{"took":269,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":9,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"19613330","_score":29.740204,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"Navy Federal closed my credit card account on XX/XX/year>. I have continued making payments on the remaining balance. \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, I sent a certified billing error notice disputing post-closure interest charges. Navy Federal received the letter on XX/XX/year>. Despite receipt of this notice, Navy Federal has : - Continued adding interest to the disputed balance ; - Failed to provide a substantive investigation response as required under 12 C.F.R. 1026.13 ; - Continued reporting the inflated balance to consumer reporting agencies ; and - Failed to ensure accurate credit reporting during an active billing dispute. \n\nMy dispute concerns post-closure interest charges that materially inflate the reported balance and significantly impact my revolving utilization and credit score. Rather than conduct and document a proper investigation, Navy Federal has issued boilerplate responses stating that interest will continue to accrue, without addressing the procedural requirements triggered by a billing-error notice. \n\nUnder Regulation Z and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ), a furnisher must conduct a reasonable investigation and report accurate information, including the disputed status of an account. Continuing to report a balance that includes disputed charges, without resolving the dispute or properly investigating it, constitutes ongoing reporting of potentially inaccurate information.\n\nThis is not a contractual disagreement about whether interest may accrue. This is a compliance issue regarding : - Failure to properly investigate a billing error notice ; - Continued assessment of disputed finance charges ; - Ongoing reporting of an inflated balance ; Credit reporting during an unresolved dispute Navy Federals responses to date demonstrate dismissal of procedural requirements and reliance on generic contractual language rather than compliance review. The violations are ongoing, and the continued balance inflation has materially harmed my credit profile and ability to obtain financing.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-02-19T06:47:36.000Z","issue":"Fees or interest","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"200XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"19613330","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","date_received":"2026-02-19T06:18:36.000Z","state":"DC","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Charged too much interest"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This is a compliance issue regarding : - Failure to properly investigate a billing <em>error</em> notice ; - <em>Continued</em> <em>assessment</em> of <em>disputed</em> <em>finance</em> <em>charges</em> ; - <em>Ongoing</em> <em>reporting</em> of an inflated balance ; Credit <em>reporting</em> during an unresolved <em>dispute</em> Navy Federals responses to date demonstrate dismissal of procedural requirements and reliance on generic contractual language rather than compliance review."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[29.740204,"19613330"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18079989","_score":21.728447,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to escalate widespread and ongoing violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act involving inaccurate charge off reporting unauthorized credit inquiries and repeated failures to conduct reasonable investigations after notice. Despite extensive documentation and multiple disputes the consumer reporting agencies and furnishers involved have continued to publish inaccurate and unlawful information that is causing ongoing financial harm. \n\nDerogatory account items involved XXXX XXXX account ending XXXX This account is reported as a charge off with a current balance of XXXX while displaying conflicting high balance credit limit and activity dates across Equifax Experian and TransUnion. One bureau reports a high balance of XXXX while others report XXXX. The date of last activity and date of last payment differ by years across bureaus while the charge off status continues to be reported as current. The payment history reflects recurring charge off month coding long after the account was closed. Charge off is a one time accounting event and may not be reported as a recurring monthly status. These contradictions make the account impossible to verify and materially misleading. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX account ending XXXX This account is reported inconsistently across bureaus as paid on one bureau and derogatory on another while reflecting a zero balance and ongoing charge off indicators. The payment history continues to display charge off coding despite the account being closed and paid. Re reporting charge off months after closure exaggerates derogatory impact and misrepresents the true condition of the account. These inaccuracies were disputed and the furnisher was placed on notice yet the same contradictory data was re reported without reconciliation demonstrating willful noncompliance. \n\nUnauthorized inquiry items involved XXXX XXXX XXXX inquiry dated XX/XX/20XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX inquiry dated XX/XX/2025 XXXX XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/2025 XXXX XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/2025 I did not apply for credit request financing authorize a credit review or provide written or verbal consent to any of these entities. There is no corresponding open account no completed application and no consumer initiated transaction that would justify access to my credit report. These inquiries were placed without permissible purpose and remain reported despite disputes. \n\nAggravating breach related factors My personally identifiable information including my Social Security number has been confirmed as compromised through documented data breaches. Once identity integrity is compromised the risk of mixed file attribution and unauthorized access increases substantially. Despite this known risk multiple unrelated entities accessed my credit file on the same date without enhanced verification safeguards. The consumer reporting agencies failed to protect my file even after breach exposure and dispute notice. \n\nFailure of reasonable investigation Each of the above items was disputed and the parties involved were placed on notice of specific inaccuracies and lack of authorization. Instead of correcting or deleting the information the same defective data was re reported. Repeating inaccurate information after notice does not constitute a reasonable investigation and reflects knowing disregard for statutory obligations. \n\nHarm caused These violations have caused ongoing financial harm credit suppression stress and loss of time. My credit profile otherwise reflects strong responsible credit management yet these unresolved derogatory accounts and unauthorized inquiries continue to negatively affect lending outcomes and risk assessments. \n\nRequested CFPB action I am requesting CFPB intervention to require the following Permanent deletion of the XXXX Card charge off Permanent deletion of the XXXX XXXX XXXX charge off Permanent deletion of all unauthorized inquiries listed above Confirmation that no permissible purpose exists for the inquiries Review and enforcement action regarding the investigation and data protection procedures used by the consumer reporting agencies and furnishers Corrective safeguards to prevent further unauthorized access and inaccurate reporting This complaint is supported by full credit reports dispute history furnisher responses bureau correspondence and breach confirmation records. The pattern demonstrates systemic noncompliance rather than isolated error. Regulatory enforcement is necessary to stop ongoing harm and restore the integrity of my credit file.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-16T17:52:47.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"76021","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18079989","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-16T17:37:25.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am submitting this complaint to escalate widespread and <em>ongoing</em> violations of the Fair Credit <em>Reporting</em> Act involving inaccurate <em>charge</em> off <em>reporting</em> unauthorized credit inquiries and repeated failures to conduct reasonable investigations after notice. Despite extensive documentation and multiple <em>disputes</em> the consumer <em>reporting</em> agencies and furnishers involved have <em>continued</em> to publish inaccurate and unlawful information that is causing <em>ongoing</em> financial harm."],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em> or other personal consumer reports"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"]},"sort":[21.728447,"18079989"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18079990","_score":21.681385,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to escalate widespread and ongoing violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act involving inaccurate charge off reporting unauthorized credit inquiries and repeated failures to conduct reasonable investigations after notice. Despite extensive documentation and multiple disputes the consumer reporting agencies and furnishers involved have continued to publish inaccurate and unlawful information that is causing ongoing financial harm. \n\nDerogatory account items involved XXXX XXXX account ending XXXX This account is reported as a charge off with a current balance of XXXX while displaying conflicting high balance credit limit and activity dates across Equifax Experian and TransUnion. One bureau reports a high balance of XXXX while others report XXXX. The date of last activity and date of last payment differ by years across bureaus while the charge off status continues to be reported as current. The payment history reflects recurring charge off month coding long after the account was closed. Charge off is a one time accounting event and may not be reported as a recurring monthly status. These contradictions make the account impossible to verify and materially misleading. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX account ending XXXX This account is reported inconsistently across bureaus as paid on one bureau and derogatory on another while reflecting a zero balance and ongoing charge off indicators. The payment history continues to display charge off coding despite the account being closed and paid. Re reporting charge off months after closure exaggerates derogatory impact and misrepresents the true condition of the account. These inaccuracies were disputed and the furnisher was placed on notice yet the same contradictory data was re reported without reconciliation demonstrating willful noncompliance. \n\nUnauthorized inquiry items involved XXXX XXXX XXXX inquiry dated XX/XX/20XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX inquiry dated XX/XX/2025 XXXX XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/2025 XXXX XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/2025 I did not apply for credit request financing authorize a credit review or provide written or verbal consent to any of these entities. There is no corresponding open account no completed application and no consumer initiated transaction that would justify access to my credit report. These inquiries were placed without permissible purpose and remain reported despite disputes. \n\nAggravating breach related factors My personally identifiable information including my Social Security number has been confirmed as compromised through documented data breaches. Once identity integrity is compromised the risk of mixed file attribution and unauthorized access increases substantially. Despite this known risk multiple unrelated entities accessed my credit file on the same date without enhanced verification safeguards. The consumer reporting agencies failed to protect my file even after breach exposure and dispute notice. \n\nFailure of reasonable investigation Each of the above items was disputed and the parties involved were placed on notice of specific inaccuracies and lack of authorization. Instead of correcting or deleting the information the same defective data was re reported. Repeating inaccurate information after notice does not constitute a reasonable investigation and reflects knowing disregard for statutory obligations. \n\nHarm caused These violations have caused ongoing financial harm credit suppression stress and loss of time. My credit profile otherwise reflects strong responsible credit management yet these unresolved derogatory accounts and unauthorized inquiries continue to negatively affect lending outcomes and risk assessments. \n\nRequested CFPB action I am requesting CFPB intervention to require the following Permanent deletion of the XXXX Card charge off Permanent deletion of the XXXX XXXX XXXX charge off Permanent deletion of all unauthorized inquiries listed above Confirmation that no permissible purpose exists for the inquiries Review and enforcement action regarding the investigation and data protection procedures used by the consumer reporting agencies and furnishers Corrective safeguards to prevent further unauthorized access and inaccurate reporting This complaint is supported by full credit reports dispute history furnisher responses bureau correspondence and breach confirmation records. The pattern demonstrates systemic noncompliance rather than isolated error. Regulatory enforcement is necessary to stop ongoing harm and restore the integrity of my credit file.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-16T17:52:47.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"76021","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18079990","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-12-16T17:52:21.000Z","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":["I am submitting this complaint to escalate widespread and <em>ongoing</em> violations of the Fair Credit <em>Reporting</em> Act involving inaccurate <em>charge</em> off <em>reporting</em> unauthorized credit inquiries and repeated failures to conduct reasonable investigations after notice. Despite extensive documentation and multiple <em>disputes</em> the consumer <em>reporting</em> agencies and furnishers involved have <em>continued</em> to publish inaccurate and unlawful information that is causing <em>ongoing</em> financial harm."],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em> or other personal consumer reports"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"]},"sort":[21.681385,"18079990"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18079991","_score":21.637053,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to escalate widespread and ongoing violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act involving inaccurate charge off reporting unauthorized credit inquiries and repeated failures to conduct reasonable investigations after notice. Despite extensive documentation and multiple disputes the consumer reporting agencies and furnishers involved have continued to publish inaccurate and unlawful information that is causing ongoing financial harm. \n\nDerogatory account items involved XXXX XXXX account ending XXXX This account is reported as a charge off with a current balance of XXXX while displaying conflicting high balance credit limit and activity dates across Equifax Experian and TransUnion. One bureau reports a high balance of XXXX while others report XXXX. The date of last activity and date of last payment differ by years across bureaus while the charge off status continues to be reported as current. The payment history reflects recurring charge off month coding long after the account was closed. Charge off is a one time accounting event and may not be reported as a recurring monthly status. These contradictions make the account impossible to verify and materially misleading. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX account ending XXXX This account is reported inconsistently across bureaus as paid on one bureau and derogatory on another while reflecting a zero balance and ongoing charge off indicators. The payment history continues to display charge off coding despite the account being closed and paid. Re reporting charge off months after closure exaggerates derogatory impact and misrepresents the true condition of the account. These inaccuracies were disputed and the furnisher was placed on notice yet the same contradictory data was re reported without reconciliation demonstrating willful noncompliance. \n\nUnauthorized inquiry items involved XXXX XXXX XXXX inquiry dated XX/XX/20XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX inquiry dated XX/XX/2025 XXXX XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/2025 XXXX XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/2025 I did not apply for credit request financing authorize a credit review or provide written or verbal consent to any of these entities. There is no corresponding open account no completed application and no consumer initiated transaction that would justify access to my credit report. These inquiries were placed without permissible purpose and remain reported despite disputes. \n\nAggravating breach related factors My personally identifiable information including my Social Security number has been confirmed as compromised through documented data breaches. Once identity integrity is compromised the risk of mixed file attribution and unauthorized access increases substantially. Despite this known risk multiple unrelated entities accessed my credit file on the same date without enhanced verification safeguards. The consumer reporting agencies failed to protect my file even after breach exposure and dispute notice. \n\nFailure of reasonable investigation Each of the above items was disputed and the parties involved were placed on notice of specific inaccuracies and lack of authorization. Instead of correcting or deleting the information the same defective data was re reported. Repeating inaccurate information after notice does not constitute a reasonable investigation and reflects knowing disregard for statutory obligations. \n\nHarm caused These violations have caused ongoing financial harm credit suppression stress and loss of time. My credit profile otherwise reflects strong responsible credit management yet these unresolved derogatory accounts and unauthorized inquiries continue to negatively affect lending outcomes and risk assessments. \n\nRequested CFPB action I am requesting CFPB intervention to require the following Permanent deletion of the XXXX Card charge off Permanent deletion of the XXXX XXXX XXXX charge off Permanent deletion of all unauthorized inquiries listed above Confirmation that no permissible purpose exists for the inquiries Review and enforcement action regarding the investigation and data protection procedures used by the consumer reporting agencies and furnishers Corrective safeguards to prevent further unauthorized access and inaccurate reporting This complaint is supported by full credit reports dispute history furnisher responses bureau correspondence and breach confirmation records. The pattern demonstrates systemic noncompliance rather than isolated error. Regulatory enforcement is necessary to stop ongoing harm and restore the integrity of my credit file.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-16T17:52:47.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"76021","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18079991","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-16T17:52:21.000Z","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":["I am submitting this complaint to escalate widespread and <em>ongoing</em> violations of the Fair Credit <em>Reporting</em> Act involving inaccurate <em>charge</em> off <em>reporting</em> unauthorized credit inquiries and repeated failures to conduct reasonable investigations after notice. Despite extensive documentation and multiple <em>disputes</em> the consumer <em>reporting</em> agencies and furnishers involved have <em>continued</em> to publish inaccurate and unlawful information that is causing <em>ongoing</em> financial harm."],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em> or other personal consumer reports"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"]},"sort":[21.637053,"18079991"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16397864","_score":14.043118,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau regarding multiple inaccuracies and violations on my credit report. Despite my previous efforts to correct these issues directly with the reporting agencies, the errors persist, causing significant harm to my creditworthiness, financial stability, and access to essential financial services. I request CFPB intervention to ensure the full and accurate reporting of my credit information in compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and related consumer protection laws. \n\nAddress : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, SC XXXX Wrong Address This address is inaccurately reported on my credit file. FCRA 611 requires reinvestigation of disputed items and correction of inaccuracies. I have never resided or authorized reporting to this address. Maintaining this address misleads lenders and affects my credit risk assessment. The bureau must verify with documented proof or delete the address. Prior investigations did not provide verification, constituting a violation of my rights under FCRA 609 ( a ), 611 ( a ). My creditworthiness and personal history are being misrepresented by this false address. Verification must include signed documentation from the creditor confirming residence. Failure to verify requires immediate deletion. This inaccurate reporting has caused tangible harm and potential denial of credit offers. Corrective action is necessary under FCRA obligations. All reporting agencies must comply fully. Deletion and written confirmation of removal are required. The failure to correct this repeated misinformation demonstrates negligence and disregard for my statutory rights. I demand immediate and permanent removal of this address from my credit file. This reporting constitutes a direct violation of FCRA that impacts credit decisions and may expose the bureaus to legal liability. \n\nAddress : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, WA XXXX Wrong Address This address is falsely associated with my credit report. Under FCRA 607 ( b ), 611, inaccurate addresses must be corrected or removed upon dispute. I have never resided here, nor authorized reporting to this location. Prior dispute efforts failed to verify or remove it. The continued presence of this incorrect information harms my credit profile and misleads lenders. I demand proper investigation with proof of residence or deletion. Documentation from the reporting entity is required. Retention of this address without verification violates FCRA 609 ( a ) and 611 ( a ). Reporting of unverified addresses is a direct violation, affecting my ability to obtain credit fairly. Immediate corrective action is required, with written confirmation. Failure to remove false addresses undermines my legal rights and financial opportunities. I insist that this incorrect address be permanently deleted to prevent future reporting errors. The presence of false addresses is a serious breach of accuracy requirements under FCRA. Written confirmation of removal is mandatory. \n\nAccount : XXXX  Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Charge Off This account is inaccurately reported as a charge-off. FCRA 611 requires that disputed accounts be verified with original creditor documentation. I have no obligation for this debt as reported ; prior disputes did not yield verification. Reporting unverified charge-offs misrepresents my creditworthiness and violates 607 ( b ), 611. I demand deletion unless proper proof is supplied. Maintaining this account as a charge-off without verification is unfair, misleading, and a violation of law. Verification must include signed account statements confirming debt responsibility. Inaccuracy continues to cause harm to my credit profile. Corrective deletion or proper verification documentation is required. Prior reinvestigation efforts failed to resolve this issue. Continued reporting violates my legal rights under FCRA and threatens my ability to secure fair financing. I demand the bureau provide full validation or remove this item immediately. I will pursue all remedies allowed under federal law if unverified items remain. Verification must include all statements, payment history, and debt agreement signed by an authorized officer. \n\nAccount : XXXX Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Charge Off FCRA 611 mandates reinvestigation of disputed accounts. This account is reported as a charge-off incorrectly. No verification has been provided. Continued reporting harms my credit and misleads lenders. Prior disputes did not result in proper documentation. Deletion or accurate reporting is required. Documentation confirming the debt and my responsibility must be provided. Unverified reporting violates 607 ( b ), 609, 611. Maintaining this item is inaccurate and prejudicial. I demand proper investigation and immediate corrective action. The bureau must comply with FCRA obligations fully. Written confirmation of correction or deletion is requested. Failure to act perpetuates misinformation and demonstrates noncompliance with federal law. Verification from the original creditor must be provided immediately. Failure to provide evidence requires deletion. \n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$1300.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Charge Off This charge-off is reported without proper verification, violating FCRA 611. Prior disputes did not provide evidence of accuracy. Retention of this item misrepresents my credit responsibility. Verification requires original creditor statements signed and dated. Failure to verify requires deletion. Reporting unverified charge-offs violates 607 ( b ), 609. Harm to my creditworthiness is ongoing. Bureau must comply with reinvestigation duties. Correction or deletion must be confirmed in writing. Reporting inaccurate charge-offs without proper verification constitutes a serious breach of FCRA. I demand immediate corrective action and written confirmation. If verification can not be provided, deletion is mandatory. Continued failure will result in further legal action. Full account history, payment records, and account opening documents must be verified. \n\nAccount : XXXX  Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Charge Off This account is reported as a charge-off inaccurately. FCRA 611 requires validation upon dispute. No verification has been provided. Reporting false charge-offs violates 607 ( b ), 611, misleading lenders. Prior investigations failed. Immediate deletion or proper verification is required. Documentation must confirm debt responsibility. Continued reporting harms credit. Verification must include complete account statements and signed evidence from the original creditor. Deletion is required if verification is unavailable. The bureau has a legal obligation to maintain accurate reporting under FCRA. Failure to comply will result in legal remedies. Full documentation, including contract and payment history, must be verified. Written confirmation of action is required. \n\nAccount : XXXX Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$1000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Charge Off FCRA 611 mandates reinvestigation. No validation provided for this charge-off. Prior disputes were ignored or improperly investigated. Continued reporting harms creditworthiness. Verification from the original creditor is required. If unverifiable, deletion is required. Reporting false charge-offs violates 607 ( b ), 609. The ongoing presence of this item is illegal and prejudicial. I demand immediate correction or removal. Written confirmation of removal or proper verification is mandatory. Failure to act demonstrates negligence and disregard for federal law. Documentation proving account accuracy must be provided immediately. \n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$160.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Charge Off This account is falsely reported. FCRA 607 ( b ), 611 require verification. Prior disputes provided no results. Reporting unverified charge-offs harms credit. Verification or deletion required. Written confirmation must be provided. Failure to verify constitutes violation of FCRA. Continued inaccurate reporting misleads lenders and negatively impacts my financial standing. All documentation must be produced or the item deleted. The bureau has statutory duty to investigate thoroughly. I demand deletion if verification is not possible. Prior disputes demonstrate ongoing negligence. Legal action will be pursued if this item is not corrected. \n\nAccount : XXXX XXXXXXXX Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$780.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Charge Off Inaccurate reporting violates FCRA 611. Prior disputes ignored verification requirements. Retention harms credit. Verification or deletion required. 607 ( b ), 609 apply. Written confirmation must follow. Prior reinvestigation failed to provide validation. Continued reporting misleads lenders and affects credit applications. I demand immediate removal if verification is not provided. All supporting documentation must be verified. Failure to act constitutes ongoing violation of FCRA. Written confirmation of action is required. \n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$500.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment This late payment is falsely reported. FCRA 611 requires verification. No proof provided. Prior disputes failed. Retention misleads lenders. Verification or deletion required. 607 ( b ), 609 violated. Harmful to credit. Written confirmation requested. Verification must include signed payment history from creditor. Failure to correct violates FCRA. Documentation proving accurate reporting must be supplied. Immediate deletion or correction required. Prior reinvestigation attempts were inadequate. Failure to comply will result in further legal action. \n\nAccount : XXXX Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$710.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment FCRA 611 requires reinvestigation. No verification. Prior disputes inadequate. Reporting is inaccurate. Verification or deletion required. 607 ( b ), 609 violated. Written confirmation requested. Account statements and creditor verification must be provided. Failure to provide verification requires deletion. Misreporting negatively impacts creditworthiness. Prior reinvestigation failed. Immediate corrective action is required. Written confirmation of deletion or correction is mandatory. \n\nAccount : XXXX Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$600.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment Reported falsely. FCRA 611 mandates verification. No proof supplied. Prior disputes failed. Reporting harms credit. Verification or deletion required. 607 ( b ), 609 violated. Written confirmation required. Full creditor documentation must be produced. Failure to correct constitutes ongoing violation. Prior reinvestigation inadequate. Immediate deletion or correction required. Written confirmation of action is mandatory. \n\nAccount : XXXX Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$610.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment FCRA 611 mandates validation. No verification. Prior disputes ignored. Misleading reporting harms credit. Verification or deletion required. 607 ( b ), 609 violated. Written confirmation requested. Original creditor records must be verified. Failure to act constitutes FCRA violation. Immediate correction required. Written confirmation mandatory. Prior reinvestigation attempts were inadequate. Failure to comply exposes bureaus to liability. \n\nAccount : XXXX  Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$490.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment FCRA 611 requires reinvestigation. No validation. Prior disputes failed. Reporting harms credit. Verification or deletion required. 607 ( b ), 609 violated. Written confirmation requested. Verification from creditor must be provided. Failure to provide documentation requires deletion. Misreporting negatively impacts creditworthiness. Prior reinvestigation attempts insufficient. Immediate corrective action required. Written confirmation mandatory. Failure to act constitutes legal violation. \n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$1100.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment Reported falsely. FCRA 611 mandates verification. No proof. Prior disputes inadequate. Verification or deletion required. 