{"took":105,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":10,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17534605","_score":19.087374,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB COMPLAINT DRAFT : BANK OF AMERICA ( Systemic Misclassification, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and Regulatory Control ) XXXX  Product : Checking or Savings Account XXXX  Complaint Category : Managing, monitoring, or closing account Issue : Problems when you are an unauthorized victim of fraud or identity theft Transaction Date : XX/XX/year> Amount : {$39.00} Transaction Descriptor : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Your Complaint Text ( Copy/Paste this description for the CFPB submission ) : My Bank of America account received an unauthorized ACH DEPOSIT of {$39.00} on XX/XX/year>XXXX  with the descriptor XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  This is a clear case of potential identity theft using my name. \nThe institutional process at Bank of America constitutes a systemic regulatory failure in seven major ways : PATTERN OF COMPLIANCE VIOLATION ( PRIOR CFPB FILINGS ) : This is not an isolated event. Prior CFPB complaints filed by me against Bank of America document a continuing pattern of systemic failure and policy abuse that deliberately obstructs fraud investigation and shifts liability onto the victim. This current case must be viewed within the context of the bank 's established, non-compliant operational history.\n\nINTENTIONAL DELAY & SHORTENING OF STATUTORY REMEDY WINDOW : The bank 's internal policy mandates that the claim 's official start date is delayed until the NEXT BUSINESS DAY after the fraud is reported. This procedure is an INTENTIONAL VIOLATION that shortens the consumer 's statutory 120-day or 180-day window for dispute resolution under Regulation E, effectively robbing the victim of legally mandated time to investigate their claim.\n\nSYSTEMIC MISCLASSIFICATION OF ACH FRAUD ( BILLIONS IN DAMAGE ) : The bank 's internal system prevents representatives from filing a direct \" Fraud '' claim for unauthorized ACH transfers, forcing them into a low-priority \" Dispute '' or \" Billing Error '' category. This deliberate abuse of Regulation E misclassifies millions of ACH-related fraud cases annually, a practice that has cost consumers an estimated BILLIONS of dollars in unresolved or delayed recovery. The banks process actively routes high-priority fraud cases away from required investigation tracks. \nImplied Admission, Obstruction, and Warning of Personal Risk : During my call at XXXXXXXX XXXX  EST ( Ref : XXXX XXXX ), the representative named XXXX provided an explicit and alarming warning to \" be careful '' before transferring me. This warning, coupled with XXXX having misspoken about a \" XXXX and something dollar credit, '' strongly suggests internal staff awareness of a hazardous or compromised claim process. Furthermore, the bank refused to provide any documentation in writing confirming the systemic policy flaws, which constitutes deliberate obstruction. \nEGREGIOUS BREACH OF DUTY OF CARE ( SUICIDAL DISCLOSURE ) : During a prior, separate call concerning money being taken from my account ( approximately a couple of months ago, right before my daughter 's birthday ), I directly disclosed to the Bank of America representative that I was crying, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX  and self-harm due to the financial distress caused by the bank 's actions. The representative, upon hearing this direct disclosure of suicidal ideation, failed to follow any institutional crisis protocol, failed to advise me to seek help, and failed to connect me to any XXXX XXXX resources. This profound disregard for consumer welfare constitutes an EGREGIOUS BREACH OF THE BANK 'S DUTY OF CARE, directly linking their financial misconduct to the endangerment of a customer 's life. \nContradictory Regulatory Stance ( Control the Narrative ) : The bank 's internal processes create a contradictory regulatory stance. While the serious, high-value fraud against my account likely triggered an internal Suspicious Activity Report ( SAR ) treating me as the source of suspicionthe bank simultaneously forced my official complaint into a low-priority \" Dispute '' category. This dual action is a deliberate attempt to control the regulatory narrative and shift liability.\n\nMishandling of Funds : As a direct result of the misclassification and delay, the bank has failed to properly isolate, remove, or trace the fraudulent funds, leaving the unauthorized {$39.00} commingled in my account. \nDesired Resolution : I require immediate escalation to a fraud compliance officer to properly classify and investigate this claim and remove the funds. Furthermore, I demand that the CFPB initiate a full, independent, third-party forensic audit of Bank of Americas entire Regulation E compliance, internal SAR filing protocols, and its crisis response procedures. Given the systemic nature of this fraud, the institutional cover-up, and the severe breach of duty of care, I demand that the CFPB use its authority to facilitate the immediate connection of the victim with suitable class action counsel to pursue structural remediation and a class-wide remedy for all affected consumers. We demand mandatory civil penalties for these systemic violations.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-26T04:30:25.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"30143","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17534605","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2025-11-26T04:20:08.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Banking errors"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The institutional process at Bank of America constitutes a systemic regulatory failure in seven major ways : PATTERN OF <em>COMPLIANCE</em> <em>VIOLATION</em> ( <em>PRIOR</em> <em>CFPB</em> <em>FILINGS</em> ) : This is not an <em>isolated</em> <em>event</em>. <em>Prior</em> <em>CFPB</em> complaints filed by me against Bank of America document a continuing pattern of systemic failure and policy abuse that deliberately obstructs fraud investigation and shifts liability onto the victim."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the <em>CFPB</em> and chooses not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[19.087374,"17534605"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16798648","_score":15.8296585,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/XXXX, Possible Finance , Inc. responded to my prior CFPB complaint ( # XXXX ) by stating there may be \" potential fraud associated with my account. I have never alleged identity theft, nor have I filed any police, FTC, or fraud report. The company has never contacted me to verify my identity, supply fraud-alert details, or request documentation to substantiate any such claim. \n\nBecause the potential fraud designation originated internally, this suggests a Possible Finance system or data-integrity breach involving consumer loan records. If the companys data were compromised, federal and state law required it to notify affected consumers, credit bureaus, and regulators. No such notification occurred. The companys response instead appears to be an attempt to avoid its reinvestigation and documentation duties under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA XXXX ). \n\nI originally mailed a certified dispute and validation request on XX/XX/XXXX, requesting full documentation of all Possible Finance tradelines reported on my XXXX filecopies of applications, agreements, and payment records. Possible Finance failed to respond or validate, then later inserted a potential fraud note through CFPB, without evidence. \n\nThis false classification has damaged my credit reputation and may conceal a broader data-compromise event. Exhibits A through Q document certified-mail proof, dispute letters, CFPB filings, and declarations showing that I have never been informed of any breach. Exhibit H and Exhibit I contain sworn declarations confirming no notice of any fraud or breach was ever received. \n\nExperian has continued to publish Possible Finance tradelines as verified despite lacking documentation, violating FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( C ). \n\nXXXX has failed to mark these accounts as consumer disputes this account, violating 623 ( a ) ( 3 ).\n\nXXXX continues to mirror outdated data and has not implemented a data-integrity hold despite receiving notice under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ).\n\nIf the Potential Fraud Claim Were Legitimate, Possible Finances Furnisher Duties are : Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 6 ) and 12 C.F.R. 1022.42, a furnisher that determines an account may involve identity theft must : Cease reporting the account entirely until it confirms authenticity. \n\nNotify all CRAs ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that the account is under fraud review. \n\nFlag the tradeline with a fraud or identity theft indicator in its Metro 2 reporting file ( field 28 Special Comment Code XB, XC, or XN ).\n\nProvide the consumer written notice acknowledging the fraud alert and requesting additional verification ( such as a signed FTC Identity Theft Report or police report ).\n\nProvide full validation if the account is found valid or permanently delete it if fraud is confirmed.\n\nNone of the actions took place. This strongly implies that Possibles potential fraud statement was internal misclassification not a true identity theft flag and that the CRAs are treating it as a normal tradeline, not a blocked or suppressed fraud record.\n\nAs shown in Exhibits F and L, these failures collectively indicate breakdowns in both furnisher and CRA compliance processes.\n\nIf Possible Finances potential fraud classification were legitimate, the company would have been required under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 6 ), 605B, and 12 C.F.R. 1022.4243 to immediately suppress the affected tradelines, flag them as identity-theft accounts using Metro 2 fraud indicators ( XB, XC, or XN ), and notify consumers and credit bureaus in writing. None of these actions occurred. The absence of these safeguards raises the likelihood that Possible Finance is systematically mislabeling unresolved account disputes as fraud to bypass FCRA reinvestigation dutiesa practice the CFPB has warned against in multiple enforcement contexts. In CFPB Supervisory Highlights, Issue 32 ( XXXX XXXX ), the Bureau cited furnishers for false fraud coding patterns that concealed internal data errors and harmed consumers through unwarranted denials of credit. If this behavior extends beyond my account, it may reflect a broader data-integrity failure within Possible Finances consumer-reporting process that threatens the accuracy of national credit files. Such systemic miscoding could impact hundreds or thousands of borrowers, skewing credit scores, suppressing legitimate dispute rights, and violating the CFPBs standards for reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy. I urge the Bureau to review this case not as an isolated error but as potential evidence of a wider industry practice requiring supervisory examination and corrective enforcement. \n\nBecause Possible Finance is headquartered in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), its operations are subject to XXXX XXXX, requiring immediate consumer notification of any data breach. Exhibit G ( Notice of False Fraud Assertion ) and Exhibit M ( Damages Statement ) quantify harm and costs arising from this mishandling. \n\nThis matter now affects all three national credit bureaus and undermines data reliability for thousands of consumers if the companys potential fraud flag masks a security incident. \n\nI request the CFPB to coordinate with the following agencies : Washington State Attorney General Data Privacy Unit ( XXXX XXXX ) for breach-notification compliance. \nTexas Attorney General Consumer Protection Division ( XXXX. XXXX. & XXXX. Code XXXX ) for failure to notify a Texas resident. \nFederal Trade Commission Privacy and Data Security Division to add this matter to the Consumer Sentinel Network as Data Breach Company Did Not Notify Me. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  to impose a data-integrity hold on all Possible Finance tradelines until the company verifies that its systems and records are secure. \n\nThe record of evidence ( Exhibits AQ ) shows consistent negligence in investigation, communication, and reporting accuracy. This pattern violates FCRA 623 ( b ), 611 ( a ) ( 1 ), and 611 ( a ) ( 7 ) and may indicate systemic non-compliance with the Consumer Financial Protection Act.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-24T20:40:58.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"78233","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16798648","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Possible Financial Inc","date_received":"2025-10-24T19:59:49.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Possible Finance failed to respond or validate, then later inserted a potential fraud note through <em>CFPB</em>, without evidence. \n\nThis false classification has damaged my credit reputation and may conceal a broader data-compromise <em>event</em>. Exhibits A through Q document certified-mail proof, dispute letters, <em>CFPB</em> <em>filings</em>, and declarations showing that I have never been informed of any breach."]},"sort":[15.8296585,"16798648"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16798275","_score":15.794293,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"On XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX responded to my prior CFPB complaint ( # XXXX ) by stating there may be \" potential fraud associated with my account. I have never alleged identity theft, nor have I filed any police, FTC, or fraud report. The company has never contacted me to verify my identity, supply fraud-alert details, or request documentation to substantiate any such claim. \n\nBecause the potential fraud designation originated internally, this suggests a XXXX XXXX system or data-integrity breach involving consumer loan records. If the companys data were compromised, federal and state law required it to notify affected consumers, credit bureaus, and regulators. No such notification occurred. The companys response instead appears to be an attempt to avoid its reinvestigation and documentation duties under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA 611623 ). \n\nI originally mailed a certified dispute and validation request on XX/XX/XXXX, requesting full documentation of all XXXX XXXX tradelines reported on my Experian filecopies of applications, agreements, and payment records. XXXX XXXXXXXX failed to respond or validate, then later inserted a potential fraud note through CFPB, without evidence. \n\nThis false classification has damaged my credit reputation and may conceal a broader data-compromise event. Exhibits A through Q document certified-mail proof, dispute letters, CFPB filings, and declarations showing that I have never been informed of any breach. Exhibit H and Exhibit I contain sworn declarations confirming no notice of any fraud or breach was ever received. \n\nExperian has continued to publish XXXX XXXX tradelines as verified despite lacking documentation, violating FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( C ). \n\nXXXX  has failed to mark these accounts as consumer disputes this account, violating 623 ( a ) ( 3 ). \n\nXXXX  continues to mirror outdated data and has not implemented a data-integrity hold despite receiving notice under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ). \n\nIf the Potential Fraud Claim Were Legitimate, Possible Finances Furnisher Duties are : Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 6 ) and 12 C.F.R. 1022.42, a furnisher that determines an account may involve identity theft must : Cease reporting the account entirely until it confirms authenticity. \n\nNotify all CRAs ( XXXX, Experian, XXXX  ) that the account is under fraud review. \n\nFlag the tradeline with a fraud or identity theft indicator in its Metro 2 reporting file ( field XXXX Special Comment Code XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nProvide the consumer written notice acknowledging the fraud alert and requesting additional verification ( such as a signed FTC Identity Theft Report or police report ). \n\nProvide full validation if the account is found valid or permanently delete it if fraud is confirmed. \n\nNone of the actions took place. This strongly implies that XXXX  potential fraud statement was internal misclassification not a true identity theft flag and that the CRAs are treating it as a normal tradeline, not a blocked or suppressed fraud record. \n\nAs shown in Exhibits F and L, these failures collectively indicate breakdowns in both furnisher and CRA compliance processes. \n\nIf XXXX XXXX  potential fraud classification were legitimate, the company would have been required under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 6 ), 605B, and 12 C.F.R. 1022.4243 to immediately suppress the affected tradelines, flag them as identity-theft accounts using Metro 2 fraud indicators XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ), and notify consumers and credit bureaus in writing. None of these actions occurred. The absence of these safeguards raises the likelihood that XXXX XXXX is systematically mislabeling unresolved account disputes as fraud to bypass FCRA reinvestigation dutiesa practice the CFPB has warned against in multiple enforcement contexts. In CFPB Supervisory Highlights, Issue XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ), the Bureau cited furnishers for false fraud coding patterns that concealed internal data errors and harmed consumers through unwarranted denials of credit. If this behavior extends beyond my account, it may reflect a broader data-integrity failure within XXXX XXXX consumer-reporting process that threatens the accuracy of national credit files. Such systemic miscoding could impact hundreds or thousands of borrowers, skewing credit scores, suppressing legitimate dispute rights, and violating the CFPBs standards for reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy. I urge the Bureau to review this case not as an isolated error but as potential evidence of a wider industry practice requiring supervisory examination and corrective enforcement. \n\nBecause XXXX XXXX is headquartered in Washington State ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX WA XXXX ), its operations are subject to XXXX XXXX, requiring immediate consumer notification of any data breach. Exhibit G ( Notice of False Fraud Assertion ) and Exhibit M ( Damages Statement ) quantify harm and costs arising from this mishandling. \n\nThis matter now affects all three national credit bureaus and undermines data reliability for thousands of consumers if the companys potential fraud flag masks a security incident. \n\nI request the CFPB to coordinate with the following agencies : Washington State Attorney General Data Privacy Unit ( XXXX XXXX ) for breach-notification compliance. \nTexas Attorney General Consumer Protection Division ( XXXX. XXXX. & XXXX. Code XXXX ) for failure to notify a Texas resident. \nFederal Trade Commission Privacy and Data Security Division to add this matter to the Consumer Sentinel Network as Data Breach Company Did Not Notify Me. \nXXXX Experian, and XXXX to impose a data-integrity hold on all XXXX XXXX tradelines until the company verifies that its systems and records are secure. \n\nThe record of evidence ( Exhibits AQ ) shows consistent negligence in investigation, communication, and reporting accuracy. This pattern violates FCRA 623 ( b ), 611 ( a ) ( 1 ), and 611 ( a ) ( 7 ) and may indicate systemic non-compliance with the Consumer Financial Protection Act.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-24T20:41:02.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"78233","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16798275","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-10-24T20:40:32.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX XXXXXXXX failed to respond or validate, then later inserted a potential fraud note through <em>CFPB</em>, without evidence. \n\nThis false classification has damaged my credit reputation and may conceal a broader data-compromise <em>event</em>. Exhibits A through Q document certified-mail proof, dispute letters, <em>CFPB</em> <em>filings</em>, and declarations showing that I have never been informed of any breach."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the <em>CFPB</em> and chooses not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[15.794293,"16798275"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15984100","_score":9.647758,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"# # CFPB Complaint Draft : Reinsertion Violation & Regulatory Failure * * Subject : * * Repeat Dispute Mishandling, Duplicate Responses from XXXX, and Reinsertion Violations Across All Three Bureaus * * Consumer Name : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Account in Question : * * PRA account ending in XXXX * * Previous CFPB Complaint IDs XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Summary of Complaint : I am submitting this third complaint regarding Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( PRA ) and their continued furnishing of disputed information to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Despite submitting two separate complaints through CFPB ( IDs listed above ), PRA responded with * * identical boilerplate letters * * that failed to address the core contradictions in my dispute file. \n\nI submitted a full contradiction archive and copies of all three credit reports showing inconsistent reporting of the same PRA account. PRA did not provide full validation, did not reconcile the contradictions across bureaus, and did not notify me in writing before continuing to report the account * * a direct violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Violations Documented : - * * FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) : * * PRA continues reporting without notifying me in writing before reinsertion or correction.\n\n- * * FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) : * * PRA furnishes information they know is disputed and potentially inaccurate.\n\n- * * FDCPA 807 : * * Misrepresentation of resolution status and failure to cease collection activity.\n\n- * * CFPB Oversight Failure : * * CFPB closed both prior complaints despite unresolved contradictions and duplicate responses. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Requested Action : 1. * * Reopen both prior complaints * * and investigate PRAs duplicate responses.\n\n2. * * Audit PRAs certification of accuracy * * and reinsertion logs across all three bureaus.\n\n3. * * Require PRA to provide full validation documentation * *, including chain of custody, billing history, and signed agreements.