither Metro 2 or FCRA guidelines, each of which MUST be satisfied for\\n applicable privilege to report to be retained.\\n Plus  Account Type Code:  is without compliance  INACCURATELY reported  as being  Flexible spending credit card  on my   Transunion       deceitfully asserted  to\\n be  Credit Card  in my   Experian         Flexible spending credit card  inside my   XXXX      As mal-stated,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting competence\\n since  the *Base/8 Portfolio Type Code (PTC)s value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value as\\n should be per 2023 CRRG mandates.;\\n Additionally  Date of Account Information:  is non-compliantly  skewing of facts  as  XXXX  upon my   Transunion        erroneously alleged  to being XXXX   within\\n my   XXXX XXXX   on my   XXXX      As alleged,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  \\nthe Base/24 Date of Account Information (DOAI) is not EACH of being (i) displayed as MMDDYYYY or MM/DD/YYYY or MM-DD-YYYY such that the 8 numeral characters are\\n in fact properly and accurately representive of a Metro 2 compliant format , (ii) displayed exactly same as that of the mandatorily always reported Header/8 Last Updated\\n Activity Date (LUAD) value, (iii) is NOT precisely aligned with latest purported DOACBal (aka Date of Base/21 Account Current Balance) value (if any) , (iv) is NOT exactly\\n aligned with the latest reported DOASC (aka Date of Account Status Code) , (v) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest reported DOPRC (aka Date of Payment Rating Code) ,\\n (vi) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest verified reporting of the OCOA (aka Base/23 Original Charge-off Amount), (vii) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest reported DLV\\n (aka Date Last Verified) , and/or (viii) elsewise is NOT displayed in full compliance with mandated maximum appropriateness!\\n In addition  Account Current Balance:  is lacking compliance   unstated  as being  --  in my   Transunion       seemingly SUPPRESSED  to be  --  inside my   Experian\\n        --  upon my   XXXX      unreliably misattributed  the allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting competence because  the Base/21 Accounts Current Balance\\n (ACBal)s value is\\n TransUnion XXXX XXXX  *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *Account Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *Account Current Balance:------\\n Date of Account Current Balance: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   that gets the facts wrong  Date Last Verified(DLV):  with being  06/17/2025  within my   Transunion   credit report,  to be  --  upon my   XXXX   credit report,  and as well as  to being  --  on my   XXXX    credit report too.  As mis-stated,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting\\n competence since  \\nthe Date Last Verified (DLV) is not EACH of being (i) displayed as MMDDYYYY or MM/DD/YYYY or MM-DD-YYYY such that the 8 numeral characters are in fact properly and\\n accurately representive of a Metro 2 compliant format , (ii) displayed exactly same as that of the mandatorily always reported Header/8 Last Updated Activity Date (LUAD)\\n value, (iii) is NOT precisely aligned with latest purported DOACBal (aka Date of Base/21 Account Current Balance) value (if any) , (iv) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest\\n reported DOASC (aka Date of Account Status Code) , (v) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest reported DOPRC (aka Date of Payment Rating Code) , (vi) is NOT exactly\\n aligned with the latest verified reporting of the OCOA (aka Base/23 Original Charge-off Amount) , (vii) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest reported DOAI (aka Date of\\n Account Information) , and/or (viii) elsewise is NOT displayed in full compliance with mandated maximum appropriateness!\\n Plus  Creditor Type:  is without compliance  wrongly purported  as  Bank Credit Cards     Transunion       skewing of facts  to being   Bank Credit Cards     XXXX          All\\n Banks      XXXX      As accused,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  it does NOT meet Metro 2 certification or FCRA requirements.\\n TransUnion XXXX XXXX XXXXData Reporter Name XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXConsumer Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *Account Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\\n *High Credit/ Original Loan AmountXXXX XXXX XXXX Creditor Type: Bank Credit Cards Bank Credit Cards All Banks \\n Date Last Verified(DLV): XXXX\\n Delete Right NOW  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   that provides erroneous data  Date of Inquiry  as being  XXXX   to inside my   XXXX    credit report.    As dis\\naccused,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting competence because  it fails to adhere to Metro 2 specifications and FCRA regulations.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *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   within my   X   credit report.    As mis-accused,  the\\n mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting competence since  it is non-compliant with the CRRGs Metro 2 standards certification and too also fails FCRA adequacy\\n checks.\\n Inquiries\\n Page 4 of 9\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1T\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1Q\\n INQ -D1X\\n INQ -D1Q\\n  \\nDR Name *HRCF12 \\nDR Address\\n *HRCF13 \\nDR Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\n *BSCF5 \\nDate of Inquiry\\n ^NTCU^ \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Bank Credit Cards XXXX\\n Delete right now  XXXX XXXX XXXX   that reports incorrectly  Date of Inquiry  to be  XXXX  upon my   X   credit report.    