607 ( b ), 609 violated. Written confirmation requested. Creditor documentation must be produced. Failure to verify requires deletion. Misreporting harms credit. Prior reinvestigation inadequate. Immediate corrective action required. Written confirmation mandatory. Failure to comply violates FCRA. \n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$35000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Late Payment FCRA 611 requires verification. Reported inaccurately. Prior disputes ineffective. Retention harms creditworthiness. Verification or deletion required. 607 ( b ), 609 violated. Written confirmation required. Full account history and creditor statements must be verified. Failure to correct constitutes violation. Immediate deletion or correction required. Written confirmation mandatory. Misreporting negatively affects my credit applications. Prior reinvestigation insufficient. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) prohibits reporting without permissible purpose. I did not authorize. Removal required. Prior disputes ignored. Written confirmation of deletion required. Unauthorized inquiry harms credit and violates federal law. Documentation of authorization must be produced or deletion required. Continued reporting constitutes a violation. Written confirmation of removal is mandatory. Failure to correct may result in legal action. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) violated. No authorization. Deletion required. Written confirmation requested. Harm to credit continues without correction. Bureau must comply with FCRA. Prior disputes ignored. Immediate corrective action required. Written confirmation mandatory. Failure to act constitutes legal violation. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ) violation. No permissible purpose. Removal required. Written confirmation needed. Unauthorized reporting harms creditworthiness. Bureau has statutory duty. Prior disputes failed. Immediate corrective action required. Written confirmation mandatory. Failure exposes bureaus to liability. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ). No authorization. Removal required. Written confirmation needed. Unauthorized reporting misleads lenders. Prior reinvestigation insufficient. Corrective action required. Written confirmation mandatory. Failure violates federal law. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ). No authorization. Removal required. Written confirmation requested. Continued reporting violates federal law. Immediate correction required. Written confirmation mandatory. Prior disputes inadequate. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ). No authorization. Removal required. Written confirmation requested. Unauthorized inquiry harms credit. Bureau must comply. Prior disputes failed. Immediate deletion required. Written confirmation mandatory. Failure violates FCRA. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ). No authorization. Removal required. Written confirmation requested. Harmful reporting continues. Bureau must act. Prior disputes failed. Immediate corrective action required. Written confirmation mandatory. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ). No authorization. Deletion required. Written confirmation requested. Unauthorized reporting harms credit. Bureau must verify authorization or delete. Prior disputes insufficient. Immediate action required. Written confirmation mandatory. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ). No authorization. Removal required. Written confirmation requested. Harmful to credit. Bureau must act. Prior disputes failed. Immediate corrective action required. Written confirmation mandatory. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ). No authorization. Deletion required. Written confirmation requested. Unauthorized reporting affects credit. Bureau must comply. Prior disputes insufficient. Immediate action required. Written confirmation mandatory. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ). No authorization. Removal required. Written confirmation requested. Harmful reporting continues. Bureau must act. Prior disputes failed. Immediate correction required. Written confirmation mandatory. \n\nInquiry : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ). No authorization. Deletion required. Written confirmation requested. Unauthorized reporting harms credit. Bureau must comply. Prior disputes failed. Immediate deletion required. Written confirmation mandatory. \n\nInquiry : XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Hard Inquiry FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 3 ). No authorization. Removal required. Written confirmation requested. Unauthorized reporting negatively impacts credit. Bureau must act. Prior disputes failed. Immediate corrective action required. Written confirmation mandatory.\n\nThese issues collectively demonstrate failures in the credit reporting process and ongoing violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. I request that CFPB ensure my credit report reflects accurate and verified information for all listed accounts and addresses, with immediate deletion or correction of inaccurate, unauthorized, or unverifiable items. Enforcement of the FCRA and investigation of the reporting agencies procedures are essential to restore the accuracy and integrity of my credit profile. I am requesting CFPB intervention to compel the reporting agencies to fully comply with federal law, correct all errors, and provide written confirmation of the actions taken.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-06T09:00:13.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"76901","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16397864","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-10-06T07:52:07.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Account : XXXX Account # : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX <em>Charge</em> Off FCRA 611 mandates reinvestigation of <em>disputed</em> accounts. This account is <em>reported</em> as a <em>charge</em>-off incorrectly. No verification has been provided. <em>Continued</em> <em>reporting</em> harms my credit and misleads lenders. Prior <em>disputes</em> did not result in proper documentation. Deletion or accurate <em>reporting</em> is required. Documentation confirming the debt and my responsibility must be provided."],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em> or other personal consumer reports"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Reporting</em> company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[14.043118,"16397864"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15545783","_score":12.2823,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint regarding multiple inaccuracies on my credit report, which are causing severe financial, emotional, and personal hardship. These errors include false charge-offs, late payments, collections, and unauthorized or inaccurate hard inquiries. Reporting these inaccuracies violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. XXXX. I demand immediate investigation, verification, and correction or removal of all inaccurate items. \nDisputed Addresses : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  This address is not associated with me. Its inclusion is misleading and has caused misdirected communications, repeated verification requests, and confusion with creditors. This false address has already resulted in delayed notifications about account activity, making it difficult for me to respond to legitimate financial matters promptly. The erroneous reporting suggests I have a history at this address, which is false, leading to inaccurate credit assessments, potential loan denials, and additional scrutiny from financial institutions. Under FCRA 1681e ( b ), credit reporting agencies must employ reasonable procedures to ensure maximum accuracy. The reporting of this incorrect address violates my rights and subjects me to unnecessary stress and potential financial harm. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, FL XXXX This incorrect address falsely indicates that I have lived at multiple locations that are not mine. It has caused misdirected account statements, confused creditors, and has complicated my efforts to secure new credit or loans. These errors are stressful, time-consuming to correct, and can negatively affect my XXXXredit score. FCRA 1681e ( b ) requires accurate reporting, and FDCPA 1692e prohibits misleading statements. Reporting this false address also affects my ability to rent or obtain housing, as landlords often rely on credit reports to verify residency history, creating unnecessary obstacles and stress. \nDisputed Accounts : XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$130000.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Reported Late Payments I have consistently paid on time. The reported late payments are false and damaging, causing undue stress and anxiety about my financial reputation. These errors have already affected my ability to refinance, increased my insurance premiums, and limited access to credit offers. FCRA 1681i ( a ) and 1681e ( b ) require accurate reporting and correction of errors. The false late payments misrepresent my reliability as a borrower, harm my financial opportunities, and require extensive time and effort to dispute, causing both emotional and practical burdens. \nXXXX XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$4000.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Reported Late Payments The reported late payments are incorrect. These false entries have caused multiple denials of credit applications, misrepresented my financial responsibility, and imposed unnecessary stress and lost opportunities. FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) mandates that unverifiable information must be corrected or removed. This inaccurate reporting creates an ongoing burden, requiring me to provide proof of payments and repeatedly communicate with creditors to correct the misinformation, wasting valuable time and resources. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX  Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$5000.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Reported Late Payments These late payments are falsely attributed to me. This misinformation has lowered my credit score, caused anxiety, delayed financial planning, and forced multiple disputes with financial institutions. FCRA 1681i ( a ) and FDCPA 1692e ( XXXX ) require reporting agencies to verify debts before reporting them. The false reporting misleads creditors about my ability to manage debt responsibly and creates undue financial stress and inconvenience. \nXXXX XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$2000.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Reported Charge-off This account has been reported as charged-off erroneously. I have either settled or maintained the account according to its terms. This false charge-off misrepresents my financial behavior, negatively affects my credit score, and prevents access to favorable credit options. FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ) requires verification, and unverifiable items must be removed. The continued reporting of this inaccuracy imposes ongoing financial stress, damages my credibility with lenders, and requires significant time and effort to resolve. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$1400.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Reported Charge-off The charge-off status is false. This incorrect information violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) and misrepresents my payment history. It has caused delays in loan approvals, forced repeated correspondence with financial institutions, and created undue stress. False reporting of a charge-off harms my reputation as a borrower, affects my access to new credit, and requires significant effort to correct. \nXXXX  ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$1400.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Reported Charge-off This account has been inaccurately marked as charged-off. This false reporting has lowered my credit score, caused denial of credit offers, and misrepresented my ability to responsibly manage debt. FCRA 1681i ( a ) and FDCPA 16XXXX require immediate correction of inaccuracies. The reporting error has created financial stress, emotional distress, and significant inconvenience. \nXXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$1400.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Reported Charge-off The charge-off status is incorrect. According to FCRA 1681i ( a ), reporting agencies must correct or remove inaccurate items upon dispute. This error has caused denials of credit, misrepresented my reliability as a borrower, and created emotional stress and potential financial harm. The false charge-off affects interest rates, loan approvals, and overall financial opportunities, requiring extensive time and documentation to dispute. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$1100.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Collection I dispute this collection as entirely inaccurate. I have never received proper verification, statements, or notifications that would confirm this debt. The reporting of this false collection has caused repeated rejections of loan applications, unnecessary scrutiny by creditors, and significant anxiety regarding my financial standing. Each application I submit is delayed or denied because lenders see this collection, which misrepresents my actual financial responsibility. Under FCRA 1681i ( a ), I have the right to demand verification and immediate correction of inaccurate items. Reporting unverified debts also violates FDCPA 1692e ( 8 ), which prohibits reporting debts that have not been properly validated. This false collection has required me to spend hours gathering documentation, communicating with multiple agencies, and dealing with the stress of defending my credit history. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$260.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Collection I dispute this debt as inaccurate. I have never received verification or a legitimate statement of this obligation. Reporting unverified debts is misleading to creditors, potentially results in higher interest rates, and causes anxiety and financial inconvenience. Under FCRA 1681i ( a ) and FDCPA 1692e, reporting agencies are required to correct or remove unverifiable debts. The false reporting has caused unnecessary stress, wasted time resolving disputes, and misrepresented my ability to responsibly manage finances. \nXXXX XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$890.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Collection This appears to be a duplicate or erroneous entry of the previously disputed XXXX account. Duplicate reporting inflates the appearance of delinquency and misleads lenders. FCRA 1681i ( a ) and 1681e ( b ) require accurate and non-duplicative reporting. The duplicate entry has unnecessarily complicated my credit profile, causing delays in loan approvals, increased interest rates, and additional stress in managing my finances. \nXXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$1100.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Collection This is likely a duplicate or misreported version of the previously disputed XXXX XXXX account. Duplicate and unverifiable reporting misrepresents my financial history, lowering my credit score and causing stress. Under FCRA 1681i ( a ) and FDCPA 1692e ( 8 ), I have the right to dispute such items and require their correction or removal. This false reporting has caused confusion among creditors and unnecessary time and effort to clarify my true financial status. \nXXXX XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$1700.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Collection I dispute this account as inaccurate and unverified. Reporting this debt has caused multiple rejections in loan applications, created anxiety, and misrepresented my financial responsibility. FCRA 1681i ( a ) mandates investigation of disputed items, and FDCPA 1692e prohibits reporting unverified debts. I have been forced to expend significant time and effort to dispute this item with no guarantee of timely correction, creating financial and emotional strain. \nXXXX XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$4300.