{"took":320,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":13,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11243819","_score":15.2134,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"SECTION 16.Rights of accused and of victims.\n\n( a ) In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall, upon demand, be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, and shall be furnished a copy of the charges, and shall have the right to have compulsory process for witnesses, to confront at trial adverse witnesses, to be heard in person, by counsel or both, and to have a speedy and public trial by impartial jury in the county where the crime was committed. If the county is not known, the indictment or information may charge venue in two or more counties conjunctively and proof that the XXXX  was committed in that area shall be sufficient ; but before pleading the accused may elect in which of those counties the trial will take place. Venue for prosecution of crimes committed beyond the boundaries of the state shall be fixed by law. \n( b ) To preserve and protect the right of crime victims to achieve justice, ensure a meaningful role throughout the criminal and juvenile justice systems for crime victims, and ensure that crime victims rights and interests are respected and protected by law in a manner no less vigorous than protections afforded to criminal defendants and juvenile delinquents, every victim is entitled to the following rights, beginning at the time of his or her victimization : ( XXXX ) The right to due process and to be treated with fairness and respect for the victims dignity. \n( XXXX ) The right to be free from intimidation, harassment, and abuse. \n( XXXX ) The right, within the judicial process, to be reasonably protected from the accused and any person acting on behalf of the accused. However, nothing contained herein is intended to create a special relationship between the crime victim and any law enforcement agency or office absent a special relationship or duty as defined by Florida law. \n( XXXX ) The right to have the safety and welfare of the victim and the victims family considered when setting bail, including setting pretrial release conditions that protect the safety and welfare of the victim and the victims family. \n( XXXX ) The right to prevent the disclosure of information or records that could be used to locate or harass the victim or the victims family, or which could disclose confidential or privileged information of the victim. \n( XXXX ) A victim shall have the following specific rights upon request : a.The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of, and to be present at, all public proceedings involving the criminal conduct, including, but not limited to, trial, plea, sentencing, or adjudication, even if the victim will be a witness at the proceeding, notwithstanding any rule to the contrary. A victim shall also be provided reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any release or escape of the defendant or delinquent, and any proceeding during which a right of the victim is implicated. \nb.The right to be heard in any public proceeding involving pretrial or other release from any form of legal constraint, plea, sentencing, adjudication, or parole, and any proceeding during which a right of the victim is implicated. \nc.The right to confer with the prosecuting attorney concerning any plea agreements, participation in pretrial diversion programs, release, restitution, sentencing, or any other disposition of the case. \nd.The right to provide information regarding the impact of the offenders conduct on the victim and the victims family to the individual responsible for conducting any presentence investigation or compiling any presentence investigation report, and to have any such information considered in any sentencing recommendations submitted to the court. \ne.The right to receive a copy of any presentence report, and any other report or record relevant to the exercise of a victims right, except for such portions made confidential or exempt by law. \nf.The right to be informed of the conviction, sentence, adjudication, place and time of incarceration, or other disposition of the convicted offender, any scheduled release date of the offender, and the release of or the escape of the offender from custody. \ng.The right to be informed of all postconviction processes and procedures, to participate in such processes and procedures, to provide information to the release authority to be considered before any release decision is made, and to be notified of any release decision regarding the offender. The parole or early release authority shall extend the right to be heard to any person harmed by the offender. \nh.The right to be informed of clemency and expungement procedures, to provide information to the governor, the court, any clemency board, and other authority in these procedures, and to have that information considered before a clemency or expungement decision is made ; and to be notified of such decision in advance of any release of the offender. \n( XXXX ) The rights of the victim, as provided in subparagraph ( XXXX ) a., subparagraph ( XXXX ) b., or subparagraph ( XXXX ) c., that apply to any first appearance proceeding are satisfied by a reasonable attempt by the appropriate agency to notify the victim and convey the victims views to the court. \n( XXXX ) The right to the prompt return of the victims property when no longer needed as evidence in the case. \n( XXXX ) The right to full and timely restitution in every case and from each convicted offender for all losses suffered, both directly and indirectly, by the victim as a result of the criminal conduct. \n( XXXX ) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay, and to a prompt and final conclusion of the case and any related postjudgment proceedings. \na.The state attorney XXXX file a good faith demand for a speedy trial and the trial court shall hold a calendar call, with notice, within XXXX days of the filing demand, to schedule a trial to commence on a date at least XXXX days but no more than XXXX days after the date of the calendar call unless the trial judge enters an order with specific findings of fact justifying a trial date more than XXXX days after the calendar call. \nb.All state-level appeals and collateral attacks on any judgment must be complete within XXXX years from the date of appeal in non-capital cases and within XXXX years from the date of appeal in capital cases, unless a court enters an order with specific findings as to why the court was unable to comply with this subparagraph and the circumstances causing the delay. Each year, the chief judge of any district court of appeal or the chief justice of the supreme court shall report on a case-by-case basis to the speaker of the house of representatives and XXXX XXXX XXXX the senate all cases where XXXX court entered an order regarding inability to comply with this subparagraph. The legislature XXXX enact legislation to implement this subparagraph. \n( XXXX ) The right to be informed of these rights, and to be informed that victims can seek the advice of an attorney with respect to their rights. This information shall be made available to the general public and provided to all crime victims in the form of a card or by other means intended to effectively advise the victim of their rights under this section. \n( c ) The victim, the retained attorney of the victim, a lawful representative of the victim, or the office of the state attorney upon request of the victim, XXXX assert and seek enforcement of the rights enumerated in this section and any other right afforded to a victim by law in any trial or appellate court, or before any other authority with jurisdiction over the case, as a matter of right. The court or other authority with jurisdiction shall act promptly on such a request, affording a remedy by due course of law for the violation of any right. The reasons for any decision regarding the disposition of a victims right shall be clearly stated on the record. \n( d ) The granting of the rights enumerated in this section to victims XXXX not be construed to deny or impair any other rights possessed by victims. The provisions of this section apply throughout criminal and juvenile justice processes, are self-executing, and do not require implementing legislation. This section XXXX not be construed to create any cause of action for damages against the state or a political subdivision of the state, or any XXXX, employee, or agent of the state or its political subdivisions. \n( XXXX ) As used in this section, a victim is a person who suffers direct or threatened physical, psychological, or financial harm as a result of the commission or attempted commission of a crime or delinquent act or against whom the crime or delinquent act is committed. The term victim includes the victims lawful representative, the parent or guardian of a minor, or the next of kin of a homicide victim, except upon a showing that the interest of such individual would be in actual or potential conflict with the interests of the victim. The term victim does not include the accused. The terms crime and criminal include delinquent acts and conduct. \nHistory.Am. XXXX. XXXX, XXXX ; adopted XXXX ; XXXX. proposed by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX, filed with the XXXX of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ; adopted XXXX ; XXXX. proposed by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX, filed with the XXXX of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ; adopted XXXX. \n\nUnder the Florida Constitution I have a right to face my accuser. \nThe Department of Education ran by a \" XXXX XXXX '' is located in XXXX, Florida therefore he and the Department of Education must abide and be bound by this Constitution via sworn oath of office, bonding company, insurance policy I have disputed this unlawful debt ; therefor until validated The Department of Education knows that the information concerning this debt is inaccurate. Thus violating due process by reporting this inaccurate information to GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES, ( XXXX ) 's or failing to report information I have already sent dating back years is breach of any contract that there may or may not have been and violation of The Department of Education 's Fiduciary Duty. \n\nDeclarations are an insufficient response, as declarations permit lying by omissions, which no honorable draft XXXX contain. \n\nI hereby give you ( XXXX ) days to reply to this notice from the above date with a notice send using post and signed under full commercial liability and penalties of perjury, assuring and promising me that all of the replies and details given to the above requests are true and without deception, fraud, or mischief. Your said failure to provide the aforementioned documentation within XXXX ( XXXX ) days, from the above date to validate these debts will constitute your agreement to the following terms... \n\nThe the debt did not exist in the first place; OR It has already been paid in full ; AND That any damages suffered, you will be held accountable/culpable ; That any negative remarks made to a credit reference agency will be updated to Paid in Full Never Late Status. \nThe Department of Education will no longer pursue this matter You agree to pay all fee schedules. \n\nPlease note : That I wish to deal with this matter in writing and I do not give your organization permission to contact me by telephone. Should you do so, I must warn you that the calls could constitute \" harassment '' and I XXXX take action under Section XXXX of the Protection from Harassment Act of XXXX and the Administration of XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX XXXX which makes it a criminal offence for a creditor or a creditors agent to make demands ( for money ) which are aimed at causing alarm, distress or humiliation, because of their frequency or manner. \n\nXXXX is a national of the nation/state of Florida, XXXX contemplated by the act of congress evidenced and restated at 8 U.S.C 1101 ( a ) ( 2 ). Affiant is aware and knows that the U.S. bankruptcy is verified in XXXX Report XXXX. XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX Session ( XXXX ), Summary of Emergency Powers Statutes, \" Trading with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX and as further codified at 12 U.S.C.A. 95 ( a ) and ( b ) as amended.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-21T18:44:57.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33870","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11243819","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"LEXISNEXIS","date_received":"2024-12-21T18:44:54.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Report provided to employer without your written authorization"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["( <em>XXXX</em> ) The right to be free from intimidation, harassment, and abuse. \n( <em>XXXX</em> ) The right, within the judicial process, to be reasonably protected from the accused and any <em>person</em> acting on behalf of the accused. However, nothing contained herein is intended to create a special relationship between the crime <em>victim</em> and any law enforcement agency or office absent a special relationship or duty as <em>defined</em> by Florida law."]},"sort":[15.2134,"11243819"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11243197","_score":15.187837,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"SECTION 16.Rights of accused and of victims.\n\n( a ) In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall, upon demand, be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, and shall be furnished a copy of the charges, and shall have the right to have compulsory process for witnesses, to confront at trial adverse witnesses, to be heard in person, by counsel or both, and to have a speedy and public trial by impartial jury in the county where the crime was committed. If the county is not known, the indictment or information may charge venue in two or more counties conjunctively and proof that the crime was committed in that area shall be sufficient ; but before pleading the accused may elect in which of those counties the trial will take place. Venue for prosecution of crimes committed beyond the boundaries of the state shall be fixed by law. \n( b ) To preserve and protect the right of crime victims to achieve justice, ensure a meaningful role throughout the criminal and juvenile justice systems for crime victims, and ensure that crime victims rights and interests are respected and protected by law in a manner no less vigorous than protections afforded to criminal defendants and juvenile delinquents, every victim is entitled to the following rights, beginning at the time of his or her victimization : ( XXXX ) The right to due process and to be treated with fairness and respect for the victims dignity. \n( XXXX ) The right to be free from intimidation, harassment, and abuse. \n( XXXX ) The right, within the judicial process, to be reasonably protected from the accused and any person acting on behalf of the accused. However, nothing contained herein is intended to create a special relationship between the crime victim and any law enforcement agency or office absent a special relationship or duty as defined by Florida law. \n( XXXX ) The right to have the safety and welfare of the victim and the victims family considered when setting bail, including setting pretrial release conditions that protect the safety and welfare of the victim and the victims family. \n( XXXX ) The right to prevent the disclosure of information or records that could be used to locate or harass the victim or the victims family, or which could disclose confidential or privileged information of the victim. \n( XXXX ) A victim shall have the following specific rights upon request : a.The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of, and to be present at, all public proceedings involving the criminal conduct, including, but not limited to, trial, plea, sentencing, or adjudication, even if the victim will be a witness at the proceeding, notwithstanding any rule to the contrary. A victim shall also be provided reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any release or escape of the defendant or delinquent, and any proceeding during which a right of the victim is implicated. \nb.The right to be heard in any public proceeding involving pretrial or other release from any form of legal constraint, plea, sentencing, adjudication, or parole, and any proceeding during which a right of the victim is implicated. \nc.The right to confer with the prosecuting attorney concerning any plea agreements, participation in pretrial diversion programs, release, restitution, sentencing, or any other disposition of the case. \nd.The right to provide information regarding the impact of the offenders conduct on the victim and the victims family to the individual responsible for conducting any presentence investigation or compiling any presentence investigation report, and to have any such information considered in any sentencing recommendations submitted to the court. \ne.The right to receive a copy of any presentence report, and any other report or record relevant to the exercise of a victims right, except for such portions made confidential or exempt by law. \nf.The right to be informed of the conviction, sentence, adjudication, place and time of incarceration, or other disposition of the convicted offender, any scheduled release date of the offender, and the release of or the escape of the offender from custody. \ng.The right to be informed of all postconviction processes and procedures, to participate in such processes and procedures, to provide information to the release authority to be considered before any release decision is made, and to be notified of any release decision regarding the offender. The parole or early release authority shall extend the right to be heard to any person harmed by the offender. \nh.The right to be informed of clemency and expungement procedures, to provide information to the governor, the court, any clemency board, and other authority in these procedures, and to have that information considered before a clemency or expungement decision is made ; and to be notified of such decision in advance of any release of the offender. \n( XXXX ) The rights of the victim, as provided in subparagraph ( XXXX ) a., subparagraph ( XXXX ) b., or subparagraph ( XXXX ) c., that apply to any first appearance proceeding are satisfied by a reasonable attempt by the appropriate agency to notify the victim and convey the victims views to the court. \n( XXXX ) The right to the prompt return of the victims property when no longer needed as evidence in the case. \n( XXXX ) The right to full and timely restitution in every case and from each convicted offender for all losses suffered, both directly and indirectly, by the victim as a result of the criminal conduct. \n( XXXX ) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay, and to a prompt and final conclusion of the case and any related postjudgment proceedings.\n\na.The state attorney may file a good faith demand for a speedy trial and the trial court shall hold a calendar call, with notice, within fifteen days of the filing demand, to schedule a trial to commence on a date at least five days but no more than sixty days after the date of the calendar call unless the trial judge enters an order with specific findings of fact justifying a trial date more than sixty days after the calendar call.\n\nb.All state-level appeals and collateral attacks on any judgment must be complete within two years from the date of appeal in non-capital cases and within five years from the date of appeal in capital cases, unless a court enters an order with specific findings as to why the court was unable to comply with this subparagraph and the circumstances causing the delay. Each year, the chief judge of any district court of appeal or the chief justice of the supreme court shall report on a case-by-case basis to the speaker of the house of representatives and the president of the senate all cases where the court entered an order regarding inability to comply with this subparagraph. The legislature may enact legislation to implement this subparagraph.\n\n( 11 ) The right to be informed of these rights, and to be informed that victims can seek the advice of an attorney with respect to their rights. This information shall be made available to the general public and provided to all crime victims in the form of a card or by other means intended to effectively advise the victim of their rights under this section.\n\n( c ) The victim, the retained attorney of the victim, a lawful representative of the victim, or the office of the state attorney upon request of the victim, may assert and seek enforcement of the rights enumerated in this section and any other right afforded to a victim by law in any trial or appellate court, or before any other authority with jurisdiction over the case, as a matter of right. The court or other authority with jurisdiction shall act promptly on such a request, affording a remedy by due course of law for the violation of any right. The reasons for any decision regarding the disposition of a victims right shall be clearly stated on the record.\n\n( d ) The granting of the rights enumerated in this section to victims may not be construed to deny or impair any other rights possessed by victims. The provisions of this section apply throughout criminal and juvenile justice processes, are self-executing, and do not require implementing legislation. This section may not be construed to create any cause of action for damages against the state or a political subdivision of the state, or any officer, employee, or agent of the state or its political subdivisions.\n\n( e ) As used in this section, a victim is a person who suffers direct or threatened physical, psychological, or financial harm as a result of the commission or attempted commission of a crime or delinquent act or against whom the crime or delinquent act is committed. The term victim includes the victims lawful representative, the parent or guardian of a minor, or the next of kin of a homicide victim, except upon a showing that the interest of such individual would be in actual or potential conflict with the interests of the victim. The term victim does not include the accused. The terms crime and criminal include delinquent acts and conduct. \nHistory.Am. S.J.R. 135, XXXX ; adopted XXXX ; XXXX. proposed by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX, filed with the Secretary of State XX/XX/XXXX ; adopted XXXX ; XXXX. proposed by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX, filed with the Secretary of State XX/XX/XXXX ; adopted XXXX. \n\nUnder the Florida Constitution I have a right to face my accuser. \nThe Department of Education ran by a \" XXXX XXXX '' is located in XXXX, Florida therefore he and the Department of Education must abide and be bound by this Constitution via sworn oath of office, bonding company, insurance policy I have disputed this unlawful debt ; therefor until validated The Department of Education knows that the information concerning this debt is inaccurate. Thus violating due process by reporting this inaccurate information to GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES, ( XXXX ) 's or failing to report information I have already sent dating back years is breach of any contract that there may or may not have been and violation of The Department of Education 's Fiduciary Duty.\n\nDeclarations are an insufficient response, as declarations permit lying by omissions, which no honorable draft may contain.\n\nI hereby give you ( 10 ) days to reply to this notice from the above date with a notice send using post and signed under full commercial liability and penalties of perjury, assuring and promising me that all of the replies and details given to the above requests are true and without deception, fraud, or mischief. Your said failure to provide the aforementioned documentation within ten ( 10 ) days, from the above date to validate these debts will constitute your agreement to the following terms...\n\nThe the debt did not exist in the first place; OR It has already been paid in full ; AND That any damages suffered, you will be held accountable/culpable ; That any negative remarks made to a credit reference agency will be updated to Paid in Full Never Late Status. \nThe Department of Education will no longer pursue this matter You agree to pay all fee schedules. \n\nPlease note : That I wish to deal with this matter in writing and I do not give your organization permission to contact me by telephone. Should you do so, I must warn you that the calls could constitute \" harassment '' and I may take action under Section 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act of XXXX and the Administration of XXXX XXXX of 1970 UCC 40 which makes it a criminal offence for a creditor or a creditors agent to make demands ( for money ) which are aimed at causing alarm, distress or humiliation, because of their frequency or manner. \n\nXXXX is a national of the nation/state of Florida, XXXX contemplated by the act of congress evidenced and restated at 8 U.S.C 1101 ( a ) ( XXXX ). XXXX is aware and knows that the XXXX bankruptcy is verified in Senate Report No. XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX Session ( XXXX ), Summary of Emergency Powers Statutes, \" Trading with the Enemy Act XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX, Chapters XXXX, XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and as further codified at 12 U.S.C.A. 95 ( a ) and ( b ) as amended.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-21T18:44:57.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33870","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11243197","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2024-12-21T18:44:54.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Report provided to employer without your written authorization"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["( e ) As used in this section, a <em>victim</em> is a <em>person</em> who <em>suffers</em> direct or threatened physical, psychological, or financial harm as a result of the commission or attempted commission of a crime or delinquent act or against whom the crime or delinquent act is committed."]},"sort":[15.187837,"11243197"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11242505","_score":15.157384,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"SECTION 16.Rights of accused and of victims.\n\n( a ) In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall, upon demand, be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, and shall be furnished a copy of the charges, and shall have the right to have compulsory process for witnesses, to confront at trial adverse witnesses, to be heard in person, by counsel or both, and to have a speedy and public trial by impartial jury in the county where the crime was committed. If the county is not known, the indictment or information may charge venue in two or more counties conjunctively and proof that the crime was committed in that area shall be sufficient ; but before pleading the accused may elect in which of those counties the trial will take place. Venue for prosecution of crimes committed beyond the boundaries of the state shall be fixed by law.\n\n( b ) To preserve and protect the right of crime victims to achieve justice, ensure a meaningful role throughout the criminal and juvenile justice systems for crime victims, and ensure that crime victims rights and interests are respected and protected by law in a manner no less vigorous than protections afforded to criminal defendants and juvenile delinquents, every victim is entitled to the following rights, beginning at the time of his or her victimization : ( 1 ) The right to due process and to be treated with fairness and respect for the victims dignity.\n\n( 2 ) The right to be free from intimidation, harassment, and abuse.\n\n( 3 ) The right, within the judicial process, to be reasonably protected from the accused and any person acting on behalf of the accused. However, nothing contained herein is intended to create a special relationship between the crime victim and any law enforcement agency or office absent a special relationship or duty as defined by Florida law.\n\n( 4 ) The right to have the safety and welfare of the victim and the victims family considered when setting bail, including setting pretrial release conditions that protect the safety and welfare of the victim and the victims family.\n\n( 5 ) The right to prevent the disclosure of information or records that could be used to locate or harass the victim or the victims family, or which could disclose confidential or privileged information of the victim.\n\n( 6 ) A victim shall have the following specific rights upon request : a.The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of, and to be present at, all public proceedings involving the criminal conduct, including, but not limited to, trial, plea, sentencing, or adjudication, even if the victim will be a witness at the proceeding, notwithstanding any rule to the contrary. A victim shall also be provided reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any release or escape of the defendant or delinquent, and any proceeding during which a right of the victim is implicated.\n\nb.The right to be heard in any public proceeding involving pretrial or other release from any form of legal constraint, plea, sentencing, adjudication, or parole, and any proceeding during which a right of the victim is implicated.\n\nc.The right to confer with the prosecuting attorney concerning any plea agreements, participation in pretrial diversion programs, release, restitution, sentencing, or any other disposition of the case.\n\nd.The right to provide information regarding the impact of the offenders conduct on the victim and the victims family to the individual responsible for conducting any presentence investigation or compiling any presentence investigation report, and to have any such information considered in any sentencing recommendations submitted to the court.\n\ne.The right to receive a copy of any presentence report, and any other report or record relevant to the exercise of a victims right, except for such portions made confidential or exempt by law.\n\nf.The right to be informed of the conviction, sentence, adjudication, place and time of incarceration, or other disposition of the convicted offender, any scheduled release date of the offender, and the release of or the escape of the offender from custody.\n\ng.The right to be informed of all postconviction processes and procedures, to participate in such processes and procedures, to provide information to the release authority to be considered before any release decision is made, and to be notified of any release decision regarding the offender. The parole or early release authority shall extend the right to be heard to any person harmed by the offender.\n\nh.The right to be informed of clemency and expungement procedures, to provide information to the governor, the court, any clemency board, and other authority in these procedures, and to have that information considered before a clemency or expungement decision is made ; and to be notified of such decision in advance of any release of the offender.\n\n( 7 ) The rights of the victim, as provided in subparagraph ( 6 ) a., subparagraph ( 6 ) b., or subparagraph ( 6 ) c., that apply to any first appearance proceeding are satisfied by a reasonable attempt by the appropriate agency to notify the victim and convey the victims views to the court.\n\n( 8 ) The right to the prompt return of the victims property when no longer needed as evidence in the case.