{"took":149,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":42,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21833860","_score":22.62348,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint because TransUnion failed to conduct a reasonable investigation as required under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA 611 ) regarding a XXXX XXXX collection account reported on my credit file.\n\nI disputed the accuracy of this account with TransUnion. After completing its investigation, TransUnion marked the dispute as resolved and added a remark stating consumer disagrees, indicating the account was verified as accurate. However, the account continues to reflect multiple inconsistencies and incomplete reporting that raise concerns about whether a reasonable investigation was performed.\n\nSpecifically : 1. TransUnion is reporting this account as a collection/charge-off account with a current balance of {$330.00} while also reporting an original balance of {$0.00}. A collection account can not logically have a {$0.00} original balance, which indicates inaccurate account structure reporting.\n\n2. The tradeline reflects a recent reporting update dated XX/XX/year> during the dispute investigation process, indicating that the account data changed while the investigation was ongoing.\n\n3. Other credit reporting agencies report different structural account details for this same XXXX XXXX tradeline, including reporting a 1 month term. Despite these inconsistencies across credit bureaus, TransUnion verified the account as accurate.\n\n4. The account includes reporting fields displaying XXXX for payment history information. When I requested clarification regarding this reporting, I was informed the meaning of this field could not be explained. Verification of a tradeline containing undefined data fields raises concerns about whether a reasonable investigation occurred.\n\n5. No payment history is reported for this account across the credit bureaus despite the account being reported as a collection/charge-off account. Reporting a derogatory account without supporting payment history raises concerns about completeness and accuracy under the FCRA.\n\n6. The account is reported with remarks stating it was closed by consumer, which is inconsistent with how collection accounts are typically reported.\n\n7. After I submitted disputes and complaints regarding this account, changes were made to the tradeline reporting, yet the account continued to be verified as accurate.\n\n8. I was informed by XXXX executive relations team that a deletion request had previously been submitted for this tradeline. Despite this, TransUnion later verified the account as accurate. Verification after a furnisher deletion request raises concerns regarding the adequacy of the investigation performed.\n\n9. When I requested the method of verification used to confirm the accuracy of this account, including Metro-2 reporting details, I was informed that a subpoena would be required to obtain that information. Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), I am entitled to receive a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information.\n\nBecause of these issues, I do not believe TransUnion conducted a reasonable investigation as required under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.\n\nI request that TransUnion provide the method of verification used to confirm this account as accurate despite these inconsistencies, or delete the tradeline from my credit report.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-05-03T11:18:58.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"10801","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21833860","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2026-05-03T10:48:24.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am submitting this complaint because <em>TransUnion</em> failed to conduct a reasonable investigation as required under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA 611 ) regarding a XXXX XXXX collection account reported on my credit file.\n\nI <em>disputed</em> the accuracy of this account with <em>TransUnion</em>. After completing its investigation, <em>TransUnion</em> marked the <em>dispute</em> as <em>resolved</em> and added a <em>remark</em> stating consumer disagrees, indicating the account was <em>verified</em> as accurate."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[22.62348,"21833860"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17151660","_score":22.20554,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is submitted by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX on behalf of consumer XXXX XXXX XXXX under written authorization dated XX/XX/year>, concerning Transunions continued furnishing and reporting of multiple, conflicting, and duplicative mortgage account entries for XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Despite prior written disputes and formal requests for reinvestigation, Transunion continues to display multiple versions of the same XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX accounts ( XXXX. XXXX and XXXX ) under slightly different identifiers, each containing inconsistent and contradictory remarks such as Dispute Resolved Subscriber Disagrees, Consumer Disputes After Resolution, and Information Disputed by Consumer. Payment percentages and reporting metrics vary from 67 percent to 98 percent even though all versions reflect the same balance and In Good Standing status. This inaccurate, misleading, and duplicative reporting materially distorts the consumers credit profile, misrepresents account performance, and constitutes violations of FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and 607 ( b ), which require furnishers and consumer reporting agencies to ensure maximum possible accuracy and to avoid furnishing false or inconsistent data. Transunions failure to properly reinvestigate, reconcile, or remove duplicate listings within 30 days of notice further violates FCRA 611 ( a ) and Regulation V ( 12 C.F.R. 1022.43 ), reflecting systemic negligence and disregard for federal obligations. The consumer, through her authorized representative, requests that the CFPB compel Transunion to conduct a complete reinvestigation, permanently delete all duplicate and inconsistent XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX entries, remove misleading dispute remarks, and issue a corrected credit file reflecting accurate verified information. The CFPB is urged to impose enforcement oversight, sanctions, or corrective action for willful and repeated noncompliance, as this persistent inaccuracy has caused measurable harm to the consumers credit standing, violated her rights under federal law, and undermined the integrity of the credit reporting system.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-10T07:56:20.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"92673","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17151660","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-10T07:44:48.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Despite prior written <em>disputes</em> and formal requests for reinvestigation, <em>Transunion</em> <em>continues</em> to <em>display</em> multiple versions of the same XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX accounts ( XXXX. XXXX and XXXX ) under slightly different identifiers, each containing inconsistent and contradictory <em>remarks</em> such as <em>Dispute</em> <em>Resolved</em> Subscriber Disagrees, Consumer <em>Disputes</em> After Resolution, and Information <em>Disputed</em> by Consumer."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[22.20554,"17151660"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18283680","_score":22.168093,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"CFPB Complaint TransUnion LLC Respondent : TransUnion LLC Issue Type : Credit reporting Product : Credit reporting / consumer report Desired Resolution : Correction or deletion of inaccurate information Complaint Narrative I am submitting this complaint against TransUnion LLC for failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy of information reported on my consumer credit report, in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) and 1681i ). \n\nDespite prior disputes and reinvestigation requests, TransUnion continues to publish materially inconsistent, internally contradictory, and unverifiable information regarding a closed mortgage account, while marking the account as dispute resolved ; customer disagrees. \n\n\n\nAccount at Issue Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ) Account Type : Mortgage Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date Closed : XX/XX/XXXX Current Balance : {$0.00} Status : Closed / Paid Basis of Complaint 1. Materially Inconsistent Reporting Across Credit Bureaus Attached exhibits demonstrate that TransUnions reporting conflicts directly with XXXX  reporting of the same mortgage obligation. The XXXX bureaus report different : Loan terms ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Original balances Modification status Historical characterization These contradictions establish that at least XXXX report is inaccurate, and TransUnion has failed to reconcile or correct its reporting despite notice. \n\n\n\n2. Improper Post-Dispute Verification TransUnion continues to display the remark Dispute resolved ; customer disagrees without correcting or deleting the tradeline, despite clear inconsistencies that render the information unverifiable. \n\nA reasonable reinvestigation would require TransUnion to : Identify and resolve discrepancies with other consumer reporting agencies, or Delete the tradeline if accuracy can not be confirmed TransUnion has done neither. \n\n\n\n3. Reporting of Questionable and Unverifiable Loan Terms TransUnion reports the mortgage as having a XXXX term, which is facially inconsistent with a conventional mortgage opened in XXXX and closed in XXXX. This term length conflicts with both industry norms and XXXX  reporting of the same obligation. \n\nPublishing implausible or unsupported loan terms violates TransUnions duty to ensure accuracy. \n\n\n\nHarm to Consumer As a result of TransUnions continued publication of inaccurate and inconsistent information : My creditworthiness has been adversely affected I have been forced to repeatedly dispute the same tradeline TransUnions reporting creates confusion for creditors reviewing my report","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-25T19:20:30.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"92562","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18283680","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-25T19:11:16.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Improper Post-<em>Dispute</em> <em>Verification</em> <em>TransUnion</em> <em>continues</em> to <em>display</em> the <em>remark</em> <em>Dispute</em> <em>resolved</em> ; customer disagrees without correcting or deleting the tradeline, despite clear inconsistencies that render the information unverifiable. \n\nA reasonable reinvestigation would require <em>TransUnion</em> to : Identify and <em>resolve</em> discrepancies with other consumer reporting agencies, or Delete the tradeline if accuracy can not be confirmed <em>TransUnion</em> has done neither. \n\n\n\n3."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[22.168093,"18283680"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18220215","_score":20.71523,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint against the credit reporting agencies Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion, as well as the data furnishers XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX, for continued violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Regulation V, and the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ).\n\nDespite multiple prior disputes, these entities continue to report inaccurate, inconsistent, and unverified information on my consumer credit reports. The inaccurate reporting has caused ongoing harm to my creditworthiness, resulting in adverse credit decisions, higher interest rates, and financial distress. \n\nFAILURE TO CONDUCT A REASONABLE REINVESTIGATION I previously disputed specific inaccuracies on the accounts listed below. However, the same erroneous data remains on my credit reports, demonstrating that the credit reporting agencies and furnishers failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation, as required by 15 U.S.C. 1681i.\n\nAdditionally, the continued reporting of contradictory data violates 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), which requires consumer reporting agencies to maintain reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy. \n\nACCOUNT-SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Acct. ending XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) This installment auto loan is reported as open with a balance of approximately {$36000.00} and a monthly payment of {$810.00}. The account is being reported with multiple XXXX and XXXX late payments. \n\nHowever : The payment history grids show multiple OK months that do not align with the reported delinquency status. \n\nPast-due amounts, delinquency codes, and late payment counts differ across Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. \n\nKey Metro 2 fields ( Account Status, Payment Rating, Past Due Amount, Date of Last Activity, Date of Last Payment ) do not match, which is a direct violation of Metro 2 reporting standards. \n\nIf the late payments were accurate, the furnisher must be able to identify : The exact billing cycle for each alleged late payment The precise amount past due at that time The contractual due date The actual date payment was received That level of verification has not been provided. I am requesting correction, not deletion. All inaccurate late payment remarks and delinquency indicators must be removed so the tradeline reflects accurate, compliant reporting. \n\nXXXX. XXXX Credit Card ( Acct. ending XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) This revolving credit card account is reported as closed, yet it continues to display XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX delinquency codes. \n\nThese late payment indicators : Conflict with the payment history grids, which largely show OK months Conflict with remarks stating the account was previously in dispute now resolved Conflict with the accounts closed status An account can not reasonably be reported as closed with disputes resolved while still escalating delinquency codes unless each late payment is fully documented. The continued reporting of this contradictory data violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681i, Regulation V, and Metro 2 consistency requirements.\n\nI am requesting correction only. All late payment remarks, delinquency codes, and past-due indicators must be removed so the tradeline reflects a closed account with no derogatory payment history. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Acct. ending XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) This account reflects a {$0.00} balance and is reported as paid and closed. Despite this, the tradeline continues to display late payment indicators that directly contradict : The XXXX balance The paid/closed status The payment history grid, which shows consistent OK reporting A paid, closed account with no past-due balance can not lawfully report late payments without clear, documented proof. The continued reporting of contradictory information after prior disputes demonstrates a failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681i, and Metro 2 standards. \n\nI am requesting that all late payment remarks be removed and the account be updated to Paid as Agreed. \n\nADDITIONAL LEGAL CONCERNS The furnishers failed to properly reflect payments and account activity, constituting billing errors under 15 U.S.C. 1666 ( b ).\n\nInconsistent reporting across bureaus indicates a lack of internal controls and compliance.\n\nContinued reporting of disputed, unverifiable information may constitute willful noncompliance, exposing the parties to liability under 15 U.S.C. 1681n.\n\nREQUESTED RESOLUTION I am requesting that the CFPB require the credit reporting agencies and furnishers to : Conduct a lawful, documented reinvestigation Remove or correct all inaccurate late payment remarks and delinquency indicators Ensure all reporting complies fully with FCRA, Regulation V, FCBA, and Metro 2 standards Provide written confirmation of the corrections made If these violations are not corrected promptly, I reserve the right to pursue additional remedies through the State Attorney General, FTC, and civil litigation.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-22T16:18:31.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"295XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18220215","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-22T15:44:19.000Z","state":"SC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["These late payment indicators : Conflict with the payment history grids, which largely show OK months Conflict with <em>remarks</em> stating the account was previously in <em>dispute</em> now <em>resolved</em> Conflict with the accounts closed status An account can not reasonably be reported as closed with <em>disputes</em> <em>resolved</em> while still escalating delinquency codes unless each late payment is fully documented."]