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Late Payment I dispute the reported late payment as inaccurate. I have consistently made payments according to account terms. False reporting of late payments affects my credit score, delays loan approvals, and misrepresents my financial reliability. FCRA 1681i ( a ) requires accurate reporting and correction of unverifiable negative entries. This inaccurate late payment has caused repeated rejections of applications, forced me to gather proof of payments, and imposed emotional and practical burdens. \nXXXX XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$5000.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Charge-off This account has been falsely reported as charged-off. I have maintained or settled this account according to terms. A false charge-off damages my credit score, misrepresents my ability to manage debt, and causes undue stress and anxiety about my financial reputation. FCRA 1681i ( a ) requires verification of account status, and unverifiable charge-offs must be removed. This erroneous reporting has already caused loan delays and created unnecessary administrative burdens. \nXXXX XXXX  ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$26000.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Charge-off This account has been falsely reported as a charge-off. I have consistently maintained this account according to the terms agreed upon. The false charge-off has led to substantial financial consequences, including the denial of mortgage refinancing, higher insurance premiums, and rejection of multiple loan applications. Beyond financial impact, this misreporting has caused ongoing emotional stress, anxiety about my financial future, and a sense of injustice as I have devoted countless hours gathering documents to prove accuracy. Under FCRA XXXX681i ( a ), I have the right to dispute unverified information, and the reporting of unverifiable debts violates FDCPA 1692e ( 8 ). This false entry misrepresents my ability to manage debt responsibly, harming both my personal and professional life. \nXXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$4000.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Charge-off This account is incorrectly reported as charged-off. I have never defaulted in a manner that would justify this status. Reporting unverified charge-offs is a violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) and FDCPA 1692e. The false charge-off has negatively affected my credit score, caused delays and denials in loan applications, and misrepresented my reliability as a borrower. Beyond the financial consequences, this misreporting has created continuous mental and emotional strain, as I must repeatedly contact creditors, gather evidence, and attempt to rectify the false information. \nXXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$1700.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Charge-off This account has been falsely marked as charged-off. The reporting of this account is not only inaccurate but also misleads lenders into believing I have unresolved debt, impacting loan approvals and interest rates. FCRA 1681i ( a ) mandates that disputed items must be verified and corrected if found to be inaccurate. The inaccurate charge-off has resulted in financial obstacles, wasted time, and emotional distress, including anxiety over long-term creditworthiness and the inability to plan future financial decisions confidently. \nXXXX XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$90.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Charge-off Though a small account, this charge-off has an outsized negative impact on my credit profile. Misrepresentation of even minor debts can trigger adverse effects from lenders, including higher interest rates and scrutiny of all financial applications. Under FCRA 1681i ( a ), unverifiable accounts must be removed immediately. The reporting of this false charge-off has caused unnecessary stress, fear of financial instability, and multiple hours spent disputing the record with credit bureaus. \nXXXX XXXX ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$4400.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Late Payment The reported late payment is inaccurate. I have made all payments on time, and this false reporting misrepresents my financial responsibility. FCRA 1681i ( a ) guarantees that disputed information must be investigated and corrected. The false late payment has led to loan application delays, higher interest rate offers, and personal stress from defending my credit history. The emotional and practical burdens caused by this inaccurate report are significant, affecting my ability to plan for large financial commitments, such as homeownership or investment opportunities. \nXXXX  ( Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$2000.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) Charge-off I dispute this account as inaccurately reported. This false charge-off misrepresents my payment history and has caused repeated denials of credit applications, making it difficult to secure personal and business financing. FCRA 1681i ( a ) requires unverifiable negative information to be corrected or removed. The emotional toll includes stress, frustration, and the overwhelming time required to gather supporting evidence to correct these inaccuracies. \nDisputed Inquiries : XXXX XXXX  ( XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ) I dispute these inquiries as unauthorized or inaccurately reported. Unauthorized or inaccurate hard inquiries reduce my credit score and misrepresent my credit-seeking behavior to lenders. FCRA 1681b ( c ) ensures that inquiries must be authorized, and FDCPA 1692e prohibits misleading reporting. These inaccurate inquiries have caused delays in loan approvals, increased interest rates, and substantial stress. Each unauthorized inquiry has required time-consuming investigation and correspondence with financial institutions to clarify my rights and ensure correction. The cumulative impact has been both financially and emotionally burdensome, affecting my ability to plan large-scale financial decisions confidently. \nImpact Statement : These inaccurate entries have caused : Loan and credit denials Higher interest rates on existing and future credit Increased insurance premiums Emotional distress, stress, and anxiety Wasted time and effort in gathering documentation and disputing errors Misrepresentation of my financial responsibility to lenders, employers, and institutions Action Requested : I request that the CFPB : XXXX. Investigate each disputed account and inquiry immediately. \nXXXX. Ensure that all unverifiable, inaccurate, or duplicate items are corrected or removed. \nXXXX. Provide written confirmation of the results of your investigation. \nXXXX. Ensure that reporting agencies comply with FCRA 1681i ( a ) and FDCPA 1692e ( 8 ).\n\nThese errors have caused demonstrable financial and emotional harm, and I reserve the right to pursue legal remedies if the inaccuracies are not promptly corrected.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-28T01:42:29.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"322XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15545783","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-08-28T01:40:34.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The <em>continued</em> <em>reporting</em> of this inaccuracy imposes <em>ongoing</em> financial stress, damages my credibility with lenders, and requires significant time and effort to resolve. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Acct : XXXX, High Credit : {$1400.00}, Opened : XX/XX/XXXX ) <em>Reported</em> <em>Charge</em>-off The <em>charge</em>-off status is false. This incorrect information violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) and misrepresents my payment history."],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em> or other personal consumer reports"],"issue":["Improper use of your <em>report</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Reporting</em> company used your <em>report</em> improperly"]},"sort":[12.2823,"15545783"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16859092","_score":11.452684,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"1. Introduction At this time XX/XX/XXXX Goldman Sach not honoring and notr refunded any cent to me This document outlines the case of Claimant, XXXX XXXX, against Respondent, Goldman Sachs Bank USA ( \" the Bank '' ), concerning the systemic mishandling of her Apple Card account over a period of more than four years. This dispute is not a series of isolated customer service issues, but a documented pattern of persistent billing errors, improper dispute reversals, inaccurate credit reporting, discriminatory practices, and bad-faith conduct by the Bank. The following chronological narrative will demonstrate the Bank 's violations of multiple federal and state consumer protection laws, which have inflicted significant financial, reputational, and emotional harm upon the Claimant. 2.\nThe Genesis of the Dispute : An Unresolved Charge Ignites a Pattern of Failure ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) The initial incident that sparked this protracted dispute serves as a microcosm of the systemic failures that would plague XXXX XXXX for years. The Bank 's handling of a single disputed transaction for a non-delivered product reveals a foundational breakdown in its billing and dispute resolution processes, setting a precedent of error and distrust.\n\nThe dispute originated from a XXXX * * XXXX XXXX purchase made in XX/XX/XXXX. The product was never delivered to XXXX XXXX. Despite this, the Bank proceeded to improperly bill her for eight separate monthly installments of * * XXXX, including in XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and six further charges in XXXX. These repeated billings for a phantom product resulted in over {$780.00} in unauthorized charges, interest, and related fees. \n\nThe Bank 's actions regarding this matter were contradictory and negligent. After years of improper billing and failed dispute resolutions, the Bank finally admitted in a formal response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) that an \" inadvertent processing error occurred '' concerning this dispute. However, this admission came only after profound harm had already been done, with the credit for this charge only being made permanent on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXnearly four years after the initial transaction. This unresolved issue established a foundation of error and distrust, precipitating a wider breakdown in account management that continues to this day. \n\n3. A System-Wide Breakdown : Pervasive Errors and Security Lapses ( XXXX - XXXX ) The initial billing error was not an anomaly but the first sign of a complete breakdown in the Bank 's dispute resolution process, as mandated by federal law. Evidence demonstrates that the Bank 's systems were incapable of correctly processing disputes, leading to a cycle of errors that harmed XXXX XXXX repeatedly over four years. \n\nThis systemic failure is evidenced by the sheer volume of issues ; XXXX XXXX was forced to file at least 67 transaction disputes between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. These were not isolated incidents but part of a recurring pattern where the Bank would issue a temporary credit only to reverse it later without proper investigation or justification. This flawed cycle is clearly illustrated by a XXXX XXXX transaction from the XX/XX/XXXX statement : Date Action Amount Result XX/XX/XXXX DISPUTE CREDIT - {$160.00} Temporary credit applied. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX DISPUTE REVERSAL + {$160.00} Credit improperly reversed without resolution. \n\nThis pattern of mismanagement extended to critical security failures. In XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX was stolen. She immediately reported the theft to XXXX with instructions to lock the card and secure the account. Despite this timely notification, the Bank failed to take effective action, allowing criminals to make over {$1000.00} in unauthorized charges. This documented pattern of mishandling disputes and failing to secure the account after being notified of theft constitutes a clear abrogation of the Bank 's statutory duties under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ) and the Electronic Fund Transfer Act ( EFTA ).\n\n4. Compounded Harm : Devastating Credit Damage and Discriminatory Barriers The Bank 's procedural failures were not victimless errors ; they inflicted profound, tangible, and lasting financial and personal harm upon XXXX XXXX. This harm was compounded by discriminatory practices that systematically blocked her access to resolution, creating an inescapable cycle of financial distress and frustration.\n\nFirst, the Bank violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by furnishing inaccurate and derogatory information to credit reporting agencies. On XX/XX/XXXX, the Bank reported XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX account as \" Charged Off. '' This severely negative report was inherently false and misleading because it was based on a balance containing disputed amountsincluding the {$630.00} chargethat the Bank itself later admitted were the result of its own \" processing error. '' Reporting this balance as \" Charged Off '' constitutes a willful violation of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2, as the Bank furnished information to credit reporting agencies that it knew, or consciously disregarded the risk that it was, inaccurate, given its own admission of a foundational \" processing error. '' Second, the Bank violated California 's Unruh Civil Rights Act through discriminatory practices. XXXX XXXX has a documented XXXX  XXXX, a fact of which the Bank was informed. Despite this, the Bank systematically insisted on voice authentication as a primary method for account security and dispute resolution. This rigid, one-size-fits-all protocol repeatedly denied her full and equal access to the services necessary to protect her account and address the Bank 's errors. These barriers were particularly egregious during a period when XXXX XXXX was medically incapacitated due to a tracheotomy, rendering voice communication impossible. The Banks failure to provide this reasonable accommodation was not a separate, isolated harm ; it was the primary barrier that prevented XXXX XXXX from addressing the cascade of other billing and security failures, thus compounding the financial and emotional damages. This failure constitutes a distinct and actionable violation of California 's Unruh Civil Rights Act, which guarantees all persons equal access to business services regardless of disability.\n\n5. Evidence of Willful Bad Faith : Coercion and Breach of Promise ( XXXX ) The Bank 's pattern of conduct culminated in recent actions that demonstrate a shift from gross negligence to willful, bad-faith behavior. These events show a deliberate and calculated effort to leverage its position to the detriment of XXXX XXXX, providing unequivocal evidence of oppression and fraud. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, the Bank engaged in coercive conduct. It was holding an accepted refund of XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX that was due to XXXX XXXX since XX/XX/XXXX. The Bank 's representatives conditioned the release of these funds on a coercive requirement : XXXX XXXX had to agree to close a separate, valid * XXXX XXXX dispute related to a XXXX computer. \n\nForced into an impossible position and seeking to recover the larger sum, the Claimant complied with this condition. However, the Bank subsequently failed to honor its promise. To date, the {$3800.00} refund remains uncredited to her account. This sequence of events is a textbook case of fraudulent inducement and a clear breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. This incident is not a misunderstanding ; it is unambiguous evidence of a willful, oppressive, and fraudulent pattern of conduct that justifies punitive measures.\n\n6. Summary of Legal Violations and Causes of Action The aforementioned facts, supported by extensive documentation, constitute multiple and severe violations of federal and state law. The following is a summary of the causes of action against the Respondent : Violation of the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA )/ TILA : The Bank failed to properly investigate and resolve 67 disputes in a timely manner as required by law. It illegally assessed unauthorized installment charges for a non-delivered item and is currently engaged in an ongoing violation by illegally retaining the {$3800.00} accepted refund.