\n\n( 9 ) The right to full and timely restitution in every case and from each convicted offender for all losses suffered, both directly and indirectly, by the victim as a result of the criminal conduct.\n\n( 10 ) The right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay, and to a prompt and final conclusion of the case and any related postjudgment proceedings.\n\na.The state attorney may file a good faith demand for a speedy trial and the trial court shall hold a calendar call, with notice, within fifteen days of the filing demand, to schedule a trial to commence on a date at least five days but no more than sixty days after the date of the calendar call unless the trial judge enters an order with specific findings of fact justifying a trial date more than sixty days after the calendar call.\n\nb.All state-level appeals and collateral attacks on any judgment must be complete within two years from the date of appeal in non-capital cases and within five years from the date of appeal in capital cases, unless a court enters an order with specific findings as to why the court was unable to comply with this subparagraph and the circumstances causing the delay. Each year, the chief judge of any district court of appeal or the chief justice of the supreme court shall report on a case-by-case basis to the speaker of the house of representatives and the president of the senate all cases where the court entered an order regarding inability to comply with this subparagraph. The legislature may enact legislation to implement this subparagraph.\n\n( 11 ) The right to be informed of these rights, and to be informed that victims can seek the advice of an attorney with respect to their rights. This information shall be made available to the general public and provided to all crime victims in the form of a card or by other means intended to effectively advise the victim of their rights under this section.\n\n( c ) The victim, the retained attorney of the victim, a lawful representative of the victim, or the office of the state attorney upon request of the victim, may assert and seek enforcement of the rights enumerated in this section and any other right afforded to a victim by law in any trial or appellate court, or before any other authority with jurisdiction over the case, as a matter of right. The court or other authority with jurisdiction shall act promptly on such a request, affording a remedy by due course of law for the violation of any right. The reasons for any decision regarding the disposition of a victims right shall be clearly stated on the record.\n\n( d ) The granting of the rights enumerated in this section to victims may not be construed to deny or impair any other rights possessed by victims. The provisions of this section apply throughout criminal and juvenile justice processes, are self-executing, and do not require implementing legislation. This section may not be construed to create any cause of action for damages against the state or a political subdivision of the state, or any officer, employee, or agent of the state or its political subdivisions.\n\n( e ) As used in this section, a victim is a person who suffers direct or threatened physical, psychological, or financial harm as a result of the commission or attempted commission of a crime or delinquent act or against whom the crime or delinquent act is committed. The term victim includes the victims lawful representative, the parent or guardian of a minor, or the next of kin of a homicide victim, except upon a showing that the interest of such individual would be in actual or potential conflict with the interests of the victim. The term victim does not include the accused. The terms crime and criminal include delinquent acts and conduct. \nXXXX XXXXXXXX. XXXX, XXXX ; adopted XXXX ; XXXX. proposed by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX, filed with the XXXX of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ; adopted XXXX ; XXXX. proposed by XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX, filed with the XXXX of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ; adopted XXXX. \n\nUnder the Florida Constitution I have a right to face my accuser. \nThe Department of Education ran by a \" XXXX XXXX '' is located in XXXX, Florida therefore he and the Department of Education must abide and be bound by this Constitution via sworn oath of office, bonding company, insurance policy I have disputed this unlawful debt ; therefor until validated The Department of Education knows that the information concerning this debt is inaccurate. Thus violating due process by reporting this inaccurate information to GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES, ( XXXX ) 's or failing to report information I have already sent dating back years is breach of any contract that there may or may not have been and violation of The Department of Education 's Fiduciary Duty.\n\nDeclarations are an insufficient response, as declarations permit lying by omissions, which no honorable draft may contain. \n\nI hereby give you ( XXXX ) days to reply to this notice from the above date with a notice send using post and signed under full commercial liability and penalties of perjury, assuring and promising me that all of the replies and details given to the above requests are true and without deception, fraud, or mischief. Your said failure to provide the aforementioned documentation within ten ( 10 ) days, from the above date to validate these debts will constitute your agreement to the following terms...\n\nThe the debt did not exist in the first place; OR It has already been paid in full ; AND That any damages suffered, you will be held accountable/culpable ; That any negative remarks made to a credit reference agency will be updated to Paid in Full Never Late Status. \nThe Department of Education will no longer pursue this matter You agree to pay all fee schedules. \n\nPlease note : That I wish to deal with this matter in writing and I do not give your organization permission to contact me by telephone. Should you do so, I must warn you that the calls could constitute \" harassment '' and I may take action under Section XXXX of the Protection from Harassment Act of XXXX and the Administration of Justice Act of 1970 UCC 40 which makes it a criminal offence for a creditor or a creditors agent to make demands ( for money ) which are aimed at causing alarm, distress or humiliation, because of their frequency or manner.\n\nAffiant is a national of the nation/state of Florida, as contemplated by the act of congress evidenced and restated at 8 U.S.C 1101 ( a ) ( 2 ). Affiant is aware and knows that the U.S. bankruptcy is verified in Senate Report No. XXXX XXXX. Congress, 1st Session ( XXXX ), Summary of Emergency Powers Statutes, \" Trading with the Enemy Act ( Sixty-Fifth Congress, XXXX XXXX, Chapters XXXX, XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and as further codified at 12 U.S.C.A. 95 ( a ) and ( b ) as amended.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-12-21T18:44:57.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33870","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11242505","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2024-12-21T18:44:54.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Report provided to employer without your written authorization"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["( e ) As used in this section, a <em>victim</em> is a <em>person</em> who <em>suffers</em> direct or threatened physical, psychological, or financial harm as a result of the commission or attempted commission of a crime or delinquent act or against whom the crime or delinquent act is committed."]},"sort":[15.157384,"11242505"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12638741","_score":12.270695,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"1. My true and correct name is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX!!!!! ( PLEASE REVIEW MY NEW IDENTITY THEFT REPORT WITH NEW DETAILS REGARDING THE BELOW FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTS AND MY MAIL BEING STOLEN TO MAINTAIN THESE ACCOUNTS WHICH IS ALSO A FEDERAL CRIME )!!!! I AM A VICTIM OF IDENTITY THEFT.! I AM REQUESTING A SECURITY FREEZE BE PLACED ON MY ACCOUNT IMMEDIATELY! SUPPORTING DOCUMENT FROM XXXX XXXX REMOVING INFORMATION FROM THIER SYSTEM AS WELL FOR THE FRAUD I HAVE SUFFERED WILL BE A POTENTIAL EXHIBIT IF THIS CAN NOT BE SETTLED ALONG WITH THE OTHER SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS I AM SUBMITTING TO SUPPORT ME INFORMING ALL THE FURNISHERS THAT I AM A VICTIM OF FRAUD. \n\n!!!! Please do not respond staying you have previously responded to these disputed accounts or that they are being disputed!!!!! \n\n!!!!! RESPOND HERE ON THE CFPB AND UPLOAD THE RESULTS IN YOUR DETERMINATION WITH THE CLOSING IF THIS COMPLAINT!!! \n\nSince in all your previous replies you have sent me no such determination that complies with the FCRA regarding the opening of fraudulent accounts and their removal. Once you have been notified of such a fraudulent account. Nor have you proven that my claim is frivolous to deny a fraud block granted by law. \n\n\n\n2. Pursuant to FDCPA Section 807 ( 8 ), as it appears in the United States Code : 15 U.S. Code 1692e - False or misleading representations A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section : ( 8 ) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed. \n\n\n\n3. I personally complained and wrote to and made XXXX aware of these fraudulent accounts they also refused to comply. And in the event that they are not removed I will be seeking damages pursuant to FCRA 616 civil liability for willful non compliance.\n\n4. Also pursuant the willful non compliance with California Civil Code 1785.16 ( k ) Which states : ( k ) ( 1 ) If the information of a consumer has been placed on file or is otherwise available at a consumer credit reporting agency and is subsequently blocked pursuant to Section 1785.16.3, the consumer credit reporting agency shall remove from its file all information that the consumer identifies as information placed on file or otherwise available as a result of identity theft.\n\n( 2 ) A consumer credit reporting agency shall notify the person who furnished an item of information that the consumer identifies as information placed on file or otherwise available as a result of identity theft that the item has been blocked pursuant to Section 1785.16.3. \n( 3 ) A consumer credit reporting agency shall block the information pursuant to this subdivision only if the consumer submits proper identification, as defined in subdivision ( b ) of Section 1785.16.3, along with either of the following : ( A ) A copy of an identity theft report filed with a law enforcement agency pursuant to Section 530.5 of the Penal Code or a copy of a Department of Motor Vehicles investigative report made pursuant to Section 1668 of the Vehicle Code. \n\n\n\n5. I AM CONTACTING YOU TO HAVE MY NAME CORRECTED AND ACCURATELY REPORTED. \n\n\n\n6. I am also contacting you to have these fraudulent accounts removed through a fraud block mandated by law : XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX  Highest Balance : {$5000.00} XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX Highest Balance : {$3000.00} 9. You have willfully failed to fix my true and correct name to reflect accurately on my credit report. The true and correct name on my social security card and California ID. 10. IN MY PREVIOUS DISPUTE YOU REQUESTED IDENTITY DOCUMENT AND AN IDENTITY THEFT REPORT. IN THIS\nCOMPLAINT I WILL BE SUBMITTING BOTH AND THE PREVIOUS POLICE REPORT DETAILING THE THEFT OF MY IDENTITY DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE OPENING OF THESE FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTS.\n\n10. You are intentionally ignoring my request to accurately portray my true and correct name that is on my California id and social security card which is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Per : 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) : Accuracy of Reports \" Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares consumer report, it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. '' You are refusing to comply with this 12. You responded through mail that you needed an identity theft report to initiate a fraud block. Here are the updated documents 13. Pursuant to : FCRA 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) ( a ) Block. States : Except as otherwise provided in this section, a consumer reporting agency shall block the reporting of any information in the file of a consumer that the consumer identifies as information that resulted from an alleged identity theft, not later than 4 business days after the date of receipt by such agency of ( 1 ) appropriate proof of the identity of the consumer ; ( 2 ) a copy of an identity theft report ; ( 3 ) the identification of such information by the consumer; and ( 4 ) a statement by the consumer that the information is not information relating to any transaction by the consumer.act fraud. \n\n\n\n( The elements of 1-4 have been satisfied by me ( the consumer who is a victim of identity theft ) : 1.A police report for stolen identity documents was filed before the opening of this account to support the fact that I am factually claiming that these accounts : XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX XXXX  Highest Balance : {$5000.00} XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX Highest Balance : {$3000.00} ARE FRAUD This report is including an identity theft report, police reports, identity documents and is my true and factual statement that these accounts are in fact FRAUD.\n\n14. This will be the last time I respond with proper documentation before I seek damages for intentional misreporting reporting allowed pursuant : Negligent Violations : 15 U.S.C. 1681 addresses negligent noncompliance : \" Any person who is negligent in failing 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 ( 1 ) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure; and ( 2 ) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney 's fees. '' And also pursuant to violation of 15 U.S. Code 1681b - Permissible purposes of consumer reports. This section was not met and satisfied by the creditor nor you the furnished. To legally furnish these accounts nor publicly report them being that they are FRAUD. Not one of the three required notices were received And no contract was signed by me the victim of fraud nor permission to furnish these fraudulent accounts were given to the creditors by me the victim of fraud. \n\n\n\n\nXXXX. You removed XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX, 2023 Highest Balance : {$5000.00} XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX Highest Balance : {$3000.00} previously once 16. BECAUSE YOU WERE MADE AWARE THAT THE ACCOUNTS WERE FRAUDULENT. Then allowed them to be replaced. Though you received both and identity theft report and a police report allowing you the information that my identity documents were stolen before the opening of this account.\n\n17. A crime was committed against me. My information was fraudulently used and a fraudulent account was opened. You removed it and then allowed it to be replaced though you were made aware of : FCRA 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 16811 ) PROCEDURE IN CASE OF DISPUTED ACCURACY 5 ( a ) ( I ) ( c ) States : Procedures to reappearance. A consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable procedures designed to prevent the reappearance in a consumer 's file, and in consumer reports on the consumer, of information that is deleted pursuant to this paragraph ( other than information that is reinserted in accordance with subparagraph ( B ) ( i ) 18. Definition of Identity Theft : According to the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681a ), identity theft refers to the unauthorized use of another person 's personal information to commit fraud or other crimes 19. You have willfully failed to delete the disputed information as I have requested. In lieu of the disputed information, you willfully failed to conduct a reasonable investigation to my dispute because you believe it was certified. However, your excuse and assumption is a not valid reason under the FCRA to not block the information according to the above laws. Note, you have not made any reasonable determination that my dispute was frivolous or irrelevant. Nor stated that you believed it was you have simply refused to comply with out any reasoning backed by law or the fcra.\n\n20. It is crucial to note that since the payments were made by the fraudster, I can not be held liable for any such transactions under FCRA 615. The FCRA mandates that any payments made from fraudulent accounts should not implicate the actual victim of identity theftin this case, myself. I did not authorise these accounts nor open these accounts. Nor make past payments on these accounts. The person who fraudulently assumed and took over my identity did. \n21. So past payment for a fraudulent account made by the fraudsters will not constitute as validity.\n\nDefinition of Identity Theft : According to the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681a ), identity theft refers to the unauthorized use of another person 's personal information to commit fraud or other crimes 22. Things I explained in my dispute previously : 1 ) I requested A FRAUD BLOCK FROM THE CREDITORS YOU Illegally PUBLISHED THESE FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTS TO 2.A factual identity theft report has been submitted again with details regarding the fraud as well as transunion and eqifaxs non compliance 3.afidavit/statement that this account does not belong to me has been submitted 4.Appropriate identity verification had been made XXXX. Please correct my name and block the accounts according to law and refrain from allowing them to be replaced pursuant to FCRA 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 16811 ) PROCEDURE IN CASE OF DISPUTED ACCURACY 5 ( a ) ( I ) ( c ) States : Procedures to reappearance. A consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable procedures designed to prevent the reappearance in a consumer 's file, and in consumer reports on the consumer, of information that is deleted pursuant to this paragraph ( other than information that is reinserted in accordance with subparagraph ( B ) ( i ) as you have Already done once before after removing them and being made aware they were fraud.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-23T20:38:29.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"90008","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12638741","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-03-23T20:06:20.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["SUPPORTING DOCUMENT FROM <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> REMOVING INFORMATION FROM THIER SYSTEM AS WELL FOR THE <em>FRAUD</em> I HAVE <em>SUFFERED</em> WILL BE A POTENTIAL EXHIBIT IF THIS CAN NOT BE SETTLED ALONG WITH THE OTHER SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS I AM SUBMITTING TO SUPPORT ME INFORMING ALL THE FURNISHERS THAT I AM A <em>VICTIM</em> OF <em>FRAUD</em>. \n\n!!!! Please do not respond staying you have previously responded to these disputed accounts or that they are being disputed!!!!! \n\n!!!!!"]},"sort":[12.270695,"12638741"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12649818","_score":12.264876,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"1. My true and correct name is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX!!!!! ( PLEASE REVIEW MY NEW IDENTITY THEFT REPORT WITH NEW DETAILS REGARDING THE BELOW FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTS AND MY MAIL BEING STOLEN TO MAINTAIN THESE ACCOUNTS WHICH IS ALSO A FEDERAL CRIME )!!!! I AM A VICTIM OF IDENTITY THEFT.! I AM REQUESTING A SECURITY FREEZE BE PLACED ON MY ACCOUNT IMMEDIATELY! SUPPORTING DOCUMENT FROM XXXX XXXX REMOVING INFORMATION FROM THIER SYSTEM AS WELL FOR THE FRAUD I HAVE SUFFERED WILL BE A POTENTIAL EXHIBIT IF THIS CAN NOT BE SETTLED ALONG WITH THE OTHER SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS I AM SUBMITTING TO SUPPORT ME INFORMING ALL THE FURNISHERS THAT I AM A VICTIM OF FRAUD. \n\n!!!! Please do not respond staying you have previously responded to these disputed accounts or that they are being disputed!!!!! \n\n!!!!! RESPOND HERE ON THE CFPB AND UPLOAD THE RESULTS IN YOUR DETERMINATION WITH THE CLOSING IF THIS COMPLAINT!!! \n\nSince in all your previous replies you have sent me no such determination that complies with the FCRA regarding the opening of fraudulent accounts and their removal. Once you have been notified of such a fraudulent account. Nor have you proven that my claim is frivolous to deny a fraud block granted by law. \n\n\n\n2. Pursuant to FDCPA Section 807 ( 8 ), as it appears in the United States Code : 15 U.S. Code 1692e - False or misleading representations A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section : ( 8 ) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed. \n\n\n\n3. I personally complained and wrote to and made XXXX aware of these fraudulent accounts they also refused to comply. And in the event that they are not removed I will be seeking damages pursuant to FCRA 616 civil liability for willful non compliance.\n\n4. Also pursuant the willful non compliance with California Civil Code 1785.16 ( k ) Which states : ( k ) ( 1 ) If the information of a consumer has been placed on file or is otherwise available at a consumer credit reporting agency and is subsequently blocked pursuant to Section 1785.16.3, the consumer credit reporting agency shall remove from its file all information that the consumer identifies as information placed on file or otherwise available as a result of identity theft.\n\n( 2 ) A consumer credit reporting agency shall notify the person who furnished an item of information that the consumer identifies as information placed on file or otherwise available as a result of identity theft that the item has been blocked pursuant to Section 1785.16.3. \n( 3 ) A consumer credit reporting agency shall block the information pursuant to this subdivision only if the consumer submits proper identification, as defined in subdivision ( b ) of Section 1785.16.3, along with either of the following : ( A ) A copy of an identity theft report filed with a law enforcement agency pursuant to Section 530.5 of the Penal Code or a copy of a Department of Motor Vehicles investigative report made pursuant to Section 1668 of the Vehicle Code. \n\n\n\n5. I AM CONTACTING YOU TO HAVE MY NAME CORRECTED AND ACCURATELY REPORTED. \n\n\n\n6. I am also contacting you to have these fraudulent accounts removed through a fraud block mandated by law : XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX  Highest Balance : {$5000.00} XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX Highest Balance : {$3000.00} 9. You have willfully failed to fix my true and correct name to reflect accurately on my credit report. The true and correct name on my social security card and California ID. 10. IN MY PREVIOUS DISPUTE YOU REQUESTED IDENTITY DOCUMENT AND AN IDENTITY THEFT REPORT. IN THIS\nCOMPLAINT I WILL BE SUBMITTING BOTH AND THE PREVIOUS POLICE REPORT DETAILING THE THEFT OF MY IDENTITY DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE OPENING OF THESE FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTS.\n\n10. You are intentionally ignoring my request to accurately portray my true and correct name that is on my California id and social security card which is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Per : 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) : Accuracy of Reports \" Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares consumer report, it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. '' You are refusing to comply with this 12. You responded through mail that you needed an identity theft report to initiate a fraud block. Here are the updated documents 13. Pursuant to : FCRA 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) ( a ) Block. States : Except as otherwise provided in this section, a consumer reporting agency shall block the reporting of any information in the file of a consumer that the consumer identifies as information that resulted from an alleged identity theft, not later than 4 business days after the date of receipt by such agency of ( 1 ) appropriate proof of the identity of the consumer ; ( 2 ) a copy of an identity theft report ; ( 3 ) the identification of such information by the consumer; and ( 4 ) a statement by the consumer that the information is not information relating to any transaction by the consumer.act fraud. \n\n\n\n( The elements of 1-4 have been satisfied by me ( the consumer who is a victim of identity theft ) : 1.A police report for stolen identity documents was filed before the opening of this account to support the fact that I am factually claiming that these accounts : XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX XXXX  Highest Balance : {$5000.00} XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX Highest Balance : {$3000.00} ARE FRAUD This report is including an identity theft report, police reports, identity documents and is my true and factual statement that these accounts are in fact FRAUD.\n\n14. This will be the last time I respond with proper documentation before I seek damages for intentional misreporting reporting allowed pursuant : Negligent Violations : 15 U.S.C. 1681 addresses negligent noncompliance : \" Any person who is negligent in failing 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 ( 1 ) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure; and ( 2 ) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney 's fees. '' And also pursuant to violation of 15 U.S. Code 1681b - Permissible purposes of consumer reports. This section was not met and satisfied by the creditor nor you the furnished. To legally furnish these accounts nor publicly report them being that they are FRAUD. Not one of the three required notices were received And no contract was signed by me the victim of fraud nor permission to furnish these fraudulent accounts were given to the creditors by me the victim of fraud. \n\n\n\n\nXXXX. You removed XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX, 2023 Highest Balance : {$5000.00} XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX Highest Balance : {$3000.00} previously once 16. BECAUSE YOU WERE MADE AWARE THAT THE ACCOUNTS WERE FRAUDULENT. Then allowed them to be replaced. Though you received both and identity theft report and a police report allowing you the information that my identity documents were stolen before the opening of this account.\n\n17. A crime was committed against me. My information was fraudulently used and a fraudulent account was opened. You removed it and then allowed it to be replaced though you were made aware of : FCRA 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 16811 ) PROCEDURE IN CASE OF DISPUTED ACCURACY 5 ( a ) ( I ) ( c ) States : Procedures to reappearance. A consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable procedures designed to prevent the reappearance in a consumer 's file, and in consumer reports on the consumer, of information that is deleted pursuant to this paragraph ( other than information that is reinserted in accordance with subparagraph ( B ) ( i ) 18. Definition of Identity Theft : According to the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681a ), identity theft refers to the unauthorized use of another person 's personal information to commit fraud or other crimes 19. You have willfully failed to delete the disputed information as I have requested. In lieu of the disputed information, you willfully failed to conduct a reasonable investigation to my dispute because you believe it was certified. However, your excuse and assumption is a not valid reason under the FCRA to not block the information according to the above laws. Note, you have not made any reasonable determination that my dispute was frivolous or irrelevant. Nor stated that you believed it was you have simply refused to comply with out any reasoning backed by law or the fcra.\n\n20. It is crucial to note that since the payments were made by the fraudster, I can not be held liable for any such transactions under FCRA 615. The FCRA mandates that any payments made from fraudulent accounts should not implicate the actual victim of identity theftin this case, myself. I did not authorise these accounts nor open these accounts. Nor make past payments on these accounts. The person who fraudulently assumed and took over my identity did. \n21. So past payment for a fraudulent account made by the fraudsters will not constitute as validity.\n\nDefinition of Identity Theft : According to the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681a ), identity theft refers to the unauthorized use of another person 's personal information to commit fraud or other crimes 22. Things I explained in my dispute previously : 1 ) I requested A FRAUD BLOCK FROM THE CREDITORS YOU Illegally PUBLISHED THESE FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTS TO 2.A factual identity theft report has been submitted again with details regarding the fraud as well as transunion and eqifaxs non compliance 3.afidavit/statement that this account does not belong to me has been submitted 4.Appropriate identity verification had been made XXXX. Please correct my name and block the accounts according to law and refrain from allowing them to be replaced pursuant to FCRA 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 16811 ) PROCEDURE IN CASE OF DISPUTED ACCURACY 5 ( a ) ( I ) ( c ) States : Procedures to reappearance. A consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable procedures designed to prevent the reappearance in a consumer 's file, and in consumer reports on the consumer, of information that is deleted pursuant to this paragraph ( other than information that is reinserted in accordance with subparagraph ( B ) ( i ) as you have Already done once before after removing them and being made aware they were fraud.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-23T20:38:28.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"90008","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12649818","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-23T20:37:58.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["SUPPORTING DOCUMENT FROM <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> REMOVING INFORMATION FROM THIER SYSTEM AS WELL FOR THE <em>FRAUD</em> I HAVE <em>SUFFERED</em> WILL BE A POTENTIAL EXHIBIT IF THIS CAN NOT BE SETTLED ALONG WITH THE OTHER SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS I AM SUBMITTING TO SUPPORT ME INFORMING ALL THE FURNISHERS THAT I AM A <em>VICTIM</em> OF <em>FRAUD</em>. \n\n!!!! Please do not respond staying you have previously responded to these disputed accounts or that they are being disputed!!!!! \n\n!!!!!"]