},"sort":[20.71523,"18220215"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18220220","_score":20.696968,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint against the credit reporting agencies Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion, as well as the data furnishers XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX, for continued violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Regulation V, and the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ).\n\nDespite multiple prior disputes, these entities continue to report inaccurate, inconsistent, and unverified information on my consumer credit reports. The inaccurate reporting has caused ongoing harm to my creditworthiness, resulting in adverse credit decisions, higher interest rates, and financial distress. \n\nFAILURE TO CONDUCT A REASONABLE REINVESTIGATION I previously disputed specific inaccuracies on the accounts listed below. However, the same erroneous data remains on my credit reports, demonstrating that the credit reporting agencies and furnishers failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation, as required by 15 U.S.C. 1681i.\n\nAdditionally, the continued reporting of contradictory data violates 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), which requires consumer reporting agencies to maintain reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy. \n\nACCOUNT-SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Acct. ending XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) This installment auto loan is reported as open with a balance of approximately {$36000.00} and a monthly payment of {$810.00}. The account is being reported with multiple XXXX and XXXX late payments. \n\nHowever : The payment history grids show multiple OK months that do not align with the reported delinquency status. \n\nPast-due amounts, delinquency codes, and late payment counts differ across Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. \n\nKey Metro 2 fields ( Account Status, Payment Rating, Past Due Amount, Date of Last Activity, Date of Last Payment ) do not match, which is a direct violation of Metro 2 reporting standards. \n\nIf the late payments were accurate, the furnisher must be able to identify : The exact billing cycle for each alleged late payment The precise amount past due at that time The contractual due date The actual date payment was received That level of verification has not been provided. I am requesting correction, not deletion. All inaccurate late payment remarks and delinquency indicators must be removed so the tradeline reflects accurate, compliant reporting. \n\nXXXX. XXXX Credit Card ( Acct. ending XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) This revolving credit card account is reported as closed, yet it continues to display XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and even XXXX delinquency codes. \n\nThese late payment indicators : Conflict with the payment history grids, which largely show OK months Conflict with remarks stating the account was previously in dispute now resolved Conflict with the accounts closed status An account can not reasonably be reported as closed with disputes resolved while still escalating delinquency codes unless each late payment is fully documented. The continued reporting of this contradictory data violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681i, Regulation V, and Metro 2 consistency requirements.\n\nI am requesting correction only. All late payment remarks, delinquency codes, and past-due indicators must be removed so the tradeline reflects a closed account with no derogatory payment history. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Acct. ending XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) This account reflects a {$0.00} balance and is reported as paid and closed. Despite this, the tradeline continues to display late payment indicators that directly contradict : The XXXX balance The paid/closed status The payment history grid, which shows consistent OK reporting A paid, closed account with no past-due balance can not lawfully report late payments without clear, documented proof. The continued reporting of contradictory information after prior disputes demonstrates a failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681i, and Metro 2 standards. \n\nI am requesting that all late payment remarks be removed and the account be updated to Paid as Agreed. \n\nADDITIONAL LEGAL CONCERNS The furnishers failed to properly reflect payments and account activity, constituting billing errors under 15 U.S.C. 1666 ( b ).\n\nInconsistent reporting across bureaus indicates a lack of internal controls and compliance.\n\nContinued reporting of disputed, unverifiable information may constitute willful noncompliance, exposing the parties to liability under 15 U.S.C. 1681n.\n\nREQUESTED RESOLUTION I am requesting that the CFPB require the credit reporting agencies and furnishers to : Conduct a lawful, documented reinvestigation Remove or correct all inaccurate late payment remarks and delinquency indicators Ensure all reporting complies fully with FCRA, Regulation V, FCBA, and Metro 2 standards Provide written confirmation of the corrections made If these violations are not corrected promptly, I reserve the right to pursue additional remedies through the State Attorney General, FTC, and civil litigation.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-22T16:18:35.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"295XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18220220","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-22T16:18:05.000Z","state":"SC","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["These late payment indicators : Conflict with the payment history grids, which largely show OK months Conflict with <em>remarks</em> stating the account was previously in <em>dispute</em> now <em>resolved</em> Conflict with the accounts closed status An account can not reasonably be reported as closed with <em>disputes</em> <em>resolved</em> while still escalating delinquency codes unless each late payment is fully documented."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[20.696968,"18220220"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13404743","_score":20.457563,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Formal Dispute XXXX Account XXXX XXXX Reporting Violations and Unverified Charge-Off To Whom It May Concern, This letter is a formal dispute concerning the XXXX account # XXXX XXXX as currently reported on my TransUnion credit file. This trade line is being inaccurately reported as a chargeoff and contains multiple serious violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \nThe following issues are being disputed : XXXX. No Payment History : This account does not display a payment history. This omission violates XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( b ), which requires consumer reporting agencies to maintain procedures to ensure maximum accuracy. \nXXXX. Overstated High Balance : The credit limit is reported as {$270.00}, yet the high balance is reported as {$460.00}. This discrepancy suggests improper overcharging or incorrect reporting that has not been substantiated. \nXXXX. Improper Charge-Off & Resale : The account is marked as charged off as bad debt, yet the remarks indicate it was purchased by another lender. This is a clear red flag. \nOnce an account is charged off, it can not legally be resold for collection doing so constitutes double collection, a deceptive practice, and potential FCRA and FDCPA violations. \nXXXX. No Verification of Debt : Despite multiple disputes, TransUnion has not provided : o Documentation of who verified the account, o A complete and accurate payment history, o A copy of the original contract bearing my wet ink signature. \nXXXX. Missing Creditor Contact Info : The contact section lists only XXXX, OH XXXX, which is not a complete address. This omission prevents me from contacting the furnisher directly. It violates FCRA requirements under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ), which mandates that the credit bureau provide the full name and mailing address of any furnisher reporting negative information. \nFurthermore, if this account was sold to XXXX XXXX, I have already received a letter stating they could not validate it and that all credit bureaus were to remove it. Experian and Equifax complied, but TransUnion continues to verify this information, which is unacceptable. I have already submitted a complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ). \nDEMAND FOR RESOLUTION : I am demanding the following actions be taken immediately : Delete this account from my credit file, Provide the name of the party that verified the account and documentation used, Disclose the complete and accurate address of the furnisher, as required by law, Cease the continued reporting of unverifiable and inaccurate information. \nIf this matter is not resolved within the XXXX dispute period as outlined in XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( a ), I will escalate with the FTC, CFPB, and the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  for TransUnions continued violation of my consumer rights. \nPlease provide written confirmation of your findings and an updated copy of my credit report. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-09T05:04:10.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"93534","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13404743","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-09T03:12:48.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Experian and Equifax complied, but <em>TransUnion</em> <em>continues</em> to <em>verify</em> this information, which is unacceptable. I have already submitted a complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB )."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[20.457563,"13404743"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14801276","_score":20.348545,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : TransUnion falsely verified a tradeline that XXXX admits they do not own or furnish Supplemental to Complaint ID # XXXX I am submitting this complaint as a supplement to CFPB Complaint # XXXX against TransUnion, based on newly discovered material facts and supporting evidence. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX submitted an official response to my CFPB complaint against them, clearly stating that the account in questiona Line of Credit originated through XXXXXXXX XXXX and serviced by XXXX sold to XXXX, XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX expressly confirmed that they no longer own the account, are not servicing it, and do not furnish data on it to any credit reporting agency. \n\nDespite this clear statement, TransUnion issued investigation results dated XX/XX/XXXX, claiming the account was \" verified '' and that no changes were necessary. Their letter ( File # XXXX ) states that the disputed tradeline ( XXXX XXXX, Account # XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) remains on file and was updated as accurate after contacting the data furnisher. \n\nThe XX/XX/XXXX report from TransUnion continues to display this tradeline with derogatory payment history and marks it as Purchased by Another Lender Paid Collection. However, TransUnion lists XXXX as the furnishing party while simultaneously acknowledging the account was sold. This inconsistency is irreconcilable in light of XXXX sworn CFPB response. \n\nTransUnion either fabricated a verification or relied on a party ( XXXX ) who explicitly disclaims ownership or reporting authority. Either scenario constitutes a serious violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including : Violations Committed : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation TransUnion could not have reasonably verified this tradeline as accurate when XXXX explicitly stated they do not furnish data on it. \n\n15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) Failure to maintain maximum possible accuracy By continuing to publish inaccurate and misleading derogatory information on my credit file, TransUnion has violated its statutory duty.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1681n and 1681o Willful and/or negligent noncompliance The conflict between XXXX response and TransUnions reporting shows either willful deception or gross negligence. \n\nSupporting Documents Included : XXXX CFPB response dated XX/XX/XXXX, stating they no longer furnish or service the account. \n\nTransUnions investigation results dated XX/XX/XXXX, falsely marking the tradeline as verified and refusing to remove it. \n\nPage 6 of TransUnion 's XX/XX/XXXX report, showing continued publication of the XXXXXXXX XXXX tradeline with derogatory remarks. \n\n\n\nIf this matter is not resolved swiftly and the inaccurate tradeline is not deleted, I reserve the right to pursue legal action in federal court under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 1681o for actual, statutory, and punitive damages as provided by law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-22T20:12:31.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33076","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14801276","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-22T20:08:13.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>TransUnions</em> investigation results dated XX/XX/XXXX, falsely marking the tradeline as <em>verified</em> and refusing to remove it. \n\nPage 6 of <em>TransUnion</em> 's XX/XX/XXXX report, showing <em>continued</em> publication of the XXXXXXXX XXXX tradeline with derogatory <em>remarks</em>. \n\n\n\nIf this matter is not <em>resolved</em> swiftly and the inaccurate tradeline is not deleted, I reserve the right to pursue legal action in federal court under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 1681o for actual, statutory, and punitive damages as provided by law."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[20.348545,"14801276"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16155742","_score":19.88779,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am escalating this issue because XXXX investigation and continued furnishing confirm violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681, and Metro 2 reporting standards.\n\nXXXX own letter admits the loan was sold on XX/XX/XXXX, yet the XXXX continued to report as an active charge-off from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX with a {$0.00} balance and the remark purchased by another lender. If the account has already been charged o, and no further delinquency is occurring meaning no active/open billing cycle exists, the repeated CO implies new defaults that are artificially depressing my score. This misrepresents the debts legal and financial status and violates FDCPA 1692e, which prohibits false or misleading representations regarding the debt. Reporting it as both charged off and purchased by another lender while updating the status monthly constitutes re-aging, is misleading, and violates FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ). \n\nXXXX own policy as stated in their previous CFPB response, ( charge-off at 121 days past due ) mirrors FFIECs 120-day standard. Yet XXXX and TransUnion display a charge-off at 90 days, while XXXX  reflects 120 days. No bankruptcy or special uncollectible event exists to justify early charge-off. This inconsistency violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) s requirement of maximum possible accuracy and fails Metro 2 reporting standards. By reporting three different charge-off dates across CRAs, including premature treatment, XXXX is furnishing data that is both inconsistent and unlawful. \n\nFurther, XXXX confirms the account was charged off on XX/XX/XXXX. However, the CRAs display materially conflicting date of last activity entries : TransUnion XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX, and XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX. These irreconcilable dates can not all be accurate, rendering the data unreliable by definition. Furnishing conflicting payment history and activity dates across bureaus suggests a lack of proper verification or diligence in XXXX reporting violating the TILA 1666 provisions concerning billing errors.\n\nUnder FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) and FCRA 1681e ( b ), furnishers must ensure information is maximally accurate, complete, uniformed, and consistent. \n\nBy verifying this tradeline without correcting these contradictions, XXXX and the CRAs are violating XXXX11 ( a ) s duty to conduct a reasonable investigation. Producing a promissory note does not verify the accuracy of how the tradeline is furnished. Verification under the FCRA requires consistency, accuracy, and a non-misleading presentation, none of which exist here. \n\nAs the furnisher of this data, despite the sale of this account, XXXX bears the responsibility for its validity. Under FCRA 611, any information that can not be verified must be deleted. Since receiving several of my complaints and disputes, you have had sucient time to investigate and verify this account and its details. Your continued refusal to address these inaccuracies, provide adequate documentation, or resolve the discrepancies highlights your willful negligence and intentional noncompliance with federal law. \n\nBecause the account has been sold, carries a {$0.00} balance, and is reported with conflicting dates, misleading charge-off updates, and noncompliant coding, the XXXX  can not be corrected without continuing to violate federal law. Pursuant to FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), the only lawful resolution is outright deletion from XXXX XXXX, and TransUnion.