{"took":197,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":41,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7375444","_score":21.239735,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"There have been numerous amount of contact with Transunion regarding reporting the fraudulent accounts reporting on my Transunion credit report some accounts were deleted in my favor by submitting all necessary documents such as my FTC reports, Identity theft affidavit, previous CFPB reports, verifiable electric utility bills at the time any fraud account was opened to validate my ACCURATE address which is not the address the fraudulent accounts are reporting from a residence that was previously obtained and havent accurately be reported by me since the first month of XXXX  at the age of XXXX and current electric utility statement to verify my current address, screenshot of MISSOURI PUBLIC RECORDS FOR CASES that connects me to my previous address not the address attached to the fraud accounts which will also verifies my accurate address at the time the fraud accounts were opened, and SSN CARD/ STATE ID ( all documents will be attached to my CFPB report. Transunion has been delegating my file number ( XXXX ) fraud disputes between 2 main internal departments Consumer Relations and special handling department. My most recent reinvestigation included XXXX whom is notoriously known for having consumer lawsuits brung against them for inaccurate reporting, resulted in the fraudulent account being DELETED in my favor but its collection account still remains and within my efforts to gain clarity as to why the collection account remains after the original creditor account had been deleted due to fraud after the special handling department claimed that the XXXX  account still remained on my transunion report while Transunions consumer relations department confirmed otherwise that the XXXX  account was indeed deleted amongst other fraud accounts I also can confirm my transunion credit profile being obtained through XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX that also confirmed the fraud account was indeed DELETED!!! Transunion special handling department has given me a VERY HARD-TIME SEEKING CLARITY on why two separate internal departments are claiming conflicting information which also clearly proves the investigation process by Transunion is not properly being handled blocking these fraud accounts!!! Every phone call should have been notated by each department to validate my current claims and any communication with Transunion during this STRESSFUL PROCESS AS A FRAUD VICTIM. This will be my last attempt to resolve this without bringing these issues to a court of law with INTENT TO SUE violating my consumer rights.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-08-09T21:43:02.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"631XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7375444","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2023-08-09T20:44:17.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Transunion</em> special <em>handling</em> department has given me a VERY HARD-TIME SEEKING CLARITY on why two separate internal departments are claiming conflicting information which also clearly proves the <em>investigation</em> <em>process</em> by <em>Transunion</em> is not <em>properly</em> <em>being</em> <em>handled</em> <em>blocking</em> these fraud accounts!!! Every phone call should have been notated by each department to validate my current claims and any communication with <em>Transunion</em> during this STRESSFUL <em>PROCESS</em> AS A FRAUD VICTIM."],"issue":["Problem with a credit reporting company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[21.239735,"7375444"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13188147","_score":21.152426,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This complaint concerns the unlawful reinsertion and failure to properly investigate fraudulent accounts reported by XXXX on my TransUnion credit file, originally addressed in CFPB complaint XXXX XXXX. Despite my prior submission and dispute, the fraudulent accountsspecifically XXXX account XXXX and XXXX, both opened in XXXXhave been reinserted without proper notice or reinvestigation, in clear violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). I spoke with XXXX in the Special Handling Department ( Case # XXXX ), who acknowledged that the items should be blocked upon redispute and transferred me to XXXX ( Case # XXXX ), who refused to provide his employee ID and admitted that no actual documentation from the creditor was receivedonly a generic \" verified '' statusdemonstrating a lack of proper reinvestigation. XXXX stated that TransUnion does not obtain evidence or method of verification from the furnisher, confirming the absence of any legitimate review process. I also spoke with XXXX XXXX ( XXXX # XXXX ), who refused to provide a case number and contradicted XXXX prior statements, further indicating procedural inconsistencies and deception. XXXX falsely asserted that XXXX was responsible for reporting the data, despite this being a TransUnion matter, and claimed TransUnion simply reinserts items upon request without being obligated to investigatethis is a direct violation of FCRA Section 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ). Both XXXX and XXXX demonstrated clear incompetence and bad faith in handling my dispute, while XXXX appeared to understand the correct protocol. I am uploading the same sworn affidavit used in my prior CFPB complaint and demanding that TransUnion provide the complete method of verification, as required by law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-25T23:11:53.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30318","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13188147","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-25T22:34:12.