\n\n4. * * Investigate CFPBs internal handling of repeat complaints * * and failure to escalate systemic contradictionXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Supporting Documents : - PRAs duplicate response letters- Credit reports from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  - Contradiction archive submitted via CFPB - Timeline of disputes and bureau responses To Whom It XXXX Concern, I am submitting this formal contradiction and override demand regarding the PRA Group account # XXXX, which has been inaccurately and inconsistently reported across Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion, and misrepresented by PRA Group in their response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). Below is a full forensic breakdown of the contradictions and breaches, followed by PRAs full response to the CFPB for direct comparison. \nEXPERIAN REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XX/XX/XXXX, status frozen since XX/XX/XXXX Balance updated XX/XX/XXXX, with no status refresh Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX No payments, no resolution, no verified activity Disputes logged : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XX/XX/XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : PRA claims resolution, yet Experian shows unresolved dispute, delayed reinvestigation, and frozen status for 4 years. \nXXXX REPORT Fully Expanded Date of Last Reported Update : XX/XX/XXXX Balance Amount : {$790.00} Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX Date of Last Payment : Blank Actual Payment Amount : Blank Scheduled Payment Amount : Blank Date of Last Activity : Blank Charge-Off Amount : Blank Deferred Pay Start Date : Blank Balloon Pay Date : Blank Balloon Pay Amount : Blank Date Closed : Blank Status : Blank Type of Account : Open Type of Loan : Debt Buyer Whose Account : Individual Portfolio Indicator : Original Creditor Portfolio Status : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nAccount History Status Codes : Collection from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Dispute Status : Disputed from XX/XX/XXXX to Present Resolution Comment : Consumer disagrees after resolution Final Status Before Deletion : Collection account remains on report Current Status : dispute active Contradiction : PRA claimed no dispute was received and that validation resolved the issue. Equifax shows a continuous dispute for 2+ years, unresolved status, confirming the data was unverifiable and or improperly furnished. \nXXXX REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XX/XX/XXXX, balance {$790.00} Status frozen since XX/XX/XXXX, balance updated Sep 12, 2025 Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Balance history : Static from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, {$0.00} paid Disputes logged : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XX/XX/XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : PRA claims resolution, yet XXXX continues reporting the account with no payment activity or verified updates. \nPRAs FULL CFPB RESPONSE both times the same boilerplate response provided by me Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( PRA ) takes compliance with all applicable Federal, State and local laws very seriously. We investigated the complaint and found no records supporting the allegation of misconduct, including, without limitation, that PRA violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and/or any other misconduct cited in this complaint regarding the PRA account XXXX in XXXX. We will continue to honor the request to cease all communications regarding the PRA account unless otherwise permitted or required by applicable law. PRA is a \" Debt Buyer '' ; PRA purchases delinquent debt from creditors to whom such debt is owed and seeks to collect such debt from those who owe such debt. In so doing, PRA is committed to : obtain and maintain appropriate licenses and registrations to engage in its business practices in each jurisdiction in which it collects ; provide appropriate notifications ; validate account information ; investigate and resolve account-related disputes ; verify the integrity and accuracy of account information furnished to the consumer reporting agencies, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ; investigate and resolve credit reporting and identity theft related disputes ; and safeguard information, all in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ; implementing regulations of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ; and other Federal , State and local law, and industry guidelines. PRA purchased the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX from XXXX XXXXXXXX, together with the right to receive payment of the balance due on the account, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Business records provided to PRA by XXXX XXXX at the time of our purchase verify that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX social security number ends in XXXX  and that a balance of {$790.00} was due on the account at the time of XXXX purchase. We sent our initial notification letter to the consumer on or about XX/XX/XXXX. We have no record of a response, or a dispute being received in relation to our initial notification letter. Our records reflect that we subsequently received, investigated, and responded to a dispute regarding the account which was similar to the dispute made in this complaint. In response to that dispute, we sent the consumer a letter, a copy of which is attached, with validating documentation from the original account. The expiration of a statute of limitations limits PRAs ability to pursue legal actions but does not otherwise prohibit PRA from contacting a consumer regarding a debt. PRA furnished information from the account to the consumer reporting agencies in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulation V, state and local law, and industry guidelines. PRA does not control the way in which the consumer reporting agencies report the information furnished by PRA. Accordingly, any differences in their reporting of the information which PRA furnishes is the responsibility of the consumer reporting agencies, not PRA. In response to this complaint, we reinvestigated the account and are sending the consumer a letter with validating documentation from the original account. We believe that the validation provided resolved the dispute and no further steps in response to the complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time.\n\nContradiction : PRAs response denies receiving disputes, claims resolution, and deflects responsibility to the bureaus. Yet all three bureaus show disputes, delayed reinvestigation, unresolved status, and XXXX has suppressed it and current disputes across all three bureaus and cfpb Known Practices & Risks Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC PRA is known to : Report debts to credit bureaus for years without resolution File lawsuits against consumers who dont respond to collection attempts Misclassify accounts, such as reporting debt buyer accounts as open loans Delay or deny reinvestigation of disputes Blame credit bureaus for reporting errors that PRA itself furnished These practices reflect a pattern of systemic abuse and data manipulation that directly contradict their claims to the CFPB and violate multiple provisions of the FCRA and FDCPA.\n\nCFPB Enforcement Actions Against Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC XXXX CFPB Order Penalty : Over {$27.00} million in consumer refunds and civil fines Violations : FDCPA : Deceptive debt collection practices CFPA : Misleading affidavits and false legal claims Key Findings : o Collected on unsubstantiated debt o Filed misleading affidavits in court o Misrepresented intent to prove debts if contested o Sued on time-barred debt ( outside statute of limitations ) o Claimed debts were legally enforceable when they were not PRA was placed under a consent order prohibiting these practices going forward. \nXXXX CFPB Action Penalty : Over {$24.00} XXXX total {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution {$12.00} million civil penalty to CFPBs victims relief fund Violations : FCRA : Failure to properly investigate and resolve credit reporting disputes FDCPA : Continued illegal debt collection practices CFPA : Violated multiple provisions of the XXXX consent order Key Findings : Collected on unsubstantiated debt Sued consumers without documentation Threatened legal action without intent or basis Collected on time-barred debt without required disclosures Failed to provide validation documents within 30 days Blamed credit bureaus for errors PRA itself furnished CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX PRA a repeat offender, stating : After getting caught red-handed in XXXX, Portfolio Recovery Associates continued violating the law through intimidation, deception, and illegal debt collection tactics and lawsuits. \nFederal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Enforcement Portfolio Recovery Associates Year XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Cause : Deceptive debt collection practices and violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) Key Violations : PRA was accused of misrepresenting consumers rights in debt collection notices Sent letters that falsely implied consumers could not dispute debts Failed to disclose that consumers had the right to request verification of the debt Misled consumers about the legal status and enforceability of time-barred debts Used language that threatened legal action without intent or basis FTC Findings : PRAs collection letters violated Section 5 of the FTC Act , which prohibits unfair or deceptive practices PRA also violated the FDCPA, specifically : o 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) : False representation of the character, amount, or legal status of any debt o 807 ( 10 ) : Use of false representation or deceptive means to collect a debt o 809 ( a ) : Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt Outcome : PRA agreed to a consent decree with the FTC Required to change its collection practices, including : o Clear disclosure of dispute rights o No threats of legal action unless substantiated o No collection on time-barred debts without proper notice How Federal Court Rulings Prove Your Case 1. Pattern of Misrepresentation Federal courts have ruled that PRA : Sued consumers without documentation Misrepresented the validity and enforceability of debts Filed affidavits they knew were false or misleading Collected on time-barred debts without proper disclosures These rulings directly support your claim that PRA : Reported unverifiable debt to credit bureaus Falsely claimed resolution to the CFPB Continued collection despite dispute and deletion XXXX. Violation of Dispute Rights In the XXXX CFPB judgment, the court found PRA : Failed to investigate disputes Improperly rejected valid consumer disputes as frivolous Did not maintain policies to ensure accuracy of credit reporting This aligns with your XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX records showing : Delayed reinvestigation Ongoing disputes ignored for years No updates or corrections after dispute XXXX. Legal Precedent for Deletion The CFPBs XXXX final judgment required PRA to : Pay {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution Delete unverifiable accounts Reform dispute handling and credit reporting practices This sets a legal precedent that : PRAs reporting practices are unlawful Deletion is the correct remedy Consumers like you are entitled to relief 4. Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled PRA a repeat offender : Violated XXXX CFPB consent order Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored prior federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an isolated errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review. \nMy Leverage Federal rulings confirm : PRAs practices are legally documented violations my dispute history matches known patterns of abuse I am entitled to deletion, protection from reinsertion, and regulatory enforcement SECTION : Type of Account Open Misclassification by PRA PRA reported the account as Open on XXXX which falsely implies : An active credit line or revolving account Ongoing access to borrowed funds A direct relationship between the consumer and the furnisher This is categorically false. The account is : A charged-off debt purchased by a third party Closed by the original creditor ( XXXX XXXX ) Not open, revolving, or accessible to the consumer Violations FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information PRA misrepresented the account status, inflating credit utilization and misleading lenders.\n\nFCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Duty to Correct and Update PRA failed to correct the misclassification after multiple disputes.\n\nFDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False Representation of Legal Status Labeling a closed, charged-off debt as Open falsely implies ongoing liability and access.\n\nFCRA 607 ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Equifax displayed a status that contradicts the original creditors records and PRAs own CFPB response.\n\nSECTION : Type of Loan Debt Buyer Misclassification by PRA PRA reported the Type of Loan as Debt Buyer across multiple bureaus. This is not a loan productits a description of PRAs business model. This classification : Does not reflect any loan agreement signed by the consumer Misrepresents the nature of the obligation Implies the consumer borrowed directly from PRA, which is false Confuses asset ownership with consumer liability Violations FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information PRA misclassified the loan type, misleading the nature and origin of the debt.\n\nFDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False Representation of Legal Status Reporting a third-party purchase as a direct loan is a false claim of origin and enforceability.\n\nFCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Duty to Correct and Update PRA failed to update the loan type to reflect the original product ( e.g., credit card ).\n\nFCRA 607 ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Credit bureaus accepted and displayed a misclassification that harms consumers and misleads underwriters.\n\nSECTION : Charge-Off, IRS Reporting , and Ownership Contradiction XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX charged off the original account, which triggered a series of financial and legal events that directly contradict PRAs current reporting and collection practices. \nCharge-Off Process A charge-off is an accounting action where the original creditor declares the debt uncollectible and removes it from active assets. \nXXXX XXXX then claims the charged-off amount as a business loss on its annual tax filings, reducing taxable income. \nIn many cases, the creditor also receives compensation through loss prevention insurance and or by selling the debt to a third-party buyer. \nIRS Reporting Implications XXXX XXXX issued a Form XXXX ( Cancellation of Debt ), the debt is considered canceled under IRS regulations XXXX \nOnce canceled, the debt is no longer legally enforceable, and any attempt to collect or report it XXXX constitute double recovery, which is unlawful. \nPRA, as the purchaser, can not legally reclassify the debt as a new loan or report it as an Open account under the consumers name.\n\nOwnership Transfer and Legal Status PRA purchased the debt from XXXX XXXX as part of a portfolio of charged-off accounts. \nThis transaction is strictly between PRA and XXXX Onethe consumer was not a party to the sale. \nXXXXA now owns the collection rights, but not the original contract or terms.\n\nReporting the account as Open falsely implies an active relationship and ongoing liability, which violates federal law.\n\nViolations Triggered by Misclassification Federal Violations : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Failure to correct and update after dispute FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Obligation to delete unverifiable or inaccurate data FCRA 607 ( b ) Credit bureaus must ensure maximum possible accuracy FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False representation of the character or legal status of any debt FDCPA 807 ( 10 ) Use of deceptive means to collect a debt FDCPA 809 ( a ) Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt IRS Violations ( if 1099-C was issued ) : Improper collection on canceled debt False asset classification Potential double recovery Violation of IRS bad debt deduction rules Strategic Conclusion XXXX XXXX has already claimed the debt as a loss and been compensated. PRAs reporting of this account as Open and Debt Buyer misrepresents the legal status, origin, and enforceability of the debt. This contradiction supports permanent deletion under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB and IRS enforcement guidelines.\n\nSECTION : PRAs Long-Term Ownership and Monetization Contradiction Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( PRA ) has held this account for a duration sufficient to trigger its own financial reporting obligations. Under IRS regulations and standard corporate accounting practices, PRA has : Claimed the account as a business bad debt deduction under IRS Topic No. 453 and Publication 535 Reported the account as a business loss on its annual income tax filings Recovered the value through loss prevention insurance or internal portfolio write-downs IRS Bad Debt Deduction Rules According to IRS Topic No. 453 and Publication 535 : A business may deduct a debt that becomes wholly or partially worthless during the tax year The deduction must be claimed in the year the debt is deemed uncollectible The business must demonstrate reasonable efforts to collect before declaring it worthless If PRA : Held the account for multiple years Failed to collect any payments Continued reporting it as Open despite no verified activity Then, PRA has already claimed the debt as worthless for tax purposeswhile still reporting it as active on consumer credit files.\n\nInsurance Recovery Risk PRA : Insured its portfolio against non-performing assets Received compensation for this account Continued reporting or collecting on it Then, PRA has engaged in double monetization, which could trigger insurance fraud exposure under state and federal law.\n\nLegal Contradiction PRA can not : Claim the debt as a business loss Recover its value through tax deductions or insurance And still report the account as Open and collectible under the consumers name This contradiction violates : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False representation of legal status IRS Code PRA collects on a canceled or deducted debt, it may trigger unlawful double recovery Strategic Conclusion PRAs long-term ownership and monetization of this account contradict its continued reporting as an active liability. This supports permanent deletion under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB, IRS, and insurance enforcement guidelines.\n\nDEMAND FOR ACTION I am requesting the following actions be taken immediately : 1. Permanent deletion of the PRA Group account # XXXX from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) and 623 ( a ) ( 3 ).\n\n2. Confirmation that no future furnishers, including PRA Group XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, or any third-party collector, may reinsert this account or any derivative into my credit reports without : o No updates, corrections, or reinsertions may be made to my credit reports regarding any account furnished by Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( PRA ), XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX any third-party debt collector or debt buyer, without my explicit written consent. Any attempt to do so without my agreement constitutes a violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), 623 ( a ) ( 3 ), and FDCPA 807.\n\no Notification to all bureaus per FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) 3. Regulatory review of PRA Groups misrepresentation to the CFPB and breach of reinvestigation timelines.\n\n4. Investigate pra via CFPB, FTC, other law enforcement, and agencies This contradiction is now archived for legacy-grade breach documentation and survivor-centered override enforcement.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-16T19:39:04.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"315XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15984100","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2025-09-16T19:11:50.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled PRA a repeat offender : <em>Violated</em> XXXX <em>CFPB</em> consent order Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored <em>prior</em> federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an <em>isolated</em> errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review."]},"sort":[9.647758,"15984100"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15977223","_score":9.636784,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"# # CFPB Complaint Draft : Reinsertion Violation & Regulatory Failure * * Subject : * * Repeat Dispute Mishandling, Duplicate Responses from XXXX, and Reinsertion Violations Across All Three Bureaus * * Consumer Name : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Account in Question : * * XXXX account ending in XXXX * * Previous CFPB Complaint IDs : * * - XXXX - XXXX -- - # # # Summary of Complaint : I am submitting this third complaint regarding XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and their continued furnishing of disputed information to Equifax, XXXX, and XXXX  XXXX Despite submitting two separate complaints through CFPB ( IDs listed above ), XXXX responded with * * identical boilerplate letters * * that failed to address the core contradictions in my dispute file. \n\nI submitted a full contradiction archive and copies of all three credit reports showing inconsistent reporting of the same XXXX account. XXXX did not provide full validation, did not reconcile the contradictions across bureaus, and did not notify me in writing before continuing to report the account * * a direct violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) * *.