\n\nViolation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : The Bank willfully furnished inaccurate and derogatory information to credit reporting agencies by reporting the account as \" Charged Off '' based on a balance that it knew, or should have known, included amounts resulting from its own admitted processing errors.\n\nViolation of California 's Unruh Civil Rights Act : The Bank denied a person with a permanent XXXX  XXXX full and equal access to its account and security services by systematically insisting on discriminatory voice authentication protocols, failing to provide reasonable accommodation even when aware of the Claimant 's medical incapacitation.\n\nFraudulent Inducement & Breach of Contract : The Bank coerced the Claimant to close a valid {$500.00} dispute under the false pretense and fraudulent promise of releasing a {$3800.00} refund, which the Bank then failed to do, constituting a clear breach of its duty of good faith and fair dealing.\n\n7. Conclusion and Prayer for Relief The evidence presented demonstrates a multi-year pattern of systemic and willful misconduct by Goldman Sachs Bank USA. The Banks actions and failures have caused severe and\nmultifaceted harm to XXXX XXXX, including direct financial loss, catastrophic damage to her credit and reputation, and significant emotional distress resulting from years of battling a faceless and unresponsive institution that unlawfully discriminated against her. To remedy these harms, the Claimant respectfully requests that the Arbitrator issue an Award encompassing the following relief.\n\nFirst, an award for Actual Damages to make the Claimant whole : Category Amount Claimed Justification FCBA Restitution ( Held Funds ) {$3800.00} Immediate release of Accepted Refund held since XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nFCBA/Contract Overpayments {$780.00} Restitution for eight unauthorized installments on non-delivered item.\n\nLoss from Fraudulent Condition {$500.00} Loss from the XXXX dispute Claimant was forced to close.\n\nOther Documented Fraud Losses {$4500.00} Losses from other documented disputes and improper charges.\n\nTotal Actual Damages {$9700.00} Second, an award for General Damages of {$50000.00} as compensation for the severe emotional distress, XXXX, and humiliation caused by years of financial uncertainty, the destruction of her credit standing, and the degrading experience of disability discrimination.\n\nThird, an award for Litigation Expenses of {$1800.00}, representing compensation for 90 hours of uncompensated time XXXX XXXX was forced to spend compiling evidence, documenting errors, and preparing for this arbitration as a direct result of the Bank 's misconduct.\n\nFinally, the Claimant seeks Statutory, Injunctive, and Punitive Relief, including : An order compelling the Bank to direct all major credit reporting agencies to immediately delete the \" Charged Off '' status and all related negative tradelines from the Claimant 's credit files.\n\nAn order requiring the Bank to implement and maintain a permanent, secure, non-voice authentication protocol for customers with documented XXXX  XXXX. \nAn award of statutory and punitive damages sufficient to punish the Bank for its willful, oppressive, and fraudulent conduct and to deter such conduct in the future. \nReimbursement of all XXXX XXXX filing fees. \nThis relief is necessary and justified to make the Claimant whole and to hold the Respondent accountable for its sustained and egregious violations of the law. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX, XXXX XXXX wrote : .DEMAND SUBMISSION - XXXX AMENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM AND PRE-HEARING BRIEF XXXX XXXX CASE NO. : XXXX CLAIMANT RESPONDENT XXXX XXXX GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA DATE OF AMENDED FILING : XX/XX/XXXX Claimant XXXX XXXX submits this Amended Statement of Claim against Respondent Goldman Sachs Bank USA ( \" Goldman Sachs '' or \" Bank '' ) for willful, systemic, and fraudulent violations of federal and state consumer protection laws.\n\nI. JURISDICTION AND STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS The Bank 's conduct spans over four years and constitutes a pattern of violations under the Fair Credit Billing Act ( FCBA ), the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), and the Unruh Civil Rights Act.\n\nA. Systemic Failure to Resolve Billing Errors ( FCBA Violations ) Unauthorized Installment Overpayments : Despite a XX/XX/XXXX XXXX Store purchase for {$630.00} being non-delivered, the Bank improperly billed the Claimant for eight separate monthly installments of {$53.00} ( including XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and six further charges in XXXX ). These charges led to over {$780.00} in unauthorized principal, interest, and fees.\n\nBank 's Admission of Error : The Bank later confirmed in its official response that an \" inadvertent processing error occurred '' regarding the {$630.00} dispute, which was finally made permanent on XX/XX/XXXX, nearly four years after the initial transaction.\n\nContinuing FCBA Violation : The Bank is currently holding an Accepted Refund amount of {$3800.00} since XX/XX/XXXX. The failure to credit these acknowledged funds is a fresh, continuing violation of the FCBA.\n\nB. Fraudulent Inducement and Coercive Practices Fraudulent Condition : In XX/XX/XXXX, the Bank conditioned the release of the {$3800.00} held refund via direct deposit on the Claimant being forced to close a separate {$500.00} XXXX XXXX computer dispute.\n\nBreach of Promise : The Claimant complied by closing the {$500.00} dispute ; however, the Bank failed to honor its promise, and the {$3800.00} refund remains uncredited as of this filing. This action constitutes fraudulent inducement and a breach of the duty of good faith.\n\nC. Discrimination and Inaccurate Credit Reporting ( Unruh Act/FCRA ) Disability Discrimination ( Unruh Act ) : The Claimant, who has a documented XXXX  XXXX, was repeatedly denied equal access to account security and dispute resolution services because the Bank systematically insisted on voice authentication.\n\nInaccurate Credit Reporting ( FCRA ) : The Bank reported the account as \" Charged Off '' on XX/XX/XXXX. This negative report was inherently inaccurate because it was based on a balance that included disputed amounts, which the Bank subsequently admitted were subject to its own \" processing error ''.\n\nII. CAUSES OF ACTION No.\n\nCause of Action Legal Basis and Key Facts I.\n\nVIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT BILLING ACT ( FCBA )/ TILA Failure to investigate and correct billing errors ( the 67 disputes ). Illegal assessment of eight unauthorized {$53.00} installments. Illegal retention of the {$3800.00} held refund.\n\nII.\n\nVIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT ( FCRA ) Negligent and willful non-compliance in furnishing inaccurate information by reporting the account as \" Charged Off '' on XX/XX/XXXX, based on a balance that included amounts the Bank later admitted were erroneous.\n\nIII.\n\nVIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA 'S UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT Denying a person with a permanent XXXX  XXXX full and equal access to security and account services by insisting on discriminatory voice authentication protocols.\n\nIV.\n\nFRAUDULENT INDUCEMENT & BREACH OF CONTRACT Coercing the Claimant to close the {$500.00} dispute under the false pretense and fraudulent promise of immediately releasing the {$3800.00} refund.\n\nIII. RELIEF SOUGHT Claimant demands an Award against Goldman Sachs Bank USA, including but not limited to : A. ACTUAL DAMAGES ( Restitution and Financial Loss ) Category Claimed Amount Legal Basis FCBA Restitution ( Held Funds ) {$3800.00} Immediate release of the Accepted Refund on Hold since XX/XX/XXXX. \nFCBA/Contract Overpayments {$780.00} Full restitution for the eight unauthorized {$53.00} installments ( XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and six in XXXX ) and related interest/fees.\n\nLoss from Fraudulent Condition {$500.00} Loss from the {$500.00} XXXX dispute which Claimant was forced to close.\n\nFraud Losses ( Other ) {$4500.00} Losses from other documented disputes and charges.\n\nB. GENERAL DAMAGES ( Emotional Distress and Pain/Suffering ) Claim Category Justification for Damages Requested Amount Unruh Civil Rights Act / FCRA Compensation for severe emotional distress, anxiety, and humiliation caused by disability discrimination, years of financial uncertainty, and the resulting credit damage.\n\n{$50000.00} C. LITIGATION EXPENSES ( Compensation for Lost Time ) Claimant seeks compensation for the specific, uncompensated time ( 90 hours ) required to resolve and compile evidence for issues created by the Bank 's negligence and willful conduct, calculated at a rate of {$21.00} per hour.\n\nActivity Log Example Estimated Hours Spent Rate Cost Claimed Dispute Filing and Follow-Up 30 hours {$21.00} {$630.00} Evidence Compilation and Review ( 1,323 pages ) 40 hours {$21.00} {$840.00} XXXX XXXX Preparation 20 hours {$21.00} {$420.00} TOTAL TIME LOSS CLAIMED 90 Hours {$21.00} {$1800.00} D. STATUTORY, INJUNCTIVE, AND PUNITIVE RELIEF Statutory Damages : For willful violations of the FCRA, FCBA ( twice the finance charges ), and a minimum of {$4000.00} per instance of discrimination under the Unruh Act.\n\nInjunctive Relief : An Order compelling the Bank to immediately delete the \" Charged Off '' status and all negative credit reporting.\n\nPolicy Change : An Order requiring the Bank to implement a permanent, secure, non-voice authentication and resolution protocol for customers with documented XXXX  XXXX. \nPunitive Damages : Punitive damages are warranted due to the Bank 's evidence of willful, oppressive, and fraudulent conduct, including the admitted \" processing error '' and the fraudulent inducement scheme. \nFees : Reimbursement of all XXXX XXXX filing fees, costs, and attorney 's fees incurred by the Claimant","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-29T02:31:42.000Z","issue":"Closing your account","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"92231","tags":"Older American, Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16859092","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA","date_received":"2025-10-29T01:51:23.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Company closed your account"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This negative <em>report</em> was inherently inaccurate because it was based on a balance that included <em>disputed</em> amounts, which the Bank subsequently admitted were subject to its own \" processing <em>error</em> ''.\n\nII. CAUSES OF ACTION No.\n\nCause of Action Legal Basis and Key Facts I.\n\nVIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT BILLING ACT ( FCBA )/ TILA Failure to investigate and correct billing <em>errors</em> ( the 67 <em>disputes</em> ). Illegal <em>assessment</em> of eight unauthorized {$53.00} installments."],"sub_product":["General-purpose credit card or <em>charge</em> card"]},"sort":[11.452684,"16859092"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16731290","_score":7.1100693,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, CA XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX * * Date : * * [ Current Date ] * * Consumer Financial Protection Bureau * * XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, IA XXXX * * RE : FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES LLC * * * * Systematic FCRA Violations, Metro 2 Format Violations, and Willful Non-Compliance * * * * Consumer Name : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX * * Date of Birth : * * XX/XX/XXXX * * SSN : * * XXXX -- - # # COMPLAINT SUMMARY I am filing this formal complaint against * * Equifax Information Services LLC * * for systematic, willful, and repeated violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., California Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act ( CCRAA ), Cal. Civ. Code 1785.1 et seq., and Metro 2 Credit Reporting Format standards. \n\nOver a * * XXXX period * * ( XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX ), I have submitted numerous disputes regarding inaccurate information on my Equifax credit report. Rather than conducting proper investigations as required by law, Equifax has engaged in a documented pattern of : 1. * * Contradictory determinations on identical accounts * * ( verified, then deleted, then reinserted, then deleted again ) 2. * * Improper \" frivolous dispute '' designations * * to avoid legal investigation requirements 3. * * Illegal reinsertion of previously deleted information * * without required 5-day advance notice 4. * * '' Verification with modifications '' * * proving original information was inaccurate 5. * * Same-day contradictory responses * * ( multiple confirmation numbers, opposite results ) 6. * * Procedural obstruction * * through illegible document claims and identity verification inconsistencies This is not a case of isolated errors or good-faith disagreements about account accuracy. This is * * systematic obstruction of my statutory rights * * under the FCRA, demonstrating either willful non-compliance or reckless disregard for legal requirements. \n\n-- - # # DETAILED VIOLATIONS I have prepared a comprehensive * * XXXX chronological analysis * * ( attached as \" Equifax Dispute Timeline & Violations Analysis '' ) documenting * * XXXX separate dispute responses * * with the following findings : # # # * * FCRA Violations : * * * * 1. 1681e ( b ) - Failure to Follow Reasonable Procedures for Maximum Possible Accuracy * *- Same accounts reporting different balances across multiple time periods- Accounts \" verified as accurate '' yet simultaneously modified, proving inaccuracy - Inconsistent treatment : same creditor 's accounts deleted on one day, marked \" frivolous '' same day * * 2. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) - Failure to Conduct Reasonable Reinvestigation * * - Accounts \" verified '' on XX/XX/XXXX, then * * deleted * * on XX/XX/XXXX ( next day ) - Proves \" verification '' was inadequate, incomplete, or false - Multiple instances of marking disputes \" frivolous '' without assessing new information provided * * 3. 1681i ( a ) ( 3 ) - Improper Frivolous Dispute Designations * * - Marking legitimate disputes \" frivolous '' after only 2-3 attempts - No assessment of whether new information or documentation was provided - Used strategically to avoid investigation requirements after successful deletions * * 4. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) - CRITICAL : Illegal Reinsertion Without Required Notice * * - * * XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ( * XXXX ) : * * Previously deleted, then reinserted on XX/XX/XXXX * * without XXXX advance written notice * * - * * XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) : * * Deleted XX/XX/XXXX, reappeared by XX/XX/XXXX * * with no reinsertion notice whatsoever * * - Consumer denied opportunity to challenge reinsertion before it occurred - No statement of right to add consumer statement to file - No list of persons who received credit report in past 6 months * * 5. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) - Failure to Provide Notice of Deletion * * - Multiple accounts deleted without proper notification to consumer - No explanation of deletion reasons or investigation procedures - Deletions discovered only through reinsertion letters * * 6. 