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-24T17:19:16.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"480XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16155742","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-09-24T17:18:51.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Under FCRA 611, any information that can not be <em>verified</em> must be deleted. Since receiving several of my complaints and <em>disputes</em>, you have had sucient time to investigate and <em>verify</em> this account and its details. Your <em>continued</em> refusal to address these inaccuracies, provide adequate documentation, or <em>resolve</em> the discrepancies highlights your willful negligence and intentional noncompliance with federal law."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[19.88779,"16155742"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16001643","_score":19.272797,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint Against : TransUnion LLC and XXXX XXXX : Inaccurate, duplicate, and re-aged reporting of the same account -- - Statement of Complaint I am filing this complaint because TransUnion is reporting multiple, conflicting, and inaccurate versions of the same XXXX  account on my credit report. These entries are damaging my creditworthiness and are clear violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \n\nXXXX. Duplicate Reporting : TransUnion is displaying multiple trade lines for the same XXXX account, with different balances ( {$2500.00} and {$880.00} ), different statuses, and multiple dispute resolved customer disagrees remarks. \n\nThis is misleading, incomplete, and a direct violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ) ( failure to assure maximum possible accuracy ). \n\n\n\nXXXX. False Late Payments / Re-Aging : The account was closed and charged off in XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nYet, TransUnion has continued to report new late payments as of XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nThis is impossible on a closed/charged-off account and constitutes illegal re-aging of debt, a violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) and 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). \n\n\n\nXXXX. Failure to Correct After Disputes : I have disputed this account multiple times. Instead of correcting or deleting, TransUnion continues to alter and reinsert variations of the same inaccurate account. \n\nUnder FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), if an item is deleted or can not be verified, it can not be reinserted without proper notice to the consumer. I have never received such notice. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Improper Verification : TransUnion and XXXX have not provided any lawful XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX as required under FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ). \n\nThey must provide the original signed contract, full payment history, and proof of the alleged XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX missed payments. \n\n\n\n\n\n-- - Requested Resolution I am not requesting a correction. I am demanding permanent deletion of all XXXX accounts and duplicate trade lines from my TransUnion credit file, as they are unverifiable, inaccurate, and re-aged. \n\nI further demand : Written confirmation from TransUnion that these accounts have been deleted. \n\nWritten confirmation that no reinsertion will occur without full compliance with FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ).\n\nThat all supporting documents used for verification be provided to me and filed with this complaint.\n\n-- - Laws Violated FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Duty to assure maximum possible accuracy.\n\nFCRA 1681i ( a ) : Failure to reinvestigate and correct inaccurate information.\n\nFCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) : Illegal reinsertion of deleted information without notice.\n\nFCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) : Prohibition against furnishing false or misleading information. \n\n\n\n-- - This is a formal complaint, and I request resolution within 15 days of receipt.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-17T15:31:59.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77082","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16001643","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-09-17T15:24:24.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Duplicate Reporting : <em>TransUnion</em> is <em>displaying</em> multiple trade lines for the same XXXX account, with different balances ( {$2500.00} and {$880.00} ), different statuses, and multiple <em>dispute</em> <em>resolved</em> customer disagrees <em>remarks</em>. \n\nThis is misleading, incomplete, and a direct violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ) ( failure to assure maximum possible accuracy ). \n\n\n\nXXXX. False Late Payments / Re-Aging : The account was closed and charged off in XX/XX/XXXX."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[19.272797,"16001643"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14533820","_score":18.553957,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to dispute inaccurate late payment reporting on my TransUnion and Experian credit reports for XXXX accounts that are listed as paid and closed but are still displaying derogatory late payment notations. These accounts are with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( account number ending in XXXX ) with a reported late payment dated XX/XX/XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX ( account number ending in XXXX ) with a reported late payment dated XX/XX/XXXX. Both accounts are now showing a past due balance of {$0.00}, and yet the late payments remain as damaging negative marks on my reports. \n\nI have worked tirelessly to maintain accurate and responsible credit behavior. I resolved these accounts, closed them properly, and made sure there were no outstanding balances. There is no justifiable reason for these accounts to continue reflecting derogatory payment historiesespecially when there is no delinquency or money owed. These lingering late payment remarks are misleading, outdated, and ultimately punitive. \n\nEvery time I try to move forwardwhether it's applying for new credit, securing better loan terms, or even qualifying for housingthese entries come back to haunt me. It's demoralizing and deeply frustrating to know that despite doing everything by the book, my credit profile still tells a story that isnt true. These mistakes weigh heavily on me emotionally, financially, and professionally. \n\nThese types of reporting failures erode confidence in the credit reporting system. I am not alleging fraud or identity theft, but I do believe these errors could stem from data inaccuracies or even residual impact from broader data breaches or poor information sharing between creditors and bureaus. It is unacceptable that such derogatory information remains active and harmful when the accounts are clearly marked as paid with no past due amounts. \n\nUnder the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), credit bureaus have a legal responsibility to maintain maximum possible accuracy in all consumer reporting. Furthermore, once I dispute these inaccuracies, both TransUnion and Experian are obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681i to conduct a timely and reasonable reinvestigation. If they can not verify the accuracy of the reported information through reliable and current documentation, they are required to delete or correct it.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-08T23:46:30.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"85364","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14533820","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-07-08T23:43:11.000Z","state":"AZ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Furthermore, once I <em>dispute</em> these inaccuracies, both <em>TransUnion</em> and Experian are obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681i to conduct a timely and reasonable reinvestigation. If they can not <em>verify</em> the accuracy of the reported information through reliable and current documentation, they are required to delete or correct it."]},"sort":[18.553957,"14533820"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14532652","_score":18.553957,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to dispute inaccurate late payment reporting on my TransUnion and XXXX credit reports for two accounts that are listed as paid and closed but are still displaying derogatory late payment notations. These accounts are with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( account number ending in XXXX ) with a reported late payment dated XX/XX/XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX ( account number ending in XXXX ) with a reported late payment dated XX/XX/XXXX. Both accounts are now showing a past due balance of {$0.00}, and yet the late payments remain as damaging negative marks on my reports. \n\nI have worked tirelessly to maintain accurate and responsible credit behavior. I resolved these accounts, closed them properly, and made sure there were no outstanding balances. There is no justifiable reason for these accounts to continue reflecting derogatory payment historiesespecially when there is no delinquency or money owed. These lingering late payment remarks are misleading, outdated, and ultimately punitive. \n\nEvery time I try to move forwardwhether it's applying for new credit, securing better loan terms, or even qualifying for housingthese entries come back to haunt me. It's demoralizing and deeply frustrating to know that despite doing everything by the book, my credit profile still tells a story that isnt true. These mistakes weigh heavily on me emotionally, financially, and professionally.\n\nThese types of reporting failures erode confidence in the credit reporting system. I am not alleging fraud or identity theft, but I do believe these errors could stem from data inaccuracies or even residual impact from broader data breaches or poor information sharing between creditors and bureaus. It is unacceptable that such derogatory information remains active and harmful when the accounts are clearly marked as paid with no past due amounts.\n\nUnder the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), credit bureaus have a legal responsibility to maintain maximum possible accuracy in all consumer reporting. Furthermore, once I dispute these inaccuracies, both TransUnion and Experian are obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681i to conduct a timely and reasonable reinvestigation. If they can not verify the accuracy of the reported information through reliable and current documentation, they are required to delete or correct it.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-08T23:46:27.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"85364","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14532652","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-08T23:43:08.000Z","state":"AZ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Furthermore, once I <em>dispute</em> these inaccuracies, both <em>TransUnion</em> and Experian are obligated under 15 U.S.C. 1681i to conduct a timely and reasonable reinvestigation. If they can not <em>verify</em> the accuracy of the reported information through reliable and current documentation, they are required to delete or correct it."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[18.553957,"14532652"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18343772","_score":18.439734,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint regarding inaccurate and unlawful credit reporting by XXXX Bank and the consumer reporting agencies concerning a XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX. I am not disputing ownership of this account. My dispute is based solely on factual inaccuracies, internal contradictions, and improper charge off reporting that appear across my credit reports. \n\nThis account is being reported inconsistently across all three consumer reporting agencies. TransUnion, Experian, and XXXX  each display different dates of last activity, different reporting and verification dates, different charge off timelines, different high balance figures, and conflicting account remarks. A single account can not lawfully have multiple factual histories at the same time. These inconsistencies demonstrate that the information can not meet the Fair Credit Reporting Act requirement of maximum possible accuracy. \n\nIn addition, this account is being reported as Collection or Charge Off on a recurring monthly basis. A charge off is a one time accounting event, not a continuing monthly status. Repeatedly reporting a charge off month after month falsely exaggerates the severity of the account and misrepresents its true status. This type of reporting is misleading and not accurate. \n\nDespite XXXX reporting this account as charged off and reporting the unpaid balance as a loss, I have never received an IRS Form 1099 C, any debt cancellation notice, or any documentation explaining whether the debt was forgiven, sold, or retained. If XXXX is reporting a loss, it must be able to document how the debt was treated and whether required disclosures were issued. No such documentation has ever been provided. \n\nThe tradeline also contains contradictory dispute status language. It simultaneously reflects that the account is not disputed, that account information was disputed by the consumer and met requirements, and that a prior dispute was resolved. These statements can not all be true at the same time and further demonstrate inaccurate reporting. \n\nI have disputed these inaccuracies previously, yet the issues persist. Minor updates, balance adjustments, notation changes, or partial corrections do not resolve the underlying inaccuracies. Unless this account is either fully removed or reported with completely identical, accurate, and documented information across all three bureaus, it remains legally inaccurate. \n\nI have retained copies of my credit reports and documentation showing these discrepancies. Continued reporting of this account without full accuracy exposes XXXX Bank and the consumer reporting agencies to further regulatory and legal action.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-29T17:04:32.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"89011","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18343772","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-12-29T17:04:06.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>TransUnion</em>, Experian, and XXXX  each <em>display</em> different dates of last activity, different reporting and <em>verification</em> dates, different charge off timelines, different high balance figures, and conflicting account <em>remarks</em>. A single account can not lawfully have multiple factual histories at the same time. These inconsistencies demonstrate that the information can not meet the Fair Credit Reporting Act requirement of maximum possible accuracy."]},"sort":[18.439734,"18343772"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18343771","_score":18.409307,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint regarding inaccurate and unlawful credit reporting by XXXX Bank and the consumer reporting agencies concerning a XXXX credit card account ending in XXXX. I am not disputing ownership of this account. My dispute is based solely on factual inaccuracies, internal contradictions, and improper charge off reporting that appear across my credit reports. \n\nThis account is being reported inconsistently across all three consumer reporting agencies. TransUnion, Experian, and XXXX  each display different dates of last activity, different reporting and verification dates, different charge off timelines, different high balance figures, and conflicting account remarks. A single account can not lawfully have multiple factual histories at the same time. These inconsistencies demonstrate that the information can not meet the Fair Credit Reporting Act requirement of maximum possible accuracy. \n\nIn addition, this account is being reported as Collection or Charge Off on a recurring monthly basis. A charge off is a one time accounting event, not a continuing monthly status. Repeatedly reporting a charge off month after month falsely exaggerates the severity of the account and misrepresents its true status. This type of reporting is misleading and not accurate. \n\nDespite XXXX reporting this account as charged off and reporting the unpaid balance as a loss, I have never received an IRS Form 1099 C, any debt cancellation notice, or any documentation explaining whether the debt was forgiven, sold, or retained. If XXXX is reporting a loss, it must be able to document how the debt was treated and whether required disclosures were issued. No such documentation has ever been provided. \n\nThe tradeline also contains contradictory dispute status language. It simultaneously reflects that the account is not disputed, that account information was disputed by the consumer and met requirements, and that a prior dispute was resolved. These statements can not all be true at the same time and further demonstrate inaccurate reporting. \n\nI have disputed these inaccuracies previously, yet the issues persist. Minor updates, balance adjustments, notation changes, or partial corrections do not resolve the underlying inaccuracies. Unless this account is either fully removed or reported with completely identical, accurate, and documented information across all three bureaus, it remains legally inaccurate. \n\nI have retained copies of my credit reports and documentation showing these discrepancies. Continued reporting of this account without full accuracy exposes XXXX Bank and the consumer reporting agencies to further regulatory and legal action.