\n\n-- - # # # Violations Documented : - * * FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) : * * XXXX continues reporting without notifying me in writing before reinsertion or correction. \n- * * FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) : * * XXXX furnishes information they know is disputed and potentially inaccurate. \n- * * FDCPA 807 : * * Misrepresentation of resolution status and failure to cease collection activity. \n- * * CFPB Oversight Failure : * * CFPB closed both prior complaints despite unresolved contradictions and duplicate responses. \n\n-- - # # # Requested Action : XXXX. * * Reopen both prior complaints * * and investigate PRAs duplicate responses. \nXXXX. * * Audit XXXX  certification of accuracy * * and reinsertion logs across all three bureaus. \nXXXX. * * Require XXXX to provide full validation documentation * *, including chain of custody, billing history, and signed agreements. \nXXXX. * * Investigate CFPBs internal handling of repeat complaints * * and failure to escalate systemic contradiction. \n\n-- - # # # Supporting Documents : - XXXX  duplicate response letters- Credit reports from Equifax, XXXX, and XXXX  - Contradiction archive submitted via CFPB - Timeline of disputes and bureau responses To Whom It May Concern, I am submitting this formal contradiction and override demand regarding the XXXX XXXX account # XXXX, which has been inaccurately and inconsistently reported across XXXX, Equifax, and XXXX, and misrepresented by XXXX XXXX in their response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). Below is a full forensic breakdown of the contradictions and breaches, followed by PRAs full response to the CFPB for direct comparison. \nXXXX  REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XX/XX/XXXX, status frozen since XX/XX/XXXX Balance updated XX/XX/XXXX, with no status refresh Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX No payments, no resolution, no verified activity Disputes logged : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XX/XX/XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : XXXX claims resolution, yet XXXX  shows unresolved dispute, delayed reinvestigation, and frozen status for 4 years. \nEQUIFAX REPORT Fully Expanded Date of Last Reported Update : XX/XX/XXXX Balance Amount : {$790.00} Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX Date of Last Payment : Blank Actual Payment Amount : Blank Scheduled Payment Amount : Blank Date of Last Activity : Blank Charge-Off Amount : Blank Deferred Pay Start Date : Blank Balloon Pay Date : Blank Balloon Pay Amount : Blank Date Closed : Blank Status : Blank Type of Account : Open Type of Loan : Debt Buyer Whose Account : XXXX XXXX XXXX  : Original Creditor XXXX  Status : XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX \nAccount History Status Codes : Collection from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Dispute Status : Disputed from XX/XX/XXXX to Present Resolution Comment : Consumer disagrees after resolution Final Status Before Deletion : Collection account remains on report Current Status : dispute active Contradiction : XXXX claimed no dispute was received and that validation resolved the issue. Equifax shows a continuous dispute for 2+ years, unresolved status, confirming the data was unverifiable and or improperly furnished. \nXXXX  REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XX/XX/XXXX, balance {$790.00} Status frozen since XX/XX/XXXX, balance updated XXXX XXXX XXXX Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Balance history : Static from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, {$0.00} paid Disputes logged : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XX/XX/XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : XXXX claims resolution, yet XXXX  continues reporting the account with no payment activity or verified updates. \nXXXX  FULL CFPB RESPONSE both times the same boilerplate response provided by me Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) takes compliance with all applicable Federal, State and local laws very seriously. We investigated the complaint and found no records supporting the allegation of misconduct, including, without limitation, that XXXX violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and/or any other misconduct cited in this complaint regarding the XXXX account ending in XXXX. We will continue to honor the request to cease all communications regarding the XXXX account unless otherwise permitted or required by applicable law. XXXX is a \" Debt Buyer '' ; XXXX purchases delinquent debt from creditors to whom such debt is owed and seeks to collect such debt from those who owe such debt. In so doing, XXXX is committed to : obtain and maintain appropriate licenses and registrations to engage in its business practices in each jurisdiction in which it collects ; provide appropriate notifications ; validate account information ; investigate and resolve account-related disputes ; verify the integrity and accuracy of account information furnished to the consumer reporting agencies, Equifax, XXXX  and XXXX  ; investigate and resolve credit reporting and identity theft related disputes ; and safeguard information, all in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ; implementing regulations of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ; and other XXXX XXXX XXXX and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX purchased the XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX ), XXXX. ( XXXX  XXXX ) XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX from XXXX  XXXX, together with the right to receive payment of the balance due on the account, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Business records provided to XXXX by XXXX XXXX at the time of our purchase verify that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, for XXXX XXXX XXXX whose social security number ends in XXXX  and that a balance of {$790.00} was due on the account at the time of XXXX purchase. We sent our initial notification letter to the consumer on or about XX/XX/XXXX. We have no record of a response, or a dispute being received in relation to our initial notification letter. Our records reflect that we subsequently received, investigated, and responded to a dispute regarding the account which was similar to the dispute made in this complaint. In response to that dispute, we sent the consumer a letter, a copy of which is attached, with validating documentation from the original account. The expiration of a statute of limitations limits XXXX  ability to pursue legal actions but does not otherwise prohibit XXXX from contacting a consumer regarding a debt. XXXX furnished information from the account to the consumer reporting agencies in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulation V, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX does not control the way in which the consumer reporting agencies report the information furnished by XXXX. Accordingly, any differences in their reporting of the information which XXXX furnishes is the responsibility of the consumer reporting agencies, not XXXX. In response to this complaint, we reinvestigated the account and are sending the consumer a letter with validating documentation from the original account. We believe that the validation provided resolved the dispute and no further steps in response to the complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time. \nContradiction : PRAs response denies receiving disputes, claims resolution, and deflects responsibility to the bureaus. Yet all three bureaus show disputes, delayed reinvestigation, unresolved status, and Equifax has suppressed it and current disputes across all three bureaus and cfpb Known Practices & Risks XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is known to : Report debts to credit bureaus for years without resolution File lawsuits against consumers who dont respond to collection attempts Misclassify accounts, such as reporting debt buyer accounts as open loans Delay or deny reinvestigation of disputes Blame credit bureaus for reporting errors that XXXX itself furnished These practices reflect a pattern of systemic abuse and data manipulation that directly contradict their claims to the CFPB and violate multiple provisions of the FCRA and FDCPA. \nCFPB Enforcement Actions Against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB Order Penalty : Over {$27.00} XXXX in consumer refunds and civil fines Violations : FDCPA : Deceptive debt collection practices XXXX : Misleading affidavits and false legal claims Key Findings : o Collected on unsubstantiated debt o Filed misleading affidavits in court o Misrepresented intent to prove debts if contested o Sued on time-barred debt ( outside statute of limitations ) o Claimed debts were legally enforceable when they were not XXXX was placed under a consent order prohibiting these practices going forward. \nXXXX CFPB Action Penalty : Over {$24.00} XXXX total {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution {$12.00} XXXX civil penalty to CFPBs victims relief fund Violations : FCRA : Failure to properly investigate and resolve credit reporting disputes FDCPA : Continued illegal debt collection practices CFPA : Violated multiple provisions of the XXXX consent order Key Findings : Collected on unsubstantiated debt Sued consumers without documentation Threatened legal action without intent or basis Collected on time-barred debt without required disclosures Failed to provide validation documents within 30 days Blamed credit bureaus for errors XXXX itself furnished CFPB Director Rohit Chopra called XXXX a repeat offender, stating : After getting caught red-handed in XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX  continued violating the law through intimidation, deception, and illegal debt collection tactics and lawsuits. \nFederal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Enforcement Portfolio XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX Penalty : {$2.00} XXXX Cause : Deceptive debt collection practices and violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) Key Violations : XXXX was accused of misrepresenting consumers rights in debt collection notices Sent letters that falsely implied consumers could not dispute debts Failed to disclose that consumers had the right to request verification of the debt Misled consumers about the legal status and enforceability of time-barred debts Used language that threatened legal action without intent or basis FTC Findings : XXXX collection letters violated Section 5 of the FTC Act , which prohibits unfair or deceptive practices XXXX also violated the FDCPA, specifically : o 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) : False representation of the character, amount, or legal status of any debt o 807 ( 10 ) : Use of false representation or deceptive means to collect a debt o 809 ( a ) : Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt Outcome : XXXX agreed to a consent decree with the FTC Required to change its collection practices, including : o Clear disclosure of dispute rights o No threats of legal action unless substantiated o No collection on time-barred debts without proper notice How Federal Court Rulings Prove Your Case 1. Pattern of Misrepresentation Federal courts have ruled that XXXX : Sued consumers without documentation Misrepresented the validity and enforceability of debts Filed affidavits they knew were false or misleading Collected on time-barred debts without proper disclosures These rulings directly support your claim that XXXX : Reported unverifiable debt to credit bureaus Falsely claimed resolution to the CFPB Continued collection despite dispute and deletion 2. Violation of Dispute Rights In the XXXX CFPB judgment, the court found XXXX : Failed to investigate disputes Improperly rejected valid consumer disputes as frivolous Did not maintain policies to ensure accuracy of credit reporting This aligns with your XXXX, Equifax, and XXXX  records showing : Delayed reinvestigation Ongoing disputes ignored for years No updates or corrections after dispute 3. Legal Precedent for Deletion The CFPBs XXXX final judgment required XXXX to : Pay {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution Delete unverifiable accounts Reform dispute handling and credit reporting practices This sets a legal precedent that : XXXX reporting practices are unlawful Deletion is the correct remedy Consumers like you are entitled to relief 4. Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled XXXX a repeat offender : Violated XXXX CFPB consent order Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored prior federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an isolated errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review. \nMy Leverage Federal rulings confirm : XXXX practices are legally documented violations my dispute history matches known patterns of abuse I am entitled to deletion, protection from reinsertion, and regulatory enforcement SECTION : Type of Account Open Misclassification by XXXX XXXX reported the account as Open on Equifax, which falsely implies : An active credit line or revolving account Ongoing access to borrowed funds A direct relationship between the consumer and the furnisher This is categorically false. The account is : A charged-off debt purchased by a third party Closed by the original creditor ( XXXX XXXX ) Not open, revolving, or accessible to the consumer Violations FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information XXXX misrepresented the account status, inflating credit utilization and misleading lenders. \nFCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Duty to Correct and Update XXXX failed to correct the misclassification after multiple disputes. \nFDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False Representation of Legal Status Labeling a closed, charged-off debt as Open falsely implies ongoing liability and access. \nFCRA 607 ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Equifax displayed a status that contradicts the original creditors records and XXXX  own CFPB response. \nSECTION : Type of Loan Debt Buyer Misclassification by XXXX XXXX reported the Type of Loan as Debt Buyer across multiple bureaus. This is not a loan productits a description of PRAs business model. This classification : Does not reflect any loan agreement signed by the consumer Misrepresents the nature of the obligation Implies the consumer borrowed directly from XXXX, which is false Confuses asset ownership with consumer liability Violations FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information XXXX misclassified the loan type, misleading the nature and origin of the debt. \nFDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False Representation of Legal Status Reporting a third-party purchase as a direct loan is a false claim of origin and enforceability.\n\nFCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Duty to Correct and Update XXXX failed to update the loan type to reflect the original product ( e.g., credit card ). \nFCRA 607 ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Credit bureaus accepted and displayed a misclassification that harms consumers and misleads underwriters. \nSECTION : Charge-Off, IRS Reporting XXXX and Ownership Contradiction XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX charged off the original account, which triggered a series of financial and legal events that directly contradict XXXX  current reporting and collection practices. \nCharge-Off Process A charge-off is an accounting action where the original creditor declares the debt uncollectible and removes it from active assets. \nXXXX XXXX then claims the charged-off amount as a business loss on its annual tax filings, reducing taxable income. \nIn many cases, the creditor also receives compensation through loss prevention insurance and or by selling the debt to a third-party buyer. \nIRS Reporting Implications Capital One issued a Form 1099-C ( Cancellation of Debt ), the debt is considered canceled under IRS regulations .\n\nOnce canceled, the debt is no longer legally enforceable, and any attempt to collect or report it may constitute double recovery, which is unlawful. \nXXXX, as the purchaser, can not legally reclassify the debt as a new loan or report it as an Open account under the consumers name. \nOwnership Transfer and Legal Status XXXX purchased the debt from XXXX XXXX as part of a portfolio of charged-off accounts. \nThis transaction is strictly between XXXX and XXXX XXXXthe consumer was not a party to the sale. \nXXXX now owns the collection rights, but not the original contract or terms. \nReporting the account as Open falsely implies an active relationship and ongoing liability, which violates federal law.\n\nViolations Triggered by Misclassification Federal Violations : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Failure to correct and update after dispute FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Obligation to delete unverifiable or inaccurate data FCRA 607 ( b ) Credit bureaus must ensure maximum possible accuracy FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False representation of the character or legal status of any debt FDCPA 807 ( 10 ) Use of deceptive means to collect a debt FDCPA 809 ( a ) Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt IRS Violations ( if 1099-C was issued ) : Improper collection on canceled debt False asset classification Potential double recovery Violation of IRS bad debt deduction rules Strategic Conclusion XXXX XXXX has already claimed the debt as a loss and been compensated. XXXX  reporting of this account as Open and Debt Buyer misrepresents the legal status, origin, and enforceability of the debt. This contradiction supports permanent deletion under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB and IRS enforcement guidelines. \nSECTION : XXXX Long-Term Ownership and Monetization Contradiction XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) has held this account for a duration sufficient to trigger its own financial reporting obligations. Under IRS regulations and standard corporate accounting practices, XXXX has : Claimed the account as a business bad debt deduction under IRS Topic No. 453 and Publication 535 Reported the account as a business loss on its annual income tax filings Recovered the value through loss prevention insurance or internal portfolio write-downs IRS Bad Debt Deduction Rules According to IRS Topic No. 453 and Publication 535 : A business may deduct a debt that becomes wholly or partially worthless during the tax year The deduction must be claimed in the year the debt is deemed uncollectible The business must demonstrate reasonable efforts to collect before declaring it worthless If XXXX : Held the account for multiple years Failed to collect any payments Continued reporting it as Open despite no verified activity Then, XXXX has already claimed the debt as worthless for tax purposeswhile still reporting it as active on consumer credit files. \nInsurance Recovery Risk XXXX : Insured its portfolio against non-performing assets Received compensation for this account Continued reporting or collecting on it Then, XXXX has engaged in double monetization, which could trigger insurance fraud exposure under state and federal law. \nLegal Contradiction XXXX can not : Claim the debt as a business loss Recover its value through tax deductions or insurance And still report the account as Open and collectible under the consumers name This contradiction violates : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False representation of legal status IRS Code XXXX collects on a canceled or deducted debt, it may trigger unlawful double recovery Strategic Conclusion PRAs long-term ownership and monetization of this account contradict its continued reporting as an active liability. This supports permanent deletion under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB, IRS, and insurance enforcement guidelines. \nDEMAND FOR ACTION I am requesting the following actions be taken immediately : XXXX. Permanent deletion of the XXXX XXXX account # XXXX from XXXX, Equifax, and XXXX  under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) and 623 ( a ) ( 3 ).\n\n2. Confirmation that no future furnishers, including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, or any third-party collector, may reinsert this account or any derivative into my credit reports without : o No updates, corrections, or reinsertions may be made to my credit reports regarding any account furnished by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), XXXX  XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX or any third-party debt collector or debt buyer, without my explicit written consent. Any attempt to do so without my agreement constitutes a violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), 623 ( a ) ( 3 ), and FDCPA 807.\n\no Notification to all bureaus per FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) 3. Regulatory review of XXXX XXXX misrepresentation to the CFPB and breach of reinvestigation timelines. \nXXXX. Investigate pra via CFPB, FTC, other law enforcement, and agencies This contradiction is now archived for legacy-grade breach documentation and survivor-centered override enforcement.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-16T19:39:00.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"315XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15977223","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-09-16T19:38:31.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled XXXX a repeat offender : <em>Violated</em> XXXX <em>CFPB</em> consent order Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored <em>prior</em> federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an <em>isolated</em> errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review."]},"sort":[9.636784,"15977223"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15982512","_score":9.411025,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"To Whom It May Concern, I am submitting this formal contradiction and override demand regarding the PRA Group account # XXXX, which has been inaccurately and inconsistently reported across XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and misrepresented by PRA Group in their response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). Below is a full forensic breakdown of the contradictions and breaches, followed by PRAs full response to the CFPB for direct comparison. This supports permanent deletion under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB, IRS, and insurance enforcement guidelines. \nXXXX  REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XXXX XXXX XXXX, status frozen since XXXX XXXX Balance updated XXXX XXXX XXXX, with no status refresh Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX No payments, no resolution, no verified activity Disputes logged : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XXXX XXXX  Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : PRA claims resolution, yet Experian shows unresolved dispute, delayed reinvestigation, and frozen status for 4 years. \nXXXX  REPORT Fully Expanded Date of Last Reported Update : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance Amount : {$790.00} Date of First Delinquency : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Date of Last Payment : Blank Actual Payment Amount : Blank Scheduled Payment Amount : Blank Date of Last Activity : Blank Charge-Off Amount : Blank Deferred Pay Start Date : Blank Balloon Pay Date : Blank Balloon Pay Amount : Blank Date Closed : Blank Status : Blank Type of Account : Open Type of Loan : Debt Buyer Whose Account : Individual Portfolio Indicator : Original Creditor Portfolio Status : XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX \nAccount History Status Codes : Collection from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Dispute Status : Disputed from XXXX XXXX  to Present Resolution Comment : Consumer disagrees after resolution Final Status Before Deletion : Collection account remains on report Current Status : still in dispute Contradiction : PRA claimed no dispute was received and that validation resolved the issueXXXX XXXX shows a continuous dispute for 2+ years, unresolved status, and still in dispute confirming the data was unverifiable and improperly furnished. \nXXXX REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XXXX XXXX XXXX balance {$790.00} Status frozen since XXXX XXXX, balance updated XXXX XXXX XXXX Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance history : Static from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, {$0.00} paid Disputes logged : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XXXX XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : PRA claims resolution, yet XXXX continues reporting the account with no payment activity or verified updates. \nPRAs FULL CFPB RESPONSE Provided by Me Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( PRA ) takes compliance with all applicable Federal, State and local laws very seriously. We investigated the complaint and found no records supporting the allegation of misconduct, including, without limitation, that PRA violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and/or any other misconduct cited in this complaint regarding the PRA account ending in XXXX. We will continue to honor the request to cease all communications regarding the PRA account unless otherwise permitted or required by applicable law. PRA is a \" Debt Buyer '' ; PRA purchases delinquent debt from creditors to whom such debt is owed and seeks to collect such debt from those who owe such debt. In so doing, PRA is committed to : obtain and maintain appropriate licenses and registrations to engage in its business practices in each jurisdiction in which it collects ; provide appropriate notifications ; validate account information ; investigate and resolve account-related disputes ; verify the integrity and accuracy of account information furnished to the consumer reporting agencies, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ; investigate and resolve credit reporting and identity theft related disputes ; and safeguard information, all in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ; implementing regulations of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ; and other Federal , State and local law, and industry guidelines. PRA purchased the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX  XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX  from XXXX  XXXX, together with the right to receive payment of the balance due on the account, on or about XXXX XXXX XXXX Business records provided to PRA by XXXX XXXX at the time of our purchase verify that the account was opened on XXXX XXXX XXXX, for XXXX XXXX XXXX whose social security number ends in XXXX and that a balance of {$790.00} was due on the account at the time of PRAs purchase. We sent our initial notification letter to the consumer on or about XXXX XXXX XXXX We have no record of a response, or a dispute being received in relation to our initial notification letter. Our records reflect that we subsequently received, investigated, and responded to a dispute regarding the account which was similar to the dispute made in this complaint. In response to that dispute, we sent the consumer a letter, a copy of which is attached, with validating documentation from the original account. The expiration of a statute of limitations limits PRAs ability to pursue legal actions but does not otherwise prohibit PRA from contacting a consumer regarding a debt. PRA furnished information from the account to the consumer reporting agencies in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulation V, state and local law, and industry guidelines. PRA does not control the way in which the consumer reporting agencies report the information furnished by PRA. Accordingly, any differences in their reporting of the information which PRA furnishes is the responsibility of the consumer reporting agencies, not PRA. In response to this complaint, we reinvestigated the account and are sending the consumer a letter with validating documentation from the original account. We believe that the validation provided resolved the dispute and no further steps in response to the complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time. \nContradiction : PRAs response denies receiving disputes, claims resolution, and deflects responsibility to the bureaus. Yet all three bureaus show disputes, delayed reinvestigation, unresolved status, and still in dispute with all three bureaus. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC PRA is known to : Report debts to credit bureaus for years without resolution File lawsuits against consumers who dont respond to collection attempts Misclassify accounts, such as reporting debt buyer accounts as open loans Delay or deny reinvestigation of disputes Blame credit bureaus for reporting errors that PRA itself furnished These practices reflect a pattern of systemic abuse and data manipulation that directly contradict their claims to the CFPB and violate multiple provisions of the FCRA and FDCPA. \nCFPB Enforcement Actions Against Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC XXXX CFPB Order Penalty : Over {$27.00} XXXX in consumer refunds and civil fines Violations : FDCPA : Deceptive debt collection practices CFPA : Misleading affidavits and false legal claims Key Findings : o Collected on unsubstantiated debt o Filed misleading affidavits in court o Misrepresented intent to prove debts if contested o Sued on time-barred debt ( outside statute of limitations ) o Claimed debts were legally enforceable when they were not PRA was placed under a consent order prohibiting these practices going forward. \nXXXX CFPB Action Penalty : Over {$24.00} XXXX total {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution {$12.00} XXXX civil penalty to CFPBs victims relief fund Violations : FCRA : Failure to properly investigate and resolve credit reporting disputes FDCPA : Continued illegal debt collection practices CFPA : Violated multiple provisions of the XXXX consent order Key Findings : Collected on unsubstantiated debt Sued consumers without documentation Threatened legal action without intent or basis Collected on time-barred debt without required disclosures Failed to provide validation documents within 30 days Blamed credit bureaus for errors PRA itself furnished CFPB Director XXXX XXXX called PRA a repeat offender, stating : After getting caught red-handed in XXXX, Portfolio Recovery Associates continued violating the law through intimidation, deception, and illegal debt collection tactics and lawsuits. \nFederal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Enforcement Portfolio Recovery Associates Year : XXXX Penalty : {$2.00} XXXX Cause : Deceptive debt collection practices and violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) Key Violations : PRA was accused of misrepresenting consumers rights in debt collection notices Sent letters that falsely implied consumers could not dispute debts Failed to disclose that consumers had the right to request verification of the debt Misled consumers about the legal status and enforceability of time-barred debts Used language that threatened legal action without intent or basis FTC Findings : PRAs collection letters violated Section 5 of the FTC Act , which prohibits unfair or deceptive practices PRA also violated the FDCPA, specifically : o 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) : False representation of the character, amount, or legal status of any debt o 807 ( 10 ) : Use of false representation or deceptive means to collect a debt o 809 ( a ) : Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt Outcome : PRA agreed to a consent decree with the FTC Required to change its collection practices, including : o Clear disclosure of dispute rights o No threats of legal action unless substantiated o No collection on time-barred debts without proper notice How Federal Court Rulings Prove My Case 1. Pattern of Misrepresentation Federal courts have ruled that PRA : Sued consumers without documentation Misrepresented the validity and enforceability of debts Filed affidavits they knew were false or misleading Collected on time-barred debts without proper disclosures These rulings directly support your claim that PRA : Reported unverifiable debt to credit bureaus Falsely claimed resolution to the CFPB Continued collection despite dispute 2. Violation of Dispute Rights In the XXXX CFPB judgment, the court found PRA : Failed to investigate disputes Improperly rejected valid consumer disputes as frivolous Did not maintain policies to ensure accuracy of credit reporting This aligns with your Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion records showing : Delayed reinvestigation Ongoing disputes ignored for years No updates or corrections after dispute 3. Legal Precedent for Deletion The CFPBs XXXX final judgment required PRA to : Pay {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution Delete unverifiable accounts Reform dispute handling and credit reporting practices This sets a legal precedent that : PRAs reporting practices are unlawful Deletion is the correct remedy Consumers like me are entitled to relief 4. Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled PRA a repeat offender : Violated XXXX CFPB consent order Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored prior federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an isolated errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review. \nMy Leverage Federal rulings confirm : PRAs practices are legally documented violations my dispute history matches known patterns of abuse I am entitled to deletion, protection from reinsertion, and regulatory enforcement SECTION : Type of Account Open Misclassification by PRA PRA reported the account as Open on Equifax, which falsely implies : An active credit line or revolving account Ongoing access to borrowed funds A direct relationship between the consumer and the furnisher This is categorically false. The account is : A charged-off debt purchased by a third party Closed by the original creditor ( XXXX XXXXXXXX ) Not open, revolving, or accessible to the consumer Violations FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information PRA misrepresented the account status, inflating credit utilization and misleading lenders.\n\nFCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Duty to Correct and Update PRA failed to correct the misclassification after multiple disputes. \nFDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False Representation of Legal Status Labeling a closed, charged-off debt as Open falsely implies ongoing liability and access.\n\nFCRA 607 ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy XXXX displayed a status that contradicts the original creditors records and PRAs own CFPB response. \nSECTION : Type of Loan Debt Buyer Misclassification by PRA PRA reported the Type of Loan as Debt Buyer across multiple bureaus. This is not a loan productits a description of PRAs business model. This classification : Does not reflect any loan agreement signed by the consumer Misrepresents the nature of the obligation Implies the consumer borrowed directly from PRA, which is false Confuses asset ownership with consumer liability Violations FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information PRA misclassified the loan type, misleading the nature and origin of the debt.\n\nFDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False Representation of Legal Status Reporting a third-party purchase as a direct loan is a false claim of origin and enforceability.\n\nFCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Duty to Correct and Update PRA failed to update the loan type to reflect the original product ( e.g., credit card ). \nFCRA 607 ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Credit bureaus accepted and displayed a misclassification that harms consumers and misleads underwriters. \nSECTION : Charge-Off, IRS Reporting XXXX and Ownership Contradiction XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX charged off the original account, which triggered a series of financial and legal events that directly contradict PRAs current reporting and collection practices. \nCharge-Off Process A charge-off is an accounting action where the original creditor declares the debt uncollectible and removes it from active assets. \nXXXX XXXX then claims the charged-off amount as a business loss on its annual tax filings, reducing taxable income. \nIn many cases, the creditor also receives compensation through loss prevention insurance and or by selling the debt to a third-party buyer. \nIRS Reporting Implications XXXX XXXX issued a Form 1099-C ( Cancellation of Debt ), the debt is considered canceled under IRS regulations XXXX \nOnce canceled, the debt is no longer legally enforceable, and any attempt to collect or report it constitutes double recovery, which is unlawful. \nPRA, as the purchaser, can not legally reclassify the debt as a new loan or report it as an Open account under the consumers name.\n\nOwnership Transfer and Legal Status PRA purchased the debt from XXXX XXXX as part of a portfolio of charged-off accounts. \nThis transaction is strictly between PRA and XXXX XXXXthe consumer was not a party to the sale. \nPRA now owns the collection rights, but not the original contract or terms.\n\nReporting the account as Open falsely implies an active relationship and ongoing liability, which violates federal law. \nViolations Triggered by Misclassification Federal Violations : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) Failure to correct and update after dispute FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Obligation to delete unverifiable or inaccurate data FCRA 607 ( b ) Credit bureaus must ensure maximum possible accuracy FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False representation of the character or legal status of any debt FDCPA 807 ( 10 ) Use of deceptive means to collect a debt FDCPA 809 ( a ) Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt IRS Violations ( if 1099-C was issued ) : Improper collection on canceled debt False asset classification Potential double recovery Violation of IRS bad debt deduction rules Strategic Conclusion XXXX XXXX has already claimed the debt as a loss and been compensated. PRAs reporting of this account as Open and Debt Buyer misrepresents the legal status, origin, and enforceability of the debt. This contradiction supports permanent deletion under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB and IRS enforcement guidelines.\n\nSECTION : PRAs Long-Term Ownership and Monetization Contradiction Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( PRA ) has held this account for a duration sufficient to trigger its own financial reporting obligations. Under IRS regulations and standard corporate accounting practices, PRA may have : Claimed the account as a business bad debt deduction under IRS Topic No. 453 and Publication 535 Reported the account as a business loss on its annual income tax filings Recovered the value through loss prevention insurance or internal portfolio write-downs IRS Bad Debt Deduction Rules According to IRS Topic No. 453 and Publication 535 : A business may deduct a debt that becomes wholly or partially worthless during the tax year The deduction must be claimed in the year the debt is deemed uncollectible The business must demonstrate reasonable efforts to collect before declaring it worthless If PRA : Held the account for multiple years Failed to collect any payments Continued reporting it as Open despite no verified activity Then, PRA has already claimed the debt as worthless for tax purposeswhile still reporting it as active on consumer credit files.\n\nInsurance Recovery Risk If PRA : Insured its portfolio against non-performing assets Received compensation for this account Continued reporting or collecting on it Then, PRA has engaged in double monetization, which could trigger insurance fraud exposure under state and federal law.\n\nLegal Contradiction PRA can not : Claim the debt as a business loss Recover its value through tax deductions or insurance And still report the account as Open and collectible under the consumers name This contradiction violates : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) False representation of legal status IRS Code PRA collects on a canceled or deducted debt, it triggers an unlawful double recovery Strategic Conclusion PRAs long-term ownership and monetization of this account contradict its continued reporting as an active liability. This supports permanent deletion under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB, IRS, and insurance enforcement guidelines. \nDEMAND FOR ACTION I am requesting the following actions be taken immediately : 1. Permanent deletion of the PRA Group account # XXXX from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) and 623 ( a ) ( 3 ).\n\n2. Confirmation that no future furnishers, including PRA Group XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, or any third-party collector, may reinsert this account or any derivative into my credit reports without : o Full validation o Written consent from me o Notification to all bureaus per FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) 3. Regulatory review of PRA Groups misrepresentation to the CFPB and breach of reinvestigation timelines. \nThis contradiction is now archived for legacy-grade breach documentation and survivor-centered override enforcement. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-16T18:21:00.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"315XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15982512","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2025-09-16T18:20:36.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with personal statement of dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled PRA a repeat offender : <em>Violated</em> XXXX <em>CFPB</em> consent order Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored <em>prior</em> federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an <em>isolated</em> errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review."]},"sort":[9.411025,"15982512"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16670294","_score":9.211067,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT In XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXPayPal abruptly and permanently closed my account without prior warning, without specific justification, and has denied me access to my complete transaction history for nearly three years. Despite repeated attempts to contact XXXX since XX/XX/XXXX, they have : Refused to specify which policy I allegedly violated Denied me access to my transaction history ( hundreds of transactions from XXXX ) Blocked all customer service access ( phone and chat ) Left me unable to properly file my federal and state tax returns for XXXX and XXXX I am currently unable to file my XXXX tax return because I lack the detailed transaction records showing payees and payment purposes. My bank statements only show \" XXXX '' as the merchant with amounts and datesnot the critical payee information needed to document legitimate expenses, deductions, and payments for tax purposes. \nThis nearly three-year denial of access to my own financial records violates multiple federal consumer protection laws and regulations, as detailed below. \n\nDETAILED CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX : I maintained an active XXXX account in good standing, using the service for bill payments and money transfers to payees in XXXX, including payments to my fianc and legitimate business/personal expenses. I conducted hundreds of transactions during this period. \nXX/XX/XXXX : Without warning, XXXX disabled my account access. When attempting to log in, I receive only a message stating \" let 's clear up an issue, '' but nothing happensthe system does not allow me to proceed or resolve any alleged issue. \nI immediately contacted XXXX requesting : Specific explanation of which policy was violated Access to my complete transaction history for tax preparation and financial records Restoration of account access or proper account closure procedures XXXX 's Response ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : Refused to specify which policy I allegedly violated Ignored my request for transaction history Blocked access to customer service phone support Blocked access to chat support Provided no meaningful avenue for resolution or appeal Spring XXXX - XXXX Tax Return Filing : When preparing my XXXX federal and state tax returns ( filed in XXXX ), I was forced to completely omit XXXX transactions from consideration because I had no access to the detailed records showing payees and purposes. This potentially compromised the accuracy and completeness of my tax filings. \nXX/XX/XXXX- XX/XX/XXXX ( Ongoing ) : I have repeatedly attempted to contact XXXX to obtain my transaction history. All attempts have been ignored or blocked. I continue to receive the same \" let 's clear up an issue '' message with no actual resolution mechanism. \nXX/XX/XXXX ( Current Situation ) : I am now attempting to prepare my 2023 tax returns ( late filing ). My bank statements show XXXX transactions with dates and amounts, but critically lack payee informationwhich is essential for documenting : Legitimate business expenses and deductions Payments to specific individuals for tax reporting purposes Proper categorization of expenditures Compliance with IRS record-keeping requirements Without the detailed XXXX  transaction history showing who I paid and for what purpose, I can not properly complete my XXXX tax return. I am effectively trapped : I can not file accurate taxes without these records, and XXXX continues to deny me access to my own data after nearly three years. \n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS XXXX 's actions violate multiple federal consumer financial protection laws and regulations : 1. ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFER ACT ( EFTA ) VIOLATIONS 15 U.S.C. 1693 et seq. ; 12 CFR Part 1005 ( Regulation E ) The EFTA broadly covers \" electronic fund transfers, '' and Regulation E specifically applies to \" remittance transfers '' ( 12 CFR 1005.30 et seq. ), which describes XXXX 's core business. \nSpecific violations : 12 CFR 1005.31 - Remittance transfer providers must provide receipt and disclosures for each transaction. XXXX has denied me access to any receipts or transaction records for nearly XXXX years. \nXXXX CFR XXXX ( b ) - Requires periodic statements showing transaction history. XXXX has completely denied me access to any statements or transaction records since XX/XX/XXXX. \n12 CFR 1005.13 - Error resolution procedures require access to transaction history to identify and dispute errors. Without access to my records, I can not exercise my error resolution rights.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1693l - Waiver of rights prohibited. XXXX can not unilaterally deny my statutory rights to account information. \n15 U.S.C. 1693m - Civil liability for EFTA violations. XXXX 's nearly three-year denial of access creates substantial civil liability exposure. \n\nNote on statute of limitations : While EFTA has a one-year statute of limitations for individual violations ( 15 U.S.C. 1693m ( g ) ), the ongoing denial of access constitutes a continuing violation. Each day XXXX denies me access to my records could be considered a separate violation, particularly as I have made repeated requests and continue to need these records for current tax compliance. \n2. CONSUMER FINANCIAL DATA ACCESS RIGHTS 12 U.S.C. 5533 ( Dodd-Frank Section 1033 ) ; 12 CFR Part 1033 Section 1033 of the Dodd-Frank Act establishes the fundamental consumer right to access their own financial records. The new Personal Financial Data Rights Rule ( finalized October 2024, 12 CFR Part 1033 ) specifically requires : Access to at least 24 months of transaction data Data must be provided in electronic, usable format Institutions can not charge fees for consumers ' own data Data must be provided upon consumer request Although full implementation is phased through XXXX, the underlying statutory right under Section 1033 already exists and has existed since Dodd-Frank was enacted in XXXX. \nXXXX 's complete denial of access to my transaction history since XXXX XXXXnearly three yearsis a flagrant violation of both : The existing Section 1033 statutory right to access my own financial data The principles underlying the new Part 1033 regulations This is precisely the type of abuse the CFPB sought to prevent with the Personal Financial Data Rights Rule.\n\n3. UNFAIR, DECEPTIVE, OR ABUSIVE ACTS OR PRACTICES ( UDAAP ) 12 U.S.C. 5536 XXXX 's conduct constitutes unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices under UDAAP : Unfair practices ( causes substantial injury that consumers can not reasonably avoid ) : Closing my account without warning prevented me from arranging alternative payment methods or preserving transaction records Denying transaction history for nearly three years has prevented tax compliance and financial record-keeping, causing substantial documented harm I have been unable to properly file XXXX and XXXX tax returns due to lack of payee information Blocking all customer service access prevents any reasonable resolution I can not avoid this injury as XXXX exclusively controls access to my own data Abusive practices ( takes unreasonable advantage of lack of understanding or inability to protect interests ) : Vague accusations without specific policy violations leaves me unable to understand or contest the account closure No meaningful dispute resolution process despite nearly three years of requests Complete denial of customer service access creates a Kafkaesque situation where I can not even communicate with the company Using account closure as leverage to permanently deny basic consumer rights to data access Taking advantage of my inability to obtain these records from any other sourceonly XXXX has this data Deceptive practices : \" Let 's clear up an issue '' message implies resolution is possible and ongoing, but no mechanism is actually providedthis is deceptive misdirection that has persisted for nearly three years Terms of service almost certainly promised access to transaction history and account information, which XXXX has violated The nearly three-year duration of these practices demonstrates they are systematic and intentional, not mere oversights.\n\n4. BANK SECRECY ACT - RECORD RETENTION REQUIREMENTS 31 U.S.C. 5311-5336 ; 31 CFR 1010.430 ( d ) Money transmitters like XXXX are required to maintain transaction records for five years and make them \" accessible within a reasonable period of time '' ( 31 CFR 1010.430 ( d ) ). \nXXXX undoubtedly maintains my transaction records for regulatory compliance and anti-money laundering purposes. The fact that XXXX maintains these records for government access but denies consumer access to those same records violates : The accessibility requirement of the BSA regulations Basic fairness and consumer protection principles The regulatory purpose of consumer financial transparency If XXXX can produce my records for law enforcement or regulators within hours, they can certainly provide them to methe actual consumer who created those transactions.