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) - Violation of 30-Day Investigation Requirement * * - Multiple disputes marked \" in process '' for over 30 days with no results - Repeatedly told \" dispute in process '' as excuse to reject new disputes - Creates impossible situation : can't re-dispute until results received, but results never provided -- - # # SPECIFIC ACCOUNTS DEMANDING IMMEDIATE DELETION Based on Equifax 's XXXX failure to properly verify and their pattern of contradictory determinations, I demand * * immediate and permanent deletion * * of the following accounts : # # # * * XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( Account XXXX XXXXXXXX ) * * - * * Disputed : * * XXXX times between XX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX - * * Results : * * Marked frivolous, then verified with modifications, then verified again with different modifications - * * Balance Inconsistency : * * Reported as {$11000.00} across multiple \" verifications '' but with changing dates of delinquency - * * Violation : * * If truly \" verified, '' why continuously modify \" Date of Major Delinquency '' and \" Additional Information ''? \n- * * Metro 2 Violation : * * Inconsistent reporting of XXXX ( Date of Account Information ) and XXXX ( Date of First Delinquency ) # # # * * XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Account XXXX XXXXXXXX ) * * - * * Disputed : * * XXXX times between XX/XX/XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX - * * Results : * * The most egregious example of Equifax 's pattern : - XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) : \" Verified with modifications '' - XXXX {$39000.00} - XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) : \" Frivolous - dispute in process '' ( same day, same account ) - XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) : * * DELETED * * ( one day after \" verification '' ) - XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) : * * REAPPEARED * * with no reinsertion notice - Balance {$39000.00} - XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) : \" Frivolous - dispute in process '' - XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) : \" Verified with modifications '' - XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) : \" Verified '' again with different modifications- * * Balance Changes : * * {$39000.00} {$39000.00} varying amounts across \" verifications '' - * * Critical Violation : * * Account deleted XX/XX/XXXX, reappeared XXXX without 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) required notice - * * Metro 2 Violation : * * Multiple violations of consistency requirements for Account Status ( XXXX ), Balance ( XXXX ), and XXXX # # # * * XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX / XXXX XXXX  ( Multiple Account Numbers : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) * * - * * Disputed : * * XXXX times across various account number iterations- * * Pattern : * * Name variations used ( XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) suggesting intentional relabeling to evade dispute history - * * Results Cycle : * * - XX/XX/XXXX : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  DELETED * * ( Conf. XXXX & XXXX ) - XX/XX/XXXX : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX REINSERTED * * without XXXX notice ( Conf. XXXX ) - XX/XX/XXXX : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX DELETED * * again ( Conf. XXXX ) - XX/XX/XXXX : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  DELETED * * ( Conf. XXXX ) - XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX CARD * * DELETED * * ( Conf. XXXX ) - * * Critical Violation : * * Reinsertion on XX/XX/XXXX violated 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) - no XXXX advance notice - * * Metro 2 Violation : * * Use of name variations to report same account violates consistency and unique identifier requirements # # # * * XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Accounts XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) * * - * * Disputed : * * Multiple times - * * Results : * * Accounts XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXX XXXXXXXX deleted XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) without any prior mention in correspondence - * * Account XXXX XXXXXXXX : * * \" Verified as accurate '' but \" unrelated information updated '' on XX/XX/XXXX - * * Violation : * * If accounts were legitimate, why delete? If illegitimate, why were they reporting in first place? \n- * * Metro 2 Violation : * * Multiple account numbers for same institution without proper portfolio type designation # # # * * XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Account XXXX XXXXXXXX ) * * - * * First Appearance : * * XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) - * * Result : * * \" Verified as accurate '' but with modifications to : - Additional Information - Actual Payment - Scheduled Payment - Date of Major Delinquency - Historical Account Information - * * Violation : * * Brand new dispute immediately resulted in \" verified but updated '' - if verified, why modify XXXX separate fields? \n- * * Debt Buyer Issue : * * As debt buyer, must comply with 15 U.S.C. 1692g validation requirements before reporting- * * Currently Disputed : * * XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) - awaiting results # # # * * XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( Account XXXX XXXX ) * * - * * Result : * * XX/XX/XXXX ( Conf. XXXX ) - \" Verified as accurate '' but modified : - Additional Information - Closed Date - Scheduled Payment - Date of Last Payment - * * Violation : * * Account shows as \" Paid and Closed '' with {$0.00} balance, yet XXXX fields required modification after dispute - * * Metro 2 Violation : * * Reporting closed account with modification to closure date proves original reporting inaccurate -- - # # METRO 2 FORMAT VIOLATIONS The Metro 2 Credit Reporting Resource Guide ( published by Consumer Data Industry Association ) establishes mandatory data formatting and reporting standards. Equifax 's handling of the above accounts violates multiple Metro 2 requirements : * * 1. Data Consistency Requirements ( Section 3.1 ) * * - Same accounts must report consistent information across all furnishers and bureaus - XXXX  account showing different balances ( {$39000.00} vs {$39000.00} ) within XXXX period violates consistency requirement * * XXXX. XXXX Reporting Accuracy ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( Date of Account Information ) : Must reflect date of last update - XXXX ( Date of First Delinquency ) : Can not change once established - Multiple \" verifications '' that modify \" Date of Major Delinquency '' violate XXXX consistency rule * * XXXX. Account Status Codes ( Field 11 ) * * - Status changes ( deleted reinserted deleted ) without supporting documentation violate status code integrity - \" Verified '' status can not coexist with simultaneous field modifications * * XXXX. Special Comments Codes * * - \" Consumer Disputes After Resolution '' notation applied incorrectly - Should be removed after dispute resolved, but remains across multiple \" verifications '' * * XXXX. Unique Account Identification * * - XXXX using multiple name variations ( XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX  ) for same account violates unique identifier requirement - Creates confusion and suggests intentional evasion of dispute tracking -- - # # PATTERN OF WILLFUL NON-COMPLIANCE The attached chronological analysis reveals this is not negligence but * * willful non-compliance * * under FCRA 1681n, supported by : # # # * * Evidence of Intent : * * XXXX. * * Same-Day Contradictory Determinations : * * - XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX  account XXXX ( XXXX confirmations ) while XXXX  marked \" frivolous '' ( XXXX confirmation ) - XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX  * XXXX \" verified '' AND \" frivolous '' ( same account, same day, XXXX different confirmations ) XXXX. * * Strategic Use of \" Frivolous '' Designation : * * - After successful deletions in XXXX, subsequent disputes marked \" frivolous '' to prevent investigation - No assessment of new information provided with each dispute - Used to circumvent 30-day investigation requirement XXXX. * * Procedural Obstruction : * * - XX/XX/XXXX : Suddenly claimed documents \" illegible '' after processing multiple prior disputes - Identity accepted, then questioned, then accepted again - no consistent standard XXXX. * * Verification-Then-Deletion Pattern : * * - XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX  and XXXX  \" verified with modifications '' - XX/XX/XXXX : XXXX  * * deleted * * ( next day ) - Proves XX/XX/XXXX \" verification '' was knowingly false or grossly inadequate XXXX. * * Illegal Reinsertion : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reinserted XX/XX/XXXX without required XXXX advance notice - XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX reappeared XX/XX/XXXX with no notice at all - Demonstrates knowledge of deletion but intentional circumvention of reinsertion notice requirement -- - # # HARM SUFFERED As a direct result of Equifax 's violations, I have suffered : # # # * * XXXX. Financial Harm : * * - Credit applications denied or approved with unfavorable terms due to inaccurate charge-off and delinquency reporting - Unable to qualify for rental housing due to negative items - Higher interest rates on approved credit ( estimated $ [ amount ] in additional interest costs ) # # # * * 2. Credit Score Damage : * * - Constant flux of accounts being deleted, reinserted, and \" verified '' creates unstable credit profile - Score fluctuations prevent accurate assessment of creditworthiness - Current score artificially depressed by inaccurately reported charge-offs # # # * * 3. Time and Resources : * * - Over 25 months spent disputing same accounts repeatedly - XXXX dispute submissions with documentation preparation - Countless hours monitoring credit reports for unauthorized reinsertions - Cost of obtaining multiple credit reports to track Equifax 's contradictory actions # # # * * 4. Emotional Distress : * * - Stress and XXXX  from systematic obstruction of legal rights - Frustration from contradictory responses and circular dispute process - Feeling of helplessness when legitimate disputes marked \" frivolous '' # # # * * XXXX. Opportunity Costs : * * - Inability to obtain credit for business ventures- Missed opportunities for favorable financing - Delayed major purchases ( vehicle, housing ) due to credit report inaccuracies -- - # # LEGAL BASIS FOR RELIEF # # # * * Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) : * * * * 1681e ( b ) - Reasonable Procedures for Accuracy : * * * '' Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. \" * * * Violation : * * Equifax 's pattern of verifying information that is immediately deleted, reinserted without notice, and repeatedly modified proves failure to follow reasonable procedures. \n\n* * 1681i ( a ) - Procedure in Case of Disputed Accuracy : * * * '' If the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumer 's file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly... the agency shall ... conduct a reasonable reinvestigation ... '' * * * Violation : * * Marking disputes \" frivolous '' without assessing new information, conducting \" verifications '' that result in deletions the next day, and using \" dispute in process '' to avoid investigation requirements. \n\n* * 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) - Reinsertion of Disputed Information : * * * '' A consumer reporting agency shall provide written notice to a consumer of the results of a reinvestigation... not later than XXXX business days after the date on which the item of information is reinserted. \" * * * Critical Violation : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX reinserted without required advance notice. \n\n* * 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) - Notice of Deletion : * * * '' A consumer reporting agency shall provide notice of a deletion of information ... to any person specifically designated by the consumer who has within two years received a consumer report for employment purposes, or within six months received a consumer report for any other purpose ... '' * * * Violation : * * Multiple deletions occurred without proper notice or explanation of investigation procedures.\n\n* * 1681n - Civil Liability for Willful Noncompliance : * * * '' Any person who willfully fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this subchapter with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to the sum of ... any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or damages of not less than {$100.00} and not more than {$1000.00} ... '' * * * Applicable : * * Pattern of same-day contradictions, illegal reinsertions, and strategic \" frivolous '' designations demonstrates willful noncompliance. \n\n# # # * * California CCRAA ( Cal. Civ. Code 1785.1 et seq. ) : * * * * 1785.25 ( a ) - Accuracy Requirements : * * California law imposes additional accuracy requirements and provides for statutory damages, attorneys ' fees, and punitive damages for violations. \n\n-- - # # DEMANDS FOR RELIEF I respectfully demand the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau : # # # * * XXXX. IMMEDIATE ACTIONS : * * * * A. XXXX Equifax to PERMANENTLY DELETE the following accounts from my credit report within 10 business days : * * - XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXXXXXX ) - XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXXXXXX ) - XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX XXXXXXXX ) - XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX  ) - XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ( all account numbers : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) - XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXXXXXX ) - XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXXXXXX ) * * Basis : * * Equifax has demonstrated through XXXX documented dispute responses spanning 25 months that it can not or will not properly verify these accounts. Under FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), information that can not be verified must be deleted. \n\n* * B. Order Equifax to provide written confirmation of deletions within XXXX business days of deletion * * * * XXXX. Order Equifax to notify all entities who received my credit report in the past 24 months of the deletions * * # # # * * XXXX. COMPENSATORY RELIEF : * * * * A. Actual Damages : * * - Financial harm from credit denials and unfavorable terms : $ [ Amount ] - Cost of credit monitoring and report fees over 25 months : $ [ Amount ] - Lost opportunity costs : $ [ Amount ] - Emotional distress : $ [ Amount ] * * XXXX Statutory Damages under FCRA 1681n : * * - Minimum {$100.00} per violation documented violations = $ [ Amount ] - Court discretion up to {$1000.00} per violation * * XXXX Punitive Damages : * * - Pattern of willful non-compliance warrants punitive damages to deter future violations - Same-day contradictions, illegal reinsertions, and strategic \" frivolous '' designations demonstrate reckless disregard for consumer rights * * XXXX Attorney 's Fees and Costs : * * - Under FCRA 1681n ( a ) ( 3 ) and Cal. Civ. Code 1785.31 ( d ) # # # * * 3. SYSTEMIC REFORMS : * * * * A. Order Equifax to reform dispute processing procedures : * * - Eliminate use of \" frivolous '' designation without documented assessment of new information - Implement controls to prevent same-day contradictory determinations - Require documentation of verification method and furnisher response for all \" verified '' accounts * * B. Order Equifax to comply with Metro 2 format standards : * * - Maintain consistency in account identification ( prevent name variation abuse ) - Ensure K-code accuracy and consistency - Properly code dispute status and resolution * * C. Order Equifax to provide proper notice for all reinsertions : * * - Full compliance with 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) including 5-day advance notice - Statement of consumer 's right to add statement to file - List of entities who received report in past 6 months * * D. Independent audit of Equifax 's dispute processing : * * - Review of other consumers experiencing similar patterns - Assessment of automated vs. manual review procedures- Evaluation of compliance with FCRA investigation requirements # # # * * 4. REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT : * * * * A. CFPB investigation of Equifax 's systematic practices * * * * B. Civil penalties for pattern of violations affecting multiple consumers * * * * C. Consent order requiring ongoing compliance monitoring * * * * D. Public disclosure of findings to warn other consumers * * -- - # # PRIOR ATTEMPTS TO RESOLVE Before filing this complaint, I attempted to resolve these issues through : XXXX. * * XXXX separate dispute submissions * * to Equifax over XXXX period ( XX/XX/XXXX- XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX. * * Multiple written demand letters * * sent XX/XX/XXXX to : - Equifax ( demanding deletion under FCRA ) - XXXX  ( for cross-bureau violations ) - XXXX  ( for incomplete investigations ) - Direct furnishers ( XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX. * * Attempts to submit supporting documentation * * met with \" illegible documents '' claims ( XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX. * * Good faith engagement * * with dispute process, providing detailed explanations and documentation with each dispute Despite these extensive efforts, Equifax has : - Continued contradictory determinations - Maintained accounts after documented inability to verify- Illegally reinserted deleted information - Marked legitimate disputes as \" frivolous '' - Created procedural barriers through identity verification inconsistencies This complaint is necessary because Equifax has demonstrated it will not comply with FCRA requirements through voluntary measures. \n\n-- - # # REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION SCOPE I respectfully request that CFPB 's investigation include : XXXX. * * Review of Equifax 's dispute processing procedures : * * - Criteria for marking disputes \" frivolous '' - Use of automated vs. manual review systems- Internal controls to prevent same-day contradictions - Training and oversight of dispute handlers 2. * * Verification of furnisher communication : * * - What verification did furnishers actually provide for \" verified '' accounts? \n- Why were accounts \" verified '' then deleted the next day? \n- What new verification supported illegal reinsertions? \n\nXXXX. * * Examination of similar complaints : * * - Pattern analysis : Are other consumers experiencing identical issues? \n- Systemic problems with XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX accounts XXXX \n- Industry-wide issues with Metro 2 compliance? \n\nXXXX. * * Review of reinsertion procedures : * * - How many accounts were reinserted without required 5-day notice?