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-29T17:04:32.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"89011","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18343771","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-29T16:42:11.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>TransUnion</em>, Experian, and XXXX  each <em>display</em> different dates of last activity, different reporting and <em>verification</em> dates, different charge off timelines, different high balance figures, and conflicting account <em>remarks</em>. A single account can not lawfully have multiple factual histories at the same time. These inconsistencies demonstrate that the information can not meet the Fair Credit Reporting Act requirement of maximum possible accuracy."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[18.409307,"18343771"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18249485","_score":18.031345,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against multiple furnishers and consumer reporting agencies ( Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion ) for continuing to report inaccurate, misleading, and internally inconsistent credit information despite repeated disputes and clear evidence that the reported data does not reflect the true status of my accounts. \n\nAcross several tradelines, accounts are being reported as current, paid, or closed with a {$0.00} past-due balance, while simultaneously showing late payment history and negative indicators. This type of reporting is contradictory, harmful, and violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) as well as Metro 2 reporting standards.\n\nITEM 1 : XXXX XXXX  Credit Card Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  This account is reported as open, current, and not past due, with a {$0.00} past-due balance across all three credit bureaus. Despite this, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion continue to report multiple 30-day late payments on this account. \n\nReporting late payments on an account that is currently paid as agreed is inaccurate and misleading. There is no unresolved delinquency, no past-due balance, and no ongoing default that would justify continued negative payment coding. The presence of late payment history directly contradicts the accounts current status. \n\nBy reporting the account as current while simultaneously publishing late payments, the furnishers and credit bureaus are violating FCRA 1681e ( b ) by failing to ensure maximum possible accuracy. This also conflicts with Metro 2 guidelines, which require that payment history and account status align with the actual condition of the account. \n\nThis inaccurate reporting is harming my credit profile by falsely portraying poor payment behavior when I am meeting the terms of the account. \n\nITEM XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Credit Card Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This account is reported as open, current, and within the credit limit, with no past-due balance, yet it continues to display 30- and 60-day late payment remarks across the bureaus. \n\nAn account that is open and current should not continue to reflect delinquency unless a verified, ongoing default exists. No such documentation has been provided to support the continued reporting of late payments. Reporting an account as current while coding it as negative is internally inconsistent and misrepresents my actual credit behavior. \n\nThis reporting violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 1681i, as the information is neither accurate nor properly corrected after disputes. It also violates Metro 2 standards, which require that late payments not be reported indefinitely once an account has been brought current and maintained as agreed. \n\nITEM XXXX : XXXX XXXX Secured Installment Loan Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This installment loan is reported as paid, closed, and carrying a {$0.00} balance, yet late payment indicators continue to appear on my credit reports. \n\nOnce an installment account is paid and closed as agreed, continued reporting of delinquency is inaccurate unless the delinquency was unresolved at closure. There is no past-due balance, no outstanding obligation, and no evidence that late payments remain reportable. \n\nContinuing to publish late payment history on a satisfied loan misrepresents my repayment history and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ). It also directly conflicts with Metro 2 standards, which require closed, paid installment loans to reflect satisfactory performance when no delinquency remains.\n\nThis outdated negative reporting is unjustly suppressing my credit scores and distorting my installment loan history. \n\nITEM XXXX : XXXX Credit Card Account Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  This account is reported as paid, closed, and with a {$0.00} balance, yet late payment remarks and negative indicators continue to appear on some credit reports. Additionally, there are material inconsistencies across bureaus regarding account status, payment history, and dates. \n\nIf an account is paid and closed with no delinquent balance, late payments should not continue to be reported unless they are verified as accurate and properly reportable. The inconsistent reporting across bureaus confirms that the information is not being verified consistently or accurately. \n\nThis conduct violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) and demonstrates a failure to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure accuracy. \n\nITEM XXXX : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Loan Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This auto loan is reported as paid, closed, and satisfied, with Equifax and TransUnion reflecting a positive payment history. However, Experian continues to report a late payment that is not reflected by the other bureaus. \n\nWhen one bureau reports a delinquency that the others do not, it raises serious concerns about accuracy and verification. No documentation has been provided showing that a delinquency existed at the time of closure or that it remains reportable. \n\nReporting a late payment on a paid auto loan misrepresents my repayment history and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) and Metro 2 reporting standards.\n\nFAILURE TO CONDUCT REASONABLE REINVESTIGATION I have disputed these inaccuracies in writing with all three credit bureaus. Despite this, the negative information remains. This indicates that the reinvestigations conducted were inadequate, incomplete, or automated, rather than the reasonable reinvestigation required under FCRA 1681i. \n\nHARM CAUSED The continued publication of inaccurate and contradictory information has : Suppressed my credit scores Damaged my creditworthiness Distorted my true payment history Interfered with my ability to obtain credit RESOLUTION REQUESTED I respectfully request that the CFPB require the furnishers and credit reporting agencies to : Conduct lawful, reasonable reinvestigations of each account Remove all inaccurate late payment remarks and negative indicators Update all tradelines to reflect PAID AS AGREED or PAYING AS AGREED Ensure consistent and accurate reporting across all bureaus Delete any information that can not be fully verified as accurate, complete, and compliant FINAL STATEMENT I am not disputing valid debt. I am disputing inaccurate credit reporting that violates federal law and continues to harm me despite my efforts to resolve it. I am requesting CFPB intervention to enforce compliance and protect my consumer rights.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-23T16:42:42.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"082XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18249485","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-23T16:42:14.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am <em>disputing</em> inaccurate credit reporting that violates federal law and <em>continues</em> to harm me despite my efforts to <em>resolve</em> it. I am requesting CFPB intervention to enforce compliance and protect my consumer rights."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[18.031345,"18249485"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18249480","_score":18.019875,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against multiple furnishers and consumer reporting agencies ( Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion ) for continuing to report inaccurate, misleading, and internally inconsistent credit information despite repeated disputes and clear evidence that the reported data does not reflect the true status of my accounts. \n\nAcross several tradelines, accounts are being reported as current, paid, or closed with a {$0.00} past-due balance, while simultaneously showing late payment history and negative indicators. This type of reporting is contradictory, harmful, and violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) as well as Metro 2 reporting standards.\n\nITEM 1 : XXXX XXXX  Credit Card Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  This account is reported as open, current, and not past due, with a {$0.00} past-due balance across all three credit bureaus. Despite this, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion continue to report multiple 30-day late payments on this account. \n\nReporting late payments on an account that is currently paid as agreed is inaccurate and misleading. There is no unresolved delinquency, no past-due balance, and no ongoing default that would justify continued negative payment coding. The presence of late payment history directly contradicts the accounts current status. \n\nBy reporting the account as current while simultaneously publishing late payments, the furnishers and credit bureaus are violating FCRA 1681e ( b ) by failing to ensure maximum possible accuracy. This also conflicts with Metro 2 guidelines, which require that payment history and account status align with the actual condition of the account. \n\nThis inaccurate reporting is harming my credit profile by falsely portraying poor payment behavior when I am meeting the terms of the account. \n\nITEM XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Credit Card Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This account is reported as open, current, and within the credit limit, with no past-due balance, yet it continues to display 30- and 60-day late payment remarks across the bureaus. \n\nAn account that is open and current should not continue to reflect delinquency unless a verified, ongoing default exists. No such documentation has been provided to support the continued reporting of late payments. Reporting an account as current while coding it as negative is internally inconsistent and misrepresents my actual credit behavior. \n\nThis reporting violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 1681i, as the information is neither accurate nor properly corrected after disputes. It also violates Metro 2 standards, which require that late payments not be reported indefinitely once an account has been brought current and maintained as agreed. \n\nITEM XXXX : XXXX XXXX Secured Installment Loan Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This installment loan is reported as paid, closed, and carrying a {$0.00} balance, yet late payment indicators continue to appear on my credit reports. \n\nOnce an installment account is paid and closed as agreed, continued reporting of delinquency is inaccurate unless the delinquency was unresolved at closure. There is no past-due balance, no outstanding obligation, and no evidence that late payments remain reportable. \n\nContinuing to publish late payment history on a satisfied loan misrepresents my repayment history and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ). It also directly conflicts with Metro 2 standards, which require closed, paid installment loans to reflect satisfactory performance when no delinquency remains.\n\nThis outdated negative reporting is unjustly suppressing my credit scores and distorting my installment loan history. \n\nITEM XXXX : XXXX Credit Card Account Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  This account is reported as paid, closed, and with a {$0.00} balance, yet late payment remarks and negative indicators continue to appear on some credit reports. Additionally, there are material inconsistencies across bureaus regarding account status, payment history, and dates. \n\nIf an account is paid and closed with no delinquent balance, late payments should not continue to be reported unless they are verified as accurate and properly reportable. The inconsistent reporting across bureaus confirms that the information is not being verified consistently or accurately. \n\nThis conduct violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) and demonstrates a failure to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure accuracy. \n\nITEM XXXX : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Loan Account Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX This auto loan is reported as paid, closed, and satisfied, with Equifax and TransUnion reflecting a positive payment history. However, Experian continues to report a late payment that is not reflected by the other bureaus. \n\nWhen one bureau reports a delinquency that the others do not, it raises serious concerns about accuracy and verification. No documentation has been provided showing that a delinquency existed at the time of closure or that it remains reportable. \n\nReporting a late payment on a paid auto loan misrepresents my repayment history and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) and Metro 2 reporting standards.\n\nFAILURE TO CONDUCT REASONABLE REINVESTIGATION I have disputed these inaccuracies in writing with all three credit bureaus. Despite this, the negative information remains. This indicates that the reinvestigations conducted were inadequate, incomplete, or automated, rather than the reasonable reinvestigation required under FCRA 1681i. \n\nHARM CAUSED The continued publication of inaccurate and contradictory information has : Suppressed my credit scores Damaged my creditworthiness Distorted my true payment history Interfered with my ability to obtain credit RESOLUTION REQUESTED I respectfully request that the CFPB require the furnishers and credit reporting agencies to : Conduct lawful, reasonable reinvestigations of each account Remove all inaccurate late payment remarks and negative indicators Update all tradelines to reflect PAID AS AGREED or PAYING AS AGREED Ensure consistent and accurate reporting across all bureaus Delete any information that can not be fully verified as accurate, complete, and compliant FINAL STATEMENT I am not disputing valid debt. I am disputing inaccurate credit reporting that violates federal law and continues to harm me despite my efforts to resolve it. I am requesting CFPB intervention to enforce compliance and protect my consumer rights.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-23T16:42:39.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"082XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18249480","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-23T16:34:10.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am <em>disputing</em> inaccurate credit reporting that violates federal law and <em>continues</em> to harm me despite my efforts to <em>resolve</em> it. I am requesting CFPB intervention to enforce compliance and protect my consumer rights."]},"sort":[18.019875,"18249480"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13789781","_score":16.84794,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am formally disputing the following accounts on my credit report under my rights granted by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 15 U.S.C. 1692g, and the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) 15 U.S.C. 1641 ( g ).\n\nI have identified multiple legal violations regarding these accounts, and failure to correct these errors within 30 days will result in formal legal action against your agency for willful noncompliance.\n\nACCOUNTS IN DISPUTE : Account- XXXX  XXXX - XXXX 1. 1681e ( b ) Inaccurate and Misleading Reporting A. Conflicting Account Status and Payment Status The account status is listed as Paid, while the payment status shows Collection/Chargeoff. These classifications are mutually exclusive. If the account is paid and settled, it should not simultaneously reflect charge-off derogatory status.\n\nB. Contradictory Comments and Payment Data The comments state : o Account legally paid in full for less than the full balance.\n\no Unpaid balance reported as a loss by credit grantor. o Account was in dispute now resolved. These conflicting remarks cause confusion about\nthe true status of the account paid in settlement or still considered a lossand raise concerns about accurate credit representation.