\n\n5. CALIFORNIA STATE LAW VIOLATIONS California Money Transmission Act ( Cal. Fin. Code 2000 et seq. ) As a licensed money transmitter in California, XXXX must comply with state consumer protection requirements, including : Providing account holders with transaction records upon request Following proper account closure procedures with adequate notice Maintaining accessible records for California consumers Complying with California 's robust consumer protection standards XXXX 's nearly three-year denial of transaction records likely violates multiple California state law requirements beyond federal law.\n\n6. INTERFERENCE WITH TAX COMPLIANCE OBLIGATIONS 26 U.S.C. ( Internal Revenue Code ) - Record-Keeping Requirements While not a direct cause of action against XXXX, it's critical to note that IRS regulations require taxpayers to maintain adequate records to substantiate income, deductions, and credits. By denying me access to transaction records showing : Who I paid ( payee names ) When I paid them ( dates ) How much I paid ( amounts ) What the payments were for ( transaction purposes ) XXXX is interfering with my ability to comply with federal tax law. This interference causes substantial harm and supports the unfairness claims under UDAAP. \nI am currently unable to file my XXXX tax return in compliance with IRS requirements because I lack the detailed XXXX records. This creates potential IRS penalties, interest, and enforcement actionsall directly caused by XXXX 's refusal to provide my own transaction data. \n\nSPECIFIC HARMS SUFFERED The denial of account access and transaction history for nearly three years has caused me substantial, ongoing, and escalating harm : Tax Compliance Harms ( Most Critical ) : XXXX Tax Return ( Filed XXXX ) - Incomplete and Potentially Inaccurate : I was forced to completely omit XXXX transactions from my XXXX tax return because I had no access to detailed records. This may have resulted in : Underreported legitimate business deductions Improperly categorized expenses Potential IRS audit exposure if discrepancies are discovered Loss of legitimate tax benefits I was entitled to claim XXXX Tax Return ( Currently Late ) - Can not File Properly : I am currently attempting to prepare my XXXX tax return but can not complete it because : Bank statements show only \" XXXX '' as merchant with amounts and dates Critical payee information is missingI can not document who I paid Purpose of payments is unknownI can not categorize expenses or deductions I can not substantiate legitimate business expenses without payee details I can not properly track payments to specific individuals for tax reporting I am trapped : filing without this information risks IRS penalties for inadequate records, but I can not obtain the records I need Ongoing IRS Compliance Risk : The lack of proper documentation creates ongoing risk of : IRS audits and examinations Penalties for inadequate record-keeping Interest on unpaid taxes if deductions are disallowed Potential civil or criminal tax fraud accusations if discrepancies appear suspicious Attorney and accountant fees to resolve IRS disputes Late Filing Penalties : My inability to file XXXX taxes is resulting in : IRS late filing penalties ( 5 % per month, up to 25 % ) State of California late filing penalties Interest accumulating on unpaid taxes These penalties are directly caused by XXXX 's denial of my records Financial Harms : Budget Disruption : I can not track hundreds of transactions over XXXX, making it impossible to : Reconcile my finances for those years Prepare accurate budgets Understand my historical spending patterns Manage household finances effectively Inability to Make Required Payments ( XX/XX/XXXX - Present ) : Since the account closure, I can no longer : Make bill payments to payees in XXXX who only accept payment via app-based transfers like XXXX Send money to my fianc in XXXX, causing financial hardship Use the most convenient and cost-effective payment method for my needs My only alternatives are cash ( extremely inconvenient, especially when I am not in XXXX ) or finding other services with higher fees Loss of Financial Records : Beyond tax purposes , the transaction history represents nearly two years of my financial life. Without these records, I can not : Verify payments were made and received Dispute any errors or fraudulent transactions Reconstruct my financial history if needed for loans, background checks, etc.\n\nExercise any consumer rights that depend on having transaction records Personal and Emotional Harms : XXXX  and XXXX : The nearly three-year ordeal of being denied my own records, unable to file taxes properly, facing mounting IRS penalties XXXX and having XXXX XXXX for resolution has caused significant emotional XXXX  and XXXX. \nTime and Effort : I have spent substantial time over nearly three years attempting to : Contact XXXX through blocked customer service channels Research my legal rights and options Find alternative payment methods Attempt to reconstruct transactions from bank statements Prepare this complaint and gather documentation Violation of Fundamental Consumer Rights : The complete denial of access to my own financial data for nearly three years violates my fundamental rights as a consumer and undermines trust in financial institutions. This is not merely inconvenientit is a systematic deprivation of my rights. \n\n\nPATTERN OF SYSTEMATIC CONSUMER ABUSE The nearly three-year duration and XXXX 's complete stonewalling suggest this is not an isolated incident but rather a systematic pattern of consumer abuse : No specific policy violation cited - suggests arbitrary or pretextual account closure Complete customer service blackout - prevents any meaningful dispute or resolution Denial of basic data access rights- violates multiple federal laws \" Let 's clear up an issue '' message for nearly 3 years - deceptive misdirection Ignoring repeated consumer requests- demonstrates intentional denial of rights This pattern suggests XXXX may be using account closures as a tool to avoid regulatory scrutiny, customer service costs, or legal accountabilitywhile knowingly violating consumer rights to access their own data. \nI respectfully request the CFPB investigate whether this is part of a broader pattern affecting other XXXX customers.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-19T04:12:59.000Z","issue":"Other transaction problem","sub_product":"International money transfer","zip_code":"94544","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16670294","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","date_received":"2025-10-19T04:01:59.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I respectfully request the <em>CFPB</em> investigate whether this is part of a broader pattern affecting other XXXX customers."]},"sort":[9.211067,"16670294"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16636167","_score":8.828894,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"The files reveal the contradictions and violation citations committed by XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX. \n\nCFPB Complaint Draft : Reinsertion Violation & Regulatory Failure * * Subject : * * Repeat Dispute Mishandling, Duplicate Responses from XXXX, and Reinsertion Violations Across All Three Bureaus * * Consumer Name : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Account in Question : * * XXXX account ending in XXXX * * Previous CFPB Complaint IDs : * * - XXXX - XXXX -- - # # # Summary of Complaint : I am submitting this third complaint regarding XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and their continued furnishing of disputed information to Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian XXXX Despite submitting XXXX separate complaints through CFPB ( IDs listed above ), XXXX responded with * * identical boilerplate letters * * that failed to address the core contradictions in my dispute file. I submitted a full contradiction archive and copies of all three credit reports showing inconsistent reporting of the same XXXX account. XXXX did not provide full validation, did not reconcile the contradictions across bureaus, and did not notify me in writing before continuing to report the account * * a direct violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) * *. -- - # # # Violations Documented : - * * FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) : * * XXXX continues reporting without notifying me in writing before reinsertion or correction. - * * FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) : * * XXXX furnishes information they know is disputed and potentially inaccurate. - * * FDCPA XXXX : * * Misrepresentation of resolution status and failure to cease collection activity. - * * CFPB XXXX Failure : * * CFPB closed both prior complaints despite unresolved contradictions and duplicate responses. -- - # # # Requested Action : XXXX. * * Reopen both prior complaints * * and investigate PRAs duplicate responses. XXXX. * * XXXX PRAs certification of accuracy * * and reinsertion logs across all three bureaus. XXXX. * * Require XXXX to provide full validation documentation * *, including chain of custody, billing history, and signed agreements. XXXX. * * Investigate CFPBs internal handling of repeat complaints * * and failure to escalate systemic contradiction. -- - # # # Supporting Documents : - PRAs duplicate response letters- Credit reports from Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian - Contradiction archive submitted via CFPB - Timeline of disputes and bureau responses To Whom It XXXX Concern, I am submitting this formal contradiction and override demand regarding the XXXX XXXX account # XXXX, which has been inaccurately and inconsistently reported across Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion, and misrepresented by XXXX XXXX in their response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). Below is a full forensic breakdown of the contradictions and breaches, followed by PRAs full response to the CFPB for direct comparison. EXPERIAN REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XX/XX/XXXX, status frozen since XX/XX/XXXX Balance updated XX/XX/XXXX, with no status refresh Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX No payments, no resolution, no verified activity Disputes logged : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XX/XX/XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : XXXX claims resolution, yet Experian shows unresolved dispute, delayed reinvestigation, and frozen status for 4 years. EQUIFAX REPORT Fully Expanded Date of Last Reported Update : XX/XX/XXXX Balance Amount : {$790.00} Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX Date of Last Payment : Blank Actual Payment Amount : Blank Scheduled Payment Amount : Blank Date of Last Activity : Blank Charge-Off Amount : Blank Deferred Pay Start Date : Blank Balloon Pay Date : Blank Balloon Pay Amount : Blank Date Closed : Blank Status : Blank Type of Account : Open Type of Loan : Debt Buyer Whose Account : Individual Portfolio Indicator : Original Creditor Portfolio Status : XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX Account History Status Codes : Collection from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Dispute Status : Disputed from XX/XX/XXXX to Present Resolution Comment : Consumer disagrees after resolution Final Status Before Deletion : Collection account remains on report Current Status : dispute active Contradiction : XXXX claimed no dispute was received and that validation resolved the issue. Equifax shows a continuous dispute for XXXX years, unresolved status, confirming the data was unverifiable and or improperly furnished. TRANSUNION REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XX/XX/XXXX, balance {$790.00} Status frozen since XX/XX/XXXX, balance updated Sep 12, 2025 Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Balance history : Static from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, {$0.00} paid Disputes logged : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XX/XX/XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : XXXX claims resolution, yet TransUnion continues reporting the account with no payment activity or verified updates. PRAs FULL CFPB RESPONSE both times the same boilerplate response provided by me Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) takes compliance with all applicable XXXX, XXXX and local laws very seriously. We investigated the complaint and found no records supporting the allegation of misconduct, including, without limitation, that XXXX violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and/or any other misconduct cited in this complaint regarding the XXXX account XXXX in XXXX. We will continue to honor the request to cease all communications regarding the XXXX account unless otherwise permitted or required by applicable law. XXXX is a \" XXXX XXXX '' ; XXXX purchases delinquent debt from creditors to whom such debt is owed and seeks to collect such debt from those who owe such debt. In so doing, XXXX is committed to : obtain and maintain appropriate licenses and registrations to engage in its business practices in each jurisdiction in which it collects ; provide appropriate notifications ; validate account information ; investigate and resolve account-related disputes ; verify the integrity and accuracy of account information furnished to the consumer reporting agencies, Equifax, Experian and TransUnion ; XXXX and resolve credit reporting and identity theft related disputes ; and safeguard information, all in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ; implementing regulations of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ; and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and local law, and XXXX guidelines. XXXX purchased the XXXX XXXX Bank ( XXXX ), XXXX. ( Capital XXXX ) XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX from Capital XXXX, together with the right to receive payment of the balance due on the account, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Business records provided to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX at the time of our purchase verify that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX social security number ends in XXXX and that a balance of {$790.00} was due on the account at the time of XXXX purchase. We sent our initial notification letter to the consumer on or about XX/XX/XXXX. We have no record of a response, or a dispute being received in relation to our initial notification letter. Our records reflect that we subsequently received, investigated, and responded to a dispute regarding the account which was similar to the dispute made in this complaint. In response to that dispute, we sent the consumer a letter, a copy of which is attached, with validating documentation from the original account. The expiration of a statute of limitations limits PRAs ability to pursue legal actions but does not otherwise prohibit XXXX from contacting a consumer regarding a debt. XXXX furnished information from the account to the consumer reporting agencies in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX does not control the way in which the consumer reporting agencies report the information furnished by XXXX. Accordingly, any differences in their reporting of the information which XXXX furnishes is the responsibility of the consumer reporting agencies, not XXXX. In response to this complaint, we reinvestigated the account and are sending the consumer a letter with validating documentation from the original account. We believe that the validation provided resolved the dispute and no further steps in response to the complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time. Contradiction : PRAs response denies receiving disputes, claims resolution, and deflects responsibility to the bureaus. Yet all three bureaus show disputes, delayed reinvestigation, unresolved status, and Equifax has suppressed it and current disputes across all three bureaus and cfpb XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is known to : Report debts to credit bureaus for years without resolution File lawsuits against consumers who dont respond to collection attempts Misclassify accounts, such as reporting debt buyer accounts as open loans Delay or deny reinvestigation of disputes Blame credit bureaus for reporting errors that XXXX XXXX furnished These practices reflect a pattern of systemic abuse and data manipulation that directly contradict their claims to the CFPB and violate multiple provisions of the FCRA and FDCPA. CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB Order Penalty : Over {$27.00} XXXX in consumer refunds and civil fines Violations : FDCPA : Deceptive debt collection practices XXXX : Misleading affidavits and false legal claims Key Findings : o Collected on unsubstantiated debt o Filed misleading affidavits in court o Misrepresented intent to prove debts if contested o Sued on time-barred debt ( outside statute of limitations ) o Claimed debts were legally enforceable when they were not XXXX was XXXX under a consent order prohibiting these practices going forward. XXXX CFPB Action Penalty : Over {$24.00} XXXX total {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution {$12.00} XXXX civil penalty to XXXX victims relief fund Violations : FCRA : Failure to properly investigate and resolve credit reporting disputes FDCPA : Continued illegal debt collection practices XXXX : Violated multiple provisions of the XXXX consent order Key Findings : Collected on unsubstantiated debt Sued consumers without documentation Threatened legal action without intent or basis Collected on time-barred debt without required disclosures Failed to provide validation documents within 30 days Blamed credit bureaus for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX a XXXX offender, stating : After getting caught red-handed in XXXX, Portfolio Recovery Associates continued XXXX XXXX XXXX through intimidation, deception, and illegal debt collection tactics and lawsuits. Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Enforcement XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX : XXXX Penalty : {$2.00} XXXX Cause : Deceptive debt collection practices and violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) Key Violations : XXXX was accused of misrepresenting consumers rights in debt collection notices Sent letters that falsely implied consumers could not dispute debts Failed to disclose that consumers had the right to request verification of the debt Misled consumers about the legal status and enforceability of time-barred debts Used language that threatened legal action without intent or basis FTC Findings XXXX XXXX collection letters violated Section XXXX of the FTC XXXX XXXX which prohibits unfair or deceptive practices XXXX also XXXX the FDCPA, specifically : o XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) : False representation of the character, amount, or legal status of any debt o XXXX ( XXXX ) : Use of false representation or deceptive means to collect a debt o XXXX ( a ) : Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt Outcome : XXXX agreed XXXX a consent decree with the FTC Required XXXX change its collection practices, including : o Clear disclosure of dispute rights o No threats of legal action unless substantiated o No collection on time-barred debts without proper notice How Federal Court Rulings Prove Your Case XXXX. Pattern of Misrepresentation Federal courts have ruled that XXXX : Sued consumers without documentation Misrepresented the validity and enforceability of debts Filed affidavits they knew were false or misleading Collected on time-barred debts without proper disclosures These rulings directly support your claim that XXXX : Reported unverifiable debt to credit bureaus Falsely claimed resolution to the CFPB Continued collection despite dispute and deletion XXXX. Violation of Dispute Rights In the XXXX CFPB judgment, the court found XXXX : Failed to investigate disputes Improperly rejected valid consumer disputes as frivolous Did not maintain policies to ensure accuracy of credit reporting This aligns with your Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion records showing : Delayed reinvestigation Ongoing disputes ignored for years No updates or corrections after dispute XXXX. Legal Precedent for Deletion The XXXX XXXX final judgment required XXXX to : Pay {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution Delete unverifiable accounts Reform dispute handling and credit reporting practices This sets a legal precedent that : XXXX reporting practices are unlawful Deletion is the correct remedy Consumers like you are entitled to relief XXXX. Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled XXXX a repeat offender : Violated XXXX CFPB XXXX XXXX Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored prior federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an isolated errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review. My Leverage Federal rulings confirm : XXXX practices are legally documented violations my dispute history matches known patterns of abuse I am entitled to deletion, protection from reinsertion, and regulatory enforcement SECTION : Type of Account Open Misclassification by XXXX XXXX reported the account as Open on Equifax, which falsely implies : An active credit line or revolving account Ongoing access to borrowed funds A direct relationship between the consumer and the furnisher This is categorically false. The account is : A charged-off debt purchased by a third party Closed by the original creditor ( Capital XXXX ) Not open, revolving, or accessible to the consumer Violations FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information XXXX misrepresented XXXX account status, inflating credit utilization and misleading lenders. FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) Duty to Correct and Update XXXX failed to correct the misclassification after multiple disputes. FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False Representation of Legal Status Labeling a closed, charged-off debt as Open falsely implies ongoing liability and access. FCRA XXXX ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Equifax displayed a status that contradicts the original creditors records and PRAs own CFPB response. SECTION : Type of Loan Debt Buyer Misclassification by XXXX XXXX reported the Type of Loan as Debt Buyer across multiple bureaus. This is not a loan productits a description of PRAs business model. This classification : Does not reflect any loan agreement signed by the consumer Misrepresents the nature of the obligation Implies the consumer borrowed directly from XXXX, which is false Confuses asset ownership with consumer liability Violations FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information XXXX misclassified the loan type, misleading the nature and origin of the debt. FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False Representation of XXXX XXXX XXXX a third-party purchase as a direct loan is a false claim of origin and enforceability. FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) Duty to Correct and Update XXXX failed to update the loan type to reflect the original product ( e.g., credit card ). FCRA XXXX ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Credit bureaus accepted and displayed a misclassification that harms consumers and misleads underwriters. SECTION : Charge-Off, IRS Reporting XXXX and Ownership Contradiction XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX charged off the original account, which triggered a series of financial and legal events that directly contradict PRAs current reporting and collection practices. Charge-Off Process A charge-off is an accounting action where the original creditor declares the debt uncollectible and removes it from active assets. XXXX XXXX then claims the charged-off amount as a business loss on its annual tax filings, reducing taxable income. In many cases, the creditor also receives compensation through loss prevention insurance and or by selling the debt to a third-party buyer. IRS XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX issued a Form XXXX ( Cancellation of Debt ), the debt is considered canceled under IRS regulations XXXX Once canceled, the debt is no longer legally enforceable, and any attempt to collect or report it XXXX constitute double recovery, which is unlawful. XXXX, as the purchaser, can not legally reclassify