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX falsely asserted that XXXX was responsible for reporting the data, despite this <em>being</em> a <em>TransUnion</em> matter, and claimed <em>TransUnion</em> simply reinserts items upon request without <em>being</em> obligated to investigatethis is a direct violation of FCRA Section 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ). Both XXXX and XXXX demonstrated clear incompetence and bad faith in <em>handling</em> my dispute, while XXXX appeared to understand the correct protocol."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[21.152426,"13188147"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13532961","_score":20.176373,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This is a follow-up to a previous complaint that Transunion failed to respond to and has failed to open since XX/XX/XXXX, CFPB complaint # ( XXXX ). This complaint concerns the unlawful reinsertion and failure to properly investigate fraudulent accounts reported by XXXX on my TransUnion credit file, originally addressed in CFPB complaint # XXXX. Despite my prior submission and dispute, the fraudulent accounts, specifically LightStream account XXXX and XXXX, both opened in XX/XX/XXXX, have been reinserted without proper notice or reinvestigation, in clear violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). I spoke with XXXX in the Special Handling Department ( Case # XXXX ), who acknowledged that the items should be blocked upon redispute and transferred me to XXXX ( Case # XXXX ), who refused to provide his employee ID and admitted that no actual documentation from the creditor was received-only a generic \" verified '' status-demonstrating a lack of proper reinvestigation. XXXX stated that TransUnion does not obtain evidence or a method of verification from the furnisher, confirming the absence of any legitimate review process. I also spoke with XXXX XXXX ( XXXX # XXXX ), who refused to provide a case number and contradicted XXXX 's prior statements, further indicating procedural inconsistencies and deception. XXXX falsely asserted that XXXX was responsible for reporting the data, despite this being a TransUnion matter, and claimed TransUnion simply reinserts items upon request without being obligated to. This is a direct violation of FCRA Section 61 1 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ). Both XXXX and XXXX demonstrated clear incompetence and bad faith in handling my dispute, while XXXX appeared to understand the correct protocol. I am uploading the same sworn affidavit used in my prior CFPB complaint and demanding that TransUnion provide the complete method of verification, as required by law.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-15T03:33:39.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30318","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13532961","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-15T03:33:15.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This is a follow-up to a previous complaint that <em>Transunion</em> failed to respond to and has failed to open since XX/XX/XXXX, CFPB complaint # ( XXXX ). This complaint concerns the unlawful reinsertion and failure to <em>properly</em> <em>investigate</em> fraudulent accounts reported by XXXX on my <em>TransUnion</em> credit file, originally addressed in CFPB complaint # XXXX."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[20.176373,"13532961"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17647228","_score":19.763847,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"TransUnion is in continued violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Metro 2 reporting standards. I submitted formal disputes requesting lawful verification of multiple negative accounts being reported on my credit file. Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ), TransUnion is required to conduct a reasonable investigation, and under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 7 ) they are required to provide the method of verification, including the name and contact information of the furnisher, how the verification was performed, and what documentation was reviewed. \nInstead of complying, TransUnion issued a generic stall response claiming they contacted the furnisher without providing any of the legally required verification details or documentation. Simply contacting a furnisher and accepting their word DOES NOT meet the legal definition of verification under the FCRA and has been ruled repeatedly insufficient by federal courts. TransUnion failed to provide any supporting evidence such as original signed contracts, itemized payment history, chain of assignment, proof of my liability, or any documentation required by Metro 2 compliance standards to validate the reporting of these accounts. \nAdditionally, TransUnion mishandled my fraud dispute under FCRA 605B by failing to properly block fraudulent accounts within the mandatory four ( 4 ) business-day period. Instead, they improperly reinvestigated the accounts rather than blocking them as required by law and then claimed that my submitted documentation was unacceptable without identifying any actual deficiencies or providing legally required notice specifying what was missing or how to cure the alleged defects. \nTransUnions conduct constitutes multiple federal compliance violations including, but not limited to : Failure to conduct a reasonable investigation FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) Failure to provide the method of verification FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 7 ) Reinvestigating fraud claims instead of blocking them FCRA 605B Reporting unverified data that lacks documentary substantiation in violation of FCRA accuracy requirements FCRA 623 ( a ) Violations of Metro 2 reporting standards, including failure to verify : Ownership and assignment of debt Accurate dates of delinquency Itemized balances Original contracts or consumer signatures Chain-of-custody documentation Legal authority of furnishers to collect or report Despite these failures, TransUnion improperly marked my original CFPB complaint Closed with non-monetary relief even though verification was never provided, fraud blocking was not performed, and disputed accounts remain inaccurately reported. This falsely represents compliance to a federal regulatory agency and constitutes bad-faith handling of a consumer complaint. \nThe deletion of one account ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and removal of an inquiry confirm that the investigation process itself was flawed and that previously reported information was inaccurate, further proving that reasonable investigation and lawful verification were not conducted properly across all disputed items.