\n\nC. Payment History Reporting Conflict The Experian payment history reports a series of late statuses ( 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and CO ), but also shows \" OK '' payments in earlier months. If the account was charged off and settled, the transition from OK to charge-off should be verified for accuracy and consistency.\n\nD. High Credit Value Listed as {$0.00} A revolving credit card account that was used and carried a balance can not accurately reflect {$0.00} as high credit. This suggests data may be incomplete or inaccurately furnished.\n\n2. 1681i Failure to Properly Investigate Inaccuracies If I have previously disputed this account and the erroneous data persists, this may constitute a violation of 1681i ( a ), which mandates credit bureaus to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and correct or delete unverifiable or inaccurate information.\n\nAccount- XXXX XXXX 1. Conflicting Account and Payment Statuses The account is reported as Paid while simultaneously being classified as Collection/Chargeoff in the payment status field. These terms are contradictory. A paid accountespecially one settledshould not continue to reflect derogatory chargeoff status.\n\n2. Contradictory and Misleading Comments The comments show : o Account legally paid in full for less than the full balance.\n\no Paid charge off.\n\no Settlement accepted on this account.\n\nThese statements reflect that the account was settled, not left in default or chargeoff.\n\nContinuing to display derogatory statuses such as \" Collection/Chargeoff '' misrepresents the accounts final resolution and negatively impacts my creditworthiness. 3. Inaccurate Payment History\nExperian displays continuous negative payment statuses ( 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, CO ), while Equifax shows a mix of OK and late statuses but no consistent or verifiable payment trend. This inconsistency raises concerns regarding the validity of the furnished payment history and whether the reporting agencies have fulfilled their duty to ensure accuracy.\n\n4. High Credit and Credit Limit Discrepancies Experian reports the high credit as {$1800.00} and credit limit as {$0.00}, while TransUnion reflects {$1900.00} as high credit and {$1800.00} as the credit limit. These figures are inconsistent and misaligned, again suggesting inaccurate or incomplete reporting.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-29T14:52:37.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"90505","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13789781","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-29T14:48:51.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["o Unpaid balance reported as a loss by credit grantor. o Account was in <em>dispute</em> now <em>resolved</em>. These conflicting <em>remarks</em> cause confusion about\nthe true status of the account paid in settlement or still considered a lossand raise concerns about accurate credit representation.\n\nC. Payment History Reporting Conflict The Experian payment history reports a series of late statuses ( 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and CO ), but also shows \" OK '' payments in earlier months."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[16.84794,"13789781"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13789695","_score":16.84794,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am formally disputing the following accounts on my credit report under my rights granted by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 15 U.S.C. 1692g, and the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) 15 U.S.C. 1641 ( g ).\n\nI have identified multiple legal violations regarding these accounts, and failure to correct these errors within 30 days will result in formal legal action against your agency for willful noncompliance.\n\nACCOUNTS IN DISPUTE : Account- XXXX  XXXX - XXXX 1. 1681e ( b ) Inaccurate and Misleading Reporting A. Conflicting Account Status and Payment Status The account status is listed as Paid, while the payment status shows Collection/Chargeoff. These classifications are mutually exclusive. If the account is paid and settled, it should not simultaneously reflect charge-off derogatory status.\n\nB. Contradictory Comments and Payment Data The comments state : o Account legally paid in full for less than the full balance.\n\no Unpaid balance reported as a loss by credit grantor. o Account was in dispute now resolved. These conflicting remarks cause confusion about\nthe true status of the account paid in settlement or still considered a lossand raise concerns about accurate credit representation.\n\nC. Payment History Reporting Conflict The Experian payment history reports a series of late statuses ( 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and CO ), but also shows \" OK '' payments in earlier months. If the account was charged off and settled, the transition from OK to charge-off should be verified for accuracy and consistency.\n\nD. High Credit Value Listed as {$0.00} A revolving credit card account that was used and carried a balance can not accurately reflect {$0.00} as high credit. This suggests data may be incomplete or inaccurately furnished.\n\n2. 1681i Failure to Properly Investigate Inaccuracies If I have previously disputed this account and the erroneous data persists, this may constitute a violation of 1681i ( a ), which mandates credit bureaus to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and correct or delete unverifiable or inaccurate information.\n\nAccount- XXXX XXXX 1. Conflicting Account and Payment Statuses The account is reported as Paid while simultaneously being classified as Collection/Chargeoff in the payment status field. These terms are contradictory. A paid accountespecially one settledshould not continue to reflect derogatory chargeoff status.\n\n2. Contradictory and Misleading Comments The comments show : o Account legally paid in full for less than the full balance.\n\no Paid charge off.\n\no Settlement accepted on this account.\n\nThese statements reflect that the account was settled, not left in default or chargeoff.\n\nContinuing to display derogatory statuses such as \" Collection/Chargeoff '' misrepresents the accounts final resolution and negatively impacts my creditworthiness. 3. Inaccurate Payment History\nExperian displays continuous negative payment statuses ( 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, CO ), while Equifax shows a mix of OK and late statuses but no consistent or verifiable payment trend. This inconsistency raises concerns regarding the validity of the furnished payment history and whether the reporting agencies have fulfilled their duty to ensure accuracy.\n\n4. High Credit and Credit Limit Discrepancies Experian reports the high credit as {$1800.00} and credit limit as {$0.00}, while TransUnion reflects {$1900.00} as high credit and {$1800.00} as the credit limit. These figures are inconsistent and misaligned, again suggesting inaccurate or incomplete reporting.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-29T14:52:33.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"90505","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13789695","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-05-29T14:52:09.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["o Unpaid balance reported as a loss by credit grantor. o Account was in <em>dispute</em> now <em>resolved</em>. These conflicting <em>remarks</em> cause confusion about\nthe true status of the account paid in settlement or still considered a lossand raise concerns about accurate credit representation.\n\nC. Payment History Reporting Conflict The Experian payment history reports a series of late statuses ( 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and CO ), but also shows \" OK '' payments in earlier months."]},"sort":[16.84794,"13789695"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13776666","_score":16.816679,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am formally disputing the following accounts on my credit report under my rights granted by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 15 U.S.C. 1692g, and the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) 15 U.S.C. 1641 ( g ).\n\nI have identified multiple legal violations regarding these accounts, and failure to correct these errors within 30 days will result in formal legal action against your agency for willful noncompliance.\n\nACCOUNTS IN DISPUTE : Account- XXXX  XXXX - XXXX 1. 1681e ( b ) Inaccurate and Misleading Reporting A. Conflicting Account Status and Payment Status The account status is listed as Paid, while the payment status shows Collection/Chargeoff. These classifications are mutually exclusive. If the account is paid and settled, it should not simultaneously reflect charge-off derogatory status.\n\nB. Contradictory Comments and Payment Data The comments state : o Account legally paid in full for less than the full balance.\n\no Unpaid balance reported as a loss by credit grantor. o Account was in dispute now resolved. These conflicting remarks cause confusion about\nthe true status of the account paid in settlement or still considered a lossand raise concerns about accurate credit representation.\n\nC. Payment History Reporting Conflict The Experian payment history reports a series of late statuses ( 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and CO ), but also shows \" OK '' payments in earlier months. If the account was charged off and settled, the transition from OK to charge-off should be verified for accuracy and consistency.\n\nD. High Credit Value Listed as {$0.00} A revolving credit card account that was used and carried a balance can not accurately reflect {$0.00} as high credit. This suggests data may be incomplete or inaccurately furnished.\n\n2. 1681i Failure to Properly Investigate Inaccuracies If I have previously disputed this account and the erroneous data persists, this may constitute a violation of 1681i ( a ), which mandates credit bureaus to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and correct or delete unverifiable or inaccurate information.\n\nAccount- XXXX XXXX 1. Conflicting Account and Payment Statuses The account is reported as Paid while simultaneously being classified as Collection/Chargeoff in the payment status field. These terms are contradictory. A paid accountespecially one settledshould not continue to reflect derogatory chargeoff status.\n\n2. Contradictory and Misleading Comments The comments show : o Account legally paid in full for less than the full balance.\n\no Paid charge off.\n\no Settlement accepted on this account.\n\nThese statements reflect that the account was settled, not left in default or chargeoff.\n\nContinuing to display derogatory statuses such as \" Collection/Chargeoff '' misrepresents the accounts final resolution and negatively impacts my creditworthiness. 3. Inaccurate Payment History\nExperian displays continuous negative payment statuses ( 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, CO ), while Equifax shows a mix of OK and late statuses but no consistent or verifiable payment trend. This inconsistency raises concerns regarding the validity of the furnished payment history and whether the reporting agencies have fulfilled their duty to ensure accuracy.\n\n4. High Credit and Credit Limit Discrepancies Experian reports the high credit as {$1800.00} and credit limit as {$0.00}, while TransUnion reflects {$1900.00} as high credit and {$1800.00} as the credit limit. These figures are inconsistent and misaligned, again suggesting inaccurate or incomplete reporting.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-29T14:52:32.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"90505","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13776666","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-29T14:52:09.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["o Unpaid balance reported as a loss by credit grantor. o Account was in <em>dispute</em> now <em>resolved</em>. These conflicting <em>remarks</em> cause confusion about\nthe true status of the account paid in settlement or still considered a lossand raise concerns about accurate credit representation.\n\nC. Payment History Reporting Conflict The Experian payment history reports a series of late statuses ( 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and CO ), but also shows \" OK '' payments in earlier months."]},"sort":[16.816679,"13776666"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16951751","_score":16.678038,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is being filed due to repeated failures by Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion to conduct lawful and complete reinvestigations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) Section 611, and due to continued reporting of two materially inaccurate and unverifiable accounts : XXXX XXXX ( Account ending XXXX ) XXXX  ( Account ending XXXX ) Despite multiple direct disputes and attached documentation, all three credit bureaus have verified these accounts without providing any tangible evidence, billing statements, or signed contracts confirming the alleged delinquencies. This has caused severe and ongoing harm to my XXXX profile and financial stability. \n\nXXXX. Violations of FCRA XXXX ( b ) Failure to Maintain Accuracy Each bureau continues to report contradictory and inconsistent information between XXXX another : XXXX XXXX : Equifax lists the account as Paid, Experian as Paid, and TransUnion as Closed, all with a XXXX balance. \n\nYet all three simultaneously show XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX late payments. \n\nIt is factually impossible for an account that has been paid and closed with a XXXX balance to carry active delinquencies. \n\nThis violates FCRA 15 USC 1681e ( b ) and XXXX Section 2.2.3, which prohibit contradictory or obsolete data reporting. \n\nXXXX : The account is simultaneously reported as Charged Off, Paid, and Closed, depending on the bureau. \n\nEquifax shows OK payment history through 2025, while Experian shows random late codes and TransUnion lists a charge-off. \n\nNo verifiable delinquency history or creditor-issued documentation has been provided. \n\nThese inconsistencies show a systemic failure to uphold the maximum possible accuracy standard required by law. \n\n2. Violations of FCRA 1681i Failure to Reinvestigate Each bureau issued a verified result despite being provided detailed evidence of reporting contradictions, without supplying any legally verifiable proof of accuracy such as : Original signed credit agreements Itemized payment ledgers Consumer billing notices as required under TILA 1666 ( b ) All disputes were processed through automated e-Oscar verification, which fails to satisfy the FCRAs reinvestigation requirement under Section 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). This constitutes a procedural violation and denial of the consumers right to a good-faith manual investigation.\n\n3. Violations of FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) Furnisher Noncompliance The furnishers ( XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX have failed to : Investigate disputes received from the credit bureaus in a reasonable manner Correct or delete inaccurate information they can not verify Provide evidence of permissible purpose or consumer consent for continued reporting Under 1681s-2 ( b ), their failure to provide factual verification within 30 days constitutes willful noncompliance. Continuing to report unverifiable derogatories after a dispute is legally considered reckless disregard of the law, per FCRA 1681n.\n\n4. Data Security and Consumer Harm Equifaxs prior data breach settlement, which confirmed exposure of personal identifying information, raises serious concerns regarding their continued retention and use of my data. Given that Equifax confirmed my data was impacted by the breach, their refusal to correct unverifiable reporting further compounds their negligence and privacy violations. \n\nXXXX. Impact on Creditworthiness and Emotional Distress These reporting errors have resulted in lowered FICO scores, denial of new credit opportunities, and emotional distress due to persistent misrepresentation of my payment behavior. The continued verified results without lawful evidence have eroded trust in the integrity of the credit reporting process. \n\nRequested Resolution I respectfully request the CFPBs direct intervention to enforce compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act and XXXX reporting standards. Specifically : Immediate deletion of the following unverifiable accounts from all consumer reporting databases : XXXX XXXX Account ending XXXX XXXX Account ending XXXX Confirmation that each CRA has conducted a manual reinvestigation and obtained verifiable proof from the furnishers before certifying any data as accurate. \n\nReferral of this matter to the Federal Trade Commission and New York State Attorney General for further enforcement, if necessary. \n\nLegal Summary FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Inaccurate and inconsistent data reporting FCRA 1681i ( a ) : Failure to conduct a lawful reinvestigation FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Furnisher failure to verify or correct data FCRA 1681n & 1681o : Willful and negligent noncompliance TILA 1666 ( b ) : Lack of consumer billing notice before alleging delinquency XXXX Section 2.2.3 : Prohibition of contradictory or obsolete data Recommendation Proceed with CFPB escalation and deletion demand, not remark correction. \nBoth XXXX XXXX and XXXX display structural XXXX and FCRA violations, meaning partial updates ( such as Pays as agreed ) will not resolve the compliance breach. \nDeletion is the only corrective action that satisfies 15 USC 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) and preserves the consumers right to accurate reporting.