\n\n- Internal procedures for tracking deletions and preventing improper reinsertions 5. * * Assessment of technological systems : * * - Does Equifax 's system allow same-day contradictory determinations? \n- Safeguards to prevent deleted accounts from automatically reappearing -- - # # LEGAL REPRESENTATION [ ] I am currently represented by an attorney : _______________________ [ X ] I am not currently represented but reserve the right to obtain counsel [ ] I authorize CFPB to share this complaint with state attorneys general -- - # # AUTHORIZATION AND CONSENT I hereby authorize the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to : XXXX. Investigate this complaint and all related matters XXXX. Share this complaint and supporting documentation with : - Equifax Information Services LLC XXXX Federal Trade Commission - State regulatory agencies ( California DFPI ) - State attorneys general - Other relevant regulatory bodies XXXX. Request additional information or documentation from me as needed XXXX. Pursue any enforcement actions deemed appropriate XXXX. Include this complaint in public databases and statistical reporting ( with personal information redacted as appropriate ) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. \n\n-- - # # CONTACT INFORMATION * * Consumer : * * XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, CA XXXX * * Phone : * * ( XXXX ) XXXX * * Email : * * XXXX * * Preferred Contact Method : * * [ ] Phone [ X ] Email [ ] Mail * * Best Time to Contact : * * Weekdays XXXX XXXX  - XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX -- - # # RESPONDENT INFORMATION * * Equifax Information Services LLC * * XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, GA XXXX Phone : ( XXXX ) XXXX Website : www.equifax.com * * Prior Complaint References : * * - CFPB Complaint # XXXX ( referenced in my XX/XX/XXXX demand letter ) - CFPB Complaint # XXXX ( XXXX, related matter ) - CFPB Complaint # XXXX ( XXXX, related matter ) -- - * * URGENT REQUEST : * * Given the ongoing harm from inaccurate credit reporting and Equifax 's demonstrated pattern of violations over 25 months, I respectfully request : XXXX. * * Expedited investigation * * of this complaint XXXX. * * Immediate injunctive relief * * ordering temporary deletion of disputed accounts pending investigation 3. * * Priority review * * given willful nature of violations and consumer harm This is not a simple dispute about account accuracy. This is a documented pattern of systematic FCRA violations designed to frustrate consumer rights and maintain inaccurate information despite repeated proof of inability to verify. \n\nI appreciate the CFPB 's attention to this serious matter and stand ready to provide any additional information or documentation needed for your investigation. \n\nRespectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX -- - * This complaint is submitted in good faith based on documented evidence of FCRA violations. All statements are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I reserve all rights to pursue private litigation if CFPB investigation does not result in satisfactory resolution. *","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-22T00:08:22.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"91773","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16731290","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-22T00:03:43.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Credit Score Damage : * * - Constant flux of accounts being deleted, reinserted, and \" verified '' creates unstable credit profile - Score fluctuations prevent accurate <em>assessment</em> of creditworthiness - Current score artificially depressed by inaccurately <em>reported</em> <em>charge</em>-offs # # # * * 3."],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em> or other personal consumer reports"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"],"sub_issue":["Their investigation did not fix an <em>error</em> on your <em>report</em>"]},"sort":[7.1100693,"16731290"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14733269","_score":5.932077,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Submitted by : private and on record Date : XX/XX/XXXX Re : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 's multiple Federal and state law violations Against : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) Loan : Auto Loan Ending in XXXX Collateral : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Summary of Complaint : I respectfully submit this formal claim with verifiable new evidence provided and request for reinvestigation and am filing a new claim against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) regarding their deceptive XX/XX/XXXX response to the CFPB. I respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau take immediate action to demand full deletion of this tradeline from all my consumer credit reports. as it can not be resolved by mere updates or corrections. If this does not provide a resolution I will escalate this matter for further legal action My complaint was closed without a solution caused by XXXX 's refusal to provide me with all requested loan documentation up until I filed the complaint ; verification emails are attached as evidence. Their response contains numerous falsehoods, omissions, and deceptive statements that contradict XXXX own records and the statement itself; violating their duty to report information with maximum possible accuracy and violating several state and federal laws. \nThe long term damage caused by XXXX false and conflicting credit reporting, misapplied payments, improper repossession, and deceptive servicing practices along with multiple, ongoing, and irreparable violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Washington State consumer protection laws, and CFPB reporting standards warrant a full investigation of XXXX 's lending practices ( especially within the state of WA ) and a full deletion resolution with monetary compensation. \n\n-- The tradeline is not only factually inaccurate, but also misleading and incomplete as defined under 15 U.S. Code 1681s-2 and numerous other violations as follows with evidence attached; XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX STATEMENT TO THE CFPB REGARDING ADMITTED SKIP PAYMENT TO THE LOAN ( misapplied ) To the best of my knowledge and based on all records and receipts, I did not request or authorize a skip payment for XX/XX/XXXX. I made payment that month and an overpayment the previous month. Despite this, XXXX improperly applied a skip payment to XXXX. \n\nAt the time, I was told by a XXXX representative that I qualified for a skip payment as a reward for 12 months of on-time payments, and I accepted that reward for XX/XX/XXXX. I planned my finances accordingly and made no payment in XXXX trusting the skip was valid and applied as promised, otherwise I would have. \n\nInstead, XXXX recently silently moved the skip to XXXX in their new modified billing history they submitted to the CFPBwhere it was not needed or requestedand reported XXXX as 30 days late. This deceptive shift in servicing created a false delinquency timeline that caused progressive credit damage into XXXX, even though I made timely payments throughout. \n\nThis servicing error, coupled with the misrepresentation of the skip policy, constitutes a deceptive and harmful practice in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and CFPB consumer protection standards. \n\nThis false delinquency must not only be correctedit is further evidence that the entire tradeline is compromised and must be deleted. \n\n\nLegal & Regulatory Implications 1. Violation of FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) and ( b ) : They reported a late payment for XX/XX/XXXX that was verbally contractually skipped, Misrepresented XX/XX/XXXX as skipped ( which I didnt request ) as timely combined payments were made This creates a false delinquency timeline. \n\n\nXXXX. Deceptive and Unfair Servicing CFPB UDAAP Standard Presenting a skip payment as a reward, then applying it in a different month without notice, is deceptive. \n\nIt violates reasonable expectations and causes harm via negative credit reporting. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 'S FALSIFIED STATEMENT TO THE CFPB REGARDING ADMITTED WAIVED FEES ( hidden in payment structure ) XXXX XXXX own response to the CFPB dated XX/XX/XXXX, falsely claims that late fees were waived. However, their updated billing history they submitted to the CFPB contradicts this claim. One example being, my XX/XX/XXXX payment of {$420.00}, which is verifiable by XXXX 's own original documents and my own receipt as I have provided, was incorrectly applied as {$390.00} in their updated new billing statement. This manufactured a {$29.00} shortfall that was then used to justify a fraudulent late fee and delinquency snowball effect. \n\nThis misapplication of payments repeats throughout their entire billing history. \n\nThat late fee was not waived as claimed, nor were barely anythey were buried in the adjusted misapplied payments within XXXX manipulated new billing statements where they remain listed. \n\nThe mismatch between the actual payments, their online account history, and the altered ledger proves XXXX  knowingly furnished inaccurate information, in direct violation of : FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) : Furnishing information known or believed to be inaccurate ; FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Failing to correct disputed information after receiving evidence ; FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failing to maintain maximum possible accuracy ; CFPB UDAAP rules : Misrepresenting fees and falsifying servicing records to cover unlawful charges. \n\n\nThis deliberate misrepresentation, both to me and to the CFPB, undermines XXXX credibility as a furnisher of credit data. Their refusal to correct or even acknowledge the misapplied payments further supports my request for complete deletion of this tradeline from all consumer credit reports. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX STATEMENT TO THE CFPB REGARDING LATE FEES WAIVED AS COURTESY ( incorrect and irrelevant as they violated Federal laws ) I have submitted verifiable documentations which clearly show that payments were made in full, on time, and consecutively throughout the entire loan. The records support that the late fees waived were not as a courtesy as XXXX falsely claims in their statement to the CFPB but rather confirms continuous billing errors and technical difficulties that were systematically applied by XXXX invalidly ; adding that XXXX representatives misled me to believe the account was delinquent. These records prove that the loan was never legitimately delinquent. Instead, XXXX misapplication of on-time automatic payments, improper reclassification of valid overpayments, double, extra payments and false reporting of a skip payment without my request triggered continued artificial fees and delinquencies. \n\nThese false delinquencies were then perpetuated through manipulated billing histories and concealed late fees, allowing XXXX to inflate the loan balance, deny hardship relief, and obscure the true account status to justify wrongful repossession and continued damage to my credit profile. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 'S STATEMENT TO THE CFPB REGARDING DENIAL OF HARDSHIP RELIEF ( offered then denied, misrepresented with account actually being current ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX contradictory statement to the CFPB claims they offer hardship relief and are committed to helping members in distress. However, this assertion is contradicted by my experience and their own admittance in that same statement of denying that they offered me any. In reality they caused hardship on top of one as the account was not delinquent. After being misled into believing my loan was in defaultdue to XXXX own misapplied payments, altered billing history, wrongful delinquency reporting and technical difficultiesI was indeed offered hardship assistance by representatives, including a bump payment plan in XX/XX/XXXX. Under duress, I agreed to this catch-up payment arrangement, which allowed for three consecutive payments to reset the loan and move any deficiency to the end of the term and applied for hardship thereafter in XXXX as XXXX continued billing manipulation, even refusing full {$1200.00} bump payment. \n\n-These agreements and conversations between me and XXXX representatives can surely be confirmed via XXXX 's monitored and recorded phone records. \n\nMy original complaint statement to the CFPB asserting that I indeed make every attempt to make payments on time and that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) rather intentionally or due to technical difficulties prevented me from doing so. Adding that I had automatic payments set up that can be seen clearly posted in XX/XX/XXXX ( my first bump payment ) XXXX automatic payment missing regardless of receipt and a denied {$1200.00} offer to pay off bump payment plan in full as I was not locked out of my account at that time ; as they constantly blocked and unblocked my account unnecessarily. \n\nDespite this, XXXX falsely claims they have no record of placing me on any hardship or bump payment plan or was eligible for such accommodations, when their own assertion of loan delinquency contradicts their statement. \n\nThese actions constitute a deceptive and unfair practice in violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) prohibiting UDAAP ( Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ), and violate the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1691 ) for failure to acknowledge and process a valid hardship application. \n\nMy documented payments, receipts, and timeline show the loan was never truly delinquentfurther proving that XXXX denied me any meaningful relief whatsoever while manipulating the loan status to justify wrongful collection, loan inflation and repossession of the vehicle. \n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX STATEMENT TO THE CFPB REGARDING APPLIED PRORATED GAP INSURANCE REFUND ( missing ) In XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX response to the CFPB, they falsely claimed that a prorated Guaranteed Asset Protection ( GAP ) insurance refund was properly credited back to the loan account. However, after review of their new modified billing history they submitted to the CFPBshows no such credit applied at any point. This omission contradicts their written representation and deprives me of funds I am rightfully owed. \n\nThe failure to issue or apply the GAP refund constitutes a deceptive act in violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ), the Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ) due to the misrepresentation of account balances. Under Washington State law, this also violates the Consumer Protection Act ( XXXX XXXX XXXX  by engaging in unfair or deceptive practices in trade or commerce. \n\nThe GAP refund is a contractual right triggered by loan termination or vehicle loss, and its absence from both the loan payoff calculation and billing records indicates intentional concealment to inflate the remaining balance owed.