},"sort":[12.264876,"12649818"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12669022","_score":12.25226,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"1. My true and correct name is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX!!!!! ( PLEASE REVIEW MY NEW IDENTITY THEFT REPORT WITH NEW DETAILS REGARDING THE BELOW FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTS AND MY MAIL BEING STOLEN TO MAINTAIN THESE ACCOUNTS WHICH IS ALSO A FEDERAL CRIME )!!!! I AM A VICTIM OF IDENTITY THEFT.! I AM REQUESTING A SECURITY FREEZE BE PLACED ON MY ACCOUNT IMMEDIATELY! SUPPORTING DOCUMENT FROM XXXX XXXX REMOVING INFORMATION FROM THIER SYSTEM AS WELL FOR THE FRAUD I HAVE SUFFERED WILL BE A POTENTIAL EXHIBIT IF THIS CAN NOT BE SETTLED ALONG WITH THE OTHER SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS I AM SUBMITTING TO SUPPORT ME INFORMING ALL THE FURNISHERS THAT I AM A VICTIM OF FRAUD. \n\n!!!! Please do not respond staying you have previously responded to these disputed accounts or that they are being disputed!!!!! \n\n!!!!! RESPOND HERE ON THE CFPB AND UPLOAD THE RESULTS IN YOUR DETERMINATION WITH THE CLOSING IF THIS COMPLAINT!!! \n\nSince in all your previous replies you have sent me no such determination that complies with the FCRA regarding the opening of fraudulent accounts and their removal. Once you have been notified of such a fraudulent account. Nor have you proven that my claim is frivolous to deny a fraud block granted by law. \n\n\n\n2. Pursuant to FDCPA Section 807 ( 8 ), as it appears in the United States Code : 15 U.S. Code 1692e - False or misleading representations A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section : ( 8 ) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed. \n\n\n\n3. I personally complained and wrote to and made XXXX aware of these fraudulent accounts they also refused to comply. And in the event that they are not removed I will be seeking damages pursuant to FCRA 616 civil liability for willful non compliance.\n\n4. Also pursuant the willful non compliance with California Civil Code 1785.16 ( k ) Which states : ( k ) ( 1 ) If the information of a consumer has been placed on file or is otherwise available at a consumer credit reporting agency and is subsequently blocked pursuant to Section 1785.16.3, the consumer credit reporting agency shall remove from its file all information that the consumer identifies as information placed on file or otherwise available as a result of identity theft.\n\n( 2 ) A consumer credit reporting agency shall notify the person who furnished an item of information that the consumer identifies as information placed on file or otherwise available as a result of identity theft that the item has been blocked pursuant to Section 1785.16.3. \n( 3 ) A consumer credit reporting agency shall block the information pursuant to this subdivision only if the consumer submits proper identification, as defined in subdivision ( b ) of Section 1785.16.3, along with either of the following : ( A ) A copy of an identity theft report filed with a law enforcement agency pursuant to Section 530.5 of the Penal Code or a copy of a Department of Motor Vehicles investigative report made pursuant to Section 1668 of the Vehicle Code. \n\n\n\n5. I AM CONTACTING YOU TO HAVE MY NAME CORRECTED AND ACCURATELY REPORTED. \n\n\n\n6. I am also contacting you to have these fraudulent accounts removed through a fraud block mandated by law : XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX  Highest Balance : {$5000.00} XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX Highest Balance : {$3000.00} 9. You have willfully failed to fix my true and correct name to reflect accurately on my credit report. The true and correct name on my social security card and California ID. 10. IN MY PREVIOUS DISPUTE YOU REQUESTED IDENTITY DOCUMENT AND AN IDENTITY THEFT REPORT. IN THIS\nCOMPLAINT I WILL BE SUBMITTING BOTH AND THE PREVIOUS POLICE REPORT DETAILING THE THEFT OF MY IDENTITY DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE OPENING OF THESE FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTS.\n\n10. You are intentionally ignoring my request to accurately portray my true and correct name that is on my California id and social security card which is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Per : 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) : Accuracy of Reports \" Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares consumer report, it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. '' You are refusing to comply with this 12. You responded through mail that you needed an identity theft report to initiate a fraud block. Here are the updated documents 13. Pursuant to : FCRA 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) ( a ) Block. States : Except as otherwise provided in this section, a consumer reporting agency shall block the reporting of any information in the file of a consumer that the consumer identifies as information that resulted from an alleged identity theft, not later than 4 business days after the date of receipt by such agency of ( 1 ) appropriate proof of the identity of the consumer ; ( 2 ) a copy of an identity theft report ; ( 3 ) the identification of such information by the consumer; and ( 4 ) a statement by the consumer that the information is not information relating to any transaction by the consumer.act fraud. \n\n\n\n( The elements of 1-4 have been satisfied by me ( the consumer who is a victim of identity theft ) : 1.A police report for stolen identity documents was filed before the opening of this account to support the fact that I am factually claiming that these accounts : XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX XXXX  Highest Balance : {$5000.00} XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX Highest Balance : {$3000.00} ARE FRAUD This report is including an identity theft report, police reports, identity documents and is my true and factual statement that these accounts are in fact FRAUD.\n\n14. This will be the last time I respond with proper documentation before I seek damages for intentional misreporting reporting allowed pursuant : Negligent Violations : 15 U.S.C. 1681 addresses negligent noncompliance : \" Any person who is negligent in failing 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 ( 1 ) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure; and ( 2 ) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney 's fees. '' And also pursuant to violation of 15 U.S. Code 1681b - Permissible purposes of consumer reports. This section was not met and satisfied by the creditor nor you the furnished. To legally furnish these accounts nor publicly report them being that they are FRAUD. Not one of the three required notices were received And no contract was signed by me the victim of fraud nor permission to furnish these fraudulent accounts were given to the creditors by me the victim of fraud. \n\n\n\n\nXXXX. You removed XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX Account # : XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX, 2023 Highest Balance : {$5000.00} XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date opened : XXXX, XXXX Highest Balance : {$3000.00} previously once 16. BECAUSE YOU WERE MADE AWARE THAT THE ACCOUNTS WERE FRAUDULENT. Then allowed them to be replaced. Though you received both and identity theft report and a police report allowing you the information that my identity documents were stolen before the opening of this account.\n\n17. A crime was committed against me. My information was fraudulently used and a fraudulent account was opened. You removed it and then allowed it to be replaced though you were made aware of : FCRA 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 16811 ) PROCEDURE IN CASE OF DISPUTED ACCURACY 5 ( a ) ( I ) ( c ) States : Procedures to reappearance. A consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable procedures designed to prevent the reappearance in a consumer 's file, and in consumer reports on the consumer, of information that is deleted pursuant to this paragraph ( other than information that is reinserted in accordance with subparagraph ( B ) ( i ) 18. Definition of Identity Theft : According to the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681a ), identity theft refers to the unauthorized use of another person 's personal information to commit fraud or other crimes 19. You have willfully failed to delete the disputed information as I have requested. In lieu of the disputed information, you willfully failed to conduct a reasonable investigation to my dispute because you believe it was certified. However, your excuse and assumption is a not valid reason under the FCRA to not block the information according to the above laws. Note, you have not made any reasonable determination that my dispute was frivolous or irrelevant. Nor stated that you believed it was you have simply refused to comply with out any reasoning backed by law or the fcra.\n\n20. It is crucial to note that since the payments were made by the fraudster, I can not be held liable for any such transactions under FCRA 615. The FCRA mandates that any payments made from fraudulent accounts should not implicate the actual victim of identity theftin this case, myself. I did not authorise these accounts nor open these accounts. Nor make past payments on these accounts. The person who fraudulently assumed and took over my identity did. \n21. So past payment for a fraudulent account made by the fraudsters will not constitute as validity.\n\nDefinition of Identity Theft : According to the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681a ), identity theft refers to the unauthorized use of another person 's personal information to commit fraud or other crimes 22. Things I explained in my dispute previously : 1 ) I requested A FRAUD BLOCK FROM THE CREDITORS YOU Illegally PUBLISHED THESE FRAUDULENT ACCOUNTS TO 2.A factual identity theft report has been submitted again with details regarding the fraud as well as transunion and eqifaxs non compliance 3.afidavit/statement that this account does not belong to me has been submitted 4.Appropriate identity verification had been made XXXX. Please correct my name and block the accounts according to law and refrain from allowing them to be replaced pursuant to FCRA 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 16811 ) PROCEDURE IN CASE OF DISPUTED ACCURACY 5 ( a ) ( I ) ( c ) States : Procedures to reappearance. A consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable procedures designed to prevent the reappearance in a consumer 's file, and in consumer reports on the consumer, of information that is deleted pursuant to this paragraph ( other than information that is reinserted in accordance with subparagraph ( B ) ( i ) as you have Already done once before after removing them and being made aware they were fraud.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-23T20:38:29.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"90008","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12669022","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-23T20:37:58.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["SUPPORTING DOCUMENT FROM <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> REMOVING INFORMATION FROM THIER SYSTEM AS WELL FOR THE <em>FRAUD</em> I HAVE <em>SUFFERED</em> WILL BE A POTENTIAL EXHIBIT IF THIS CAN NOT BE SETTLED ALONG WITH THE OTHER SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS I AM SUBMITTING TO SUPPORT ME INFORMING ALL THE FURNISHERS THAT I AM A <em>VICTIM</em> OF <em>FRAUD</em>. \n\n!!!! Please do not respond staying you have previously responded to these disputed accounts or that they are being disputed!!!!! \n\n!!!!!"]},"sort":[12.25226,"12669022"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18823632","_score":10.289796,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"This is DIFFERENT ISSUE. This COMPLAINT Is for Elder Financial Exploitation, Violation of Consumer protection rights/ Failure to recognize POA on file, Failure to provide provisional credit and Privacy Breach Account Holder XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Perpetrator info : Known name is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to police on XX/XX/XXXX Total Loss : $ {$13000.00} + XXXX ( online and In store purchases + ATM/In Bank transactions ) COMPLAINT Subject : Urgent - Elder Financial Exploitation, Violation of Consumer protection rights/Improper Investigation, Failure to recognize POA on file, Privacy Breach I am filing a complaint against Wells Fargo on behalf of my XXXXyear-old mother who has XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Her account was targeted by a known perpetrator, XXXX XXXX, who gained access to the home, obtained my mother 's debit card/PIN, and stole over {$15000.00} over a XXXX years period. \nI, the XXXX, was bedridden during this period of time due to XXXX illness and could not review statements, a circumstance that falls under exceptions to the XXXX reporting rule. As soon as I was able to review the statements, and discovered fraud I filed a police report ( Case XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and fraud claims with Wells Fargo XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Also, I filed on XX/XX/XXXX ' a Request for Preservation of Evidences with WF XXXX Department. However, Wells Fargo denied claims for transactions made online ( {$13000.00} appr./ And for ATM, inBank withdrawals ( {$1600.00} ATM ) stating that because the PIN was used, the transactions were authorized. This is a denial of reality, as the card was stolen/compromised, and the victim is medically incapacitated. Not saying that suspect is known and police is involved, which directly contradicts the bank 's assertion of \" permission ''. Furthermore, the bank refused to acknowledge my valid POA on file stating that my name is not listed on my mother 's debit card by thus preventing me from handling this fraud in an efficient manner, and demanded I go to a branch despite being told on multiple occasions I am XXXX \nFailure to Properly Investigate & Recognize Elder Abuse : Wells Fargo denied the claims simply because the PIN was used, insisting my mother or someone she knows permitted the usage. Given her XXXX XXXX XXXX she is legally incapable of authorizing such transactions. The bank failed to recognize obvious signs of elder financial exploitation either. \nAdditionally, the bank assertion that my mother authorized transactions totaling over {$15000.00} between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX is incorrect and feels like a spit in face because I stated many times to the Claims rep.what my mother 's and my own medical conditions were and also stated that In my previous complaints. I can repeat again : My mother suffers from XXXX XXXX, diagnosed by XXXX XXXX in XXXX, XXXX. A copy of the medical diagnosis was sent to bank on multiple occasions and also is enclosed for your review. Due to this condition, ( in case if my mother would indeed authorized those transactions ) she would lacked the XXXX XXXX to understand and or authorize the use of her funds. The transactions were made by XXXX, XXXX XXXX, who had access to house, stole the information from the card and used it for online purchases and used a card itself in person which constitutes financial exploitation as defined under XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I previously filed claims for fraud with XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, but claims were denied based on the FALSE assumption of consent. Even more, under XXXX ( b ) ( XXXX ). Negligence by the consumer CAN NOT be used as the basis for imposing greater liability than it is permissible under Regulation E. Thus, consumer behavior that may constitute negligence under state law, such as writing the PIN on a debit card or on a piece of paper kept with the card, does not affect the consumer 's liability for unauthorized transfers. I can repeat again, the card ( it's information ) was stolen and physical card was used by XXXX for ATM and inBank withdrawals ( I am assuming that it was taken out of my mother 's purse, and placed back after it's use without my mother noticing it ), I also did not use my mother 's card due to being .medically incapacitated at the time the transactions were made and due to fact that I am not an authorized user on my mother 's account. \nFailure to Monitor/Stop Suspicious Activity : The bank failed to trigger fraud alerts despite large, unusual transactions ( {$1000.00} and {$5000.00} online purchases ) that deviated completely from her history of spending less than {$200.00} a month. \nXXXX. Misrepresentation of Regulation E Rights : Wells Fargo lied in its denial letter, stating if even I submit my mother 's and my own medical records proving extenuating circumstances, they can not recover funds due to their system not allowing to enter into database late claims, and/or process chargebacks beyond XXXX  days. While the XXXX rule exists, financial institutions have flexibility regarding extenuating circumstances, particularly when incapacity prevents earlier reporting.See XXXX. XXXX ( b ). \nXXXX. Under Regulation E, if Wells Fargo fails to properly investigate a claim within XXXX business days it requires to provide a professional credit.In order to avoid it WF simply closed claims citing that cardholder did authorize transactions. It seems that it is Wells Fargo 's habit to deny legitimate claims to their customers without investigating It by thus violating consumer protection rights and law and shifting liability to a consumer. As you can see on Wells Fargo Denial Letter to another person they employed a the identical language such as \" it was made by you or someone who had your permission. Consider your claim closed \". From XX/XX/XXXX till present time XXXX XXXX failed to properly investigate the claims stating that transactions were authorized because PIN was used despite that facts suggests otherwise, that it was a theft and fraud and that I sent a police report on multiple occasions, still Wells Fargo declines to provide me with a proof of authorization such as communication records which would show that my mother or someone on her behalf gave her consent and/or IP address which would show what location the transactions were originated from or what device was used for making the transactions, or signed slips for InBank withdrawals XXXX that a Request for Evidences Preservation was sent on XX/XX/XXXX ', and the case is in law enforcement 's working progress. If Wells Fargo made investigation as it is required by the Law, it would revealed that ALL online transactions were made from IP which shows a location in XXXX XXXX, the city where XXXX resides. Or, if Wells Fargo would Inquire an online merchants listed on bank statements such as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX who online merchant 's accounts belongs to, the merchants would confirm that account belongs to XXXX XXXX and registered with her cell.number XXXX and email XXXX. and that on line purchases and orders were delivered to her home address at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. If Wells Fargo reviewed video footage from XX/XX/XXXX and other early dates they would see that it was NOT my XXXX XXXX XXXX mother doing a withdrawals but a woman in her XXXX, with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Even more, a few weeks ago I received from Wells Fargo the print out of ATM/Debit card information which shows that on XX/XX/XXXX a new digital card number was issued. That means that someone added my mother 's card to their XXXX XXXX. See attached Screenshot. If my mother nor myself did not add a card to wallet, it means that XXXX would have done it. My mother does not know how to use an internet, much less she knows how to use an ATM. I, personally, also did not do it because I did not use an internet at that time and had established an access to online banking through an app on XX/XX/XXXX : only. \nWells Fargo failed per my request to investigate that issue, citing that I am not authorized to conduct a business because I am not an authorized user on my mother 's account, ignoring the fact that I am POA and legally I am authorized to do so, and that POA document is still on file. \nXXXX. Refusal to Accept Evidence : The bank refuses to provide an email address to submit medical documentation proving my mothers incapacity and /or my own illness, forcing a slow, archaic, and difficult fax and/ or regular mail process. See attached screenshots of my requests being already sent to WELLS FARGO with no avail. See attached screenshots. \nXXXX. Privacy Breach/Disclosure of Private Info : In their denial correspondence, Wells Fargo sent me the paperwork, account numbers, and personal details of another customer, someone XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for {$3000.00}. Receiving another person 's private information caused me to suffer with emotional distress due to fact that my mother 's and my own sensitive information might be jeopardized as well which could lead to devastating consequences for my mother and myself from identity theft up to stolen funds again from my mother 's account .This is a major breach of privacy and negligent handling of sensitive information indicating a massive failure in Well 's Fargo data privacy controls. \nDesired Resolution : I request that the CFPB investigate this case as Elder XXXX XXXX. I demand that Wells Fargo reopen All denied claims, review them in light of the victims incapacity, and fully reimburse the $ {$13000.00} XXXX in stolen funds. Furthermore, I request that the privacy breach be investigated and properly addressed. \n\nPS. Evidence Attached : XXXX ). Police Report ; XXXX ) Preservation Evidence Request regarding evidences of fraud ( video ATM and in Bank footages ) sent to Wells Fargo XXXX department XXXX ). Preservation Letter XXXX ). Medical proof of XXXX 's memory impairment. \nDocumentation about POA illness was sent on multiple occasions but I am ready to submit it again at provided electronic address XXXX ). The wrongly disclosed private information of the other party ( to prove the breach ). \nXXXX ). Screenshots of my XXXX Requests for providing me with electronic communication for submission of medical records. \nXXXX ). Screenshot of provided record of ATM/Debit card information showing fraudulent activities on the account. \n\nIf there is any attachment is missing, please, inform via my email! I will provide it per your request. \nPolice report XXXX initially was filed on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX regarding fraud on my debit card with XXXX. It was amended on XX/XX/XXXX including Unauthorized transaction on my mother 's debit card as well. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-19T07:59:02.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"75007","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18823632","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2026-01-19T06:51:40.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem using a debit or ATM card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The transactions were made by <em>XXXX</em>, <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, who had access to house, stole the information from the card and used it for online purchases and used a card itself in <em>person</em> which constitutes financial exploitation as <em>defined</em> under <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>. I previously filed claims for <em>fraud</em> with <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> on XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> and XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>, but claims were denied based on the FALSE assumption of consent. Even more, under <em>XXXX</em> ( b ) ( <em>XXXX</em> )."]},"sort":[10.289796,"18823632"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10981005","_score":8.7759,"_source":{"product":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\nConsumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, DC XXXX\nThis is to complain against RIA XXXX: HIGH\nIMPORTANCE: HIGH\n[WITHOUT PREJUDICE]\nI wish to practice my right as a customer of RIA to use your organisation's service, seeking a formal,\nimpartial investigation to amicably settle my dispute with RIA.\nIn order to clear up the myriad of letters and correspondences I have hitherto sent to RIA respecting my\ncomplaint, I believe it will substantially strengthen both my case and your understanding, by taking a\ndeeper look at the happenings of my case, and analysing the relevant facts in an objective and\ncomprehensive fashion.\nIt is crucial to note that I have been manipulated, socially-engineered and coerced to engage these\nfraudulent criminals. Much to my embarrassment, I recognise that I am the victim of an investment scam.\nMy complaint to the CFPB has arisen as I do not consider, by any stretch of the imagination, the conduct\nof RIA to be commensurate with their legal role and responsibility to their customers. They sell a service\nto look after their customers, protect their money and are a financial institution that maintains a traditional\nrelationship and way of working with its customers.\nDuring the complaints process with RIA, I found their communication ineffective, which further hides\ntheir conduct to management and diminishes the service offering to their clients. They are struggling to\nadapt their business offering in the ever-changing world of IT development. The internet is presenting a\nreal problem which they choose to manage in a way which is not in line with rules and regulations of\nCFPB as well as their own internal policy and procedures sold to their clients.\nGeneral Obligation:\nCommencing on XXXX XXXX, I fell victim to a multilayered scam operation orchestrated by XXXX XXXX (the Fraudsters or Company).\nMoney was transferred from my account in the total amount of XXXX XXXX.\nWhen determining whats reasonable and fair, we should focus on the issue of liability; common queries\ninclude, but are not limited to, the following (i)\nwhether RIA did not take notice of any rule, law, or regulation, and/or possibly missed any material\nelements of the relevant bylaws or codes of conduct, that may have prevented them from protecting my\nfinancial safety; (ii) whether by virtue of RIAs custodianship over my funds or by its control over them,\nthey owed a fiduciary duty to the me and if so, whether that duty was breached; (iii) whether RIA\npromoted the transaction(s) in question despite being aware of the nature of the transaction(s) in question\n(iv) whether RIA was in compliance with its own policies and procedures; (v) whether RIA owed duties\nto myself, what the scope of those duties was, and whether RIA did not uphold those duties; (vi) whether\nRIAs conduct was unfair; and (vii) whether RIA has within its power the ability to, and should,\ncompensate me for the harm that has befallen me.\nUpon identification of such unusual or suspicious activity, it is crucial that the relevant staff member\nadequately describe the factors making an activity or transaction suspicious, thoroughly depict the extent\nand nature of this activity and properly communicate to the customer that such activity meets the relevant\ncriteria of fraud.\nIn providing its services to a customer, a financial institution is required by law to exercise the care and\nskill of a diligent, prudent banker. In this case, this means that the payment service provider should not\nturn a blind eye to known facts pointing to a real possibility that their customer is being scammed. In\nother words, RIA must have had special knowledge of what was occurring or been alerted to a real\npossibility of fraud taking place. The financial institution must have known or reasonably ought to have\nknown that I was dealing with a scammer.\nGranted, there is room for diversity of view insofar as reasonableness is concerned. Indeed, there is a\nsense in which the standard of care of the reasonable person involves in its application a subjective\nelement.\nHowever, it must be remembered that the correct test is always reasonable care in all circumstances, not\naverage care. The fact that most people behave in a certain way may be good evidence that the conduct is\nreasonable, but this is not necessarily the case. Although reasonableness is a very fluid concept, all of\nthe evidence suggests that RIA did not foresee the fraud and disregarded even the most obvious dangers\nin this respect.\nSituations do tend to repeat themselves and it is advisable to examine previous outcomes to see how the\nstandard of the reasonable person should be applied, and that lessons can be learnt from the errors of the\npast.\nRIAs Position:\nPlease find attached all relevant evidence below.\nRIA conspicuously touts their security as a reason to use their service. Specifically, RIA writes on\ntheir website:\nWe work hard to protect you from fraud. That's why we:\n Apply best-in-class security technologies expertise to protect you 24/7, all year round.\n Secure every method of banking we offer including online, mobile, ATM and telephone\nbanking.\n Offer free security software from our trusted tech partners to download on to your devices.\n Frequently train our employees on the latest practices in cyber and physical security.\n Give you the security tips and resources you need to protect yourself from potential threats.\nRefuting RIAs arguments from a purely logical perspective:\nRIAs position is that the features of the situation at hand do not generate a genuine obligation to protect\ninnocent and helpless victims; they are essentially arguing that common-sense-based approaches are\ndoomed to fail, leaving their exclusively technical account of the subject matter as the only meaningful\nchoice. For reasons which are unclear, this extremely serious situation barely gets the attention it deserves\neven though ample evidence has been offered in support of this complaint.\nIn RIAs view, it is implied that we should not home in (and consequently rely) on unwritten laws,\npracticality, good judgement, reasonableness, sharpness, sensibleness, past outcomes, and insight, when\ntaking appropriate precautions. To underscore, once again, such views are at odds with common sense\nand are wildly irresponsible.\nImagine a view according to which the one and only thing that can make RIA morally obligated to do\nsomething is having it written down somewhere. Pursuant to this view, if RIA encounter the suffering of\ntotally naive victims, they are only obligated to intervene in or remedy the situation, to the degree\nrequired by written material. This is unbecoming for a reputable establishment such as RIA.\nI have reviewed the material hereto sent by RIA carefully, and it unfortunately provides no response to\nmy fundamental argument concerning the degree of care. Given its size, influence, and the resources at its\ndisposal, this establishment clearly had a far greater capacity than an individual such as myself had, to\ndetermine the level and likelihood of risk that a client such as myself is subjected to and had a duty to\nintervene as they now do to query in particular out-of-pattern transactions of this kind.\nIt is perfectly obvious that RIA, inadvertently, employs a subtle approach in addressing some of the key\nquestions in a manner which neither provides me with adequate support nor protects anything other than\nits own interests.\nIt is RIA here, who has the burden of proof, to show that it has exercised the duty of care, that is to say,\nthat RIA adhered to a standard of reasonable care in relation to the matter at issue given its extensive\nexperience compared to mine. It is RIA that claims that the damages which I have suffered in connection\nto this matter have not been reasonably foreseeable, and that my proposed degree of care is not, and has\nnot been, commensurate with RIAs capacity, experience, expertise, or scope of services in any way. To\nreemphasize, RIAs indisputable overriding purpose is by no means to purely execute transactions in a\nblind and blank fashion, but rather to strike a balance between executing those transactions and\ncapitalising on its undeniably vast capabilities to protect consumers thereby enhancing market integrity.\nApropos of the fluidity of the concept of reasonableness, all RIA has done in this regard is set up a\ndichotomy of having or not having the legal obligation under consideration, however, that does not go\none-inch toward explaining why various regulatory authorities, has maintained that financial institutions\ncan, and should, protect consumers using their systems, advanced technologies, and rich experience.