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-31T17:11:33.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"11714","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16951751","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-31T17:11:03.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This complaint is being filed due to repeated failures by Equifax, Experian, and <em>TransUnion</em> to conduct lawful and complete reinvestigations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) Section 611, and due to <em>continued</em> reporting of two materially inaccurate and unverifiable accounts : XXXX XXXX ( Account ending XXXX ) XXXX  ( Account ending XXXX ) Despite multiple direct <em>disputes</em> and attached documentation, all three credit bureaus have <em>verified</em> these accounts without providing any tangible evidence"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[16.678038,"16951751"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16949859","_score":16.668135,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint is being filed due to repeated failures by Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion to conduct lawful and complete reinvestigations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) Section 611, and due to continued reporting of two materially inaccurate and unverifiable accounts : XXXX XXXX ( Account ending XXXX ) XXXX  ( Account ending XXXX ) Despite multiple direct disputes and attached documentation, all three credit bureaus have verified these accounts without providing any tangible evidence, billing statements, or signed contracts confirming the alleged delinquencies. This has caused severe and ongoing harm to my XXXX profile and financial stability. \n\nXXXX. Violations of FCRA XXXX ( b ) Failure to Maintain Accuracy Each bureau continues to report contradictory and inconsistent information between XXXX another : XXXX XXXX : Equifax lists the account as Paid, Experian as Paid, and TransUnion as Closed, all with a XXXX balance. \n\nYet all three simultaneously show XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX late payments. \n\nIt is factually impossible for an account that has been paid and closed with a XXXX balance to carry active delinquencies. \n\nThis violates FCRA 15 USC 1681e ( b ) and XXXX Section 2.2.3, which prohibit contradictory or obsolete data reporting. \n\nXXXX : The account is simultaneously reported as Charged Off, Paid, and Closed, depending on the bureau. \n\nEquifax shows OK payment history through 2025, while Experian shows random late codes and TransUnion lists a charge-off. \n\nNo verifiable delinquency history or creditor-issued documentation has been provided. \n\nThese inconsistencies show a systemic failure to uphold the maximum possible accuracy standard required by law. \n\n2. Violations of FCRA 1681i Failure to Reinvestigate Each bureau issued a verified result despite being provided detailed evidence of reporting contradictions, without supplying any legally verifiable proof of accuracy such as : Original signed credit agreements Itemized payment ledgers Consumer billing notices as required under TILA 1666 ( b ) All disputes were processed through automated e-Oscar verification, which fails to satisfy the FCRAs reinvestigation requirement under Section 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). This constitutes a procedural violation and denial of the consumers right to a good-faith manual investigation.\n\n3. Violations of FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) Furnisher Noncompliance The furnishers ( XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX have failed to : Investigate disputes received from the credit bureaus in a reasonable manner Correct or delete inaccurate information they can not verify Provide evidence of permissible purpose or consumer consent for continued reporting Under 1681s-2 ( b ), their failure to provide factual verification within 30 days constitutes willful noncompliance. Continuing to report unverifiable derogatories after a dispute is legally considered reckless disregard of the law, per FCRA 1681n.\n\n4. Data Security and Consumer Harm Equifaxs prior data breach settlement, which confirmed exposure of personal identifying information, raises serious concerns regarding their continued retention and use of my data. Given that Equifax confirmed my data was impacted by the breach, their refusal to correct unverifiable reporting further compounds their negligence and privacy violations. \n\nXXXX. Impact on Creditworthiness and Emotional Distress These reporting errors have resulted in lowered FICO scores, denial of new credit opportunities, and emotional distress due to persistent misrepresentation of my payment behavior. The continued verified results without lawful evidence have eroded trust in the integrity of the credit reporting process. \n\nRequested Resolution I respectfully request the CFPBs direct intervention to enforce compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act and XXXX reporting standards. Specifically : Immediate deletion of the following unverifiable accounts from all consumer reporting databases : XXXX XXXX Account ending XXXX XXXX Account ending XXXX Confirmation that each CRA has conducted a manual reinvestigation and obtained verifiable proof from the furnishers before certifying any data as accurate. \n\nReferral of this matter to the Federal Trade Commission and New York State Attorney General for further enforcement, if necessary. \n\nLegal Summary FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Inaccurate and inconsistent data reporting FCRA 1681i ( a ) : Failure to conduct a lawful reinvestigation FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Furnisher failure to verify or correct data FCRA 1681n & 1681o : Willful and negligent noncompliance TILA 1666 ( b ) : Lack of consumer billing notice before alleging delinquency XXXX Section 2.2.3 : Prohibition of contradictory or obsolete data Recommendation Proceed with CFPB escalation and deletion demand, not remark correction. \nBoth XXXX XXXX and XXXX display structural XXXX and FCRA violations, meaning partial updates ( such as Pays as agreed ) will not resolve the compliance breach. \nDeletion is the only corrective action that satisfies 15 USC 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) and preserves the consumers right to accurate reporting.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-31T17:11:31.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"11714","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16949859","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-31T17:05:41.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This complaint is being filed due to repeated failures by Equifax, Experian, and <em>TransUnion</em> to conduct lawful and complete reinvestigations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) Section 611, and due to <em>continued</em> reporting of two materially inaccurate and unverifiable accounts : XXXX XXXX ( Account ending XXXX ) XXXX  ( Account ending XXXX ) Despite multiple direct <em>disputes</em> and attached documentation, all three credit bureaus have <em>verified</em> these accounts without providing any tangible evidence"]},"sort":[16.668135,"16949859"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14924133","_score":16.64785,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Starting with a review of my credit reports on XX/XX/XXXX, I discovered multiple significant inaccuracies and inconsistencies across all three bureaus ( Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion ). These errors relate to several accounts and have a severe negative impact on my credit profile. \n\nFor instance, an account originally from XXXX / XXXX ( account ending in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) is erroneously reported as a repossession, despite my explicit statement to Experian ( also on their report ) that it was 'NEVER LATE, ACCOUNT WAS PAID AS AGREED. ' This account shows no payment activity since XX/XX/XXXX and an inflated, stale balance of {$8400.00}. I initially disputed this with the bureaus, including a specific dispute with Experian in XX/XX/XXXX, but the repossession status remains unchanged, indicating a failure of their reinvestigation. \n\nA XXXX XXXX account ( ending in * * * * XXXX ) shows conflicting statuses across the bureaus reported as a charge-off on XXXX, paid in full on another, and closed by grantor on a third. Despite a prior investigation, this disputed entry remains, with inconsistent and misleading payment history. \n\nMultiple DEPT OF ED / XXXX entries ( account ending in * * * * XXXX ) display numerous inconsistencies. Balances, delinquencies, and due dates vary across reports. Several loans appear duplicated or incorrectly split. Some entries consistently show \" Over 120 Days Past Due '' with a {$0.00} payment amount, despite \" Last Payment '' dates in XX/XX/XXXX. This points to repetitive, unverifiable, and outdated information. My disputes in XX/XX/XXXX resulted in \" consumer disagrees '' or \" dispute resolved/consumer disagrees '' remarks, but the severe delinquencies persist, demonstrating inadequate reinvestigation. \n\nA XXXX XXXX XXXX account ( ending in * * * * XXXX ) is reported as a charge-off with a {$5200.00} balance, yet shows no scheduled or actual payment records. Furthermore, this account appears on some bureaus but is entirely absent from others ( TransUnion and Experian ), making it unverifiable and indicating incomplete reporting. My dispute in XX/XX/XXXX against this account also resulted in an \" unchanged '' status from the credit bureau. \n\nLastly, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX accounts ( ending in * * * * XXXX and * * * * XXXX ) are listed with balances but no history of payments, terms, or contact data. These appear to be stale and unverifiable debts. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I filed a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) regarding these same ongoing issues. Despite this formal complaint, the errors outlined above still remain uncorrected on my credit reports. \n\nI have attempted to fix these problems directly with the credit reporting companies by sending formal dispute letters, providing supporting documentation ( including a detailed discrepancy summary table and copies of all three credit reports from XX/XX/XXXX, along with proof of ID and address ). In these disputes, I requested the immediate removal of these accounts if they could not be verified with complete and accurate documentation within 30 days. I also requested details of their reinvestigation procedures. The companies have failed to adequately address these concerns or remove the inaccurate information, and the errors continue to be reported. \n\nDue to the persistent failure of these companies to resolve these critical errors, even after a CFPB complaint, I am now also escalating this matter to the California Attorney General for remedy.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-28T19:41:45.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"951XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14924133","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-28T19:25:31.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["My <em>disputes</em> in XX/XX/XXXX resulted in \" consumer disagrees '' or \" <em>dispute</em> <em>resolved</em>/consumer disagrees '' <em>remarks</em>, but the severe delinquencies persist, demonstrating inadequate reinvestigation. \n\nA XXXX XXXX XXXX account ( ending in * * * * XXXX ) is reported as a charge-off with a {$5200.00} balance, yet shows no scheduled or actual payment records."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[16.64785,"14924133"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14926762","_score":16.619967,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Starting with a review of my credit reports on XX/XX/XXXX, I discovered multiple significant inaccuracies and inconsistencies across all three bureaus ( Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion ). These errors relate to several accounts and have a severe negative impact on my credit profile. \n\nFor instance, an account originally from XXXX / XXXX ( account ending in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) is erroneously reported as a repossession, despite my explicit statement to Experian ( also on their report ) that it was 'NEVER LATE, ACCOUNT WAS PAID AS AGREED. ' This account shows no payment activity since XX/XX/XXXX and an inflated, stale balance of {$8400.00}. I initially disputed this with the bureaus, including a specific dispute with Experian in XX/XX/XXXX, but the repossession status remains unchanged, indicating a failure of their reinvestigation. \n\nA XXXX XXXX account ( ending in * * * * XXXX ) shows conflicting statuses across the bureaus reported as a charge-off on XXXX, paid in full on another, and closed by grantor on a third. Despite a prior investigation, this disputed entry remains, with inconsistent and misleading payment history. \n\nMultiple DEPT OF ED / XXXX entries ( account ending in * * * * XXXX ) display numerous inconsistencies. Balances, delinquencies, and due dates vary across reports. Several loans appear duplicated or incorrectly split. Some entries consistently show \" Over 120 Days Past Due '' with a {$0.00} payment amount, despite \" Last Payment '' dates in XX/XX/XXXX. This points to repetitive, unverifiable, and outdated information. My disputes in XX/XX/XXXX resulted in \" consumer disagrees '' or \" dispute resolved/consumer disagrees '' remarks, but the severe delinquencies persist, demonstrating inadequate reinvestigation. \n\nA XXXX XXXX XXXX account ( ending in * * * * XXXX ) is reported as a charge-off with a {$5200.00} balance, yet shows no scheduled or actual payment records. Furthermore, this account appears on some bureaus but is entirely absent from others ( TransUnion and Experian ), making it unverifiable and indicating incomplete reporting. My dispute in XX/XX/XXXX against this account also resulted in an \" unchanged '' status from the credit bureau. \n\nLastly, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX accounts ( ending in * * * * XXXX and * * * * XXXX ) are listed with balances but no history of payments, terms, or contact data. These appear to be stale and unverifiable debts. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I filed a formal complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) regarding these same ongoing issues. Despite this formal complaint, the errors outlined above still remain uncorrected on my credit reports. \n\nI have attempted to fix these problems directly with the credit reporting companies by sending formal dispute letters, providing supporting documentation ( including a detailed discrepancy summary table and copies of all three credit reports from XX/XX/XXXX, along with proof of ID and address ). In these disputes, I requested the immediate removal of these accounts if they could not be verified with complete and accurate documentation within 30 days. I also requested details of their reinvestigation procedures. The companies have failed to adequately address these concerns or remove the inaccurate information, and the errors continue to be reported. \n\nDue to the persistent failure of these companies to resolve these critical errors, even after a CFPB complaint, I am now also escalating this matter to the California Attorney General for remedy.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-28T19:41:46.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"951XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14926762","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-28T19:41:15.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["My <em>disputes</em> in XX/XX/XXXX resulted in \" consumer disagrees '' or \" <em>dispute</em> <em>resolved</em>/consumer disagrees '' <em>remarks</em>, but the severe delinquencies persist, demonstrating inadequate reinvestigation. \n\nA XXXX XXXX XXXX account ( ending in * * * * XXXX ) is reported as a charge-off with a {$5200.00} balance, yet shows no scheduled or actual payment records."]},"sort":[16.619967,"14926762"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5376878","_score":16.061453,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Since XXXX, I have contacted TransUnion approximately 20 times through notarized, written correspondents and sent by certified mail to inform them of the more than 100 inaccurate pieces of information that they are furnishing on my credit report along with the violations of my rights.\n\nIn accordance to the FCRA & FDCPA TransUnion and creditors are violating my rights and are in VIOLATION of the following : Violating Consumer Protection Afforded by the FCRA : TransUnion has furnished information without my permission. I have not granted. Permission in writing for furnish any information. Violation : 15 USC1681 SECTION 604 A Section 2 states that a consumer reporting agency can not furnish an account without written instructions from consumer.