\n\nRe-emphasizing that all of this deception combined verifies the fact that the account can not be merely just corrected but rather it needs to be fully deleted off of all my Consumer Credit files. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 'S STATEMENT WITH DOCUMENT SUBMITTED TO THE CFPB REGARDING WRONGFULLY CHARGED CPI ( Illegal use of expired insurance ) In XX/XX/XXXX, as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) was preparing to wrongfully repossess the vehicle, they improperly added a XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) charge to intentionally inflate the loan. I never received notice until I was finally provided with all the documentation that I had been continuously denied until provoked by my CFPB complaint. They cite a long-expired XXXX XXXX policy they provided to the CFPB as evidence as justification to apply this unnecessary charge to the loan in XXXX. I maintained valid auto insurance coverage throughout the entire loan with XXXX listed as the lien holder, and no lawful basis existed for this retroactive charge. The XXXX assessment was used to artificially inflate the balance of the loan further and falsely justify default status. \n\nThis action constitutes an unfair, deceptive, and abusive act or practice ( UDAAP ) in violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ), as well as a violation of the Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1666 et seq. ) for misrepresenting the loan balance and terms. Under Washington State law, it further violates the Consumer Protection Act ( XXXX XXXX ) for deceptive conduct and improper debt servicing. \n\n-The use of XXXX expired documentation to justify inflated charges in 2023without notice or valid legal basisis clear evidence of bad faith and predatory servicing behavior. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 'S STATEMENT AND DOCUMENT TO THE CFPB REGARDING INTENT TO SELL LETTER AFTER REPOSSESSION PRIVATE SALE VS. DAA PUBLIC AUCTION AND SURPLUS APPLIED WITH FALSE SALE REPRESENTATION, UNDISCLOSED AFFILIATE TRANSACTION, AND UNLAWFUL NOTICE PLUS LACK THEREOF VIOLATIONS XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) falsely represented in its XX/XX/XXXX response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that the repossessed XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was sold at a public auction for {$3500.00} applying surplus of {$2000.00} in accordance with applicable laws. This claim is demonstrably false based on the official title history, vehicle resale records and vehicle history reports. \n\nRecords Indicate Direct Title Transfer to CarStars For Resale No Auction Appears to Have Occurred The vehicle history report clearly shows only one title transfer after repossession : directly to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, a dealership located in Washington State. There is no record of the vehicle being processed through XXXX XXXX public auction, and no intermediary auction buyer appears on any record or title. This directly contradicts XXXX claim that an auction sale occurred. \n\nAdditionally, CarStars is a known affiliate of XXXX, publicly listed as a partner dealership in the PenFed Car Buying Service Experience, enabling them to buy and sell vehicles through PenFeds retail programs. This affiliation raises serious concerns about conflict of interest, commercial reasonableness, and truthful disclosure of proceeds under the Uniform Commercial Code and state law. \n\nConcealment of XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX listed the vehicle for {$10000.00}, and based on average dealer markup rates ( 10 % 35 % ), XXXX likely received between {$8000.00} and {$9900.00} for the resale. However, only {$2000.00} was credited to the loan balance ; {$6000.00} {$7900.00} in vehicle proceeds are unaccounted for, in direct violation of : XXXX XXXX ( Application of Proceeds ) RCW XXXX ( Required Explanation of Deficiency ) Truth in Lending Act ( TILA, 15 U.S.C. 1638 ) UDAAP provisions under Dodd-Frank ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) The failure to provide a complete post-sale explanation showing gross sale price, expenses, and net credit to the account constitutes both unfair and deceptive conduct and a material omission of fact ; as the PAR partners and asset recovery sales recap statement is more than likely misleading and equally recognized as non-compliant. \n\nInvalid and Misleading Notice of Intent to Sell The Notice of Intent to Sell Property XXXX  claims to have issued on XX/XX/XXXX was both procedurally and substantively defective : It failed to disclose the true method of intended sale ( auction vs. private sale ) as it was seemingly already set to go to auction according to XXXX 's submitted document, yet states private sale. \n\nIt did not identify the location, date, or time which must be listed on the NOI to be legally compliant and if truly sold at auction denied consumer the opportunity to bid in direct violation of law It misstated the timeline, did not explain the borrower 's right to redeem or reinstate, and omitted required disclosures under XXXX XXXX and XXXX. \n\nThis renders the notice legally invalid and the repossession and sale unlawful. \n\n- Additionally, XXXX claims they sold the vehicle in a commercially reasonable legal manner based on the vehicle 's condition yet all documents I am providing ; even their own they submitted clearly prove otherwise. The vehicle had been thoroughly maintained with recent maintenance, new brakes and a thorough complete inspection, XXXX records, inspection report, vehicle history report and XXXX selling the vehicle at XXXX XXXX XXXX value of {$10000.00} after repossession support this. \n\nThe resale of the repossessed vehicle was conducted in a commercially unreasonable manner, violating UCC 9-610 and Washington 's XXXX XXXX. The vehicle was sold significantly below fair market value, with no transparency, raising concerns of bad faith and unfair surplus distribution. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 'S STATEMENT TO THE CFPB REGARDING DENYING MY REQUESTS FOR ALL LOAN INFORMATION AND DEBT RESOLUTION ( deceptive statements ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX falsely claimed in their XX/XX/XXXX CFPB response that I had not requested any loan documents prior to XX/XX/XXXX. This is undeniably false as I have provided emails proving otherwise. I made multiple detailed requests for my full account history, fee breakdowns, repossession records, GAP documentation, and 'bump payment ' terms as early as XX/XX/XXXX and was continuously denied. \n\nThe XX/XX/XXXX email from XXXX XXXX XXXX recovery specialist I have included as evidence, clearly acknowledges my request for a settlement offer, and confirms that it was refused, not merely ignored. Thats direct evidence that XXXX 's statement to the CFPB is false and deceptive. \n\nXXXX falsely claimed in its XX/XX/XXXX response to the CFPB that I was given the opportunity to make payment arrangements or resolve the alleged balance. This is directly contradicted by documented evidence that I have provided. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX, Recovery Specialist at XXXX, responded to my inquiry and explicitly acknowledged my request regarding a settlement offer. His written response stated that the account had been assigned to a third-party collection agency as XXXX XXXX and that I would need to speak with them instead. In other words, XXXX rejected my settlement offer outright and denied me the ability to resolve the matter directly with them. \n\nThen, on XX/XX/XXXX, I followed up with another email to XXXX XXXX XXXX  recovery specialist, urgently reiterating my denial of my request for full documentation of the loan, including : My payment history ; GAP and insurance records ; The sale amount of the repossessed vehicle ; A full loan ledger with all fees and balances. \n\n\nI also restated my concern that without this information, I was being blocked from resolving the issue, and explicitly raised potential legal violations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). In response, XXXX XXXX XXXX recovery specialist again refused to provide the requested documents, stating I would have to go through XXXX XXXX a third-party debt collector. \n\nXXXX effectively shut me out of the resolution process while continuing to report negative tradelines on my credit report. \n\nDespite my written attempt to settle the debt and resolve the matter in good faith, XXXX  : Refused to accept payment or negotiate a resolution ; Denied me access to my account records and legal disclosures ; Misrepresented this entire sequence of events in their CFPB response, stating that I never made any such requests prior to XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n\nThese actions are not only deceptive, but also constitute : A violation of the FCRA for inaccurate reporting and failure to provide supporting documentation ; A violation of the XXXX under XXXX standards for obstructive and unfair practices ; A violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) by misleading a consumer and interfering with the ability to resolve a debt ; A violation of Washington State consumer protection laws, including XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, by refusing to negotiate and denying access to essential loan information. \n\n\nI respectfully request that the CFPB include this critical evidence of XXXX false statement, refusal to negotiate, and intentional obstruction of payment resolution in the reinvestigation of this case. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 'S STATEMENT TO THE CFPB REGARDING TRANSFER OF DEBT TO XXXX XXXX ( Statement Regarding False Representation of Debt Ownership and Deceptive Blocking of Resolution ) In XXXX XX/XX/XXXX response to the CFPB, they falsely stated that the account was assigned to a collection agency ( XXXX XXXX ) in XX/XX/XXXX and implied they were no longer responsible for account resolution. This is factually and provably false. \n\nI am submitting direct written proof that contradicts this claim. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX  Recovery Specialist XXXX XXXX emailed me stating : XXXX The account was recalled back from XXXX XXXX and is now solely in house within XXXX. \n\nThis email confirms that XXXX had full control over the account at the time they denied my settlement offer and refused to provide documentation. Their claim to the CFPB that I needed to resolve the matter through XXXX XXXX was knowingly false and appears to have been made to evade responsibility, delay resolution, and continue furnishing derogatory credit data while obstructing my ability to dispute or pay the debt. \n\nThis conduct violates multiple federal and state consumer protection laws, including : 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 of the FCRA, which prohibits furnishing inaccurate information to credit bureaus ; 15 U.S.C. 1692e of the FDCPA, which bars false, deceptive, or misleading representations in connection with debt collection ; 12 U.S.C. 5531 of the CFPA, under which this conduct qualifies as a deceptive and abusive act or practice ( UDAAP ) ; And likely RCW XXXX of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, which prohibits unfair methods of competition and deceptive acts in the conduct of trade or commerce. \n\n\nBy falsely shifting responsibility to a third-party collector that no longer had control of the account, XXXX intentionally blocked my legal right to dispute, resolve, or verify the debtand then misled a federal agency about it. \n\nI respectfully ask that the CFPB review this email and hold XXXX accountable for knowingly providing false and deceptive information in response to a federal investigation. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX AND FCRA VIOLATIONS XXXX  has continued to report this loan as charged-off with a large deficiency balance to national credit bureaus, including Equifax and XXXX. Because the reported balance does not reflect the full resale value of the vehicle, nor any GAP or CPI refunds that XXXX  falsely claimed were issued, the credit reporting is inaccurate and incomplete, in violation of : Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ) Duty to investigate and correct disputed information Duty to furnish complete and accurate information Summary of Federal and State Law Violations Committed by XXXX  : XXXX XXXX Failure to conduct sale in a commercially reasonable manner XXXX XXXX & XXXX Deficient and misleading Notice of Sale XXXX XXXX Failure to apply full proceeds from resale RCW XXXX Failure to provide required deficiency explanation TILA ( 15 U.S.C. 1638 ) Misrepresentation of post-default finance terms UDAAP ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) Unfair and deceptive conduct in debt collection and resale FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) Inaccurate tradeline reporting, failure to correct disputed data Requested Relief and Enforcement Recap I respectfully request the following remedies : XXXX. Full deletion of the tradeline from all consumer reporting agencies. \n\n\nXXXX. Reimbursement or cancellation of any alleged deficiency balance, including misapplied fees. \n\n\n3. Regulatory enforcement for the numerous violations outlined above. \n\n\nXXXX. Formal investigation into XXXX repossession and resale practices, including its relationship with affiliated dealerships and their failure to follow state and federal law. \n\nXXXX. Resolution of my claims with a final and possible monetary compensation for me","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-18T07:03:26.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"985XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14733269","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-18T07:02:57.000Z","state":"WA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["cover unlawful <em>charges</em>."],"product":["Credit <em>reporting</em> or other personal consumer reports"],"issue":["Incorrect information on your <em>report</em>"],"sub_product":["Credit <em>reporting</em>"]},"sort":[5.932077,"14733269"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":9,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":9}]}},"product":{"doc_count":9,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":7,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":7}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":2}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":9,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":3},{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Closing your account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company closed your account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Fees or interest","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Charged too much interest","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":1,"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":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":9,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":9}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":9,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":6},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":3}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":9,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":9}]}},"company":{"doc_count":9,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":3},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":3},{"key":"GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA","doc_count":1},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":9,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TX","doc_count":4},{"key":"CA","doc_count":2},{"key":"DC","doc_count":1},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"WA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":9,"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":4},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":9,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American, 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":{}}}