\nRIA is obliged to take some action if it is sufficiently aware of a real possibility that a fraud may be being\nperpetuated. If you don't question its customers instructions or raise the possibility of a scam with the\ncustomer in these circumstances, it may be liable if the red flags indicate the customer is:\n particularly vulnerable, or\n if the possibility of fraud was serious or real, not just suspected.\nThere are some recommendations to organisations for protecting customers from financial harm that\nmight occur as a result of fraud or financial abuse; and gives guidance on how to recognise customers\nwho might be at risk, how to assess the potential risks to the individual and how to take the necessary\nactions to prevent or minimise financial harm.\nThese recommendations are established as a general principle, the organisation should deliver a\nservice that:\n1) Takes a proactive approach to minimising risks, impact and incidences of financial harm and it\nsets out systems and tools for the prevention and detection of fraud and financial abuse. As a general\npoint, it says organisations should ensure that all systems are developed using technologies and\nmethodologies that are effective in the prevention of fraud and financial abuse, through authorised\nand unauthorised payments, thereby minimising the risk of financial harm to customers. As regards to\nthe detection of fraud and financial abuse, it says the organisation:\nA) should have measures in place across all payment channels and products to detect suspicious\ntransactions or activities that might indicate fraud or financial abuse. It then lists the following\nexamples of suspicious activity on customer accounts:\na. multiple cheque books;\nb. sudden increased spending;\nc. transfers to other accounts;\nd. multiple password attempts;\ne. logins from new devices, multiple geographical locations;\nf. sudden changes to the operation of the account; Unusual transactions are\ntransactions whose amount, characteristics and frequency bear no relation to the\neconomic activity of the customer, exceed normal market parameters or have no\napparent legal justification.\ng. a withdrawal or payment for a large amount;\nh. a payment or series of payments to a new payee;\ni. financial activity that matches a known method of fraud or financial abuse.\nB) organisations should have a process in place to ensure that staff make contact with the\ncustomer to verify the financial activity, challenge its authenticity, explain the nature of the\nsuspected or detected fraud and discuss an appropriate plan of action.\nRIA are yet to show, or otherwise provide me with, a compelling argument that their wide-ranging\nexperience and wealth of specialist knowledge in detecting transactional anomalies were not sufficient to\navert the fraud at issue. By contrast, I have provided a multitude of sound and powerful reasons by which\nrequiring their involvement has not only been pressingly relevant but also eminently reasonable and welljustified.\nRather than empathising with and undertaking substantial efforts to convey their knowledge of the\nexistence of such regulations abroad and thereafter use it to protect and proactively relieve the plight of\nconsumers who have been cheated out of their money and whose role in society is properly fulfilled,\npositively contributing to local economic growth, development and sustainability  RIA adopts a rather\ninsouciant attitude toward my financial predicament portrayed herein.\nI am deeply convinced that the disastrous results that I have previously elaborated upon will continue to\nensue if no responsibility is adopted by RIA in relation to this matter. I have also thoroughly detailed why\nthey cannot simply dismiss this problem by strictly adhering to legal technicalities which, after careful\nreflection, struck me as being nothing more than self-interest. Indeed, it seems to me utterly unfair to\ndisregard fragile, sensitive, and vulnerable consumers who are afflicted by such allegedly malevolent acts,\nthereby keeping an unjust status-quo that is corrupting our society at its core.\nConclusion:\nBased on my analysis, and as confirmed by various authorities concerned with such matters, there is\nabundant evidence that forward-thinking financial institutions ought to take reasonable steps to forestall\nfraud, or at least mitigate its risk by using an effective risk management system, demonstrating their\nundisputed ability to responsibly and pre-emptively respond to questionable transactions in the digital\narena. The use of such systems, largely based on newly adopted technologies aimed at effectively\nnavigating the evolving threat landscape, is only one of a number of possible endeavours undertaken in\nthis connection, alongside the application of past knowledge and experience related to popular fraudulent\npractices.\nAstonishingly, I am pondering how it is that, despite being shown that RIAs business conduct was\ninsufficient insofar as background checks are concerned, they keep refuting their indisputable role and\nresponsibility in connection with the matter herein discussed. The points that I have hitherto made are too\ncrucial to be taken lightly. RIAs non-observance of the fundamental principles of justice  that is, to\ncompletely overlook and not even remotely try to mitigate the suffering of vulnerable consumers is\ninexcusable given the size of the establishment and the vast resources at its disposal as the direct result of\nthe patronage of clients like myself.\nIf it was, indeed, solely my responsibility, we must then believe at least one of the following clauses: a)\nfinancial institutions have absolutely no role whatsoever in preventing and detecting fraud, b) the fraud in\nquestion was not reasonably foreseeable, or c) the transactions in question were not sufficiently alarming.\nIt is extremely unfortunate that RIA pushes quite hard for me to believe all three of these thingsdespite\nevidence to the contrary.\nIn summary, I respectively ask your organisation to consider my points, given your personal and\ncompanywide obligation to provide a fair and reasonable investigation into the complaint.\nI look forward to your input and would gladly cooperate to reach a fair and reasonable outcome.\nThank you. XXXX XXXX XXXX\nXXXX  THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK\nXXXX XXXX XXXX\nTo: RIA\nXXXX XXXX, California , United States\nVia Email\n[Without Prejudice]\nAttn: Complaints/Fraud Dept.\nDear Sir or Madam,\nRe: Demand Letter  Fraud\nI hope this letter has correctly found itself within your complaints/fraud department as it is essential to me that\nyou become aware of the ordeal I have had to go through.\nCommencing on XXXX XXXX I fell victim to a multilayered scam operation orchestrated by XXXX XXXX (the Fraudsters or Company) with the design, development, manufacturing, promoting,\nmarketing, distributing, labeling, and/or sale of illegal and outright fraudulent investment services, all of\nwhich aim at contributing to the goal of robbing and defrauding clients through a predetermined cycle of the\nclient losses to gains.\nMoney was transferred from my account in the total amount of XXXX XXXX utilizing your services.\nOVERVIEW\n This letter shall thrust into the spotlight, inter alia, the increasingly important role those financial\ninstitutions play in the fight against financial crime and fraud, and the pressing need for enhanced\nsupervision and vigilance within your organization.\n Heres an indisputable fact: had you looked at the wider circumstances surrounding the abovereferenced\ntransaction(s), this illicit transfer of wealth could have been prevented.\n Obviously, there is no consensus with respect to the degree and scope to which regulated and licensed\nfinancial institutions must intervene and block suspicious transactions, and indeed, in so doing,\nfinancial institutions may often cause payments to be slowed down unnecessarily or even some\nlegitimate payments may be rejected, however, please be noted that additional frictions such as slower\npayments (such as delaying payments or freezing funds to investigate) is beneficial to and welcomed\nby vulnerable customers and is widely considered to be a positive practice that is necessary in order to\nmaintain their financial safety, particularly for large-value and/or out of pattern.\n Executing transactions without proper authority is not only a severe regulatory offense but also an\nirresponsible and reckless disregard of the customers financial safety.\n Against this background, and without derogating any of my rights, I hereby hold you liable for\nfinancial and emotional harm as well as medical problems relating to this victimization and insist that\nyou reimburse my account in full within 14 days from the date of this letter.\nINTRODUCTION\nFinancial crimes and fraud investigations often involve a high degree of sophistication, complexity, and\nsensitiveness to detail. Accordingly, this letter aims to address the issue at hand as profoundly and fairly as\npossible, by taking into consideration contextual regulations, laws, and bylaws, as well as guidance, standards\nand rules promoted by supervisory authorities, relevant codes of practice and (where suitable) what was good\nindustry practice (GIP) at all times relevant hereto. The allegations contained herein are predicated either\nupon knowledge with respect to myself and my own experience, or upon facts obtained through investigations\nconducted by qualified third parties. I strongly believe that substantive evidence in support of the allegations\nset forth herein will be found after an appropriate opportunity for discovery. Key facts supporting the\nallegations contained herein are known only to the Company and/or are exclusively within their control.\nThe Company cleverly orchestrated a prevalent scheme of deception to lead people to invest significant sums\nwhile knowing that those would-be investors would ultimately lose the money, they had entrusted to it. The\noverall purpose of the scheme, in other words, was to target and defraud people who are often inexperienced\nand naive, in pursuance of illicit wealth through various fraudulent representations.\nI did not know, and through the exercise of reasonable diligence could not have discovered, the fraud\nthat was being perpetrated upon me by the Company. Fraud is commonly conceptualized as withholding\nfrom the weaker party in a financial transaction (e.g., an investor) information which is necessary to make an\ninformed, rational or autonomous decision.\nIn this regard, even access to adequate information is insufficient to achieve complete autonomy. A\ncomplication here is that the weaker party, amateur/unseasoned investors in particular, might have trouble\nanalyzing the data at hand sufficiently well to identify fraudulent schemes. Unfortunately, because financial\nproducts are often abstract and complex, there is no easy solution to this problem. Therefore, full autonomy of\ninvestors might not only require access to sufficient information, but also access to relevant technologies,\nknow-how, processing capabilities, and resources to analyze the information. A reasonable solution is that\nfinancial institutions would be required to promote transparent communication in which they track the\nunderstanding of its customers.\nAccording to the Federal Trade Commissions interpretations of certain terms (like the words deceptive and\nunfair), the FTC has found that a deceptive act or practice encompasses a representation, omission or\npractice that is likely to mislead the consumer acting reasonably in the circumstances, to the consumers\ndetriment.\nThe federal courts have defined a deceptive trade practice [i] as any act or practice that has the tendency or\ncapacity to deceive consumers and have defined an unfair trade practice as any act or practice that offends\npublic policy and is immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, or substantially injurious to consumers.\nThe false representations and omissions made by the Company have a tendency or capacity to deceive\nconsumers, such as myself, into unwittingly providing funds that fueled the Companys fraudulent scheme\nand are therefore, by their very nature, jointly immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous, and\nsubstantially injurious to consumers.\nAs a result of the Companys deceptive trade practices, I was deceived into transferring my funds for\ninvestment returns that were never delivered. I will certainly never receive any monetary value for the\ninvestments considering the way the Company had their scheme rigged, thus causing significant economic\ndamage to me. The false statements of material facts and omissions as described above; and the fraudulent\ntransaction(s) the Company perpetrated upon me; were unfair, unconscionable, and deceptive practices which\nwould have likely deceived any reasonable person under the circumstances.\nMERCHANTS FRAUD SCHEME  ALLEGATIONS\nThe Company hired, managed, and trained personnel, and collaborated with others as accomplices to\ntheir crimes to induce fraud that resulted in my financial and psychological damages. These include,\nbut are not limited to, the following allegations, all of which involve criminal, non-regulated, and\nmalicious activities:\n1. The Company directed and instructed others to work from shell companies that were operating\nfrom various unassociated locations across the globe.\n2. The Company opened bank accounts in multiple countries and used them through their\naccomplices and strawmen from around the world to conceal and disguise the identity of\nillegally obtained proceeds so that they appear to have originated from legitimate sources.\n3. The Company intentionally committed fraudulent misrepresentation, and falsified its agent names,\ncredentials, competencies, qualifications and location. The Companys name is merely a brand name,\nofficially owned by shell corporations located offshore. In reality, the entire operation is being\nconducted from elsewhere (supposed location is evidently fictitious), and on top of that the call center,\nmarketing, and decision making, are all being performed by completely anonymous and hidden\nentities. Concealing true identities and utilizing front companies as a vehicle for a wide spectrum\nof financial maneuvers is a notorious practice of criminal organizations.\n4. The Company has blatantly violated international laws, as it has been practicing without a\nlicense and funneling enormous sums of money, through countries and jurisdictions that require\nregistration to operate.\n5. The Company provided direct investment advice - not utilizing 3rd party recommendations (e.g.,\naccording to Bloomberg TV/Investing.com)\n6. The Company offered investment services/advice not related to real market/exchange data\n(manufacturing false charts etc.). The trading platform was purposely manipulated, in a way that\neach client would ineluctably and unknowingly lose money, as the trades were simply\nconcocted. Instead, the Companys staff and its accomplices simply pocketed the money, using\nit to purchase various luxurious, non-essential items.\n7. The Company prohibited my ability to withdraw my funds.\n8. The Company was guaranteeing returns/yields (unrealistic ones).\n9. The Company furnished me with bonuses - which are not allowed to be given.\n10. My money was not held in a segregated account.\n11. The Company did not advertise/disclose/was not transparent regarding the statistical data representing\nthe percentage of total client losses at the company.\n12. The Company did not mention the commission and overnight swaps.\n13. The Company did not read the risk disclosure prior to my deposit(s).\n14. The Company used high pressure tactics and outbursts, which took a severe toll on my health.\n15. Armed with my personal details, the Companys staff seduced me into transferring all of my\nsavings to them. They utilized their knowledge of my cultural context, which stressed square\nand honorable business dealings along with honesty, in order to maliciously take advantage of\nmy trusting nature.\nPlease take notice that my funds were transferred through means of coercion and under false pretenses.\nAttached, please find supportive statements, screenshots, and further evidence.\nEXPOSING YOUR ORGANIZATIONS MISCONDUCT\nI hereby allege that your organization has completely failed to adequately investigate the circumstances\nsurrounding the transaction(s) in question and willfully blinded itself to obvious red flags.\nMany suspicions should have arisen at your organization as an issue of great concern, with respect to the\nunusual activity taking place in my account. Despite the regulatory and statutory requirements your\norganization should abide by as a licensed and regulated financial institution  and instead of detecting\npatterns, drawing certain conclusions, and taking actions accordingly you at best, merely and insufficiently\nperformed some hasty and haphazard reviews of the transaction(s) or possibly asked only minimal generic\nquestions regarding the suspicious activities, and at worst, shut your eyes completely rather than being careful,\nmethodical, and vigilant. Had you bothered, you would probably have realized that the funds were associated\nwith fraud and financial crime, rather than some other legitimate revenue/activity.\nIn light of the above, and after conducting a comprehensive review of our communication/interactions,\nit has become glaringly obvious to me that no adequate information and/or documentation were sought\nby your organization, at best, and at worst no appropriate safeguards were implemented.\nIf a financial institution executes a customer order to transfer money knowing it to be dishonestly given,\nshutting its eyes to the obvious fact of the dishonesty, or acting recklessly in failing to make such inquiries as\nan honest and reasonable individual would undergo, it would be in breach of its duty of care, even if the\npayment was made in accordance with the terms of the mandate, and the financial institution should still be\nliable for negligence resulting in damages.\nCompliance departments should ensure that staff members understand the legal requirements and where there\nare suspicions, these suspicions be communicated to all relevant personnel whilst being investigated.\nFor the avoidance of doubt, reasonable grounds should not necessarily be interpreted as proof. On the basis of\nvarious signs, you should have assumed that something suspicious was going on therefore should have\nsuspended transaction(s) until reasonable enquiries could be made to verify that the transaction(s)\nwas/were properly executed. In other words, I am a victim of your negligence for facilitating the\nmisappropriation of funds, and doing little to safeguard public financial interests. Any reasonable staff\nmember would have realized that there were many obvious, even glaring, signs that I was being defrauded.\n(XXXX XXXX XXXX (in liquidation) v XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX [XXXX] XXXX XXXX) [ii]\nYou knew or should have known that the funds being transferred through your services did not rightfully\nbelong to the recipient fraudsters. Similarly, you knew or should have known that the funds being transferred\nthrough your services serve no legitimate or lawful purpose. You turned a blind eye to the crimes that you\nhave facilitated and thus provided an array of essential money transfer services, acting as a vehicle, with the\nawareness that it was enabling the fraudsters to commit crimes and enrich themselves with the funds of their\nvictims.\nYour services undoubtedly served as a crucial element in the fraudulent scheme detailed herein, and you were\neither unaware of your complicity in the fraud, or, more worryingly, completely aware and silent. Had you\nconducted an adequate account analysis, you would have discovered the nature of the recipient, and\nsubsequently, disclosed and reported the fraudsters activities to law enforcement authorities/agencies and\nregulators. Instead, to satisfy your financial interests, you conveniently closed your eyes, even though you\nundeniably had, at all material times, the necessary controls and resources to influence, whether directly or\nindirectly, those particular transactions.\nYou also had the duty to stop those crimes, yet you refused to do so because you were more interested in\nenriching yourself, even if it meant furthering those crimes and allowing them to cause massive financial\nlosses to plenty of victims  many of whom are probably your customers. Therefore, it is clear that you did\nnot have in place adequate security measures to properly safeguard my assets  hence, you have\nirreparably harmed me and, if not enjoined, will continue to irreparably harm other victims as well as\ntheir loved\nones and associates. You have irreparably harmed me and, if not enjoined, will continue to irreparably\nharm the general public, and our society deserves better.\nA financial institution which wrongly pays money away when it has no authority to do so will usually be\ntreated as if it had paid using its own funds, not those of its customer.\nWhen discussing the responsibilities that a financial institution might incur, it is crucial not to forget the fact\nthat a legitimate complaint by, or cause of action on the part of, a client might generate/give rise to further\nstatutory cause of action and/or additional liabilities beholden by a financial institution to the relevant\nregulatory authority. Obligations/duties beholden by a financial institution to a regulator are distinct from\nthose beholden to the customer. Moreover, you may be held liable to more than one regulator.\nAs a regulated and licensed financial institution, you have strict statutory and regulatory obligations to\nmonitor transactions and report any suspicious activities to law enforcement authorities. The importance of\nimplementing robust internal systems to detect and report money laundering and other suspicious activities\nhas been continuously emphasized in the industry in addition to having the appropriate policies, procedures\nand internal controls in place to ensure ongoing compliance in respect to the aforementioned systems. You\nshould have analysed and distinguished thereafter between that which may be normal activity and that which\ncould suggest an illegal activity. This is a well-known standard industry practice which plays a substantial role\nin preventing criminals from liquidating and laundering funds.\nFRAUD\nActual fraud can be described, inter alia, as suppression of that which is true, by one having knowledge or\nbelief of the fact. Therefore, due to your actual knowledge that such scams are so prevalent, you are liable for\ndamages. Similarly, due to the fact that you knew or were grossly negligent in not kn","date_sent_to_company":"2024-11-30T09:15:06.000Z","issue":"Fraud or scam","sub_product":"International money transfer","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10981005","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ria Envia, LLC","date_received":"2024-11-30T08:54:09.000Z","state":null,"company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>\n<em>XXXX</em>  THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK\n<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>\nTo: RIA\n<em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, California , United States\nVia Email\n[Without Prejudice]\nAttn: Complaints/<em>Fraud</em> Dept.\nDear Sir or Madam,\nRe: Demand Letter  <em>Fraud</em>\nI hope this letter has correctly found itself within your complaints/<em>fraud</em> <em>department</em> as it is essential to me that\nyou become aware of the ordeal I have had to go through."],"issue":["<em>Fraud</em> or scam"]},"sort":[8.7759,"10981005"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7212368","_score":6.531909,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"OnXX/XX/XXXX I used Best buy Auto payments to pay my bill for XXXX. This was the end of a promotion so I paid off the remaining total XXXX before the due date on XXXX XXXX Best Buy wrote down. I only paid XXXX My bank account reflected that the XXXX left my account on XXXX XXXX. At that time, my Best Buy account statement did not reflect my payment for XXXX  As a matter of fact, they increased my interest rate that months by falsely stating they did not receive my payment to pay off the last month of a promotion. At that time  it was disputed that they were paid. Best Buy citibank credit card services said they would fix the discrepancy. Instead they applied my payment for XXXX to the following month XXXX and kept the high interest rate penalty for not making the end of promotion payment in XXXX. By adding it to XXXX, theyre admitting that I made the payment on time and that the only reason I got charged eith high interest rate is because they falsified my payment History. This is reflected in the statement on XX/XX/XXXXThe exact payment for XXXX is reflected on the XXXX account statement. It is obvious that we called in to fix it immediately after the discrepancy was identified. I could not identify a discrepancy until I received the account statement. \n\nUpon realizing that I was still paying on some thing that should have been paid off a long time ago. I called Best Buy again to figure out why it had not been paid off. XXXX a month for a bill that should be completely paid for by now and after calculating it out, they owe me money. When calling in to resolve the matter, I was informed that they cannot see the records that far back so I had Best Buy snail mail me my records and this is how I discovered that Best Buy never fixed their discrepancy from XX/XX/XXXX which you can see by the XX/XX/XXXXstatement that they were contacted and informed to correct my payment history.  It was their system or their personnel that did not apply the payment correctly. It left my bank on time. I disputed it at that time which is why its reflected on the very next months account statement. After receiving the records, I called Best Buy to make a dispute, but due to them sending me the monthly statements records out of order, I could not quite figure out exactly what was wrong, so I had to call back and make a second dispute after I put the months in chronological order. I was told at that time by the employee which was a male that it would be resolved. I called back in at that time to find out if it was resolved, and I was informed by a female employee that the only way that you can make a dispute is by sending my dispute via mail to My Best Buy Credit Card Services, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This completely contradicted with a male employee said. I was informed there was no way to email Best Buy and this was the only way to contact them to resolve a dispute they consider to be out of their current date range and accessible on their computers. This is a lie because when I called back 11 business days ago another employee pulled up the records right there on the phone with me after I told them I had already sent in a dispute letter and they hadnt responded pass. The time frame that they said they were going to respond. I mailed them the screenshots from my bank account as requested along with correlating copies of the Best Buy account statements onXX/XX/XXXXI was informed that in 30-90 days I would have a response from Best Buy. I received no response from Best Buy. I called back in and Best Buy claimed they never received the letter at all. On XX/XX/XXXX I spoke to Employee ID Z19058 and was informed that the matter would be resolved in 7 to 10 business days. I called back on the 11th business day today, the XXXX XXXX XXXX, and was informed by XXXX an account verification specialist, that they could only fix the payment for that promotion month in XX/XX/XXXX unless I had disputed it before or on the same month according to the fine print. I did disputed it at that time and Best Buy assured me at that time that it would be resolved and I believed them. \nI made the payment for XX/XX/XXXXon time and then I had to wait for the account statement to find out they claimed they received no end of promotion payment.  IlThere is no way for me to know if Best Buy is going to act like the money didnt show up in their bank account until i recieve their account statement! I had to call them and tell them Oh yes you did get that money and then they were like you are right we did only for them to pay it to the wrong month! Im not talking to kindergartners learning math who  dont know how to read, write, and add Im talking a full grown adults which makes me think they know what theyre doing and its fraud and they are con artists. Unless maybe I was talking to children and they are participating in breaking child labor laws.\n I have spoken to multiple Best Buy employees at this point, and none of them have informed me until now that they could never resolve it and the only thing that they could do was give me XXXX. I have probably paid well over XXXX due to the incorrect high interest penalty for XX/XX/XXXX andXX/XX/XXXX. I didnt do anything wrong as a customer and it is their employees and their company that falsely documented my payment history. And, now they claim they never received the certified mail with proof of that. XXXX  actually tried to tell me to send it again and wait another 30 to 90 days while simultaneously telling me that the only way I couldve gotten it resolved is if I had done it in a certain amount of time. They cant read They cant write. They cant do math. They dont report things in a timely manner and when you contact them, they never respond. They have no brick and mortar building and every time you call you get a different customer service representative. I have spent hours upon hours upon hours trying to resolve this with Best Buy and I have been lied to and misled and punished for their incompetence and gross negligence. Icing in the cake, today, I have now been told there is nothing I can do about it. Its fraudulent, I have paid my bill off and they are trying to keep me in eternal debt to them by falsifying my payment history and then furthermore disregarding all evidence, giving me no way to contact them except for mail in the 21st century, and then, claiming they didnt even receive the mail, but the United States, postal service certified. They did deliver it to their XXXX XXXX which is the only way I can deliver any documentation that I paid them on time. They refuse to accept email because it will be dated and they cannot deny they received it which is why I sent it certified mail.  No matter what I did Best Buy was determined to steal from me, regardless of anything I did as a customer and that is the definition of a confidence scheme or trick to deceive Someone out of their hard earned money. I cant dispute what Best Buy did until the next month when I receive an updated account statement. Regardless of that, I paid on time and anything else they say after that is to trick me out of my money. XXXX  stated that I had to make a dispute the month before or on the same month. I DID dispute it at that time. I made my payment ON TIME and when the dispute was made THEY AGREED at that time and there is no reason a customer should suffer for a companys GROSS NEGLIGENCE or INCOMPETENCE. The only reason I need to make a dispute it because they screwed up! And then, would you look at that, its so common practice for them to screw over their customers that they made a rule for it! Knowing full well theyre tactic is to claim the customer didnt pay and then subsequently never fix it when the customer reports it. They take your money thaf they know they already have and then apply it to the wrong payment period. Because they specifically made a rule for end of promotion payments that prevents customers from paying it off. I paid it off on XX/XX/XXXX and I have been paying for it all the way into XX/XX/XXXX because they refuse to admit I paid it off in XX/XX/XXXX. Its fraud and because Ive been taking so much money they know they XX/XX/XXXX probably well over XX/XX/XXXX \nPenal Code section 487 defines grand theft in California. In California, grand theft consists of stealing money, labor, real property, or personal property with a value exceeding XX/XX/XXXX. Every payment I make Im not supposed to be making because of their fraud increases their penalty. The pictures I attached are of the day I went into the UPS store and painstakingly wrote up what happened and then attached screenshots of my bank account and copies of the account statements for the months I received high interest for payments that were paid on time.  XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX Automatic payments dont work with Best Buy because somehow theyre automatic system randomly acts like you never paid anything or you paid less than what you actually did. Which means they are falsifying their customers payment history on purpose. Each page is numbered. I have a witness at theXX/XX/XXXX who helped me send the letter. I gave the information for my bank over the phone to Best Buy and Best Buy told me I had to send a letter with screenshots to prove that I made those payments. They refused to contact my bank directly. Best Buy claims they received no letter. Again, They can call my bank themselves if they want and get the wire transfer numbers and dates for when I made my payments, but they do not. this was all included in the letter. They put the burden of proof on me and I submitted the burden of proof to them and they claim the US Postal Service never sent it to them. The pictures prove I sent the letter. It proves I went to XXXX The pictures inside that letter prove I made my payments on time. It also proves Best Buy falsified my my payment history and that they intentionally applied the payment to the wrong month so that they could charge me illegally for high interest. I shouldnt have to be writing this, I used Best Buy auto payments, my bank reflects the payment was paid on time, the pictures show I paid and sent certified mail. Proof  I have done everything I can possibly do to resolve this matter, and I have spent gobs of time trying to do just that and the fact that I am typing this out right now goes to show why no one should ever do business with Best Buy or Citibank. I am flabbergasted that the governments solution for accountability of a company falsely changing their customers payment history, considering they pay taxes to the IRS, is that I write this letter for it to be sent to themwhich I already did. I sent it to their Best Buy credit card XXXX XXXX  address in XXXX XXXX Missouri and what I am writing now is nowhere near as comprehensive. The reason they dont call my Bank themselves is because they know they lied about my payment history. They have nothing to gain from proving that a customer paid the payment. They make their money by claiming their customers dont make their payments on time and create irroneous rules to prevent their customers from getting their money back. None of their rules matter all that should matter is that the customer paid on time and they need to apply the payment to when it was paid. I have never seen a company take a payment and apply it to the wrong month. Never! It doesnt matter what company it is if they claim they didnt receive the payment. All Ive ever had to do is provide proof that I did make the payment and then they add the payment to the correct month because that was the month that had the discrepancy. It is a logical for me to make two payments on the next month and never have the payment I made for the correct month ever be applied to it. They are falsifying my payment history and then stonewalling me when I ask them to stop lying and pay it to the correct month and remove the penalty for high interest for missing that month payment. I never missed XXXX XXXX months payment I paid on time. It was their responsibility to document My payment. They had no problems proving I had made the payment when they were confronted about it. There is no reason for them to apply it to the wrong month except that is how they illegally charge their customers high interest for a missed payment, even though they made the payment on time. When I disputed this, there is no reason the high interest should not have been removed and the payment applied to the correct months unless they are making money off of fraud victims. XXXX informed me today that this illegal fraudulent business practice is so common that they made a rule for it. A rule to intentionally trick and con customers that DO PAY ON TIME out of their money. Best Buy intentionally miss led me by telling me that if I paid my bills on time I would not be hit with high interest. What they did not tell me is that they would falsify my payment history. I did not sign a contract agreeing to them falsifying my payment history. I did not sign a contract agreeing to them denying me any right to redress or to protect myself from their fraud. Five major rights of consumers: safety, information, choice, voice, and redress. Best Buy misled me as a customer. I have done everything right and I still cant get my money back from Best Buy. They withheld information from me. They lied to me. They have given me no way to redress them for my own safety. They have victimized me and probably countless others via false advertising. I paid on time. I have no control over what Best Buy does with my payment after I pay. And I should not be made to be penalized for what they do after I pay them because I do not run Best Buy and I am not responsible for Best Buy. I am the customer and I did my part as the customer. The bank did their part in the US Postal Service did their part. And so far all I can get from Best Buy is we lost it. we didnt receive it. You never did it. We gave you an incredibly small window to address us after we finally told you about it and because of this were gonna keep taking your money. We know you didnt do anything wrong but we operate illegally through fraud and thats how we steal everybodys money. I didnt walk into a casino. I walked into Best Buy. The casino tells you youre gonna lose your money and the casino customer knows the risks. I walked into a department store and I bought some products with a Best Buy debit card from Citibank. I made my payments on time. I did nothing illegal. I did not lie. I made my payments on time. I was told if I made my payments on time I could get a XXXX XXXXnterest or a low interest loan. This is what Best Buy advertised. It is false advertising if customers make the payments they dont accept the payments and still charge you high interest. I made the payment. The bank says I made the payment on time. But somehow Best Buy can lie and write down on mud Best Buy account statement that for some reason they just didnt receive that payment for well over XXXX. Who wants to do business with a company that loses a payment for over XXXX? They did not accept my payment for XXXX XXXX and falsely claimed I didnt make a payment at all. That is not what I agreed to when I signed up for Best Buy business card I did not agree to business fraud. I agreed that if I missed a payment, then they could charge me high interest. I did not agree to be charged high interest for false reasons or false claims that they were a legal practicing business. Do they also falsely claim how much money they make to the IRS? If theyre lying to their customers and theyre lying about what other businesses are doing like the US Postal Service and my bank then theyre probably lying to the IRS because as a tax paying citizen, I know theyre stealing my money.  I know theyre not above changing their accounting books to benefit them while screwing everybody else over. Unlawful business practices: \n This unlawful business practice may also occur if a party makes a misrepresentation during the formation of the contract that benefits the breaching party.\n Consumer fraud is an unlawful business practice that involves using unfair or deceptive tactics to illegally lure consumers into purchasing a product or service. This type of fraud can include false advertising, pyramid schemes, and/or bait and switch. A bait and switch occurs when a customer is lured into purchasing a product or service that is no longer available and is offered an alternative product or service instead. Financial Fraud is listed among unlawful business practices.\n\n There are all kinds of unlawful business practices and win a customer like me paid extra money, pays on time, calls, and makes the dispute, and follows every single guideline a company offers, and they still cant receive their money back well it makes you wonder how many unlawful business practices does Best Buy and Citibank have and how are they allowed to be operating because as a loyal customer for well over eight years what they are doing to me right now makes no sense because the company that wants to keep their customers doesnt treat their customers like this unless it was always there intention to learn a customer in on false advertising, misrepresent the contract, falsify financial records of payment from their customers, and raise the interest so high that customers become life long slaves to their companies by forcing their customers into debt by illegal methods. I pay XXXX  a month for products I have already paid for and Im about to sell because they are that old. Im no longer gonna have the products I bought from Best Buy and theyre still going to try to charge me for them unless I give them even more money. Its Debt bondage, also known as debt slavery, bonded labour, or peonage, is the pledge of a person's services as security for the repayment for a debt or other obligation. Where the terms of the repayment are not clearly or reasonably stated, the person who holds the debt has thus some control over the laborer, whose freedom depends on the undefined debt repayment.[1] The services required to repay the debt may be undefined, and the services' duration may be undefined, thus allowing the person supposedly owed the debt to demand services indefinitely.[2] Debt bondage can be passed on from generation to generation. I was told if I made my payments on time I could pay off my debt. I was not told that they would falsify my payments to where I could never pay off my debt. These are unlawful and unfair business practices when a person like me cant pay them off because they change the rules and my payment history to keep me from ever paying them off. Its illegal. Its fraud. Its mondern day debt bondage. On top of that they have hit my credit report making these false claims negating me the opportunity to have a better credit rating, stopping me from having access to opportunities. I should be afforded for having a good credit rating which I would have if they would stop committing fraud. I needed to buy a better car and I cant afford the car I want because I have Best Buy falsifying my payment history and ruining my credit. They are ruining my life for no reason. Ive done everything right and because I did business with a Best Buy they have ruined my credit, my life opportunities, and quite frankly stated today theres nothing I can do about it because they cant confirm or deny that charging customers who paid on time, insanely high interest, for not paying is FRAUD! I served my country and I am suffering tyranny from a freaking department store in a credit card company!!!!! They wont let me go free unless I give them even more money for the falsified interest they put on my bill. I would have to actually pay the insanely high interest off all at once in order to get out from under them. I didnt do anything wrong and I dont deserve this. Fun fact, they can falsify my payment history again and keep charging me high interest until the day I die because theres no accountability for them. I would have to get a lawyer. Thats even more money. I should not have to spend my hard earned money  I earned from serving my freaking country and putting my life on the line to pay off a god dang appliance from a department store!!!!!! Every hour I spend on this is them stealing another hour of my life. They should not be able to operate in the US. They should lose their business license. This is an attack on liberty and the American dream. Its on unAmerican. Its a antiAmerican. Its organized crime and they should go to jail. No one should ever be made to be a Debt slave for years because the company doesnt want to admit they were already paid off. The fact that they falsify their customers payment history should be enough to close down their businesses. We have modern technology and computers dont lie. They just compute. If the bank said, I paid then it should be reflected in Best Buys bank. And if its not, the only thing I should have to do with the customer is show them I paid, and they wont even let me do that. They wont let me send in the records. They wont admit they received the mail. But, theyll take my money I paid in XXXX and apply it to the XXXXXXXX They change the rules to benefit them and screw over the customer. Theyre trying to keep their business practices in the stone ages by forcing people to mail. It is obvious everything they are doing is to avoid accountability from their customers for illegal business practices. This is America, the land of the free. How in the hell is this crap happening in XXXX?\n\nPS. I have been dealing with this for three years. I have been disputing this for XXXX years. I have a lot of other things going on in my life besides Best Buys in ability to do their own job. If Best Buy or Citibank cannot run their companies or operate their businesses in force their customers to do all the work for them then perhaps they need to close the businesses down. It is exhausting fighting a company for three years to correct a single payment and the following year on the same exact date its discrepancy. They take extra payments. They take my payments every month, but they managed to lose my payment on the month when they know they can get an obscene amount of interest if I dont pay. I feel violated, frustrated, and a whole list of other negative emotions, because of the gaslighting I have received from Best Buy credit card services. You pay they claim you didnt pay. You sending mail they claim you did not send in mail. You want to provide proof they will not let you provide proof. Denial is their favorite word so they can get that plausible deniability. They can claim all day they didnt know. But they do know and the bank knows as does the US Postal Service and I know.  I do not have this problem with any of the other companies that I deal with on a daily basis. I am tired, and I have just spent hours trying to write this in a way to where it would convey how unbelievably ridiculously stupid my situation is with Best Buy credit services. I gave up time. I should be spending with my family and my loved ones. I had to neglect other responsibilities in my life to give my undivided attention to the company, responsible for ruining my life. If there are typing errors it is because it has negatively impacted me in such a way that Im left, speechless, or unable to respond in a comprehensive sentence, because the magnitude of the level of incompetence or greed, it would take to do this is Jaw dropping, and it leaves me unable to find words. This is the kind of behavior I expect from a snotty middle schooler trying to change the rules in a game of monopoly to win. But, this from a well-established company? In America? With brick and mortar buildings all across America, giving off the impression that it is a successful and legitimate business? Using child is tactics like lying to run their business? How were they ever allowed to run a business in the first place? Its depressing thinking about it. How does a company like this exist? Ive been a customer for well over eight years and why have they not been stopped from doing this already?","date_sent_to_company":"2023-07-07T04:11:22.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"49855","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7212368","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CITIBANK, N.A.","date_received":"2023-07-07T03:34:06.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Debt was paid"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I paid it off on XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> and I have been paying for it all the way into XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> because they refuse to admit I paid it off in XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>. Its <em>fraud</em> and because Ive been taking so much money they know they XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> probably well over XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em> \nPenal Code section 487 <em>defines</em> grand theft in California. In California, grand theft consists of stealing money, labor, real property, or personal property with a value exceeding XX/XX/<em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[6.531909,"7212368"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6652671","_score":6.4920177,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dispute of Inaccurate Credit Report Information To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to dispute inaccurate information on my credit report that has been reported by XXXX XXXX  Specifically, XXXX XXXX  has reported a charged off account which is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) as defined by Sections 1681e and 1681i of the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681-1681x ), as well as other federal laws and regulations. \n\nI am writing to dispute inaccurate information on my credit report that relates to my account with XXXX XXXX. The account information on my credit report is as follows : Account Number : XXXX Original Creditor : - Company Sold : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Account Type : Unsecured Loan Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Open/Closed : Closed Status : Charge-off Status Updated : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Balance Updated : XX/XX/XXXX Original Balance : {$33000.00} Monthly Payment : - Past Due Amount : - Highest Balance : - Terms : 60 Months Responsibility : Individual I believe that the information listed above is inaccurate and unfairly damaging my credit score. I dispute this information on the grounds that XXXXXXXX XXXX has violated federal laws in their collection activities against me. Specifically, I believe that XXXXXXXX XXXX violated the following USC Codes : USC 1692e - False or misleading representations USC 1692f - Unfair practices USC 1681s-2 - Duties of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies USC 1692d - Harassment or abuse USC 1692c - Communication in connection with debt collection USC 1692b - Acquisition of location information USC 1692a - Definitions Furthermore, I have previously sent two certified letters to your offices, the first letter was for debt validation made pursuant to Title X 111-203q Sec. 809 ( b ) of the FDCPA. I respectfully requested that your offices provide me with competent evidence that I have any legal obligation to pay you. The second letter refers to Acceptance for Value and Counter Offer/Claim for Proof of Claim . \nDespite my attempts to resolve this issue, XXXXXXXX XXXX has continued to violate my rights as a consumer. Specifically, I am troubled by the fact that you charged off my debt in XX/XX/XXXX, just a few months after opening the account in XX/XX/XXXX. This action violates USC 1692e, which prohibits false or misleading representations in connection with debt collection. I believe that charging off a debt so soon after it was opened is not only unfair but also misleading to consumers. \nAdditionally, XXXXXXXX XXXX sold my debt to XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. According to my credit report, XXXX XXXX XXXX is reporting the account as seriously past due and assigned to an attorney, collection agency, or credit grantor 's internal collection department. This action violates USC 1692d, which prohibits harassment or abuse in connection with debt collection, and USC 1692c, which regulates communication in connection with debt collection. \nI demand that XXXXXXXX XXXX take immediate action to correct the inaccurate information on my credit report and provide monetary relief for the damages caused by your violations. I request that XXXX XXXX  pay me {$1000.00} per violation in accordance with the CFPB 's past cases where clients received monetary relief for similar violations. \n\nUnder the FCRA, consumer reporting agencies must follow certain procedures for reporting information about consumers ' creditworthiness including when reporting \" charged off '' debts. Sections 1681e and 1681i of the FCRA require consumer reporting agencies to follow reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of consumer credit information and to promptly investigate disputes. Additionally, the FCRA allows for consumers to dispute inaccurate information on their credit reports and request corrections. \n\nIn XXXX, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) took action against several large credit reporting agencies, including XXXXXXXX XXXX for violations of the FCRA, resulting in millions of dollars in monetary relief for affected consumers. The CFPB alleged that these credit reporting agencies failed to maintain accurate information and failed to investigate disputes in a timely manner. As a victim of unfair debt collection practices, I am writing to express my concerns about the charge-off reporting on my credit report. Despite my numerous attempts to resolve the debt, XXXXXXXX XXXX has failed to respond to my requests for validation or to provide proof of the alleged debt. Instead, they charged off the debt and continued to report it to the credit bureaus, damaging my credit score and causing me financial hardship. \n\nIt is important to note that charging off a debt does not mean that the debt is forgiven or that the consumer is no longer liable for the debt. Charging off a debt simply means that the lender has written off the debt as uncollectible and has claimed it as a loss on their tax return. However, the debt remains on the consumer 's credit report and can continue to be reported by the lender, causing significant harm to the consumer 's credit score and financial reputation. \n\nFurthermore, the decision to charge off a debt should only be made after the lender has exhausted all other efforts to collect the debt, including sending validation of the debt, negotiating payment arrangements, and pursuing legal action if necessary. In my case, XXXXXXXX XXXX failed to provide any validation of the debt, refused to negotiate payment arrangements, and instead pursued legal action against me without providing proof of the debt. \n\nThis is a clear violation of several federal laws, including the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), which prohibits debt collectors from making false or misleading statements and from using unfair or abusive practices to collect a debt. Additionally, the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) requires that all information on a consumer 's credit report be accurate, verifiable, and complete. Reporting a charge-off without proper validation or documentation violates these laws and can result in significant damages to the consumer. \n\nI am requesting that XXXXXXXX XXXX take immediate action to remove the charge-off from my credit report, provide proof of the alleged debt, and compensate me for any damages incurred as a result of their unfair and illegal debt collection practices. I am also requesting that they stop all legal action against me until the debt has been properly validated and resolved. \n\nDue process is a constitutional right that guarantees individuals fair treatment under the law. In my case, I reached out to XXXXXXXX XXXX. multiple times via certified mail to remedy my accounts and provide debt validation, but they failed to respond. This lack of response is a violation of my due process rights, as it denies me the opportunity to address and resolve any issues with my accounts. \n\nThe USC code that pertains to this violation is USC 1692g, which requires debt collectors to provide consumers with written validation of the debt within five days of initial contact. Failure to provide validation can result in a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and may entitle the consumer to statutory damages. \nFurthermore XXXXXXXX XXXX. charged off my debt and reported it to credit bureaus, which has negatively impacted my credit score and reputation.\n\nThis reporting is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), which mandates that credit reporting agencies and creditors report accurate and complete information. Charging off a debt does not relieve a creditor of the responsibility to report the accurate status of the account. \nThe USC code that pertains to this violation is USC 1681s-2 ( a ), which states that furnishers of information to credit reporting agencies must provide accurate and complete information. Violations of this section can result in liability for actual and punitive damages, as well as attorney 's fees and costs. \n\nI encourage the CFPB to take action against XXXX XXXX for their illegal and unethical practices. It is unacceptable for a financial institution to take advantage of consumers in this manner, and I hope that my case will serve as a warning to others who may be experiencing similar issues. \n\nIn addition to FCRA violations, XXXXXXXX XXXX has also violated other federal laws and regulations, including the Privacy Act of 1974 ( 5 U.S.C. 522a ), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( 15 USC 1681, 15 USC 6801-6809 ), the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR 313.1-313.7, 16 CFR 433.2-433.3 ), and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692p ). XXXXXXXX XXXX has also failed to adequately protect my personal information, which is a violation of the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998 ( 18 U.S. Code 1028 ). \n\nFCRA : Actual damages : Any financial loss or harm suffered by the consumer as a result of the inaccurate information reported by the credit reporting agency, such as denial of credit, higher interest rates, or loss of employment. \nPunitive damages : Additional damages awarded to punish the credit reporting agency for willful or negligent violations of the FCRA. \nStatutory damages : A fixed amount of damages awarded to the consumer for each violation of the FCRA, regardless of whether any actual harm was suffered. The amount of statutory damages can range from {$100.00} to {$1000.00} per violation, depending on the nature and severity of the violation. \n\nExamples of FCRA violations that can result in damages include : 1. Reporting inaccurate information on the consumer 's credit report, such as a charged off account that has been paid in full or a debt that does not belong to the consumer.\n\n2. Failing to correct inaccurate information on the consumer 's credit report after receiving a dispute from the consumer.\n\n3. Failing to conduct a reasonable investigation of a consumer dispute.\n\n4. Continuing to report inaccurate information on the consumer 's credit report even after being informed of the inaccuracy. \n\nUSC codes related to the FCRA : Sections 1681e and 1681i of the FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681-1681x USC codes related to the FDCPA : 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692p USC codes related to the TILA : 15 U.S.C. 1601-1667f FDCPA : Actual damages : Any financial loss or harm suffered by the consumer as a result of the debt collector 's actions, such as lost wages or medical expenses. \nStatutory damages : A fixed amount of damages awarded to the consumer for each violation of the FDCPA, regardless of whether any actual harm was suffered. The amount of statutory damages can range from {$100.00} to {$1000.00} per violation, depending on the nature and severity of the violation. \n\nAttorney 's fees : If the consumer prevails in a lawsuit against the debt collector, the court may order the debt collector to pay the consumer 's attorney 's fees. \nExamples of FDCPA violations that can result in damages include : Harassing or abusive language used by the debt collector, such as threats of violence or using profanity. \n\n1. Falsely representing the amount or nature of the debt owed.\n\n2. Falsely representing that the debt collector is an attorney or government representative.\n\n3. Failing to validate the debt within 30 days of the initial contact with the consumer. \nTILA : Actual damages : Any financial loss or harm suffered by the consumer as a result of the creditor 's failure to disclose required information, such as hidden fees or incorrect interest rates. \n\nStatutory damages : A fixed amount of damages awarded to the consumer for certain violations of the TILA, regardless of whether any actual harm was suffered. The amount of statutory damages can range from {$400.00} to {$4000.00} per violation, depending on the nature and severity of the violation. \n\nRescission : The right of the consumer to cancel certain types of loans within a specified period of time if the creditor fails to provide the required disclosures. \n\nExamples of TILA violations that can result in damages include : 1. Failing to provide the consumer with a written disclosure of the finance charge, annual percentage rate ( APR ), and other important terms of the loan. \nXXXX. Failing to provide the consumer with a right of rescission for certain types of loans, such as home equity loans. \nMisrepresenting the terms or conditions of the loan, such as falsely stating that the loan has a fixed interest rate when it actually has a variable rate. \n\nThere have been several recent case studies where the CFPB has awarded monetary relief to consumers for violations of the FCRA and other relevant laws. In XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and Experian agreed to pay a combined {$26.00} XXXX in restitution to affected consumers for FCRA violations. In XXXX, the CFPB ordered XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to pay {$1.00} XXXX in restitution to affected consumers for violations of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E. \nXXXX appears to be in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692p ) and the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1601-1667f ). The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from using false, deceptive, or misleading representations or means in connection with the collection of any debt. The TILA requires creditors to provide certain disclosures about the terms and conditions of a consumer credit transaction. Failure to comply with these laws can result in monetary damages and statutory penalties. \n\nUnder the FCRA, consumer reporting agencies must follow certain procedures for reporting information about consumers ' creditworthiness, including when reporting \" charged off '' debts. Sections 1681e and 1681i of the FCRA require consumer reporting agencies to follow reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of consumer credit information and to promptly investigate disputes. Violations of the FCRA can result in actual damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees. \n\nExamples of damages related to FCRA violations include : 1. Denial of credit or employment 2. Higher interest rates on loans 3. Increased insurance premiums 4. Emotional distress and loss of enjoyment of life XXXXXXXX XXXX inaccurate reporting of the charged off account on your credit report is a violation of the FCRA. In XXXX, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) took action against several large credit reporting agencies, including XXXXXXXX XXXX, for violations of the FCRA, resulting in millions of dollars in monetary relief for affected consumers. The CFPB alleged that these credit reporting agencies failed to maintain accurate information and failed to investigate disputes in a timely manner. \n\nThe FDCPA, which is enforced by the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), protects consumers from abusive debt collection practices. 