As dis-stated,  the claim is in deviation of\\n reporting adequacy(ies) because  it fails to satisfy BOTH the CDIAs Metro 2 certification of compliant reporting and applicable FCRA regulations.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name *XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Contact No.\\n *HRCF14 \\nDR Identification No.\\XXXX XXXX XXXXnDate of Inquiry\\n XXXX \\nPermissible Purpose\\n ^NTCU^ \\nDR Industry Type\\n ^NTCU^ \\nCredit Bureau\\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Bank Credit Cards Experian\\n DELETE Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that is incorrect  Date of Inquiry  to being  XXXX  on my   T   credit report.    As mis-purported,  the allegation stands in\\n nonconformity of reporting competence because  it falls short of being provably Metro 2 certified let alone FCRA compliant.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Identification 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   that distorts the facts  Date of Inquiry  as being  XXXX   to inside my   T   credit report.    As deceptively misreported,  the\\n mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting competence since  it does NOT adhere to Metro 2s certified specifications or even that of the FCRAs guidelines.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name 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     As stated,  the claim is in deviation of\\n reporting adequacy(ies) because  it is neither Metro 2 certifiable nor FCRA compliant.\\n Inquiries\\n  \\nDR Name 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 TransUnion\\n Delete right now  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   that gives unproven or false information  Date of Inquiry  to be\"","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-21T22:40:14.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"10468","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14767850","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-21T22:34:11.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["as\\n upheld in its original statement by the contributor developing injurious descriptions concerning me , so retract from consumer <em>files</em> the inaccurately attributed\\n <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>   rendering   hard inquiry date (DOI) as <em>filed</em> by  <em>XXXX</em>   formulated to be  <em>XXXX</em> The unjustified unfavorable commentary herein alleged must be performed as critically evaluated, systematically reconfirmed, and affirmed as meeting rigorous compliance\\n standards as written when written by author broadcasting unsupportive"]},"sort":[3.165107,"14767850"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":19,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":19}]}},"product":{"doc_count":19,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":7,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":7}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Virtual currency","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Installment loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":19,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt was paid","doc_count":2},{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":1},{"key":"Old information reappears or never goes away","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Funds not handled or disbursed as instructed","doc_count":1},{"key":"Problem using a debit or ATM card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Escrow, taxes, or insurance","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card company isn't resolving a dispute about a purchase on your statement","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with additional add-on products or services","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":19,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":19}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":19,"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":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":19,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":19}]}},"company":{"doc_count":19,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":3},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"NCD Financial, LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":2},{"key":"Affirm Holdings, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"Coinbase, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FIFTH THIRD FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rossi Law Offices, Ltd","doc_count":1},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":1},{"key":"Selene Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRUIST FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":19,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"PA","doc_count":3},{"key":"CA","doc_count":2},{"key":"CT","doc_count":2},{"key":"FL","doc_count":2},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":2},{"key":"NY","doc_count":2},{"key":"AR","doc_count":1},{"key":"DE","doc_count":1},{"key":"GA","doc_count":1},{"key":"MD","doc_count":1},{"key":"MI","doc_count":1},{"key":"MO","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":19,"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":7}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":19,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{}}}