\n\nViolating Consumer Protection Afforded by the FCRA : Violating Rights to Privacy : I do not consent to the information that currently furnished on. My consumer report and demand for the removal of the information in question. Violation : 15 USC 1681 SECTION 602 A States that I have the right to privacy. \n\nDefamation, Willful Injury : TransUnion refuses to correct information. After being provided proof of inaccuracy. Violation : FCRA Section 623 XXXX XXXX Trans Union XXXX. US Court of Appeals for the XXXX Circuit Court case XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, Filed ( XXXX No. XXXX ) Violating Consumer Protection Afforded by the FCRA : TransUnion has failed to respond to multiple written disputes within 30 days. Violation : FCRA Section 611 Part ( A ) ( 1 ) Violating Consumer Protection Under the FCRA : Transunion has failed to conduct a proper investigation and delete all inaccurate and unverifiable information. Violation 1 Violating Consumer Protection Under the FDCPA : TransUnion and creditors have failed to report all disputed debts as disputed on consumer report. Violation : FDCPA Section 807 ( 8 ) Violating Consumer Protection Under the FDCPA : TransUnion and creditors have failed and refused to validate debt but continues to furnish on consumer report. Violation : FDCPA Section 809 ( b ), FTC opinion letter Cass from XXXX. \n\nDefamation, financial injury : TransUnion and creditors are reporting my credit history inaccurately. Violation : US Court of Appeals XXXX XXXX, No XXXX, XXXX vs. XXXX XXXX Violating Consumer Protection Afforded by the FCRA : TransUnion has failed to report all disputed debts as disputed on consumer report. Violation : FCRA Section 623 Violating Consumer Protection Afforded by the FCRA : XXXX have Re-aged multiple accounts by reporting the date of the of the last activity instead of the date of the first delinquency. Violation : FCRA Section 605 ( c ) TransUnion is reporting and furnishing the following INACCURATE account information : ALL following details refer to 3 accounts that are displayed on my credit report as XXXX. \n\n\n\nXXXX : The following inaccurate account information is being furnished on my credit report. REMOVE /DELETE FROM CREDIT REPORT FOR FCRA NON-COMPLIANCE of inaccurate data being furnished on the consumer report. \n\nThese accounts were deleted from XXXX XX/XX/XXXX as a result of inaccurate information ; however, remains on Transunion. \n1st date of delinquency is inaccurate and throws off the entire history of the ac count, different dates for last paid is being reported differently to the each bureau, inaccurate date last active, Reporting as Chargeoff/Collections. Can not report as. Both debt and income Past Due Amounts are. Being reported differently to to each credit bureau.\n\nDifferent Charged off Amounts being reported to different bureaus.\n\nPast Due Balance. Being reported on what is deemed a Charged Off account.\n\nPast Due Amounts are. Being reported differently to to each credit bureau.\n\nInaccurate balances are being reported and request for documentation proving so inaccurate payment history, Unverified account and requesting original documents of signed contract TransUnion is reporting and furnishing the following INACCURATE account information : ALL following details refer to 11 accounts that are displayed on my credit report as US DEPT OF EDUCATION. \n\nUS DEPT OF EDUCATION : The following inaccurate account information is being furnished on my credit report. REMOVE /DELETE FROM CREDIT REPORT FOR FCRA NON-COMPLIANCE of inaccurate data being furnished on the consumer report.\n\ndate of 1st delinquency is inaccurate and throws off the entire history of the ac count, a Past Due Balance is being reported even though this is a collections account : Violation Unverified account and requesting original documents of signed contract different dates for last paid is being reported differently to the each bureau, Open date reflects multiple inaccuracies ; multiple dates are reported as date open Unverified account and requesting original documents of signed contract Date last paid shows multiple dates on different bureaus inaccurate date last active, Inaccurate payment history Unverified account and requesting original documents of signed contract Account is reported as both a collections and a. Charge off Payment status is being reported differently across bureaus TransUnion is reporting and furnishing the following INACCURATE account information : ALL following details refer to 11 accounts that are displayed on my credit report as DEPT OF ED / XXXX DEPT OF ED / XXXX : The following inaccurate account information is being furnished on my credit report. REMOVE /DELETE FROM CREDIT REPORT FOR FCRA NON-COMPLIANCE of inaccurate data being furnished on the consumer report.\n\nAccount Status is transferred and should no longer be furnished on consumer report.\n\nAccount Status is transferred but states 120 days late 1st date of delinquency is inaccurate and throws off the entire history of the ac count, Date last paid shows multiple dates Different date last active ( different months and years ) is being reported Different dates of lats payment is being reported. \nDifferent date of last activity Unverified account and requesting original documents of signed contract TransUnion is reporting and furnishing the following INACCURATE account information : ALL following details refer to 1 account that is displayed on my credit report as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : The following inaccurate account information is being furnished on my credit report. REMOVE /DELETE FROM CREDIT REPORT FOR FCRA NON-COMPLIANCE of inaccurate data being furnished on the consumer report.\n\nUnverified account and requesting original documents of signed contract TransUnion is reporting and furnishing the following INACCURATE account information : ALL following details refer to 1 account that is displayed on my credit report as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. :. The following inaccurate account information is being furnished on my credit report. REMOVE /DELETE LATE PAYMENTS FROM CREDIT REPORT FOR FCRA NON-COMPLIANCE of inaccurate data being furnished on the consumer report. \n\nLate payments are inaccurately being. Reported and are not consistent across all 3 bureaus Inaccurate payment history TransUnion is in reporting and furnishing the following INACCURATE account information : PERSONAL INFORMATION. :. The following inaccurate account information is being furnished on my credit report. REMOVE /DELETE EMPLOYER FROM CREDIT REPORT FOR FCRA NON-COMPLIANCE of inaccurate data being furnished on the consumer report.\n\nEmployers : REMOVE FROM CONSUMER REPORT EXPLANATION OF EVIDENCE : &. ATTEMPTS TO RESOLVE THESE MATTERS Provided below is the timeline of correspondence to TransUnion that detailed all the above information regarding inaccuracies that have been blatantly furnished on my. Credit report over a 2.5. year time period.\n\nEach correspondence was. a typed or written document that was notarized and sent by certified mail to TransUnion.\n\nThe following explains all requests mailed as well as responses or lack thereof from TransUnion. The documents that I have provided to support my complaint demonstrates that timeline that is described below. \n\nI have provided the notarized written correspondence that I have sent to TransUnion along with their responses to such correspondents. \n\n\n\n\nXXXX : All following details refer to accounts that are displayed on my credit report as NAVIENT**** XX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt along with the deletion of all unverifiable. Accounts XX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Terms ; Rating. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt for a second time-requesting original documentations. From the creditor with my signature along with deletion of unverifiable accounts XX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that. We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Date Updated ; Past Due ; Terms ; Rating. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt for a third time-requesting original documentations. From the creditor with my signature along with deleting unverifiable accounts XXXX. XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Rating. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that we received additional information about your dispute the investigation will be completed XX/XX/XXXX. However, no. response. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Through written correspondence, I informed Transunion. That there are different Charged OFF Amounts being reported to different bureaus. Request. For deletion due to reporting inacccuracies. \n\nNo response XX/XX/XXXX : Through written correspondence, I informed Transunion for a second time. That there are different Charged Off Amounts being reported to different bureaus. Along with request for deletion. Due to reporting inaccuracies. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Transunion responds with : Dear XXXX XXXX XXXX, We understand that recently something on your credit report did not seem right to you. We take this matter seriously, and we want to make sure your TransUnion credit report is accurate. It's our commitment to you. ln the pages that follow you will see a full copy of your credit report. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : XXXX responds stating that We are in receipt of the additional information regarding your current dispute ( s ). Due to this additional information, the time frame for completing the investigation has been extended. Your initial correspondence was received on XXXX XXXX and your additional information was received on XXXX, which allows TransUnion fifteen additional days. Therefore, your investigation witl be completed on or before XXXX. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Transunion. Responds and states that : We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Terms : Rating : Date closed : Payment Received : XXXX. XXXX : Through written correspondence, I informed Transunion That they are reporting a Past Due Balance on what is deemed a Charged Off account. This is a clear violation. Of the FCRA. Request for deletion due to reporting inaccuracies XXXX. XXXX : Through written correspondence, I informed Transunion That XXXX Due Amounts are. Being reported differently to to each credit bureau. \nThis is a clear violation. Of the FCRA. Requested deletion for inaccurate reporting XX/XX/XXXX : Through written correspondence, I informed Transunion the the 1st date of delinquency is inaccurate and throws off the entire history of the ac count, inaccurate balance is being reported and I am asking for paperwork to prove current data being furnished and finally, inaccurate payment history along with deletion due to reporting inaccurate information. \n\n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX : All following details refer to accounts that are displayed on my credit report as XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt and request deletion. Of unverified account XX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Not specified. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt for a second time along with deletion due to unverified account XX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Not specified. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt for a third time-requesting original documentations. From the creditor with my signature along with deletion due. To unverified account XX/XX/XXXX Transunion Responds and states that We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Not specified. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that we received additional information about your dispute the investigation will be completed XX/XX/XXXX. However, no. response. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Through written correspondence, I informed Transunion that this is an unverified account and am requesting documentation. To prove that it is mine or delete due to unverifiable account and inaccurate reporting XXXX XXXX : All following details refer to accounts that are displayed on my credit report as XXXX XXXXXXXX XX/XX/XXXX : I sent a request for the removal of the inaccurate late payments that are being furnished on my credit report US DEPT OF EDUCATION : All following details refer to accounts that are displayed on my credit report as US DEPT OF EDUCATION -- '' * XX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt along with deletion of unverfiable account. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Not specified. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt for a second time along with deletion of unverifiable account. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Not specified. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt for a third time-requesting original documentations. From the creditor with my signature along with deletion of unverfiable account. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that we received additional information about your dispute the investigation will be completed XX/XX/XXXX. However, no. response. \n\nNo. Respnose! \n\nXX/XX/XXXX Written request to delete accounts due to furnishing inaccurate information : a Past Due Balance is being reported even though this is a collections account : Violation No response! \n\nXXXX. XXXX : XXXX Written request to delete accounts due to furnishing inaccurate information : a Past Due Balance is being reported even though this is a collections account : Violation XX/XX/XXXX : I sent a written correspondence to inform Transunion of the inaccurate information that is furnished on my credit report and requested that they remove such accounts : Inaccuracies discussed in letter include different dates last paid and open are being reflected, unverified account and need to provide original contracts with my signature, inaccurate balance owed, inaccurate 1st date of delinquency, payment history is inaccurate, along with deletion of unverifiable account.\n\nDEPT OF ED / XXXX ****t : All following details refer to accounts that are displayed on my credit report as DEPT OF ED / XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt along with deletion of unverifiable account. \n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Rating. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt for a second time along with deletion of unverifiable account. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Rating. And We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Not specified. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : I Requested validation of debt for a third time-requesting original documentations. From the creditor with my signature along with deletion of unverifiable account. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that ( 1 ) We investigated the information you disputed and updated : Remarks ; Rating. And ( 2 ) We investigated the information you disputed and the disputed information wa $ lERlFlED AS ACCURATE ; however, we updated : Past Due ; Terrns ; Remark $ ; Payrnent Received and ( 3 ) We investigated the information you disputed and the disputed information was VERIFIED AS ACCURATE ; however, we updated : Remarks ; Rating XX/XX/XXXX : Transunion Responds and states that we received additional information about your dispute the investigation will be completed XX/XX/XXXX. However, no. response. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX : I informed XXXX that inaccurate info is reporting : dates last active reporting differently, date last paid shows multiple dates, inaccurate 1st date of delinquency, payment history, and multiple dates for date of last activity. I request deletion due to. Inaccuracies reporting.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-03-28T19:04:57.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"07601","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5376878","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2022-03-28T16:59:03.000Z","state":"NJ","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["And ( 2 ) We investigated the information you <em>disputed</em> and the <em>disputed</em> information wa $ lERlFlED AS ACCURATE ; however, we updated : Past Due ; Terrns ; <em>Remark</em> $ ; Payrnent Received and ( 3 ) We investigated the information you <em>disputed</em> and the <em>disputed</em> information was <em>VERIFIED</em> AS ACCURATE ; however, we updated : <em>Remarks</em> ; Rating XX/XX/XXXX : <em>Transunion</em> Responds and states that we received additional information about your <em>dispute</em> the investigation will be completed XX/XX/XXXX."