the debt as a new loan or report it as an XXXX account under the consumers name. Ownership Transfer and XXXX XXXX XXXX purchased the debt from XXXX XXXX as part of a portfolio of charged-off accounts. This transaction is strictly between XXXX and XXXX XXXX consumer was not a party to the sale. XXXX now owns the collection rights, but not the original contract or terms. Reporting the account as XXXX falsely implies an active relationship and ongoing liability, which violates federal law. Violations Triggered by Misclassification Federal Violations : FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) Failure to correct and update after dispute FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Obligation to delete unverifiable or inaccurate data FCRA XXXX ( b ) Credit bureaus must ensure maximum possible accuracy FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False representation of the character or legal status of any debt FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) Use of deceptive means to collect a debt FDCPA XXXX ( a ) Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt IRS Violations ( if XXXX was issued ) : Improper collection on canceled debt False asset classification Potential double recovery Violation of IRS bad XXXX deduction rules Strategic Conclusion XXXX XXXX has XXXX claimed the debt as a loss and been compensated. PRAs reporting of this account as XXXX and XXXX XXXX misrepresents the legal status, origin, and enforceability of the debt. This contradiction supports permanent deletion under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB and IRS enforcement guidelines. SECTION : XXXX Long-Term Ownership and Monetization Contradiction XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) has held this account for a duration sufficient to trigger its own financial reporting obligations. Under IRS regulations and standard corporate accounting practices, XXXX has : Claimed the account as a business bad debt deduction under IRS Topic No. XXXX and Publication XXXX Reported the account as a business loss on its annual income tax filings Recovered the value through loss prevention insurance or internal portfolio write-downs IRS Bad XXXX Deduction Rules According to IRS Topic XXXX. XXXX and Publication XXXX : A business XXXX deduct a debt that becomes wholly or partially worthless during the tax year The deduction must be claimed in the year the debt is deemed uncollectible The business must demonstrate reasonable efforts to collect before declaring it worthless If XXXX : Held the account for multiple years Failed to collect any payments Continued reporting it as Open despite no verified activity Then, XXXX has already claimed the debt as worthless for tax purposeswhile still reporting it as active on consumer credit files. Insurance Recovery Risk XXXX : Insured its portfolio against non-performing assets Received compensation for this account Continued reporting or collecting on it Then, XXXX has engaged in double monetization, which could trigger insurance fraud exposure under state and federal law. Legal Contradiction XXXX can not : Claim the debt as a business loss Recover its value through tax deductions or insurance And still report the account as Open and collectible under the consumers name This contradiction violates : FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False representation of legal status IRS XXXX XXXX collects on a canceled or deducted debt, it XXXX trigger unlawful double recovery Strategic Conclusion PRAs long-term ownership and monetization of this account contradict its continued reporting as an active liability. This supports permanent deletion under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB, IRS, and insurance enforcement guidelines. DEMAND FOR ACTION I am requesting the following actions be taken immediately : XXXX. Permanent deletion of the XXXX XXXX account # XXXX from Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) and XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ). XXXX. Confirmation that no future furnishers, including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX, or any third-party collector, XXXX reinsert this account or any derivative into my credit reports without : o No updates, corrections, or reinsertions XXXX be made to my credit reports regarding any account furnished by XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX any third-party debt collector or debt buyer, without my explicit written consent. Any attempt to do so without my agreement constitutes a violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), 623 ( a ) ( 3 ), and FDCPA XXXX o Notification to all bureaus per FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) XXXX. XXXX review of XXXX XXXX misrepresentation to the CFPB and breach of reinvestigation timelines. XXXX. Investigate pra via CFPB, FTC, other law enforcement, and agencies This contradiction is now archived for legacy-grade breach documentation and survivor-centered override enforcement. \n\nhere XXXX the XXXX boiler plate responses from pra llc that also are invalid Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) investigated the complaint and verified the XXXX account ending in XXXX and the accuracy of the information we furnished to the consumer reporting agencies regarding the account in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulation V, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX is a \" XXXX XXXX '' ; XXXX purchases delinquent debt from creditors to whom such debt is owed and seeks to collect such debt from those who owe such debt. In so doing, XXXX is committed to : obtain and maintain appropriate licenses and registrations to engage in its business practices in each jurisdiction in which it collects ; provide appropriate notifications ; validate account information ; investigate and resolve account-related disputes ; verify the integrity and accuracy of account information furnished to the consumer reporting agencies, EquifaxXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ; investigate and resolve credit reporting and identity theft related disputes ; and safeguard information, all in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ; implementing regulations of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ; and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and local law, and XXXX guidelines. XXXX purchased the XXXX XXXX Bank ( XXXX ), XXXX. ( \" XXXX XXXX \" ) XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX from Capital XXXX, together with the right to receive payment of the balance due on the account, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Business records provided to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX at the time of our purchase verify that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX social security number ends in XXXX and that a balance of {$790.00} was due on the account at the time of XXXX XXXX purchase. We sent our initial notification letter to the consumer on or about XX/XX/XXXX. We take compliance with all applicable state and federal laws very seriously. We have no record of a request or dispute being received in relation to our initial notification letter. XXXX furnished information regarding the account to the consumer reporting agencies in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX does not control the way in which the consumer reporting agencies report the information furnished by XXXX. Accordingly, any differences in their reporting of the information which XXXX furnishes is the responsibility of the consumer reporting agencies, not XXXX. Our records reflect that we subsequently received, investigated, and responded to several disputes regarding the account which were similar to the dispute made in this complaint. In response to those disputes, we verified the accuracy of the information we furnished to the consumer reporting agencies regarding the account and sent the consumer letters, a copy of XXXX which is attached, with validating documentation from the original account. In response to this complaint, we investigated the account and sent the consumer the attached letter with validating documentation from the original account. We believe that the validation provided resolved the dispute and no further steps in response to the complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time. \n\nXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX response This complaint lists someone the company does not recognize as their customer or their customers authorized representative. \n\nWe reviewed your complaint and sent it to the company for a response. The company let us know that it cant respond because this complaint lists someone who is not listed on the account or loan or authorized to receive the consumers financial information. \nCompanies are required to protect their customers privacy. Companies can not share consumers financial informationincluding as part of the complaint processunless everyone listed in the complaint is also listed on the account or loan or authorized by the customer to receive financial information. Companies can require that their customers provide signed, written permission directly to the company before sharing financial information with a third party, such as a lawyer, guardian, or power of attorney. \nCOMPLAINT ID XXXX SUBMITTED ON XX/XX/XXXX PRODUCT Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports ISSUE Problem with a company 's investigation into an existing problem XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have the right to collect, but XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX am not on the account or an authorized user or representative of the account. Therefore, this seems to be an illegal and deceptive collection by XXXX XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-16T09:30:52.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"315XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16636167","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-16T09:30:28.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled XXXX a repeat offender : <em>Violated</em> XXXX <em>CFPB</em> XXXX XXXX Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored <em>prior</em> federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an <em>isolated</em> errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review."]},"sort":[8.828894,"16636167"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16636169","_score":8.81557,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"The files reveal the contradictions and violation citations committed by XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX. \n\nCFPB XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Subject : * * Repeat Dispute Mishandling, Duplicate Responses from XXXX, and Reinsertion Violations Across All Three Bureaus * * Consumer Name : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Account in Question : * * XXXX account ending in XXXX * * Previous CFPB Complaint IDs : * * - XXXX - XXXX -- - # # # Summary of Complaint : I am submitting this third complaint regarding XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and their continued furnishing of disputed information to Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian XXXX Despite submitting XXXX separate complaints through CFPB ( IDs listed above ), XXXX responded with * * identical boilerplate letters * * that failed to address the core contradictions in my dispute file. I submitted a full contradiction archive and copies of all three credit reports showing inconsistent reporting of the same XXXX account. XXXX did not provide full validation, did not reconcile the contradictions across bureaus, and did not notify me in writing before continuing to report the account * * a direct violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) * *. -- - # # # Violations Documented : - * * FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) : * * XXXX continues reporting without notifying me in writing before reinsertion or correction. - * * FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) : * * XXXX furnishes information they know is disputed and potentially inaccurate. - * * FDCPA XXXX : * * Misrepresentation of resolution status and failure to cease collection activity. - * * CFPB XXXX Failure : * * CFPB closed both prior complaints despite unresolved contradictions and duplicate responses. -- - # # # Requested Action : XXXX. * * Reopen both prior complaints * * and investigate PRAs duplicate responses. XXXX. * * XXXX PRAs certification of accuracy * * and reinsertion logs across all three bureaus. XXXX. * * Require XXXX to provide full validation documentation * *, including chain of custody, billing history, and signed agreements. XXXX. * * Investigate CFPBs internal handling of repeat complaints * * and failure to escalate systemic contradiction. -- - # # # Supporting Documents : - PRAs duplicate response letters- Credit reports from Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian - Contradiction archive submitted via CFPB - Timeline of disputes and bureau responses To Whom It XXXX Concern, I am submitting this formal contradiction and override demand regarding the XXXX XXXX account # XXXX, which has been inaccurately and inconsistently reported across Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion, and misrepresented by XXXX XXXX in their response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). Below is a full forensic breakdown of the contradictions and breaches, followed by PRAs full response to the CFPB for direct comparison. EXPERIAN REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XX/XX/XXXX, status frozen since XX/XX/XXXX Balance updated XX/XX/XXXX, with no status refresh Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX No payments, no resolution, no verified activity Disputes logged : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XX/XX/XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : XXXX claims resolution, yet Experian shows unresolved dispute, delayed reinvestigation, and frozen status for 4 years. EQUIFAX REPORT Fully Expanded Date of Last Reported Update : XX/XX/XXXX Balance Amount : {$790.00} Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX Date of Last Payment : Blank Actual Payment Amount : Blank Scheduled Payment Amount : Blank Date of Last Activity : Blank Charge-Off Amount : Blank Deferred Pay Start Date : Blank Balloon Pay Date : Blank Balloon Pay Amount : Blank Date Closed : Blank Status : Blank Type of Account : Open Type of Loan : Debt Buyer Whose Account : Individual Portfolio Indicator : Original Creditor Portfolio Status : XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX Account History Status Codes : Collection from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Dispute Status : Disputed from XX/XX/XXXX to Present Resolution Comment : Consumer disagrees after resolution Final Status Before Deletion : Collection account remains on report Current Status : dispute active Contradiction : XXXX claimed no dispute was received and that validation resolved the issue. Equifax shows a continuous dispute for XXXX years, unresolved status, confirming the data was unverifiable and or improperly furnished. TRANSUNION REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XX/XX/XXXX, balance {$790.00} Status frozen since XX/XX/XXXX, balance updated Sep 12, 2025 Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Balance history : Static from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, {$0.00} paid Disputes logged : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XX/XX/XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : XXXX claims resolution, yet TransUnion continues reporting the account with no payment activity or verified updates. PRAs FULL CFPB RESPONSE both times the same boilerplate response provided by me Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) takes compliance with all applicable XXXX, XXXX and local laws very seriously. We investigated the complaint and found no records supporting the allegation of misconduct, including, without limitation, that XXXX violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and/or any other misconduct cited in this complaint regarding the XXXX account XXXX in XXXX. We will continue to honor the request to cease all communications regarding the XXXX account unless otherwise permitted or required by applicable law. XXXX is a \" XXXX XXXX '' ; XXXX purchases delinquent debt from creditors to whom such debt is owed and seeks to collect such debt from those who owe such debt. In so doing, XXXX is committed to : obtain and maintain appropriate licenses and registrations to engage in its business practices in each jurisdiction in which it collects ; provide appropriate notifications ; validate account information ; investigate and resolve account-related disputes ; verify the integrity and accuracy of account information furnished to the consumer reporting agencies, Equifax, Experian and TransUnion ; XXXX and resolve credit reporting and identity theft related disputes ; and safeguard information, all in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ; implementing regulations of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ; and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and local law, and XXXX guidelines. XXXX purchased the XXXX XXXX Bank ( XXXX ), XXXX. ( Capital XXXX ) XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX from Capital XXXX, together with the right to receive payment of the balance due on the account, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Business records provided to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX at the time of our purchase verify that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX social security number ends in XXXX and that a balance of {$790.00} was due on the account at the time of XXXX purchase. We sent our initial notification letter to the consumer on or about XX/XX/XXXX. We have no record of a response, or a dispute being received in relation to our initial notification letter. Our records reflect that we subsequently received, investigated, and responded to a dispute regarding the account which was similar to the dispute made in this complaint. In response to that dispute, we sent the consumer a letter, a copy of which is attached, with validating documentation from the original account. The expiration of a statute of limitations limits PRAs ability to pursue legal actions but does not otherwise prohibit XXXX from contacting a consumer regarding a debt. XXXX furnished information from the account to the consumer reporting agencies in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX does not control the way in which the consumer reporting agencies report the information furnished by XXXX. Accordingly, any differences in their reporting of the information which XXXX furnishes is the responsibility of the consumer reporting agencies, not XXXX. In response to this complaint, we reinvestigated the account and are sending the consumer a letter with validating documentation from the original account. We believe that the validation provided resolved the dispute and no further steps in response to the complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time. Contradiction : PRAs response denies receiving disputes, claims resolution, and deflects responsibility to the bureaus. Yet all three bureaus show disputes, delayed reinvestigation, unresolved status, and Equifax has suppressed it and current disputes across all three bureaus and cfpb XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is known to : Report debts to credit bureaus for years without resolution File lawsuits against consumers who dont respond to collection attempts Misclassify accounts, such as reporting debt buyer accounts as open loans Delay or deny reinvestigation of disputes Blame credit bureaus for reporting errors that XXXX XXXX furnished These practices reflect a pattern of systemic abuse and data manipulation that directly contradict their claims to the CFPB and violate multiple provisions of the FCRA and FDCPA. CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB Order Penalty : Over {$27.00} XXXX in consumer refunds and civil fines Violations : FDCPA : Deceptive debt collection practices XXXX : Misleading affidavits and false legal claims Key Findings : o Collected on unsubstantiated debt o Filed misleading affidavits in court o Misrepresented intent to prove debts if contested o Sued on time-barred debt ( outside statute of limitations ) o Claimed debts were legally enforceable when they were not XXXX was XXXX under a consent order prohibiting these practices going forward. XXXX CFPB Action Penalty : Over {$24.00} XXXX total {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution {$12.00} XXXX civil penalty to XXXX victims relief fund Violations : FCRA : Failure to properly investigate and resolve credit reporting disputes FDCPA : Continued illegal debt collection practices XXXX : Violated multiple provisions of the XXXX consent order Key Findings : Collected on unsubstantiated debt Sued consumers without documentation Threatened legal action without intent or basis Collected on time-barred debt without required disclosures Failed to provide validation documents within 30 days Blamed credit bureaus for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX a repeat offender, stating : After getting caught red-handed in XXXX, Portfolio Recovery Associates continued XXXX XXXX XXXX through intimidation, deception, and illegal debt collection tactics and lawsuits. Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Enforcement Portfolio XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX Penalty : {$2.00} XXXX Cause : Deceptive debt collection practices and violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) Key Violations : XXXX was accused of misrepresenting consumers rights in debt collection notices Sent letters that falsely implied consumers could not dispute debts Failed to disclose that consumers had the right to request verification of the debt Misled consumers about the legal status and enforceability of time-barred debts Used language that threatened legal action without intent or basis FTC Findings XXXX XXXX collection letters violated Section XXXX of the FTC XXXX XXXX which prohibits unfair or deceptive practices XXXX also XXXX the FDCPA, specifically : o XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) : False representation of the character, amount, or legal status of any debt o XXXX ( XXXX ) : Use of false representation or deceptive means to collect a debt o XXXX ( a ) : Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt Outcome : XXXX agreed XXXX a consent decree with the FTC Required XXXX change its collection practices, including : o Clear disclosure of dispute rights o No threats of legal action unless substantiated o No collection on time-barred debts without proper notice How Federal Court Rulings Prove Your Case XXXX. Pattern of Misrepresentation Federal courts have ruled that XXXX : Sued consumers without documentation Misrepresented the validity and enforceability of debts Filed affidavits they knew were false or misleading Collected on time-barred debts without proper disclosures These rulings directly support your claim that XXXX : Reported unverifiable debt to credit bureaus Falsely claimed resolution to the CFPB Continued collection despite dispute and deletion XXXX. Violation of Dispute Rights In the XXXX CFPB judgment, the court found XXXX : Failed to investigate disputes Improperly rejected valid consumer disputes as frivolous Did not maintain policies to ensure accuracy of credit reporting This aligns with your Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion records showing : Delayed reinvestigation Ongoing disputes ignored for years No updates or corrections after dispute XXXX. Legal Precedent for Deletion The XXXX XXXX final judgment required XXXX to : Pay {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution Delete unverifiable accounts Reform dispute handling and credit reporting practices This sets a legal precedent that : XXXX reporting practices are unlawful Deletion is the correct remedy Consumers like you are entitled to relief XXXX. Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled XXXX a repeat offender : Violated XXXX CFPB XXXX XXXX Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored prior federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an isolated errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review. My Leverage Federal rulings confirm : XXXX practices are legally documented violations my dispute history matches known patterns of abuse I am entitled to deletion, protection from reinsertion, and regulatory enforcement SECTION : Type of Account Open Misclassification by XXXX XXXX reported the account as Open on Equifax, which falsely implies : An active credit line or revolving account Ongoing access to borrowed funds A direct relationship between the consumer and the furnisher This is categorically false. The account is : A charged-off debt purchased by a third party Closed by the original creditor ( Capital XXXX ) Not open, revolving, or accessible to the consumer Violations FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information XXXX misrepresented XXXX account status, inflating credit utilization and misleading lenders. FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) Duty to Correct and Update XXXX failed to correct the misclassification after multiple disputes. FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False Representation of Legal Status Labeling a closed, charged-off debt as Open falsely implies ongoing liability and access. FCRA XXXX ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Equifax displayed a status that contradicts the original creditors records and PRAs own CFPB response. SECTION : Type of Loan Debt Buyer Misclassification by XXXX XXXX reported the Type of Loan as Debt Buyer across multiple bureaus. This is not a loan productits a description of PRAs business model. This classification : Does not reflect any loan agreement signed by the consumer Misrepresents the nature of the obligation Implies the consumer borrowed directly from XXXX, which is false Confuses asset ownership with consumer liability Violations FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information XXXX misclassified the loan type, misleading the nature and origin of the debt. FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False Representation of XXXX XXXX XXXX a third-party purchase as a direct loan is a false claim of origin and enforceability. FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) Duty to Correct and Update XXXX failed to update the loan type to reflect the original product ( e.g., credit card ). FCRA XXXX ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Credit bureaus accepted and displayed a misclassification that harms consumers and misleads underwriters. SECTION : Charge-Off, IRS Reporting XXXX and Ownership Contradiction XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX charged off the original account, which triggered a series of financial and legal events that directly contradict PRAs current reporting and collection practices. Charge-Off Process A charge-off is an accounting action where the original creditor declares the debt uncollectible and removes it from active assets. XXXX XXXX then claims the charged-off amount as a business loss on its annual tax filings, reducing taxable income. In many cases, the creditor also receives compensation through loss prevention insurance and or by selling the debt to a third-party buyer. IRS XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX issued a Form XXXX ( Cancellation of Debt ), the debt is considered canceled under IRS regulations XXXX Once canceled, the debt is no longer legally enforceable, and any attempt to collect or report it XXXX constitute double recovery, which is unlawful. XXXX, as the purchaser, can not legally reclassify the debt as a new loan or report it as an XXXX account under the consumers name. Ownership Transfer and XXXX XXXX XXXX purchased the debt from XXXX XXXX as part of a portfolio of charged-off accounts. This transaction is strictly between XXXX and XXXX XXXX consumer was not a party to the sale. XXXX now owns the collection rights, but not the original contract or terms. Reporting the account as XXXX falsely implies an active relationship and ongoing liability, which violates federal law. Violations Triggered by Misclassification Federal Violations : FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) Failure to correct and update after dispute FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Obligation to delete unverifiable or inaccurate data FCRA XXXX ( b ) Credit bureaus must ensure maximum possible accuracy FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False representation of the character or legal status of any debt FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) Use of deceptive means to collect a debt FDCPA XXXX ( a ) Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt IRS Violations ( if XXXX was issued ) : Improper collection on canceled debt False asset classification Potential double recovery Violation of IRS bad XXXX deduction rules Strategic Conclusion XXXX XXXX has XXXX claimed the debt as a loss and been compensated. PRAs reporting of this account as XXXX and XXXX XXXX misrepresents the legal status, origin, and enforceability of the debt. This contradiction supports permanent deletion under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB and IRS enforcement guidelines. SECTION : XXXX Long-Term Ownership and Monetization Contradiction XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) has held this account for a duration sufficient to trigger its own financial reporting obligations. Under IRS regulations and standard corporate accounting practices, XXXX has : Claimed the account as a business bad debt deduction under IRS Topic No. XXXX and Publication XXXX Reported the account as a business loss on its annual income tax filings Recovered the value through loss prevention insurance or internal portfolio write-downs IRS Bad XXXX Deduction Rules According to IRS Topic XXXX. XXXX and Publication XXXX : A business XXXX deduct a debt that becomes wholly or partially worthless during the tax year The deduction must be claimed in the year the debt is deemed uncollectible The business must demonstrate reasonable efforts to collect before declaring it worthless If XXXX : Held the account for multiple years Failed to collect any payments Continued reporting it as Open despite no verified activity Then, XXXX has already claimed the debt as worthless for tax purposeswhile still reporting it as active on consumer credit files. Insurance Recovery Risk XXXX : Insured its portfolio against non-performing assets Received compensation for this account Continued reporting or collecting on it Then, XXXX has engaged in double monetization, which could trigger insurance fraud exposure under state and federal law. Legal Contradiction XXXX can not : Claim the debt as a business loss Recover its value through tax deductions or insurance And still report the account as Open and collectible under the consumers name This contradiction violates : FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False representation of legal status IRS XXXX XXXX collects on a canceled or deducted debt, it XXXX trigger unlawful double recovery Strategic Conclusion PRAs long-term ownership and monetization of this account contradict its continued reporting as an active liability. This supports permanent deletion under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB, IRS, and insurance enforcement guidelines. DEMAND FOR ACTION I am requesting the following actions be taken immediately : XXXX. Permanent deletion of the XXXX XXXX account # XXXX from Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) and XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ). XXXX. Confirmation that no future furnishers, including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX, or any third-party collector, XXXX reinsert this account or any derivative into my credit reports without : o No updates, corrections, or reinsertions XXXX be made to my credit reports regarding any account furnished by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), Capital XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX any third-party debt collector or debt buyer, without my explicit written consent. Any attempt to do so without my agreement constitutes a violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ), XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ), and FDCPA XXXX o Notification to all bureaus per FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) XXXX. XXXX review of XXXX XXXX misrepresentation to the CFPB and breach of reinvestigation timelines. XXXX. Investigate pra via CFPB, FTC, other law enforcement, and agencies This contradiction is now archived for legacy-grade breach documentation and survivor-centered override enforcement. \n\nhere XXXX the XXXX boiler plate responses from pra llc that also are invalid Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) investigated the complaint and verified the XXXX account ending in XXXX and the accuracy of the information we furnished to the consumer reporting agencies regarding the account in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX is a \" XXXX XXXX '' ; XXXX purchases delinquent debt from creditors to whom such debt is owed and seeks to collect such debt from those who owe such debt. In so doing, XXXX is committed to : obtain and maintain appropriate licenses and registrations to engage in its business practices in each jurisdiction in which it collects ; provide appropriate notifications ; validate account information ; investigate and resolve account-related disputes ; verify the integrity and accuracy of account information furnished to the consumer reporting agencies, Equifax, Experian and TransUnion ; XXXX and resolve credit reporting and identity theft related disputes ; and safeguard information, all in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ; implementing regulations of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ; and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and local law, and XXXX guidelines. XXXX purchased the XXXX XXXX Bank ( XXXX ), XXXX. ( \" XXXX XXXX \" ) XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX from Capital XXXX, together with the right to receive payment of the balance due on the account, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Business records provided to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX at the time of our purchase verify that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX social security number ends in XXXX and that a balance of {$790.00} was due on the account at the time of XXXX XXXX purchase. We sent our initial notification letter to the consumer on or about XX/XX/XXXX. We take compliance with all applicable state and federal laws very seriously. We have no record of a request or dispute being received in relation to our initial notification letter. XXXX furnished information regarding the account to the consumer reporting agencies in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX does not control the way in which the consumer reporting agencies report the information furnished by XXXX. Accordingly, any differences in their reporting of the information which XXXX furnishes is the responsibility of the consumer reporting agencies, not XXXX. Our records reflect that we subsequently received, investigated, and responded to several disputes regarding the account which were similar to the dispute made in this complaint. In response to those disputes, we verified the accuracy of the information we furnished to the consumer reporting agencies regarding the account and sent the consumer letters, a copy of XXXX which is attached, with validating documentation from the original account. In response to this complaint, we investigated the account and sent the consumer the attached letter with validating documentation from the original account. We believe that the validation provided resolved the dispute and no further steps in response to the complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time. \n\nXXXX XXXX bank XXXX XXXX response This complaint lists someone the company does not recognize as their customer or their customers authorized representative. \n\nWe reviewed your complaint and sent it to the company for a response. The company let us know that it cant respond because this complaint lists someone who is not listed on the account or loan or authorized to receive the consumers financial information. \nCompanies are required to protect their customers privacy. Companies can not share consumers financial informationincluding as part of the complaint processunless everyone listed in the complaint is also listed on the account or loan or authorized by the customer to receive financial information. Companies can require that their customers provide signed, written permission directly to the company before sharing financial information with a third party, such as a lawyer, guardian, or power of attorney. \nCOMPLAINT ID XXXX SUBMITTED ON XX/XX/XXXX PRODUCT Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports ISSUE Problem with a company 's investigation into an existing problem XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have the right to collect, but XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX am not on the account or an authorized user or representative of the account. Therefore, this seems to be an illegal and deceptive collection by XXXX XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-16T09:30:52.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"315XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16636169","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-16T09:30:28.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled XXXX a repeat offender : <em>Violated</em> XXXX <em>CFPB</em> XXXX XXXX Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored <em>prior</em> federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an <em>isolated</em> errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review."],"company_public_response":["Company has responded to the consumer and the <em>CFPB</em> and chooses not to provide a public response"]},"sort":[8.81557,"16636169"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16619422","_score":8.231061,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"The files reveal the contradictions and violation citations committed by XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX. CFPB XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Subject : * * Repeat Dispute Mishandling, Duplicate Responses from XXXX, and Reinsertion Violations Across All Three Bureaus * * Consumer Name : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Account in Question : * * XXXX account ending in XXXX * * Previous CFPB Complaint IDs : * * - XXXX - XXXX -- - # # # Summary of Complaint : I am submitting this third complaint regarding Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC XXXX XXXX ) and their continued furnishing of disputed information to Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian XXXX Despite submitting XXXX separate complaints through CFPB ( IDs listed above ), XXXX responded with * * identical boilerplate letters * * that failed to address the core contradictions in my dispute file. I submitted a full contradiction archive and copies of all three credit reports showing inconsistent reporting of the same XXXX account. XXXX did not provide full validation, did not reconcile the contradictions across bureaus, and did not notify me in writing before continuing to report the account * * a direct violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) * *. -- - # # # Violations Documented : - * * FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) : * * XXXX continues reporting without notifying me in writing before reinsertion or correction. - * * FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) : * * XXXX furnishes information they know is disputed and potentially inaccurate. - * * FDCPA XXXX : * * Misrepresentation of resolution status and failure to cease collection activity. - * * CFPB XXXX Failure : * * CFPB closed both prior complaints despite unresolved contradictions and duplicate responses. -- - # # # Requested Action : XXXX. * * Reopen both prior complaints * * and investigate PRAs duplicate responses. XXXX. * * XXXX PRAs certification of accuracy * * and reinsertion logs across all three bureaus. XXXX. * * Require XXXX to provide full validation documentation * *, including chain of custody, billing history, and signed agreements. XXXX. * * Investigate CFPBs internal handling of repeat complaints * * and failure to escalate systemic contradiction. -- - # # # Supporting Documents : - PRAs duplicate response letters- Credit reports from Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian - Contradiction archive submitted via CFPB - Timeline of disputes and bureau responses To Whom It XXXX Concern, I am submitting this formal contradiction and override demand regarding the PRA Group account # XXXX, which has been inaccurately and inconsistently reported across Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion, and misrepresented by PRA Group in their response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). Below is a full forensic breakdown of the contradictions and breaches, followed by PRAs full response to the CFPB for direct comparison. EXPERIAN REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XX/XX/XXXX, status frozen since XX/XX/XXXX Balance updated XX/XX/XXXX, with no status refresh Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX No payments, no resolution, no verified activity Disputes logged : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XX/XX/XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : XXXX claims resolution, yet Experian shows unresolved dispute, delayed reinvestigation, and frozen status for 4 years. EQUIFAX REPORT Fully Expanded Date of Last Reported Update : XX/XX/XXXX Balance Amount : {$790.00} Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX Date of Last Payment : Blank Actual Payment Amount : Blank Scheduled Payment Amount : Blank Date of Last Activity : Blank Charge-Off Amount : Blank Deferred Pay Start Date : Blank Balloon Pay Date : Blank Balloon Pay Amount : Blank Date Closed : Blank Status : Blank Type of Account : Open Type of Loan : Debt Buyer Whose Account : Individual Portfolio Indicator : Original Creditor Portfolio Status : XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX Account History Status Codes : Collection from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Dispute Status : Disputed from XX/XX/XXXX to Present Resolution Comment : Consumer disagrees after resolution Final Status Before Deletion : Collection account remains on report Current Status : dispute active Contradiction : XXXX claimed no dispute was received and that validation resolved the issue. Equifax shows a continuous dispute for XXXX years, unresolved status, confirming the data was unverifiable and or improperly furnished. TRANSUNION REPORT Provided by Me Account opened XX/XX/XXXX, balance {$790.00} Status frozen since XX/XX/XXXX, balance updated Sep 12, 2025 Monthly C ( Collection ) status from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Balance history : Static from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, {$0.00} paid Disputes logged : XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX Reinvestigation processed only in XX/XX/XXXX Consumer statement : THIS ACCOUNT SHOULD NOT BE IN COLLECTIONS AND SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM MY REPORT Bureau comment : Completed investigation of FCRA dispute consumer disagrees Contradiction : XXXX claims resolution, yet TransUnion continues reporting the account with no payment activity or verified updates. PRAs FULL CFPB RESPONSE both times the same boilerplate response provided by me Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( XXXX ) takes compliance with all applicable XXXX, XXXX and local laws very seriously. We investigated the complaint and found no records supporting the allegation of misconduct, including, without limitation, that XXXX violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and/or any other misconduct cited in this complaint regarding the XXXX account XXXX in XXXX. We will continue to honor the request to cease all communications regarding the XXXX account unless otherwise permitted or required by applicable law. XXXX is a \" XXXX XXXX '' ; XXXX purchases delinquent debt from creditors to whom such debt is owed and seeks to collect such debt from those who owe such debt. In so doing, XXXX is committed to : obtain and maintain appropriate licenses and registrations to engage in its business practices in each jurisdiction in which it collects ; provide appropriate notifications ; validate account information ; investigate and resolve account-related disputes ; verify the integrity and accuracy of account information furnished to the consumer reporting agencies, Equifax, Experian and TransUnion ; XXXX and resolve credit reporting and identity theft related disputes ; and safeguard information, all in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ; implementing regulations of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ; and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and local law, and XXXX guidelines. XXXX purchased the XXXX XXXX Bank ( XXXX ), XXXX. ( Capital XXXX ) XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX from Capital XXXX, together with the right to receive payment of the balance due on the account, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Business records provided to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX at the time of our purchase verify that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX social security number ends in XXXX and that a balance of {$790.00} was due on the account at the time of XXXX purchase. We sent our initial notification letter to the consumer on or about XX/XX/XXXX. We have no record of a response, or a dispute being received in relation to our initial notification letter. Our records reflect that we subsequently received, investigated, and responded to a dispute regarding the account which was similar to the dispute made in this complaint. In response to that dispute, we sent the consumer a letter, a copy of which is attached, with validating documentation from the original account. The expiration of a statute of limitations limits PRAs ability to pursue legal actions but does not otherwise prohibit XXXX from contacting a consumer regarding a debt. XXXX furnished information from the account to the consumer reporting agencies in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX does not control the way in which the consumer reporting agencies report the information furnished by XXXX. Accordingly, any differences in their reporting of the information which XXXX furnishes is the responsibility of the consumer reporting agencies, not XXXX. In response to this complaint, we reinvestigated the account and are sending the consumer a letter with validating documentation from the original account. We believe that the validation provided resolved the dispute and no further steps in response to the complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time. Contradiction : PRAs response denies receiving disputes, claims resolution, and deflects responsibility to the bureaus. Yet all three bureaus show disputes, delayed reinvestigation, unresolved status, and Equifax has suppressed it and current disputes across all three bureaus and cfpb XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC XXXX is known to : Report debts to credit bureaus for years without resolution File lawsuits against consumers who dont respond to collection attempts Misclassify accounts, such as reporting debt buyer accounts as open loans Delay or deny reinvestigation of disputes Blame credit bureaus for reporting errors that XXXX XXXX furnished These practices reflect a pattern of systemic abuse and data manipulation that directly contradict their claims to the CFPB and violate multiple provisions of the FCRA and FDCPA. CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC XXXX CFPB Order Penalty : Over {$27.00} XXXX in consumer refunds and civil fines Violations : FDCPA : Deceptive debt collection practices XXXX : Misleading affidavits and false legal claims Key Findings : o Collected on unsubstantiated debt o Filed misleading affidavits in court o Misrepresented intent to prove debts if contested o Sued on time-barred debt ( outside statute of limitations ) o Claimed debts were legally enforceable when they were not XXXX was XXXX under a consent order prohibiting these practices going forward. XXXX CFPB Action Penalty : Over {$24.00} XXXX total {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution {$12.00} XXXX civil penalty to XXXX victims relief fund Violations : FCRA : Failure to properly investigate and resolve credit reporting disputes FDCPA : Continued illegal debt collection practices XXXX : Violated multiple provisions of the XXXX consent order Key Findings : Collected on unsubstantiated debt Sued consumers without documentation Threatened legal action without intent or basis Collected on time-barred debt without required disclosures Failed to provide validation documents within 30 days Blamed credit bureaus for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX a repeat offender, stating : After getting caught red-handed in XXXX, Portfolio Recovery Associates continued XXXX XXXX XXXX through intimidation, deception, and illegal debt collection tactics and lawsuits. Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Enforcement Portfolio Recovery Associates XXXX : XXXX Penalty : {$2.00} XXXX Cause : Deceptive debt collection practices and violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) Key Violations : XXXX was accused of misrepresenting consumers rights in debt collection notices Sent letters that falsely implied consumers could not dispute debts Failed to disclose that consumers had the right to request verification of the debt Misled consumers about the legal status and enforceability of time-barred debts Used language that threatened legal action without intent or basis FTC Findings XXXX XXXX collection letters violated Section XXXX of the FTC XXXX XXXX which prohibits unfair or deceptive practices XXXX also XXXX the FDCPA, specifically : o XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) : False representation of the character, amount, or legal status of any debt o XXXX ( XXXX ) : Use of false representation or deceptive means to collect a debt o XXXX ( a ) : Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt Outcome : XXXX agreed XXXX a consent decree with the FTC Required XXXX change its collection practices, including : o Clear disclosure of dispute rights o No threats of legal action unless substantiated o No collection on time-barred debts without proper notice How Federal Court Rulings Prove Your Case XXXX. Pattern of Misrepresentation Federal courts have ruled that XXXX : Sued consumers without documentation Misrepresented the validity and enforceability of debts Filed affidavits they knew were false or misleading Collected on time-barred debts without proper disclosures These rulings directly support your claim that XXXX : Reported unverifiable debt to credit bureaus Falsely claimed resolution to the CFPB Continued collection despite dispute and deletion XXXX. Violation of Dispute Rights In the XXXX CFPB judgment, the court found XXXX : Failed to investigate disputes Improperly rejected valid consumer disputes as frivolous Did not maintain policies to ensure accuracy of credit reporting This aligns with your Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion records showing : Delayed reinvestigation Ongoing disputes ignored for years No updates or corrections after dispute XXXX. Legal Precedent for Deletion The XXXX XXXX final judgment required XXXX to : Pay {$12.00} XXXX in consumer restitution Delete unverifiable accounts Reform dispute handling and credit reporting practices This sets a legal precedent that : XXXX reporting practices are unlawful Deletion is the correct remedy Consumers like you are entitled to relief XXXX. Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled XXXX a repeat offender : Violated XXXX CFPB XXXX XXXX Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored prior federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an isolated errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review. My Leverage Federal rulings confirm : XXXX practices are legally documented violations my dispute history matches known patterns of abuse I am entitled to deletion, protection from reinsertion, and regulatory enforcement SECTION : Type of Account Open Misclassification by XXXX XXXX reported the account as Open on Equifax, which falsely implies : An active credit line or revolving account Ongoing access to borrowed funds A direct relationship between the consumer and the furnisher This is categorically false. The account is : A charged-off debt purchased by a third party Closed by the original creditor ( Capital XXXX ) Not open, revolving, or accessible to the consumer Violations FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information XXXX misrepresented XXXX account status, inflating credit utilization and misleading lenders. FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) Duty to Correct and Update XXXX failed to correct the misclassification after multiple disputes. FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False Representation of Legal Status Labeling a closed, charged-off debt as Open falsely implies ongoing liability and access. FCRA XXXX ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Equifax displayed a status that contradicts the original creditors records and PRAs own CFPB response. SECTION : Type of Loan Debt Buyer Misclassification by XXXX XXXX reported the Type of Loan as Debt Buyer across multiple bureaus. This is not a loan productits a description of PRAs business model. This classification : Does not reflect any loan agreement signed by the consumer Misrepresents the nature of the obligation Implies the consumer borrowed directly from XXXX, which is false Confuses asset ownership with consumer liability Violations FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing Inaccurate Information XXXX misclassified the loan type, misleading the nature and origin of the debt. FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False Representation of XXXX XXXX XXXX a third-party purchase as a direct loan is a false claim of origin and enforceability. FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) Duty to Correct and Update XXXX failed to update the loan type to reflect the original product ( e.g., credit card ). FCRA XXXX ( b ) CRA Duty to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Credit bureaus accepted and displayed a misclassification that harms consumers and misleads underwriters. SECTION : Charge-Off, IRS Reporting XXXX and Ownership Contradiction XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX charged off the original account, which triggered a series of financial and legal events that directly contradict PRAs current reporting and collection practices. Charge-Off Process A charge-off is an accounting action where the original creditor declares the debt uncollectible and removes it from active assets. XXXX XXXX then claims the charged-off amount as a business loss on its annual tax filings, reducing taxable income. In many cases, the creditor also receives compensation through loss prevention insurance and or by selling the debt to a third-party buyer. IRS XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX issued a Form XXXX ( Cancellation of Debt ), the debt is considered canceled under IRS regulations XXXX Once canceled, the debt is no longer legally enforceable, and any attempt to collect or report it XXXX constitute double recovery, which is unlawful. XXXX, as the purchaser, can not legally reclassify the debt as a new loan or report it as an XXXX account under the consumers name. Ownership Transfer and XXXX XXXX XXXX purchased the debt from XXXX XXXX as part of a portfolio of charged-off accounts. This transaction is strictly between XXXX and XXXX XXXX consumer was not a party to the sale. XXXX now owns the collection rights, but not the original contract or terms. Reporting the account as XXXX falsely implies an active relationship and ongoing liability, which violates federal law. Violations Triggered by Misclassification Federal Violations : FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) Failure to correct and update after dispute FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Obligation to delete unverifiable or inaccurate data FCRA XXXX ( b ) Credit bureaus must ensure maximum possible accuracy FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False representation of the character or legal status of any debt FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) Use of deceptive means to collect a debt FDCPA XXXX ( a ) Failure to notify consumers of their right to dispute the debt IRS Violations ( if XXXX was issued ) : Improper collection on canceled debt False asset classification Potential double recovery Violation of IRS bad XXXX deduction rules Strategic Conclusion XXXX XXXX has XXXX claimed the debt as a loss and been compensated. PRAs reporting of this account as XXXX and XXXX XXXX misrepresents the legal status, origin, and enforceability of the debt. This contradiction supports permanent deletion under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB and IRS enforcement guidelines. SECTION : XXXX Long-Term Ownership and Monetization Contradiction Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( XXXX ) has held this account for a duration sufficient to trigger its own financial reporting obligations. Under IRS regulations and standard corporate accounting practices, XXXX has : Claimed the account as a business bad debt deduction under IRS Topic No. XXXX and Publication XXXX Reported the account as a business loss on its annual income tax filings Recovered the value through loss prevention insurance or internal portfolio write-downs IRS Bad XXXX Deduction Rules According to IRS Topic XXXX. XXXX and Publication XXXX : A business XXXX deduct a debt that becomes wholly or partially worthless during the tax year The deduction must be claimed in the year the debt is deemed uncollectible The business must demonstrate reasonable efforts to collect before declaring it worthless If XXXX : Held the account for multiple years Failed to collect any payments Continued reporting it as Open despite no verified activity Then, XXXX has already claimed the debt as worthless for tax purposeswhile still reporting it as active on consumer credit files. Insurance Recovery Risk XXXX : Insured its portfolio against non-performing assets Received compensation for this account Continued reporting or collecting on it Then, XXXX has engaged in double monetization, which could trigger insurance fraud exposure under state and federal law. Legal Contradiction XXXX can not : Claim the debt as a business loss Recover its value through tax deductions or insurance And still report the account as Open and collectible under the consumers name This contradiction violates : FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) Furnishing inaccurate information FDCPA XXXX ( XXXX ) ( A ) False representation of legal status IRS XXXX XXXX collects on a canceled or deducted debt, it XXXX trigger unlawful double recovery Strategic Conclusion PRAs long-term ownership and monetization of this account contradict its continued reporting as an active liability. This supports permanent deletion under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ), reinsertion protection under XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ), and regulatory review under CFPB, IRS, and insurance enforcement guidelines. DEMAND FOR ACTION I am requesting the following actions be taken immediately : XXXX. Permanent deletion of the PRA Group account # XXXX from Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) and XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ). XXXX. Confirmation that no future furnishers, including PRA Group XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX, or any third-party collector, XXXX reinsert this account or any derivative into my credit reports without : o No updates, corrections, or reinsertions XXXX be made to my credit reports regarding any account furnished by Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( XXXX ), Capital XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX any third-party debt collector or debt buyer, without my explicit written consent. Any attempt to do so without my agreement constitutes a violation of FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ), XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ), and FDCPA XXXX o Notification to all bureaus per FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ) XXXX. XXXX review of XXXX XXXX misrepresentation to the CFPB and breach of reinvestigation timelines. XXXX. Investigate pra via CFPB, FTC, other law enforcement, and agencies This contradiction is now archived for legacy-grade breach documentation and survivor-centered override enforcement. here XXXX the XXXX boiler plate responses from pra llc that also are invalid Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( XXXX ) investigated the complaint and verified the XXXX account ending in XXXX and the accuracy of the information we furnished to the consumer reporting agencies regarding the account in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX is a \" XXXX XXXX '' ; XXXX purchases delinquent debt from creditors to whom such debt is owed and seeks to collect such debt from those who owe such debt. In so doing, XXXX is committed to : obtain and maintain appropriate licenses and registrations to engage in its business practices in each jurisdiction in which it collects ; provide appropriate notifications ; validate account information ; investigate and resolve account-related disputes ; verify the integrity and accuracy of account information furnished to the consumer reporting agencies, Equifax, Experian and TransUnion ; XXXX and resolve credit reporting and identity theft related disputes ; and safeguard information, all in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ; implementing regulations of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ; and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and local law, and XXXX guidelines. XXXX purchased the XXXX XXXX Bank ( XXXX ), XXXX. ( \" XXXX XXXX \" ) XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX from Capital XXXX, together with the right to receive payment of the balance due on the account, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Business records provided to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX at the time of our purchase verify that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX social security number ends in XXXX and that a balance of {$790.00} was due on the account at the time of XXXX XXXX purchase. We sent our initial notification letter to the consumer on or about XX/XX/XXXX. We take compliance with all applicable state and federal laws very seriously. We have no record of a request or dispute being received in relation to our initial notification letter. XXXX furnished information regarding the account to the consumer reporting agencies in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX does not control the way in which the consumer reporting agencies report the information furnished by XXXX. Accordingly, any differences in their reporting of the information which XXXX furnishes is the responsibility of the consumer reporting agencies, not XXXX. Our records reflect that we subsequently received, investigated, and responded to several disputes regarding the account which were similar to the dispute made in this complaint. In response to those disputes, we verified the accuracy of the information we furnished to the consumer reporting agencies regarding the account and sent the consumer letters, a copy of XXXX which is attached, with validating documentation from the original account. In response to this complaint, we investigated the account and sent the consumer the attached letter with validating documentation from the original account. We believe that the validation provided resolved the dispute and no further steps in response to the complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time. XXXX XXXX bank XXXX XXXX response This complaint lists someone the company does not recognize as their customer or their customers authorized representative. We reviewed your complaint and sent it to the company for a response. The company let us know that it cant respond because this complaint lists someone who is not listed on the account or loan or authorized to receive the consumers financial information. Companies are required to protect their customers privacy. Companies can not share consumers financial informationincluding as part of the complaint processunless everyone listed in the complaint is also listed on the account or loan or authorized by the customer to receive financial information. Companies can require that their customers provide signed, written permission directly to the company before sharing financial information with a third party, such as a lawyer, guardian, or power of attorney. COMPLAINT ID XXXX SUBMITTED ON XX/XX/XXXX PRODUCT Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports ISSUE Problem with a company 's investigation into an existing problem XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX have the right to collect, but XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX am not on the account or an authorized user or representative of the account. Therefore, this seems to be an illegal and deceptive collection by XXXX XXXX. \npra llc boilerplate response Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Portfolio Recovery Associates , LLC ( XXXX ) investigated the complaint and verified the XXXX account ending in XXXX and the accuracy of the information we furnished to the consumer reporting agencies regarding the account in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX is a \" XXXX XXXX '' ; XXXX purchases delinquent debt from creditors to whom such debt is owed and seeks to collect such debt from those who owe such debt. In so doing, XXXX is committed to : obtain and maintain appropriate licenses and registrations to engage in its business practices in each jurisdiction in which it collects ; provide appropriate notifications ; validate account information ; investigate and resolve account-related disputes ; verify the integrity and accuracy of account information furnished to the consumer reporting agencies, Equifax, Experian and TransUnion ; XXXX and resolve credit reporting and identity theft related disputes ; and safeguard information, all in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ; implementing regulations of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ; and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and local law, and XXXX guidelines. XXXX purchased the XXXX XXXX Bank ( XXXX ), XXXX. ( \" XXXX XXXX \" ) XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX from Capital XXXX, together with the right to receive payment of the balance due on the account, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Business records provided to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX at the time of our purchase verify that the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX, for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX social security number ends in XXXX and that a balance of {$790.00} was due on the account at the time of XXXX XXXX purchase. We sent our initial notification letter to the consumer on or about XX/XX/XXXX. We take compliance with all applicable state and federal laws very seriously. We have no record of a request or dispute being received in relation to our initial notification letter. XXXX furnished information regarding the account to the consumer reporting agencies in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act as amended, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX, state and local law, and industry guidelines. XXXX does not control the way in which the consumer reporting agencies report the information furnished by XXXX. Accordingly, any differences in their reporting of the information which XXXX furnishes is the responsibility of the consumer reporting agencies, not XXXX. Our records reflect that we subsequently received, investigated, and responded to several disputes regarding the account which were similar to the dispute made in this complaint. In response to those disputes, we verified the accuracy of the information we furnished to the consumer reporting agencies regarding the account and sent the consumer letters, a copy of XXXX which is attached, with validating documentation from the original account. In response to this complaint, we investigated the account and sent the consumer the attached letter with validating documentation from the original account. We believe that the validation provided resolved the dispute and no further steps in response to the complaint or follow-up actions are required at this time. \ncaptiol XXXX response XXXX responded there is an unauthorized third party on XX/XX/XXXX i have included all files","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-16T09:42:26.000Z","issue":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"315XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16619422","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2025-10-16T09:31:56.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Collected or attempted to collect exempt funds"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Repeat Offender Status Federal courts and agencies have labeled XXXX a repeat offender : <em>Violated</em> XXXX <em>CFPB</em> XXXX XXXX Fined again in XXXX for the same conduct Ignored <em>prior</em> federal mandates This proves systemic misconductnot an <em>isolated</em> errorand strengthens my demand for permanent deletion and regulatory review."]},"sort":[8.231061,"16619422"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":10,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":10}]}},"product":{"doc_count":10,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":6,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":6}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"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":"Debt collection","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"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":"International money transfer","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":10,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":7,"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":6},{"key":"Problem with personal statement of dispute","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Banking errors","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Other transaction problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Collected or attempted to collect exempt funds","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":10,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":10}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":10,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":8},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":2}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":10,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":10}]}},"company":{"doc_count":10,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","doc_count":3},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Paypal Holdings, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"Possible Financial Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":10,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"GA","doc_count":7},{"key":"TX","doc_count":2},{"key":"CA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":10,"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":3}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":10,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":2}]}}},"_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":{}}}