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692p outline the regulations that debt collectors must follow. Violations of the FDCPA can result in actual damages, statutory damages, and attorney fees. \n\nExamples of damages related to FDCPA violations include : 1. Harassment or abuse 2. False or misleading representations 3. Unfair or unconscionable practices The Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) is a federal law that requires creditors to disclose certain information to borrowers, including the annual percentage rate ( APR ), finance charges, and the total cost of credit. 15 U.S.C. 1601-1667f outline the regulations that creditors must follow. Violations of the TILA can result in actual damages, statutory damages, and attorney fees. \n1. Examples of damages related to TILA violations include : 2. Payment of excessive fees 3. Overcharging for credit 4. Failure to disclose required information It is possible that XXXX XXXX actions, including the terms of the credit card agreement and any fees charged, may constitute violations of the TILA. \nThe Privacy Act of 1974 ( 5 U.S.C. 522a ) is a federal law that governs the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of personal information by federal agencies. It also provides individuals with certain rights to access and amend their own records. Violations of the Privacy Act can result in actual damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees. \nXXXXXXXX XXXX failure to adequately protect your personal information, which was disclosed in the complaint, may constitute a violation of the Privacy Act. \nIn conclusion XXXXXXXX XXXX inaccurate reporting of the charged off account and the actions of the XXXX XXXX XXXX may have violated several federal laws, including the FCRA, FDCPA, TILA, and Privacy Act. \nThese violations may have resulted in actual damages, statutory damages, and attorney fees I would like to emphasize the emotional distress and financial hardship that XXXXXXXX XXXX and the XXXX XXXX XXXX have caused me and my family. The inaccurate reporting of the charged off debt has negatively impacted my credit score and financial standing, making it difficult for me to obtain credit or loans, which has caused significant stress and anxiety. \n\nFurthermore, the burden of defending against a lawsuit and potentially paying for damages and legal fees has taken a toll on me and my family. This has prevented me from investing in new business ventures or pursuing other opportunities that would have helped improve my financial situation. \n\nI strongly urge XXXXXXXX XXXX and the XXXX XXXX XXXX to correct any inaccurate information related to the charged off debt and to provide me with a written explanation of the investigation and resolution of any disputes. I also request that they provide me with a copy of my credit report and any information related to the charged off debt that has been provided to third parties. \n\nXXXXXXXX XXXX has violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by reporting inaccurate and misleading information to credit reporting agencies. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), XXXX XXXX has a duty to provide accurate and complete information to credit reporting agencies. However, the data provided clearly shows that XXXXXXXX XXXX  has reported inaccurate and false information regarding my accounts, including the status and amount of the debt owed. This has resulted in significant harm to my credit score and overall financial standing. \n\nAdditionally, XXXXXXXX XXXX has violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) by engaging in abusive and harassing behavior towards me. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1692d, debt collectors are prohibited from engaging in conduct that is intended to harass, oppress, or abuse any person. However, the data provided shows that XXXXXXXX XXXX has engaged in repeated and aggressive phone calls and letters, despite my requests to cease such communication. This conduct has caused significant emotional distress and anxiety for me and it has affected my cognitive abilities to focus on daily task and functioning. \n\nFurthermore, XXXXXXXX XXXX has violated the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) by failing to disclose important information regarding my account. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1638 ( a ) ( 2 ), creditors are required to disclose the finance charge, annual percentage rate ( APR ), and other important terms and conditions of a credit account. However, the data provided shows that XXXXXXXX XXXX failed to disclose certain fees and charges associated with the account, resulting in unexpected and excessive charges. \n\nFinally, XXXXXXXX XXXX has violated 18 U.S.C. 242 by engaging in conduct that constitutes a color of law violation. Pursuant to this statute, it is illegal for any person, acting under color of law, to deprive another person of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. The data provided shows that XXXXXXXX XXXX has engaged in deceptive and unfair practices, this resulted in reporting inaccurate information to credit reporting agencies, engaging in abusive debt collection practices, and failing to disclose important information regarding his account. These practices have deprived me of my rights to fair and accurate credit reporting, protection from abusive debt collection practices, and full disclosure of the terms and conditions of his account. \nIn light of these violations, I urge the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) to investigate XXXXXXXX XXXX to conduct and take appropriate action to hold them accountable for their actions. I deserve fair and just treatment, and it is imperative that financial institutions such as XXXX XXXX are held to the highest standards of fairness, transparency, and accountability. \nLastly, I have not given consent for XXXXXXXX XXXX to share my personal information with third-party companies, yet I have received numerous calls and emails from companies claiming to have received my information from XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX This is a clear violation of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), which requires financial institutions to safeguard their customers ' personal information. I have experienced unprofessional behavior from XXXXXXXX XXXX representatives. When attempting to resolve issues with my account, I have been met with hostility and condescension. This is not only disrespectful, but it is also a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Consumer Financial Protection Act. \n\nFurthermore, I have been provided with deceptive contract terms and language. The terms and conditions presented to me were confusing and intentionally misleading. This violates USC codes 15 U.S. Code 41, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce. \n\nOverall, these actions by XXXXXXXX XXXX have caused significant harm to me and my financial situation, and I urge the CFPB to take swift action against them. I request that the CFPB hold XXXXXXXX XXXX accountable for violating the EFTA, TISA, FDCPA, CFPA, USC 15 U.S. Code 41, and GLBA. Additionally, I request that I receive monetary relief and account remedy for the harm caused to me and my family. \n\nI am writing to express my deep concern regarding the treatment I have received from your company. Despite my efforts to remedy the issues with my account, I have not received any satisfactory resolution. I have contacted your company via certified mail on two separate occasions, yet I have not received any response or action regarding my concerns. \n\nFurthermore, I have requested debt validation and acceptance for value and counteroffer/claim for proof of claim, but your company has failed to provide me with any evidence or documentation to support their claims against me. This is a clear violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Consumer Financial Protection Act. \n\nI believe that your company has committed several violations of the USC codes, including USC 15 1692 et seq. and USC 12 5536, which prohibit unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in consumer financial products or services. \n\nIn addition, your company 's actions have caused me significant financial and emotional damages. I have experienced unauthorized overdraft fees, unprofessional behavior from XXXX Bank representatives, and deceptive contract terms and language. These actions are also a violation of USC codes 15 U.S. Code 41 and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which requires financial institutions to safeguard their customers ' personal information. \nI would like to urge your company to take immediate action to remedy my accounts and provide me with monetary relief for the damages I have incurred. I am also requesting that you provide me with documentation that supports the claims made against me, as well as evidence of the credit card agreement that was allegedly entered into on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nFurthermore, I would like to draw your attention to the issue of language fraud, which is a violation of USC 18 1343. Your company has created a security in my name and made an XXXX out of my name without my knowledge or consent. This is a clear violation of my rights and is a form of language fraud.\n\nUSC Codes related to my case : 1. USC 15 1692 et seq.\n\n2. USC 12 5536 3. USC 15 U.S. Code 41 4. Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act 5. USC 18 1343 I have recently discovered that XXXX Bank has created a security in my name and made an LLC out of my name, XXXX XXXX XXXX, without my knowledge or consent. This is a clear violation of the U.S. Code, specifically USC Title 15, Chapter 2D, Section 78c, which defines what constitutes a security. It is also a violation of my privacy and personal rights. \n\nAs a valued customer of XXXX Bank, I expect transparency and respect when it comes to my personal information and financial accounts. It is concerning to me that this security was created without my knowledge or consent, and I request immediate action to remedy this situation. \n\nI kindly ask that you provide me with a detailed explanation of how this security was created and what steps will be taken to correct this issue. Additionally, I request that you provide me with any and all documentation related to this security and LLC. \nI trust that you will take this matter seriously and work to resolve this issue in a timely and efficient manner. Thank you for your attention to this matter. \n\nI have not given consent for XXXX Bank to share my personal information with third-party companies, yet I have received numerous calls and emails from companies claiming to have received my information from XXXX Bank XXXX This is a clear violation of the XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), which requires financial institutions to safeguard their customers ' personal information. I have experienced unprofessional behavior from XXXX Bank representatives. When attempting to resolve issues with my account, I have been met with hostility and condescension. This is not only disrespectful, but it is also a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Consumer Financial Protection Act. \n\nFurthermore, I have been provided with deceptive contract terms and language. The terms and conditions presented to me were confusing and intentionally misleading. \nThis violates XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce. \n\nOverall, these actions by XXXX Bank have caused significant harm to me and my financial situation, and I urge the CFPB to take swift action against them. I request that the CFPB hold XXXX Bank accountable for violating the XXXX, XXXX, FDCPA, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX Code XXXX, and XXXX. Additionally, I request that I receive monetary relief and account remedy for the harm caused to me and my family. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the treatment I have received from your company. Despite my efforts to remedy the issues with my account, I have not received any satisfactory resolution. I have contacted your company via certified mail on XXXX separate occasions, yet I have not received any response or action regarding my concerns. \n\nFurthermore, I have requested debt validation and acceptance for value and counteroffer/claim for proof of claim, but your company has failed to provide me with any evidence or documentation to support their claims against me. This is a clear violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Consumer Financial Protection Act.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-03-07T02:59:35.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"48188","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6652671","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2023-03-07T02:59:24.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Pursuant to this statute, it is illegal for any <em>person</em>, acting under color of law, to deprive another <em>person</em> of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States."]},"sort":[6.4920177,"6652671"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6652670","_score":6.477186,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dispute of Inaccurate Credit Report Information To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to dispute inaccurate information on my credit report that has been reported by XXXXXXXX XXXX Specifically, XXXX XXXX  has reported a charged off account which is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) as defined by Sections 1681e and 1681i of the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681-1681x ), as well as other federal laws and regulations. \n\nI am writing to dispute inaccurate information on my credit report that relates to my account with XXXXXXXX XXXX. The account information on my credit report is as follows : Account Number : XXXX Original Creditor : - Company Sold : LNMV Funding LLC Account Type : Unsecured Loan Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Open/Closed : Closed Status : Charge-off Status Updated : XX/XX/XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Balance Updated : XX/XX/XXXX Original Balance : {$33000.00} Monthly Payment : - Past Due Amount : - Highest Balance : - Terms : 60 Months Responsibility : Individual I believe that the information listed above is inaccurate and unfairly damaging my credit score. I dispute this information on the grounds that XXXX XXXX has violated federal laws in their collection activities against me. Specifically, I believe that XXXXXXXX XXXX violated the following USC Codes : USC 1692e - False or misleading representations USC 1692f - Unfair practices USC 1681s-2 - Duties of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies USC 1692d - Harassment or abuse USC 1692c - Communication in connection with debt collection USC 1692b - Acquisition of location information USC 1692a - Definitions Furthermore, I have previously sent two certified letters to your offices, the first letter was for debt validation made pursuant to Title X 111-203q Sec. 809 ( b ) of the FDCPA. I respectfully requested that your offices provide me with competent evidence that I have any legal obligation to pay you. The second letter refers to Acceptance for Value and Counter Offer/Claim for Proof of Claim . \nDespite my attempts to resolve this issue, XXXXXXXX XXXX has continued to violate my rights as a consumer. Specifically, I am troubled by the fact that you charged off my debt in XX/XX/XXXX, just a few months after opening the account in XX/XX/XXXX. This action violates USC 1692e, which prohibits false or misleading representations in connection with debt collection. I believe that charging off a debt so soon after it was opened is not only unfair but also misleading to consumers. \nAdditionally, XXXXXXXX XXXX sold my debt to LNMV Funding LLC on XX/XX/XXXX. According to my credit report, LNMV Funding LLC is reporting the account as seriously past due and assigned to an attorney, collection agency, or credit grantor 's internal collection department. This action violates USC 1692d, which prohibits harassment or abuse in connection with debt collection, and USC 1692c, which regulates communication in connection with debt collection. \nI demand that XXXXXXXX XXXX take immediate action to correct the inaccurate information on my credit report and provide monetary relief for the damages caused by your violations. I request that XXXXXXXX XXXX pay me {$1000.00} per violation in accordance with the CFPB 's past cases where clients received monetary relief for similar violations. \n\nUnder the FCRA, consumer reporting agencies must follow certain procedures for reporting information about consumers ' creditworthiness including when reporting \" charged off '' debts. Sections 1681e and 1681i of the FCRA require consumer reporting agencies to follow reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of consumer credit information and to promptly investigate disputes. Additionally, the FCRA allows for consumers to dispute inaccurate information on their credit reports and request corrections. \n\nIn XXXX, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) took action against several large credit reporting agencies, including XXXXXXXX XXXX, for violations of the FCRA, resulting in millions of dollars in monetary relief for affected consumers. The CFPB alleged that these credit reporting agencies failed to maintain accurate information and failed to investigate disputes in a timely manner. As a victim of unfair debt collection practices, I am writing to express my concerns about the charge-off reporting on my credit report. Despite my numerous attempts to resolve the debt, XXXXXXXX XXXX has failed to respond to my requests for validation or to provide proof of the alleged debt. Instead, they charged off the debt and continued to report it to the credit bureaus, damaging my credit score and causing me financial hardship. \n\nIt is important to note that charging off a debt does not mean that the debt is forgiven or that the consumer is no longer liable for the debt. Charging off a debt simply means that the lender has written off the debt as uncollectible and has claimed it as a loss on their tax return. However, the debt remains on the consumer 's credit report and can continue to be reported by the lender, causing significant harm to the consumer 's credit score and financial reputation. \n\nFurthermore, the decision to charge off a debt should only be made after the lender has exhausted all other efforts to collect the debt, including sending validation of the debt, negotiating payment arrangements, and pursuing legal action if necessary. In my case, XXXXXXXX XXXX failed to provide any validation of the debt, refused to negotiate payment arrangements, and instead pursued legal action against me without providing proof of the debt. \n\nThis is a clear violation of several federal laws, including the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), which prohibits debt collectors from making false or misleading statements and from using unfair or abusive practices to collect a debt. Additionally, the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) requires that all information on a consumer 's credit report be accurate, verifiable, and complete. Reporting a charge-off without proper validation or documentation violates these laws and can result in significant damages to the consumer. \n\nI am requesting that XXXXXXXX XXXX take immediate action to remove the charge-off from my credit report, provide proof of the alleged debt, and compensate me for any damages incurred as a result of their unfair and illegal debt collection practices. I am also requesting that they stop all legal action against me until the debt has been properly validated and resolved. \n\nDue process is a constitutional right that guarantees individuals fair treatment under the law. In my case, I reached out to XXXXXXXX XXXX. multiple times via certified mail to remedy my accounts and provide debt validation, but they failed to respond. This lack of response is a violation of my due process rights, as it denies me the opportunity to address and resolve any issues with my accounts. \n\nThe USC code that pertains to this violation is USC 1692g, which requires debt collectors to provide consumers with written validation of the debt within five days of initial contact. Failure to provide validation can result in a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and may entitle the consumer to statutory damages. \nFurthermore XXXXXXXX XXXX. charged off my debt and reported it to credit bureaus, which has negatively impacted my credit score and reputation. \nThis reporting is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), which mandates that credit reporting agencies and creditors report accurate and complete information. Charging off a debt does not relieve a creditor of the responsibility to report the accurate status of the account. \nThe USC code that pertains to this violation is USC 1681s-2 ( a ), which states that furnishers of information to credit reporting agencies must provide accurate and complete information. Violations of this section can result in liability for actual and punitive damages, as well as attorney 's fees and costs. \n\nI encourage the CFPB to take action against XXXX XXXX for their illegal and unethical practices. It is unacceptable for a financial institution to take advantage of consumers in this manner, and I hope that my case will serve as a warning to others who may be experiencing similar issues. \n\nIn addition to FCRA violations, XXXX XXXX has also violated other federal laws and regulations, including the Privacy Act of 1974 ( 5 U.S.C. 522a ), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( 15 USC 1681, 15 USC 6801-6809 ), the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR 313.1-313.7, 16 CFR 433.2-433.3 ), and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692p ). XXXXXXXX XXXX has also failed to adequately protect my personal information, which is a violation of the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998 ( 18 U.S. Code 1028 ). \n\nFCRA : Actual damages : Any financial loss or harm suffered by the consumer as a result of the inaccurate information reported by the credit reporting agency, such as denial of credit, higher interest rates, or loss of employment. \nPunitive damages : Additional damages awarded to punish the credit reporting agency for willful or negligent violations of the FCRA. \nStatutory damages : A fixed amount of damages awarded to the consumer for each violation of the FCRA, regardless of whether any actual harm was suffered. The amount of statutory damages can range from {$100.00} to {$1000.00} per violation, depending on the nature and severity of the violation. \n\nExamples of FCRA violations that can result in damages include : XXXX. Reporting inaccurate information on the consumer 's credit report, such as a charged off account that has been paid in full or a debt that does not belong to the consumer. \nXXXX. Failing to correct inaccurate information on the consumer 's credit report after receiving a dispute from the consumer. \nXXXX. Failing to conduct a reasonable investigation of a consumer dispute. \nXXXX. Continuing to report inaccurate information on the consumer 's credit report even after being informed of the inaccuracy. \n\nUSC codes related to the FCRA : Sections 1681e and 1681i of the FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681-1681x USC codes related to the FDCPA : 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692p USC codes related to the TILA : 15 U.S.C. 1601-1667f FDCPA : Actual damages : Any financial loss or harm suffered by the consumer as a result of the debt collector 's actions, such as lost wages or medical expenses. \nStatutory damages : A fixed amount of damages awarded to the consumer for each violation of the FDCPA, regardless of whether any actual harm was suffered. The amount of statutory damages can range from {$100.00} to {$1000.00} per violation, depending on the nature and severity of the violation. \n\nAttorney 's fees : If the consumer prevails in a lawsuit against the debt collector, the court may order the debt collector to pay the consumer 's attorney 's fees. \nExamples of FDCPA violations that can result in damages include : Harassing or abusive language used by the debt collector, such as threats of violence or using profanity. \n\nXXXX. Falsely representing the amount or nature of the debt owed. \nXXXX. Falsely representing that the debt collector is an attorney or government representative. \nXXXX. Failing to validate the debt within 30 days of the initial contact with the consumer. \nTILA : Actual damages : Any financial loss or harm suffered by the consumer as a result of the creditor 's failure to disclose required information, such as hidden fees or incorrect interest rates. \n\nStatutory damages : A fixed amount of damages awarded to the consumer for certain violations of the TILA, regardless of whether any actual harm was suffered. The amount of statutory damages can range from {$400.00} to {$4000.00} per violation, depending on the nature and severity of the violation. \n\nRescission : The right of the consumer to cancel certain types of loans within a specified period of time if the creditor fails to provide the required disclosures. \n\nExamples of TILA violations that can result in damages include : XXXX. Failing to provide the consumer with a written disclosure of the finance charge, annual percentage rate ( APR ), and other important terms of the loan. \nXXXX. Failing to provide the consumer with a right of rescission for certain types of loans, such as home equity loans. \nMisrepresenting the terms or conditions of the loan, such as falsely stating that the loan has a fixed interest rate when it actually has a variable rate. \n\nThere have been several recent case studies where the CFPB has awarded monetary relief to consumers for violations of the FCRA and other relevant laws. In XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX agreed to pay a combined {$26.00} XXXX in restitution to affected consumers for FCRA violations. In XXXX, the CFPB ordered XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX to pay {$1.00} XXXX in restitution to affected consumers for violations of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E. \nXXXX appears to be in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692p ) and the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1601-1667f ). The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from using false, deceptive, or misleading representations or means in connection with the collection of any debt. The TILA requires creditors to provide certain disclosures about the terms and conditions of a consumer credit transaction. Failure to comply with these laws can result in monetary damages and statutory penalties. \n\nUnder the FCRA, consumer reporting agencies must follow certain procedures for reporting information about consumers ' creditworthiness, including when reporting \" charged off '' debts. Sections 1681e and 1681i of the FCRA require consumer reporting agencies to follow reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of consumer credit information and to promptly investigate disputes. Violations of the FCRA can result in actual damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees. \n\nExamples of damages related to FCRA violations include : XXXX. Denial of credit or employment XXXX. Higher interest rates on loans XXXX. Increased insurance premiums XXXX. Emotional distress and loss of enjoyment of life XXXXXXXX XXXX inaccurate reporting of the charged off account on your credit report is a violation of the FCRA. In XXXX, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) took action against several large credit reporting agencies, including XXXX XXXX, for violations of the FCRA, resulting in millions of dollars in monetary relief for affected consumers. The CFPB alleged that these credit reporting agencies failed to maintain accurate information and failed to investigate disputes in a timely manner. \n\nThe FDCPA, which is enforced by the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), protects consumers from abusive debt collection practices. 15 U.S.C. 1692-1692p outline the regulations that debt collectors must follow. Violations of the FDCPA can result in actual damages, statutory damages, and attorney fees. \n\nExamples of damages related to FDCPA violations include : XXXX. Harassment or abuse XXXX. False or misleading representations XXXX. Unfair or unconscionable practices The Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) is a federal law that requires creditors to disclose certain information to borrowers, including the annual percentage rate ( APR ), finance charges, and the total cost of credit. 15 U.S.C. 1601-1667f outline the regulations that creditors must follow. Violations of the TILA can result in actual damages, statutory damages, and attorney fees. \nXXXX. Examples of damages related to TILA violations include : XXXX. Payment of excessive fees XXXX. Overcharging for credit XXXX. Failure to disclose required information It is possible that XXXXXXXX XXXX actions, including the terms of the credit card agreement and any fees charged, may constitute violations of the TILA. \nThe Privacy Act of 1974 ( 5 U.S.C. 522a ) is a federal law that governs the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of personal information by federal agencies. It also provides individuals with certain rights to access and amend their own records. Violations of the Privacy Act can result in actual damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees. \nXXXXXXXX XXXX failure to adequately protect your personal information, which was disclosed in the complaint, may constitute a violation of the Privacy Act. \nIn conclusion XXXX XXXX inaccurate reporting of the charged off account and the actions of the XXXX XXXX XXXX may have violated several federal laws, including the FCRA, FDCPA, TILA, and Privacy Act. \nThese violations may have resulted in actual damages, statutory damages, and attorney fees I would like to emphasize the emotional distress and financial hardship that XXXXXXXX XXXX and the XXXX XXXX XXXX have caused me and my family. The inaccurate reporting of the charged off debt has negatively impacted my credit score and financial standing, making it difficult for me to obtain credit or loans, which has caused significant stress and anxiety. \n\nFurthermore, the burden of defending against a lawsuit and potentially paying for damages and legal fees has taken a toll on me and my family. This has prevented me from investing in new business ventures or pursuing other opportunities that would have helped improve my financial situation. \n\nI strongly urge XXXXXXXX XXXX and the XXXX XXXX XXXX to correct any inaccurate information related to the charged off debt and to provide me with a written explanation of the investigation and resolution of any disputes. I also request that they provide me with a copy of my credit report and any information related to the charged off debt that has been provided to third parties. \n\nXXXXXXXX XXXX has violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by reporting inaccurate and misleading information to credit reporting agencies. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), XXXX XXXX has a duty to provide accurate and complete information to credit reporting agencies. However, the data provided clearly shows that XXXXXXXX XXXX has reported inaccurate and false information regarding my accounts, including the status and amount of the debt owed. This has resulted in significant harm to my credit score and overall financial standing. \n\nAdditionally, XXXXXXXX XXXX has violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) by engaging in abusive and harassing behavior towards me. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1692d, debt collectors are prohibited from engaging in conduct that is intended to harass, oppress, or abuse any person. However, the data provided shows that XXXXXXXX XXXX has engaged in repeated and aggressive phone calls and letters, despite my requests to cease such communication. This conduct has caused significant emotional distress and anxiety for me and it has affected my cognitive abilities to focus on daily task and functioning. \n\nFurthermore, XXXXXXXX XXXX has violated the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) by failing to disclose important information regarding my account. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1638 ( a ) ( 2 ), creditors are required to disclose the finance charge, annual percentage rate ( APR ), and other important terms and conditions of a credit account. However, the data provided shows that XXXXXXXX XXXX failed to disclose certain fees and charges associated with the account, resulting in unexpected and excessive charges. \n\nFinally, XXXXXXXX XXXX has violated 18 U.S.C. 242 by engaging in conduct that constitutes a color of law violation. Pursuant to this statute, it is illegal for any person, acting under color of law, to deprive another person of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. The data provided shows that XXXXXXXX XXXX has engaged in deceptive and unfair practices, this resulted in reporting inaccurate information to credit reporting agencies, engaging in abusive debt collection practices, and failing to disclose important information regarding his account. These practices have deprived me of my rights to fair and accurate credit reporting, protection from abusive debt collection practices, and full disclosure of the terms and conditions of his account. \nIn light of these violations, I urge the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) to investigate XXXXXXXX XXXX to conduct and take appropriate action to hold them accountable for their actions. I deserve fair and just treatment, and it is imperative that financial institutions such as XXXXXXXX XXXX are held to the highest standards of fairness, transparency, and accountability. \nLastly, I have not given consent for XXXXXXXX XXXX to share my personal information with third-party companies, yet I have received numerous calls and emails from companies claiming to have received my information from XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX This is a clear violation of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), which requires financial institutions to safeguard their customers ' personal information. I have experienced unprofessional behavior from XXXXXXXX XXXX representatives. When attempting to resolve issues with my account, I have been met with hostility and condescension. This is not only disrespectful, but it is also a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Consumer Financial Protection Act. \n\nFurthermore, I have been provided with deceptive contract terms and language. The terms and conditions presented to me were confusing and intentionally misleading. This violates USC codes 15 U.S. Code 41, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce. \n\nOverall, these actions by XXXXXXXX XXXX have caused significant harm to me and my financial situation, and I urge the CFPB to take swift action against them. I request that the CFPB hold XXXXXXXX XXXX accountable for violating the XXXX, XXXX, FDCPA, XXXX, XXXX 15 U.S. Code 41, and GLBA. Additionally, I request that I receive monetary relief and account remedy for the harm caused to me and my family. \n\nI am writing to express my deep concern regarding the treatment I have received from your company. Despite my efforts to remedy the issues with my account, I have not received any satisfactory resolution. I have contacted your company via certified mail on two separate occasions, yet I have not received any response or action regarding my concerns. \n\nFurthermore, I have requested debt validation and acceptance for value and counteroffer/claim for proof of claim, but your company has failed to provide me with any evidence or documentation to support their claims against me. This is a clear violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Consumer Financial Protection Act. \n\nI believe that your company has committed several violations of the USC codes, including USC 15 1692 et seq. and USC 12 5536, which prohibit unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in consumer financial products or services. \n\nIn addition, your company 's actions have caused me significant financial and emotional damages. I have experienced unauthorized overdraft fees, unprofessional behavior from XXXXXXXX XXXX representatives, and deceptive contract terms and language. These actions are also a violation of USC codes 15 U.S. Code 41 and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which requires financial institutions to safeguard their customers ' personal information. \nI would like to urge your company to take immediate action to remedy my accounts and provide me with monetary relief for the damages I have incurred. I am also requesting that you provide me with documentation that supports the claims made against me, as well as evidence of the credit card agreement that was allegedly entered into on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nFurthermore, I would like to draw your attention to the issue of language fraud, which is a violation of USC 18 1343. Your company has created a security in my name and made an XXXX out of my name without my knowledge or consent. This is a clear violation of my rights and is a form of language fraud. \n\n\nUSC Codes related to my case : 1. USC 15 1692 et seq.\n\n2. USC 12 5536 3. USC 15 U.S. Code 41 4. Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act 5. USC 18 1343 I have recently discovered that XXXXXXXX XXXX has created a security in my name and made an XXXX out of my name, XXXX XXXX XXXX, without my knowledge or consent. This is a clear violation of the U.S. Code, specifically USC Title 15, Chapter 2D, Section 78c, which defines what constitutes a security. It is also a violation of my privacy and personal rights. \n\nAs a valued customer of XXXXXXXX XXXX, I expect transparency and respect when it comes to my personal information and financial accounts. It is concerning to me that this security was created without my knowledge or consent, and I request immediate action to remedy this situation. \n\nI kindly ask that you provide me with a detailed explanation of how this security was created and what steps will be taken to correct this issue. Additionally, I request that you provide me with any and all documentation related to this security and LLC. \nI trust that you will take this matter seriously and work to resolve this issue in a timely and efficient manner. Thank you for your attention to this matter. \n\nI have not given consent for XXXXXXXX XXXX  to share my personal information with third-party companies, yet I have received numerous calls and emails from companies claiming to have received my information from XXXX XXXX  XXXX This is a clear violation of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ), which requires financial institutions to safeguard their customers ' personal information. I have experienced unprofessional behavior from XXXX XXXX representatives. When attempting to resolve issues with my account, I have been met with hostility and condescension. This is not only disrespectful, but it is also a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Consumer Financial Protection Act. \n\nFurthermore, I have been provided with deceptive contract terms and language. The terms and conditions presented to me were confusing and intentionally misleading. \nThis violates USC codes 15 U.S. Code 41, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce. \n\nOverall, these actions by XXXXXXXX XXXX have caused significant harm to me and my financial situation, and I urge the CFPB to take swift action against them. I request that the CFPB hold XXXX XXXX accountable for violating the EFTA, TISA, FDCPA, CFPA, USC 15 U.S. Code 41, and GLBA. Additionally, I request that I receive monetary relief and account remedy for the harm caused to me and my family. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the treatment I have received from your company. Despite my efforts to remedy the issues with my account, I have not received any satisfactory resolution. I have contacted your company via certified mail on two separate occasions, yet I have not received any response or action regarding my concerns. \n\nFurthermore, I have requested debt validation and acceptance for value and counteroffer/claim for proof of claim, but your company has failed to provide me with any evidence or documentation to support their claims against me. This is a clear violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Consumer Financial Protection Act.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-03-07T02:59:35.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"48188","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6652670","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","date_received":"2023-03-07T02:59:24.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Pursuant to this statute, it is illegal for any <em>person</em>, acting under color of law, to deprive another <em>person</em> of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States."]},"sort":[6.477186,"6652670"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"5758615","_score":5.9860897,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX To : XXXX  ( XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) CFPB ( Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ) From : XXXX XXXX ( Home owner ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX Dear officers of state and federal government : My name is XXXX XXXX and I am going to write to you asking for your help with a loan originator, Amerisave Mortgage. But before I get into this issue Im going to provide some background information as to why this loan is of utmost importance. Here is the information I had submitted in XXXX of XXXX and happy to say that XXXX XXXX now has an XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX is in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in Georgia. Not everyone responded but all were alerted. This is the lead up to my request for a loan : XX/XX/XXXX To : XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Fictitious Names Filing System ) XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX. Internal Revenue Service XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX. Florida Department XXXX XXXX XXXX La XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, FL XXXX From : XXXX XXXX ( Victim of Fake Contractor/ Fraud ) XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX : XXXX Re : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Address as on original contract, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX XXXX : XXXX Hello and thank you for your time. This letter is intended to shed a light on not only my financial misfortune at the hands of allowing this self proclaimed XXXX into my home, but to ask each of you to hold him accountable for knowingly advertising and willfully operating as a XXXX within XXXX XXXX, FL without any proper licensure, professional, or business. I am a victim of XXXX fraud and the XXXX XXXX XXXX Department defines victim as : A victim is a person who suffers direct or threatened physical, psychological, financial harm as a result of the commission or attempted commission of a crime or delinquent act or against whom the crime or delinquent act is committed. \nI met XXXX XXXX XXXX, owner of said company XXXX XXXX, while he was working at a former neighbors rental house off XXXX  XXXX in XXXX. I asked him if he was available to look at my home and possible do some work to install sheetrock and windows as well as replace my flooring. I had secured not only the permit to have my electrical work done but had also hired licensed electricians. He met my electricians and had told them he too was an electrician ; I stayed with the originally hired electricians, as I had hired them first. ( Im thankful for that decision as I now know XXXX XXXX XXXX is NOT an electrician. ) Later, XXXX XXXX XXXX agreed to meet me at my home and presented me a contract as the XXXX. This happened on XX/XX/XXXX to do the work for a total of XXXX, XXXX of which he was initially paid XXXX. We both signed this contract in front of a young woman he said was his wife : I have the original. This initial amount was paid directly to him, XXXX XXXX XXXX, to secure windows that he told me were approximately XXXX. XXXX and the remainder would be put toward sheetrock and supplies. I had purchased all my own tile flooring, electrical supplies and bath vanities and all fixtures as well as my French doors he later billed me for. The next check he asked me to make for XXXX to avoid bank issues and to make it out to XXXX. Both checks were cashed and I still do not have my windows. I also have all text messages and email correspondence to validate everything I claim. \nI had applied for a loan and was having trouble securing it due to my home having been earlier destroyed by a flood. I moved after the flood but I realized the person who had promised me to repair my home right after the flood was the epitome of a con man and fake XXXX ; he is now in jail but had fleeced me for over XXXX and never repaired my home as promised. XXXX XXXX XXXX knew my misfortune and promised he was going to make my home beautiful and do a great job as he advertised Always Done Right. He told me he was not only a XXXX, ( stated in his contract ) but an electrician. So even though my home wasnt in condition to take money/equity out of it, even though I own it outright, I had to invest in it to get it in condition to appraise for a loan. I gave XXXX XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX nearly all my money with the promise of being able to move back into it by the end of XXXX when my last rental lease would be up. It didnt happen and I wasnt able to move into it until mid XXXX when my children returned from their summer trip to Montana XXXX \nIn a nutshell, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and his Spanish speaking crew from XXXX XXXX, not only did work without a license, they did work that resulted in my upstairs vanity sink falling out and separating from the vanity, removed my flat roof which has now resulted in my sky light leaking, ( I have ample video footage ) ceilings only primed, and windows never installed yet taken apart from the inside leaving me and my children to face drafts and air leaks and may other things still left unfinished. My water bills and heating/cooling bills are exceptionally high even to the point of having to turn my water off in a bathroom because it ran constantly. He had his crew improperly install my toilet and therefore it ran constantly. My home is not finished, in fact it has been a nightmare living in our unfinished home that was supposed to be ready and comfortable at the end of XX/XX/XXXX. I can assure you it is not. I have even received from my home owner insurance that as of XXXX, XXXX, they are dropping me due to the unsatisfactory condition of my home. The XXXX said it wasnt in a condition to continue to insure even though I pay over XXXX per month to maintain insurance. Imagine my anxiety! I am having a difficult time wrapping my head around this and how it should have been a happier homecoming than it has been. I am trying to reconcile what I could have possibly purchased for all the money he got from me and had even asked him to account for what he had done and the cost for that. He sent me an invoice for over {$120000.00} and demand for me to pay and then placed a lien on my home to which I have disputed. I never did get the answer to the question I posed asking to tell me what he had done for all the money he had been given as I know I never got the windows. \nI signed XXXX contract with XXXX XXXX and got a text message one day about a different contract I had never seen or signed. I said Id only ever signed one contract and he then sent me an additional one for over XXXX. I never signed that contract and never would as I didnt have the money or resources to cover that. In fact I have a message telling him to NOT buy things as I wanted to wait for my loan to go though. He would buy things and I would tell him I didnt want them such as interior doors. His greed seemed to have no bounds as the lien he placed on me and my house asked me to pay that egregious amount. He had a lady who represented him, ( I have the voice mails ) threaten me to pay or get a lien or have them show up at my office of employment for payment. I work as a XXXX XXXX for the XXXX XXXX Collector in XXXX so imagine the angst that created for me : to have been calm with that threat. The harassment and threats as well as substandard work, and no windows has made it very hard on all of us. My children and I have risen to meet this with positivity and respectfully ask that you look into this for us and please help make things right. Please hold XXXX XXXX XXXX accountable for what he has done and failed to do ; he is not a XXXX yet acted the part in every way and caused me additional stress and financial hardship by having to redo and repair his inadequacies. He has no license to do the things he did in my home such as even hooking up my gas oven incorrectly which if my oldest son had not smelled the gas, we would have been blown up if Id lit one of my candles. We need your help. \nI did contact my friend, a private XXXX, who did differentiate between a certified XXXX and a fake XXXX ; this illuminated the fact that XXXX XXXX XXXX is not a XXXX but had presented on paper and in person as a XXXX. He advised me to contact the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and file a report to which they sent an XXXX to hear my story, take photos of all documents ( contracts ), and look at my home noting that my windows are rotted out and are in dire need of repair, and most obviously that I had paid for them but did not get them installed or at a minimum left with me after having paid for them. \nAs a mother of XXXX children, I have worked very hard to not only instill in my children to follow rules but to note how when rules are not followed, the consequences can be unsettling. I have followed the rules. XXXX XXXX XXXX has not. I paid for products and service yet didnt receive them and not only didnt receive them, my money was taken under the guise of professionalism and integrity. There can be no professionalism and integrity when one is an imposter and ruining the reputations of other legitimate contractors. Those who fake their abilities ruin the trust of people like me who depend on the word of someone especially when in a desperate situation. Please show my children that the rules put in place are there for a reason and that agencies with the power to make things right, actually do. Let them see that justice can be served and doing the right thing always sets one apart for the greater good. I also ask that I see justice carried out as the reason for the rules being put in place in the first place. \nWhen I met XXXX XXXX XXXX, I was desperate to get into my home after having moved XXXX times in XXXX years trying to get back to our home after it had flooded in XXXX. You can only XXXX my relief when told he could have me in my home at the end of XXXX XXXX You can not XXXX my anguish, anxiety and grief knowing everything he said was not only a lie, but a lie with a smile and promise to help when I was most vulnerable. \nAgain, I am asking that each of you look into this mans company ( XXXX ) and employees as none of them spoke XXXX ; he had told me he brought them in from XXXX XXXX after having met them while he did missionary work with them. I now wonder if this is the truth. The facts that he has no professional license or fictitious name and operates out of his home not paying any tax to the city XXXX XXXX, no workers comp insurance and he has performed work in both city XXXX XXXX limits lends itself to being less than credible. \nPlease reach out to me if you have any questions as I am eager to talk with you and go over any documents or photos of my home that may help you understand. I look forward to your coming together as the founding agencies committed to making things like this right. \nMy report is with investigations at the XXXX XXXX XXXX Department and I am awaiting their reply as to their investigations of all I have discussed, shown, and paid out yet not received. I still have not heard back from them however I appreciate your time reading this and I hope that one less fake XXXX or con man prowls the streets seeking the ruin of ones financial situation especially at a time of great stress, vulnerability, emergency and or hardship. \n\n\nMost Sincerely, XXXX XXXX and family Now to the issue with Amerisave. I had first applied for a loan with them, loan originator XXXX XXXX, in XXXX XXXX had my mother as a cosigner and we had problem after problem with them receiving documents which required me or my mother or her accountant to resend many times the requested documents. Bottom line to this first attempt to secure the loan, it stalled because of the lien I had on my property due to a disgruntled neighbor. While the XXXX was removed by the XXXX XXXX, in XXXX, I was still at the mercy of home repairs as is still the case. I reapplied for the loan in XX/XX/XXXX, to which I did it solo. I resent everything requested and again, stall after stall to include being told I had everything in to receiving a text, call or email stating underwriting needed just one more thing. I sent them all financial information to include bank statements, divorce decree with child support information, SS income the children receive, and my salary amount from my job with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I was even not trusted with what I sent them as they asked me to revisit my divorce attorney, XXXX XXXX, to get a letter stating my child support was accurately reported. I refused to do this as my divorce attorney had been mugged a few years back and lost an eye and I didnt think he practiced law any more. They then required proof of my childrens school grade so I had to provide their report cards proving their grade. I sent old and updated SS income they receive on more than one occasion. I have downloaded the loan paperwork more than 2-3 times and last check it was wrong with errors in several areas. I corrected them stating that if I had signed those documents it was a felony. They were wrong numbers and I caught it thankfully. They made me do another home appraisal even though I had one done in XXXX of XXXX and please note, my home is fully paid for. They have checked my credit several times as evidenced by my credit score. They have been sent all documents requested not just once, but several times and the hold up on their end caused me to run out of time with my home owner ins. Remember my home is still in a situation where repairs are needed such as windows, and a roof, and most importantly a retaining wall before the hurricanes hit. Amerisaves delays became a nightmare for me as with my ins. Even though I had home owner ins through XXXX of XXXX, they required me to provide ins for the XXXX year. So I contacted my agent XXXX XXXX, with XXXX, and we looked for a policy close to what I had. Not to be found as FL had increased all premiums by doubling. They solicited my RCE and I didnt even know what that was until my ins company informed me it was illegal for them to ask for. I sent a message back to them that t he statutes prohibit that request. Everything has changed since I expressed my frustration with them as a loan company. I stated that I had lost faith in them and that my concerns would be addressed with the FL XXXX, and government regulators. I called the governors office and was referred to XXXX  to whom I am making a formal complaint. I believe they are changing rules and denying me my loan based on the fact that I cited I wanted answers. \nSo even though Amerisave had repeatedly told me I had everything in for underwriting approval, they are now telling me that my loan can not go though as it was first told to me. Because my home owner ins went up, they have told me that my debt to income ratio is at 51 % and my loan can not continue unless I find cheaper ins or pay off all my debt. I told them that since the only variable was ins, if my mother paid it would that wipe out the debt they are calculating into the equation. They emphatically told me no and that I would have to either pay off all my debt, ( student loan was previously not included but now would be ) or find cheaper ins. There is no cheaper ins because I lost out on being able to get repairs done to get a XXXX pt inspection to get new ins. Ive had several agents on this loan application, XXXX in fact : XXXX XXXX, a female I dont remember her name as I only had her for a couple days even though she assured me she would see my loan though to the end, King- Lakans supervisor no longer working there, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX  XXXX. Ive begged for a supervisor to help to which they delayed and refused finally to give me the VP of customer service. He told me he was surprised it hadnt come across his desk earlier or that he hadnt seen my application before but assured me they were working on it. Ive had my loan cancelled on their end without prior notice, delays, several agents passed off to, and requests for information that have been sent repeatedly. They are now unwilling to give me the loan as it was written because my insurance premium went up and even though that is the only change in circumstances, they still claim it will not be approved unless I find cheaper ins.. There is none. I asked repeatedly if I paid off any of my debts if that would help and they said no because they were already paid off with the loan if approved. But I asked to recalculate and he refused to come back with the only option was to pay off all debt to get approval. They tried to offer an alternative stating that all my debt would be rolled into the loan application and I would receive XXXX XXXX. Originally I was to over XXXX, XXXX. Ive had my loan amount change so many times XXXX cant even tell you what the real number was going to be. Big difference since having told them about their illegal request ( requirement to approve loan ) of XXXX and that I was going to get answers from you. \nThis has been a nightmare for me. I need help with this and I feel that they are now denying me based on the fact that I was upfront about reaching out to regulators. I believe that is my right and without help on their end talking with a supervisor to look into the issues Id asked about, I now know it is definitely my only option to get an answer. \nPlease help me sort through this as my timeline is ticking. My goal is to get windows and a retaining wall and roof. All these are necessary to avoid further hurricane damage. Their delay and stall antics are hurting me and all insured due to losses I dont want to have. Under the penalty of perjury I affirm and swear that all information I am telling you is true and accurate. I have ample documentation to back this up and I was told also that Amerisave records their conversations so I can provide dates of calls, they can provide conversations unless they chose not to record mine.\n\nIm sure there are things Ive forgotten that will come up and Ill be happy to share them with you. Ive been through a lot in the past four years and the crawl back has not been easy. Amerisave knows my situation. They have taken a hard situation and made it excruciating. Every day I wait for a closing and every day they change something for me. Maybe they will be forthright with you and you can get the answers I couldnt as to why my new insurance changed everything and why if debts or ins was paid the loan only became a mangled mess. Now the only option they give me is to pay off all debt and they have changed my interest rate again and lowered my cash value I can take from my home even though fully paid for. The only variable to change and now I dont know what to do. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2022-07-11T13:55:31.000Z","issue":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","sub_product":"Other type of mortgage","zip_code":"32507","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"5758615","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERISAVE MORTGAGE CORPORATION","date_received":"2022-07-11T13:44:25.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company believes complaint represents an opportunity for improvement to better serve consumers","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I am a <em>victim</em> of <em>XXXX</em> <em>fraud</em> and the <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>Department</em> <em>defines</em> <em>victim</em> as : A <em>victim</em> is a <em>person</em> who <em>suffers</em> direct or threatened physical, psychological, financial harm as a result of the commission or attempted commission of a crime or delinquent act or against whom the crime or delinquent act is committed. \nI met <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, owner of said company <em>XXXX</em> <em>XXXX</em>, while he was working at a former neighbors rental house off <em>XXXX</em>  <em>XXXX</em> in <em>XXXX</em>."]},"sort":[5.9860897,"5758615"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13693898","_score":4.697538,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complaint for Violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act Introduction : Nature of the Action : Plaintiff XXXX XXXX XXXX ( hereinafter Plaintiff ) brings this Complaint against Defendant TransUnion Consumer Solutions ( TransUnion ) for repeated and willful violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., and for failure to comply with industry Metro 2 reporting standards. Plaintiff alleges that TransUnion has persistently reported inaccurate and fraudulent information on his credit report and failed to conduct reasonable reinvestigations of disputed information, in violation of federal law. Despite multiple disputes and a prior identity theft report, TransUnion has continued to report erroneous account information, causing ongoing harm to Plaintiffs credit reputation and financial well-being.\n\nSummary of Violations : TransUnions wrongful conduct includes : ( a ) reporting charged-off accounts with ongoing past-due balances, which is inconsistent with FCRA accuracy requirements and Metro 2 guidelines\n; ( b ) failing to reinvestigate and correct these inaccuracies within the time frame required by law ; ( c ) refusing to provide Plaintiff with the documentation or description of its investigation as required ; and ( d ) effectively performing only cursory, automated investigations that merely parrot furnishers responses, contrary to the FCRAs mandate of a genuine, reasonable investigationcaselaw.findlaw.comcaselaw.findlaw.com. These practices have been condemned by courts and regulators alike, including in a recent enforcement action where the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) described TransUnions dispute handling as sham investigations that flout federal lawconsumerfinance.gov.