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[16.061453,"5376878"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13010379","_score":15.991926,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This is a formal dispute of inaccurate, inconsistent, and abusive credit reporting tied to the XXXX XXXX credit card account listed under my credit profile. \n\nDespite multiple disputes submitted since XX/XX/XXXX, the following violations remain unresolved : My {$95.00} payment on XX/XX/XXXX was not applied toward the past due amount, and the account continues to show a 30-day delinquency. \nMultiple months ( e.g., XX/XX/XXXX ) are marked OK despite no payments being made. \nCross-bureau discrepancies exist between balances, status codes, and payment history for the same time periods. \nI was enrolled in XXXX XXXX and charged monthly for it, but it was never honored or appliedduring a time of financial hardship. \nI was never informed that I needed to notify the creditor in advance for the protection to apply. No documentation or instructions were provided. If such a clause exists, it was never disclosedmaking it invalid. \n\nThe creditors behavior is unlawful and violates : FCRA 607 ( b ) & 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) FDCPA 807 TILA and UDAAP provisions Detailed Evidence Supporting My Dispute : 1. Payment Reporting Inaccuracy Example : A {$95.00} payment was made on XX/XX/XXXX, yet the account is still reported as 30 days late across Experian and TransUnion. \nEvidence : Transaction history ; XX/XX/XXXX billing statement ; account screenshots. \n2. Contradictory Delinquency Ratings Across Bureaus Example : XX/XX/XXXX shows no payment was made, but it is marked OK in Equifax and TransUnion, creating a conflict with XXXX delinquency claim. \nEvidence : Payment history grid ; Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion reports. \n3. Stacking of Abusive Fees Example : In XX/XX/XXXXXXXX I was charged the following within a single cycle : {$41.00} Late Fee {$26.00} Interest {$14.00} Credit Protection Fee {$19.00} Monthly Fee {$49.00} Annual Fee ( charged XX/XX/XXXX ) Evidence : XX/XX/XXXX billing statement ( all charges itemized ). \n4. Failure to Apply Credit Protection Benefits Example : Although I was enrolled in and paying for XXXX XXXX, no benefits were ever appliedno fee waivers, no deferments, and no hardship relief. \nEvidence : XXXX XXXX billing charges ; lack of any disclosure agreement or claim process. \n5. Over-Limit Balance Misuse Example : My balance reached {$990.00} on a {$700.00} limit ( 142 % utilization ), with no breakdown of over-limit fees or justification. \nEvidence : XX/XX/XXXX statement showing balance and limit ; absence of itemized over-limit fees. \n6. Failure to Correct Disputed Data Example : I submitted disputes starting in XX/XX/XXXX, yet each bureau continues to report unresolved and inaccurate derogatory marks. \nEvidence : notations in bureau reports labeled dispute resolved by data furnisher with no correction made. \nXXXX. Predatory Billing Patterns Example : Despite making a {$140.00} payment in XXXX and {$95.00} in XXXX, my past due amount continued to grow due to fee stacking, interest, and improper application of payments. \nEvidence : Payment history log ; billing statements from XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. \n8. Lack of Disclosure on Hardship Requirements Example : At no point was I told, verbally or in writing, that I needed to notify the creditor in advance to use the Credit Protection plan I was being charged for. \nEvidence : Absence of terms and conditions ; no email, letter, or portal communication indicating this policy. \n9. Violations of Federal Law Statutes Violated : FCRA 607 ( b ) : Inaccurate and inconsistent bureau reporting FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Furnishing of false information FCRA 611 : Failure to correct disputed data FDCPA 807 : Misrepresentation of debt status TILA ( Reg Z ) : Failure to disclose billing practices and protection terms UDAAP ( Dodd-Frank ) : Predatory, deceptive, and abusive fee structures Cross-Bureau Discrepancies and Inaccuracies The following inconsistencies exist between Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion, all of which contradict one another and fail to accurately reflect my account history : XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Payment & Status Conflict Experian : Reports account 30 days late, {$56.00} past due. \nEquifax : Reports 30 days late, also lists {$56.00} past due.\n\nTransUnion : Marks account as OK or 30 days late without consistently displaying past due amount. \nReality : A {$95.00} payment was made on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXenough to cover the reported minimum due, yet not properly applied by any bureau. \nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Payment Omission vs. OK Status All Bureaus : List status as OK or current, despite no payment being made that month. \nInconsistency : The absence of a payment should have triggered a 30-day late flag, or at minimum a past due remarknone of which appear consistently. \nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Overpayment Ignored Payment Made : {$140.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. \nScheduled Payment : {$63.00}. \nBureaus : Experian and Equifax both fail to reflect this surplus, and still report past due balances in subsequent months, indicating misallocation of overpayment. \n4. Derogatory Remarks During OK Periods Equifax and Experian : Apply DRG ( Derogatory ) status in months where the payment grid shows OK, including XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. \nTransUnion : Omits DRG remark but also fails to clearly indicate balance activity or accurate past due totals. \n5. Past Due Amount Discrepancies Experian & Equifax : Report {$56.00} past due for XX/XX/XXXX. \nActual Statement ( XXXX ) : Shows {$110.00} past due. \nTransUnion : Displays either no past due amount or an unverified {$70.00} minimum due without matching it to payments made. \nXXXX. Utilization Not Reflected Properly Balance Across Bureaus : {$990.00} reported.\n\nCredit Limit : {$700.00}. \nNo Bureau Reports Over-the-Limit Status Clearly : None indicate utilization at 142 %, and no bureau flags the account for excessive revolving credit. \nXXXX. Dispute Resolution Status Misleading All Bureaus : State Account in dispute, resolved by data furnisher. \nReality : Reporting remains inaccurate, and no documented resolution or reinvestigation results were provided to me. \n\n\nI demand that your office : 1. Reinvestigate this tradeline immediately 2. Correct all errors and remove all derogatory reporting 3. Require the data furnisher to recalculate my balance and remove improperly assessed fees 4. Remove the account entirely if validation can not be provided 5. Document and disclose the full results of your reinvestigation I have included supporting documentation that verifies these claims. If you fail to correct the reporting within the timeframe allowed by law, I am prepared to escalate this through legal and regulatory channels.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-16T01:01:43.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"483XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13010379","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-04-16T01:01:16.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Failure to Correct <em>Disputed</em> Data Example : I submitted <em>disputes</em> starting in XX/XX/XXXX, yet each bureau <em>continues</em> to report unresolved and inaccurate derogatory marks. \nEvidence : notations in bureau reports labeled <em>dispute</em> <em>resolved</em> by data furnisher with no correction made. \nXXXX. Predatory Billing Patterns Example : Despite making a {$140.00} payment in XXXX and {$95.00} in XXXX, my past due amount <em>continued</em> to grow due to fee stacking, interest, and improper application of payments."]},"sort":[15.991926,"13010379"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13000173","_score":15.964594,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This is a formal dispute of inaccurate, inconsistent, and abusive credit reporting tied to the XXXX XXXX credit card account listed under my credit profile. \n\nDespite multiple disputes submitted since XX/XX/XXXX, the following violations remain unresolved : My {$95.00} payment on XX/XX/XXXX was not applied toward the past due amount, and the account continues to show a 30-day delinquency. \nMultiple months ( e.g., XX/XX/XXXX ) are marked OK despite no payments being made. \nCross-bureau discrepancies exist between balances, status codes, and payment history for the same time periods. \nI was enrolled in XXXX XXXX and charged monthly for it, but it was never honored or appliedduring a time of financial hardship. \nI was never informed that I needed to notify the creditor in advance for the protection to apply. No documentation or instructions were provided. If such a clause exists, it was never disclosedmaking it invalid. \n\nThe creditors behavior is unlawful and violates : FCRA 607 ( b ) & 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) FDCPA 807 TILA and UDAAP provisions Detailed Evidence Supporting My Dispute : 1. Payment Reporting Inaccuracy Example : A {$95.00} payment was made on XX/XX/XXXX, yet the account is still reported as 30 days late across Experian and TransUnion. \nEvidence : Transaction history ; XX/XX/XXXX billing statement ; account screenshots. \n2. Contradictory Delinquency Ratings Across Bureaus Example : XX/XX/XXXX shows no payment was made, but it is marked OK in Equifax and TransUnion, creating a conflict with XXXX delinquency claim. \nEvidence : Payment history grid ; Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion reports. \n3. Stacking of Abusive Fees Example : In XX/XX/XXXXXXXX I was charged the following within a single cycle : {$41.00} Late Fee {$26.00} Interest {$14.00} Credit Protection Fee {$19.00} Monthly Fee {$49.00} Annual Fee ( charged XX/XX/XXXX ) Evidence : XX/XX/XXXX billing statement ( all charges itemized ). \n4. Failure to Apply Credit Protection Benefits Example : Although I was enrolled in and paying for XXXX XXXX, no benefits were ever appliedno fee waivers, no deferments, and no hardship relief. \nEvidence : XXXX XXXX billing charges ; lack of any disclosure agreement or claim process. \n5. Over-Limit Balance Misuse Example : My balance reached {$990.00} on a {$700.00} limit ( 142 % utilization ), with no breakdown of over-limit fees or justification. \nEvidence : XX/XX/XXXX statement showing balance and limit ; absence of itemized over-limit fees. \n6. Failure to Correct Disputed Data Example : I submitted disputes starting in XX/XX/XXXX, yet each bureau continues to report unresolved and inaccurate derogatory marks. \nEvidence : notations in bureau reports labeled dispute resolved by data furnisher with no correction made. \nXXXX. Predatory Billing Patterns Example : Despite making a {$140.00} payment in XXXX and {$95.00} in XXXX, my past due amount continued to grow due to fee stacking, interest, and improper application of payments. \nEvidence : Payment history log ; billing statements from XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. \n8. Lack of Disclosure on Hardship Requirements Example : At no point was I told, verbally or in writing, that I needed to notify the creditor in advance to use the Credit Protection plan I was being charged for. \nEvidence : Absence of terms and conditions ; no email, letter, or portal communication indicating this policy. \n9. Violations of Federal Law Statutes Violated : FCRA 607 ( b ) : Inaccurate and inconsistent bureau reporting FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Furnishing of false information FCRA 611 : Failure to correct disputed data FDCPA 807 : Misrepresentation of debt status TILA ( Reg Z ) : Failure to disclose billing practices and protection terms UDAAP ( Dodd-Frank ) : Predatory, deceptive, and abusive fee structures Cross-Bureau Discrepancies and Inaccuracies The following inconsistencies exist between Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion, all of which contradict one another and fail to accurately reflect my account history : XXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Payment & Status Conflict Experian : Reports account 30 days late, {$56.00} past due. \nEquifax : Reports 30 days late, also lists {$56.00} past due.\n\nTransUnion : Marks account as OK or 30 days late without consistently displaying past due amount. \nReality : A {$95.00} payment was made on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXenough to cover the reported minimum due, yet not properly applied by any bureau. \nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Payment Omission vs. OK Status All Bureaus : List status as OK or current, despite no payment being made that month. \nInconsistency : The absence of a payment should have triggered a 30-day late flag, or at minimum a past due remarknone of which appear consistently. \nXXXX. XX/XX/XXXX Overpayment Ignored Payment Made : {$140.00} on XX/XX/XXXX. \nScheduled Payment : {$63.00}. \nBureaus : Experian and Equifax both fail to reflect this surplus, and still report past due balances in subsequent months, indicating misallocation of overpayment. \n4. Derogatory Remarks During OK Periods Equifax and Experian : Apply DRG ( Derogatory ) status in months where the payment grid shows OK, including XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. \nTransUnion : Omits DRG remark but also fails to clearly indicate balance activity or accurate past due totals. \n5. Past Due Amount Discrepancies Experian & Equifax : Report {$56.00} past due for XX/XX/XXXX. \nActual Statement ( XXXX ) : Shows {$110.00} past due. \nTransUnion : Displays either no past due amount or an unverified {$70.00} minimum due without matching it to payments made. \nXXXX. Utilization Not Reflected Properly Balance Across Bureaus : {$990.00} reported.\n\nCredit Limit : {$700.00}. \nNo Bureau Reports Over-the-Limit Status Clearly : None indicate utilization at 142 %, and no bureau flags the account for excessive revolving credit. \nXXXX. Dispute Resolution Status Misleading All Bureaus : State Account in dispute, resolved by data furnisher. \nReality : Reporting remains inaccurate, and no documented resolution or reinvestigation results were provided to me. \n\n\nI demand that your office : 1. Reinvestigate this tradeline immediately 2. Correct all errors and remove all derogatory reporting 3. Require the data furnisher to recalculate my balance and remove improperly assessed fees 4. Remove the account entirely if validation can not be provided 5. Document and disclose the full results of your reinvestigation I have included supporting documentation that verifies these claims. If you fail to correct the reporting within the timeframe allowed by law, I am prepared to escalate this through legal and regulatory channels.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-16T01:01:43.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"483XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13000173","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-16T00:53:27.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Failure to Correct <em>Disputed</em> Data Example : I submitted <em>disputes</em> starting in XX/XX/XXXX, yet each bureau <em>continues</em> to report unresolved and inaccurate derogatory marks. \nEvidence : notations in bureau reports labeled <em>dispute</em> <em>resolved</em> by data furnisher with no correction made. \nXXXX. Predatory Billing Patterns Example : Despite making a {$140.00} payment in XXXX and {$95.00} in XXXX, my past due amount <em>continued</em> to grow due to fee stacking, interest, and improper application of payments."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[15.964594,"13000173"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":42,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":42}]}},"product":{"doc_count":42,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":38,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":38}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":4}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":42,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":15,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":14},{"key":"Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":15,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":8},{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":7}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":10,"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":9},{"key":"Problem with personal statement of dispute","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":2}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":42,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":42}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":42,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":30},{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":12}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":42,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":42}]}},"company":{"doc_count":42,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":24},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":10},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":7},{"key":"Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc.","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":42,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"CA","doc_count":9},{"key":"IL","doc_count":5},{"key":"NY","doc_count":5},{"key":"MI","doc_count":4},{"key":"IN","doc_count":3},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":3},{"key":"VA","doc_count":3},{"key":"AZ","doc_count":2},{"key":"FL","doc_count":2},{"key":"NV","doc_count":2},{"key":"SC","doc_count":2},{"key":"LA","doc_count":1},{"key":"TX","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":42,"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":31}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":42,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[15.965587,"13000173"]}}}