\n\nPurpose of Complaint : Through this legal-style complaint ( modeled as a federal civil action ), Plaintiff seeks to compel TransUnion to immediately delete all disputed, inaccurate accounts from his credit file and to ensure full compliance with the FCRA and Metro 2 standards. Plaintiff further puts TransUnion on notice that failure to comply within 14 days will result in legal action in federal court, where Plaintiff will seek all available relief, including statutory and punitive damages for TransUnions willful noncompliance. This Complaint is deliberately structured in a formal legal manner so as to bypass automated e-OSCAR dispute processing and demand direct attention from TransUnions compliance and legal departments.\n\nJurisdiction and Venue : Jurisdiction : This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681p and 28 U.S.C. 1331, because Plaintiffs claims arise under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. TransUnions violations of 15 U.S.C. 1681i and 1681e ( b ) give rise to a private right of action for which Plaintiff seeks relief. Supplemental jurisdiction over any state law claims ( if asserted ) would be proper under 28 U.S.C. 1367. \nXXXX  : XXXX is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. 1391 ( b ) because Plaintiff resides in this District and the events giving rise to the claims occurred here. TransUnion regularly conducts business in this District and maintains substantial contacts here. TransUnion, as one of the nations largest consumer reporting agencies, is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District and throughout the United States. Given that the harm to Plaintiffs credit report was felt in this District, venue is appropriate for the adjudication of this dispute. \n\nIntradistrict Assignment : ( If applicable under local rules. ) The events described herein occurred primarily in the county of Plaintiffs residence ( XXXX XXXX, Maryland ). Accordingly, assignment to the XXXX XXXX of this XXXX would be proper. \n\nParties Plaintiff : XXXX XXXX XXXX is a natural person and consumer residing in XXXX XXXX, XXXX. Plaintiff is a consumer as defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( c ), in that he is an individual about whom TransUnion prepares and furnishes consumer credit reports. Plaintiff has at all relevant times been the victim of false and inaccurate credit reporting by TransUnion, which has adversely affected his credit score, credit opportunities, and peace of mind. \n\nDefendant : TransUnion Consumer Solutions/TransUnion LLC ( TransUnion ) is a publicly traded company in XXXX under the ticker symbol XXXX on the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX TransUnion principal place of business is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX. TransUnion is a consumer reporting agency ( CRA ) as defined by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( f ) : it regularly engages in the practice of assembling or evaluating consumer credit information for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports to third parties for monetary fees. TransUnion does business nationwide, including substantial business in the XXXX of XXXX. At all relevant times, TransUnion acted through its agents, employees, or representatives, who were in the scope of their employment and under TransUnions supervision and control. \n\nNon-Party Furnishers : Various creditor institutions and debt collectors furnished the information at issue to TransUnion. These furnishers include, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( collectively, the Furnishers ). While not named as defendants in this complaint, the Furnishers are mentioned to the extent that TransUnion relied on their information and responses. Under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), these Furnishers have duties to investigate and correct disputed information when notified by a CRA. TransUnions conduct in this case is intertwined with the Furnishers failures to correct the false data ; TransUnions actions effectively facilitated and continued those statutory violations by the Furnishers. \n\nFactual Allegations XXXX XXXX XXXX Account : TransUnion was reporting an installment loan account with XXXX XXXX XXXX that had been charged off after alleged non-payment. Here again, TransUnion listed the XXXX account with a status of XXXX XXXX while simultaneously indicating a significant past-due balance remaining. The presence of a past-due balance on an account flagged as a charge-off is contrary to the Metro 2 reporting standards set by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Metro 2 guidelines require that once an account is charged off, the account should reflect a zero current balance and no ongoing past due amount ( since the debt is no longer an open receivable on a current schedule ). TransUnions reporting of the XXXX account violated this standard by showing the account as if payments were still actively delinquent post-charge-off. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : TransUnion was also reporting a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card ( XXXX XXXX ) account with inaccurate status. This account was listed as a charge-off with a past-due balance of several XXXX dollars. If this account was legitimately charged off by XXXX XXXX, it should not have a continuing past due amount in the manner a currently delinquent account would. The reporting created a misleading impression that XXXX had an open, delinquent balance with XXXX XXXX, when in reality the account was closed and charged off ( or, potentially, was also impacted by identity theft or prior disputePlaintiff had previously contested its accuracy ). \n\nOther Accounts and Inaccuracies : In addition to the above, other accounts on Plaintiffs TransUnion report showed similar discrepancies ( charge-off notations with continuing balances, inconsistent dates or amounts, etc. ). Each of these inaccuracies represents a failure by TransUnion to assure maximum possible accuracy in Plaintiffs credit file as required by 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). For example, at least XXXX collection account continued to be reported even after the underlying debt was resolved, and several accounts did not reflect notices of dispute that Plaintiff had lodged, which TransUnion is required to note on the report per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( c ). For brevity, this Complaint focuses on the primary accounts listed above, but Plaintiff alleges that any and all disputed accounts on his TransUnion report contain errors that TransUnion negligently and willfully failed to correct. \n\nImpact of Inaccurate Reporting : The inaccurate information described in Paragraph XXXX was highly damaging to Plaintiff. TransUnions report portrayed Plaintiff as significantly more delinquent and high-risk than he actually is. The reporting of multiple active past-due balances on charged-off accounts made Plaintiffs credit profile appear as if he had multiple severe, unresolved delinquencies at the same time. This has adversely affected Plaintiffs credit score and has led to credit denials or offers on far worse terms than Plaintiff would otherwise qualify for. Moreover, the continued presence of fraudulent accounts ( the XXXX XXXX cards opened by identity thieves ) on the report means Plaintiff is effectively being penalized for crimes committed by others, a harm the FCRA specifically intended to prevent through 1681c-2. Plaintiff has suffered credit damage, loss of credit opportunities, and considerable emotional distress ( including stress, anxiety, and frustration ) as a direct result of TransUnions reporting failures. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX Plaintiffs Dispute to TransUnion : Promptly after reviewing the XX/XX/XXXX credit report, on or about XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX submitted a detailed dispute to TransUnion, challenging the inaccurate accounts. Plaintiff utilized the CFPBs consumer complaint portal to lodge this dispute ( CFPB XXXX XXXX. XXXX, submitted XX/XX/XXXX, and forwarded to TransUnion shortly thereafter ). In his dispute, Plaintiff clearly identified each erroneous account and explained why the reporting was incorrect or inconsistent with the FCRA and Metro 2 standards. Specifically, Plaintiffs dispute highlighted that TransUnion was : Reporting charge-off accounts with an active past-due balance, which is a contradiction and an FCRA violation ( failing to maintain accuracy ) as well as a Metro 2 violation. Plaintiff cited 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ( requirement for consumer reporting agencies to use reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of information ) and noted that this standard was breached by the blatant errors on his report. \n\nFailing to note previous disputes/investigations. Plaintiff referenced that he had disputed the same accounts before ( in XXXX ), and TransUnions reinvestigation obligations under 15 U.S.C. 1681i had not been met, as the results remained incorrect. He emphasized that TransUnion must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of each disputed item, contact the Furnishers with all relevant information, and delete or correct any information that can not be verified as accurate. \n\nPossibly ignoring supporting documentation. Plaintiff attached and/or referenced supporting documents in the CFPB complaint ( such as correspondence, prior dispute results, the identity theft police report, billing statements showing discrepancies, etc. ), and insisted that TransUnion review this evidence rather than relying on automated means alone. \n\nIn this XX/XX/XXXX dispute, Plaintiff expressly requested that TransUnion : ( a ) delete the fraudulent XXXX XXXX accounts ; ( b ) remove or correct the past-due balance reporting on any charged-off accounts ( including XXXX and XXXX Card ) and several other accounts so that they are accurate or deleted if unverifiable ; and ( c ) provide Plaintiff with a copy of the updated report and an explanation of the investigation results. Plaintiff also indicated that if the accounts were verified as accurate, he wanted to be provided with the method of verification and documentation that TransUnion relied upon, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( 7 ).\n\nTransUnions Statutory Duty to Reinvestigate : Upon receiving Plaintiffs dispute, TransUnion was legally required to conduct a meaningful reinvestigation of the disputed items. Under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), a consumer reporting agency must reinvestigate disputed information on a consumers report within 30 days of receiving notice of the dispute ( with a possible 15-day extension if the consumer provides additional relevant information during the 30-day period ). By law, TransUnion was required to : notify the Furnishers of the dispute, provide them all relevant information about the dispute, review and consider all information provided by Plaintiff, and then delete or modify any information that is found to be inaccurate or unverifiable. If the reinvestigation resulted in no change, TransUnion was obligated to send Plaintiff a notice of the results and, upon request, a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information ( the method of verification ) per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) and ( 7 ). These FCRA provisions impose a grave responsibility on TransUnion to do more than simply take a creditors word if the information could be inaccuratecaselaw.findlaw.com. \n\nTransUnions Failure to Timely Respond ( No Response in 30 Days ) : TransUnion did not provide any response or results of investigation within the 30-day period following Plaintiffs XX/XX/XXXX dispute. By law, the reinvestigation should have been completed by approximately XX/XX/XXXX ( 30 days after the dispute was communicated to TransUnion ), or by XX/XX/XXXX if a XXXX extension applied due to additional information provided by XXXX. Those dates passed with no communication from TransUnion. Plaintiff received no update in XX/XX/XXXX regarding the status or outcome of his dispute. This silence itself was a violation of FCRA 1681i. TransUnions failure to reinvestigate and respond within the statutory timeframe is a clear violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ), which mandates prompt handling of consumer disputes. Indeed, TransUnions conduct forced Plaintiff to take further action, as described below. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX Delayed TransUnion Response : On XX/XX/XXXX roughly 51 days after Plaintiffs dispute TransUnion provided a belated response through the CFPB portal, which TransUnion characterized as the results of its investigation. In this response ( which Plaintiff received on that date ), TransUnion claimed to have verified the disputed accounts as accurate and made no meaningful changes to the report. TransUnion did not delete the fraudulent XXXX XXXX accounts ; it did not remove the past-due balance fields on the charge-off accounts ; and it did not otherwise correct the misinformation. Essentially, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX response indicated that the data was verified as accurate by the source. The response was cursory and failed to specifically address the evidence Plaintiff had provided. Furthermore, TransUnion did not provide any of the underlying documents or details of the verification process. It did not, for example, supply Plaintiff with copies of any verification forms or correspondence from XXXX XXXX, XXXX, or XXXX XXXX. Nor did it explain how a charge-off with a past-due balance could be deemed accurate under industry standards. \n\nNo Method of Verification Provided : Plaintiff, upon receiving TransUnions XX/XX/XXXX response, noticed that TransUnion did not include a method of verification letter or description. On XX/XX/XXXX ( the same day the response was received ), Plaintiff requested via follow-up communication that TransUnion provide a detailed description of the procedures used to verify the disputed information, as is his right under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ). TransUnion failed to comply with this request. TransUnion did not send any further explanation of how it conducted its reinvestigation. It provided no information about who at the Furnishers was contacted, what information was given to the Furnishers, or what the Furnishers replied with. This lack of transparency violated TransUnions obligation to provide the method of verification upon request, an important consumer right designed to allow individuals to assess whether the credit bureaus investigation was reasonable. By withholding this information, TransUnion hindered Plaintiffs ability to further challenge or correct the errors, effectively stonewalling his dispute. \n\nTransUnions XXXX on Automated Procedures : From the substance of TransUnions XX/XX/XXXX investigation results, it is evident that TransUnion relied solely on automated processes ( e.g., e-OSCAR ) and the Furnishers electronic responses in handling Plaintiffs dispute. TransUnions response to the CFPB complaint was generic and gave no indication of any human review of Plaintiffs documentation. Upon information and belief, TransUnion simply sent an Automated Consumer Dispute Verification ( ACDV ) form through the e-OSCAR system to XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX XXXX, and other accounts and then blindly accepted their responses that the accounts were verified as reported. TransUnion did not exercise any independent judgment or scrutiny, even though the face of the data contained glaring inconsistencies ( such as a charge-off with an ongoing balance ). In essence, TransUnions investigation was no investigation at all it was an automated forwarding of information and regurgitation of whatever the Furnishers responded with.\n\nFailure to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation : TransUnions handling of the dispute fell far short of a reasonable reinvestigation as required by FCRA 1681i ( a ). A reasonable investigation would have entailed, at minimum : recognizing the obvious red flags in the data, seeking clarifications from Furnishers about the charge-off status vs. balance discrepancy, and independently verifying the identity theft claims ( for example, by reviewing the police report, comparing signatures, or examining account application records for the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. TransUnion did none of this. It merely confirmed the information with the source and took no further steps, which courts have held to be inadequate. In XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX held that simply sending a form to the creditor and doing nothing more is insufficient a credit bureau must bear some responsibility for evaluating the accuracy of information obtained from subscribers in a reinvestigationcaselaw.findlaw.com. Similarly, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Trans Union Corp. held that a reinvestigation that merely parrots the creditors position can not fulfill the obligations contemplated by the statute.caselaw.findlaw.com TransUnions conduct here mirrors the discredited practices in those cases. It shifted the burden back to Plaintiff and the Furnishers, rather than actually resolving the dispute, thus violating the core purpose of 1681i. \n\nCFPB Recognition of XXXX XXXX Practices : XXXX pattern of handling disputes in this automated, perfunctory manner is not only a violation of the FCRA as interpreted by the courts, but it has also drawn regulatory scrutiny. On XX/XX/XXXX, the CFPB filed a public enforcement action against XXXX, alleging that XXXX  does not take sufficient steps to ... investigate ... consumer disputes, resulting in the inclusion of incorrect information on credit reports.consumerfinance.gov The CFPBs Director XXXX XXXX stated that TransUnion was conducting sham investigations rather than properly reviewing the disputes as required by federal law.consumerfinance.gov The experiences of the Plaintiff in this case exemplify the very misconduct that the CFPB identified. XXXX failure to genuinely investigate Plaintiffs dispute especially in the context of identity theft and blatant reporting errors aligns with the CFPBs allegations that XXXX systems prioritize speed and automation over accuracy and fairness. This regulatory action underscores that TransUnions violations in Plaintiffs case are not isolated incidents but part of a broader pattern of willful non-compliance. \n\nContinued Reporting of Disputed Accounts : As of the filing of this Complaint, TransUnion continues to report the disputed accounts on Plaintiffs credit file without the corrections requested. The XXXX XXXX accounts remain, still marked as charge-offs with balances ; the XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX and other accounts, still show past-due amounts despite charge-off status. Each monthly cycle that passes, these accounts potentially update in TransUnions system as continuing derogatory marks, further prolonging the damage to Plaintiffs creditworthiness. Plaintiff has expended considerable time and effort trying to resolve these issues ( including writing complaints, gathering evidence, and researching his rights ), all due to TransUnions failure to meet its statutory obligations. \nTransUnions Violations Were Willful or, Alternatively, Negligent : TransUnions conduct described above was willful. TransUnion is fully aware of its duties under the FCRA it has been subject to prior lawsuits and regulatory actions for similar conduct, and it literally co-owns the e-OSCAR system used for disputes. TransUnion knew or had reason to know that the information it was reporting about Plaintiff was inaccurate ( the inconsistencies were facially obvious ), yet it willfully chose to ignore the red flags. TransUnion also willfully decided to use an automated dispute verification system without employing any manual review for Plaintiffs dispute, despite the complexity ( involving identity theft and multiple accounts ). In the alternative, if TransUnion claims it did not act intentionally, then at minimum its actions were negligent. Any reasonable company in TransUnions position, acting with due care, would have conducted a proper investigation and corrected the errors. TransUnions failure to do so, whether by conscious design or gross indifference, directly caused harm to Plaintiff.\n\nSummary of Harm to Plaintiff : As a direct result of TransUnions actions and omissions, Plaintiff has suffered injury including damage to his credit reputation, denial of credit opportunities, higher interest rates on credit offers, and emotional distress ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) from the ongoing inability to correct his credit report. Plaintiff has been forced to engage in a protracted struggle to have basic errors corrected, undermining his confidence in the fairness of the credit reporting system. These harms are precisely what the FCRA was designed to prevent. TransUnions repeated failure to comply with the FCRAs mandates is particularly egregious given the multiple opportunities it had to correct course ( in XXXX and again in XXXX ). Plaintiff now brings this Complaint seeking relief to finally rectify the situation and hold TransUnion accountable under the law. \n\nCase Law and Regulatory Support XXXX XXXX TransUnion XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) : In XXXX, the XXXX XXXX emphasized that a credit bureaus reinvestigation of disputed information must be more than a token effort. The court held that the FCRA imposes grave responsibilities on agencies like TransUnion to ensure accuracy, and that a so-called reinvestigation that merely rubber-stamps the furnishers response is inadequatecaselaw.findlaw.com. In that case, Trans Union had verified an obviously fraudulent account by simply asking the creditor, which the court found could violate 1681i. The XXXX XXXX flatly stated that the burden of investigation is on the consumer reporting agency, not the consumer : the statute places the burden of reinvestigation squarely on the [ CRA ] a reinvestigation that merely shifts the burden back to the consumer and the credit grantor can not fulfill the obligations contemplated by the statute.caselaw.findlaw.comcaselaw.findlaw.com TransUnions handling of Plaintiffs disputes in the present case mirrors the disapproved conduct in XXXX. Like TransUnion in this case, TransUnion simply parroted information from its subscribers ( creditors ) without carrying out its own duty to verify accuracy. Under XXXX, such conduct violates 1681is requirement of a reasonable reinvestigation. \n\nXXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) : In XXXX, the XXXX XXXX confronted a scenario involving fraudulent accounts ( opened by the plaintiffs son ) where the CRA relied solely on form requests to creditors during reinvestigation. The court held this was insufficient. It famously wrote : In a reinvestigation of the accuracy of credit reports, a credit bureau must bear some responsibility for evaluating the accuracy of information obtained from subscribers.caselaw.findlaw.com The XXXX XXXX reasoned that if a consumer has alerted the agency that the source of information ( the creditor ) maXXXX be unreliable ( for example, due to fraud or error ), the agency is obliged to go beyond the initial source and conduct a more searching inquirylaw.justia.com. It rejected the argument that a consumer should have to resolve the fraud directly with the creditor, affirming that the onus is on the CRA to resolve it caselaw.findlaw.com. In the case at bar, Plaintiff explicitly alerted TransUnion that the accounts were products of fraud or error ( and even provided an identity theft report and other evidence ). Under XXXX, TransUnion was duty-bound to do more than just ask the creditor via e-OSCAR. TransUnions failure to take any additional steps ( such as actually examining the police report or contacting Plaintiff for more info ) runs afoul of the standard set in XXXX. The lessons of XXXX reinforce that TransUnions simplistic approach to Plaintiffs dispute was legally deficient. \n\nXXXX v. XXXX  XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) : In XXXX, the plaintiffs disputed an erroneous credit item multiple times, and XXXX  repeatedly verified it by relying on the creditors word, despite evidence the information was wrong. The court denied summary judgment for XXXX, holding that 1681i ( a ) can require a CRA to go beyond the original source of information when the circumstances indicate the source may be XXXX. The decision noted that the majority of courts have found that a CRA must verify the accuracy of its initial source in certain situations, rather than blindly trusting the XXXX. In XXXX, the plaintiffs had even provided court documents to prove the account was resolved, yet XXXX  still took the creditors outdated report at face valuelaw.justia.com. The court cited XXXX and XXXX approvingly in concluding that whether a CRAs investigation was reasonable is usually a question for the XXXX, especially when the consumer has provided information calling the creditors data into XXXX. XXXX applies squarely here : XXXX gave TransUnion ample reason to doubt the furnishers ( pointing out obvious errors and fraud ), but TransUnion persisted in relying exclusively on those furnishers. Just as in XXXX, a fact-finder could ( and likely would ) determine that TransUnion willfully failed to conduct a proper reinvestigation. The case law thus supports Plaintiffs position that TransUnions conduct was unlawful under the FCRA. \n\nRecent CFPB Enforcement CFPB XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX. XXXX. XXXX ) : The Consumer Financial Protection Bureaus lawsuit against Experian, filed in XX/XX/XXXX, serves as powerful confirmation by the nations chief consumer credit regulator that XXXX  dispute-handling practices violate the FCRA.\n\nMetro 2 Compliance Standards : While not codified in the FCRA, the Metro 2 format guidelines ( issued by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) are the industry standard for reporting credit information. Adherence to Metro 2 is indicative of reasonable procedures for accuracy under 1681e ( b ). One key Metro 2 guideline is that an account that is charged off ( Category Profit and Loss Write-Off ) should have a current balance of {$0.00} and no past-due amount, since the debt is no longer an open obligation in the creditors portfolio. .Metro 2 Compliance Standards. Adherence to Metro 2 is indicative of reasonable procedures for accuracy under 1681e ( b ). One key Metro 2 guideline is that an account that is charged off ( Category Profit and Loss Write-Off ) should have a current balance of {$0.00} and no past-due amount, since the debt is no longer an open obligation in the creditors portfolio. By maintaining past-due balances on charged-off accounts, TransUnion deviated from Metro 2 standards, further highlighting the unreasonableness of its procedures. Additionally, Metro 2 provides specialized codes for indicating disputed information and identity theft accounts ; TransUnion either did not use these codes or ignored them in Plaintiffs case. The result was tradelines that were blatantly non-compliant with industry norms, reinforcing that TransUnions conduct was not just a technical error but a failure of the very controls meant to ensure data integrity.\n\nWillfulness and Pattern of Non-Compliance : The above legal authorities show that TransUnion has been on notice for decades that it must do more than superficial checks when consumers dispute information, especially in cases of fraud or obvious error. XXXX ( XXXX ) and XXXX ( XXXX ) have long been part of FCRA jurisprudence, and the FCRA statute itself is clear in its language. The fact that in XXXX TransUnion is still engaging in conduct that those cases found unlawful strongly suggests willfulness. TransUnions pattern of ignoring both court guidance and regulatory warnings ( like those from the CFPB and prior state Attorneys General settlements ) constitutes reckless disregard of consumers rights, which meets the standard for willfulness under 15 U.S.C. 1681n ( a ). Consequently, not only is TransUnion liable to Plaintiff for actual damages ( and/or statutory damages ), but an award of punitive damages is warranted to deter TransUnion from continuing its unlawful practices and to punish it for this pattern of misconduct.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-24T15:47:29.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"20904","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13693898","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-24T15:20:03.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Plaintiff is a consumer as <em>defined</em> by 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( c ), in that he is an individual about whom TransUnion prepares and furnishes consumer credit reports. Plaintiff has at all relevant times been the <em>victim</em> of false and inaccurate credit reporting by TransUnion, which has adversely affected his credit score, credit opportunities, and peace of mind."]},"sort":[4.697538,"13693898"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":13,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":13}]}},"product":{"doc_count":13,"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 reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Money transfer, virtual currency, or money service","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"International money transfer","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other type of mortgage","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":13,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Report provided to employer without your written authorization","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt was paid","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Fraud or scam","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem using a debit or ATM card","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":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":13,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":13}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":13,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":8},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":3},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":2}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":13,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":13}]}},"company":{"doc_count":13,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":3},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":3},{"key":"AMERISAVE MORTGAGE CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"CITIBANK, N.A.","doc_count":1},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"LEXISNEXIS","doc_count":1},{"key":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ria Envia, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":13,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"FL","doc_count":4},{"key":"CA","doc_count":3},{"key":"MI","doc_count":3},{"key":"MD","doc_count":1},{"key":"TX","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":13,"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":8},{"key":"Company believes complaint represents an opportunity for improvement to better serve consumers","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":13,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":2},{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{}}}