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-02T23:07:56.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77379","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17647228","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-02T22:57:18.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This falsely represents compliance to a federal regulatory agency and constitutes bad-faith <em>handling</em> of a consumer complaint. \nThe deletion of one account ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and removal of an inquiry confirm that the <em>investigation</em> <em>process</em> itself was flawed and that previously reported information was inaccurate, further proving that reasonable <em>investigation</em> and lawful verification were not conducted <em>properly</em> across all disputed items."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["<em>Investigation</em> took more than 30 days"]},"sort":[19.763847,"17647228"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10041150","_score":18.812418,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally lodge a complaint regarding TransUnion 's continuous violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), specifically concerning the removal of fraudulent inquiries from my consumer credit file. Despite multiple attempts to resolve this issue directly with TransUnion, they have failed to act in accordance with federal regulations and continue to misrepresent themselves during the process. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I spoke with three different representatives in the Fraud Department at TransUnion, all of whom falsely claimed to be supervisors. These representatives denied that I had ever made disputes regarding two fraudulent inquiries from XXXX  XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, and again on XX/XX/XXXX. This is categorically untrue, as I have previously submitted disputes regarding these fraudulent inquiries in compliance with FCRA procedures. \n\nThese fraudulent inquiries arose as a result of my Social Security number being exposed in the XXXX XXXX XXXX breach. Despite this, TransUnion has refused to take the necessary steps to remove these inquiries, which continues to harm my credit file. Instead, it appears that TransUnion is profiting by continuing to report and sell this inaccurate and fraudulent information for financial gain, which is a gross violation of their duties under the FCRA. \n\nIn this regard, I would like to highlight the following specific violations of the FCRA and related regulations by TransUnion : 1. 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( a ) Block of Information Resulting from Identity Theft Under this provision, upon receipt of appropriate proof of identity theft, TransUnion is required to block the reporting of any information that resulted from the theft of my identity, including the fraudulent inquiries in question. My personal information, including my Social Security number, was compromised during the XXXX XXXX XXXX breach, which is directly linked to the fraudulent inquiries from XXXX  XXXX XXXX. TransUnion has failed to block these inquiries, in violation of this statute. \n\n2. 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) Furnishing of Information with Knowledge of Errors This section of the FCRA imposes an obligation on credit reporting agencies like TransUnion to ensure the accuracy of the information they report. By continuing to report these fraudulent inquiries despite being notified of their inaccuracy, TransUnion is in clear violation of this regulation.\n\n3. 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Reinvestigation of Disputed Information The FCRA mandates that TransUnion conduct a reasonable investigation of disputes concerning the accuracy of the information in my credit file. My disputes regarding the fraudulent inquiries were either ignored or not properly investigated. Additionally, TransUnion 's misrepresentation of their employees as supervisors and denial of my dispute further violate this section of the FCRA, as they failed to provide adequate response or follow up.\n\n4. 12 CFR 1022.43 Investigations and Handling of Fraud Alerts This section requires credit reporting agencies to handle fraud alerts and related disputes in an appropriate and timely manner. TransUnion 's refusal to acknowledge my disputes and failure to act on the fraudulent inquiries also constitute a violation of this regulation. \n\nIn addition to these violations, TransUnion 's actions or inaction constitute a violation of my rights as a consumer, specifically under the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( CFPA ). The failure to protect the accuracy of my credit report after multiple disputes and continued reporting of fraudulent data has caused me undue harm and financial stress. \n\nI respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau investigate TransUnions conduct and take appropriate action to ensure compliance with FCRA regulations. I also ask for the immediate removal of the fraudulent inquiries from my credit report and the enforcement of the necessary corrective measures to prevent such issues from occurring in the future.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-09-06T17:39:33.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"78259","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10041150","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2024-09-06T17:39:29.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["By continuing to report these fraudulent inquiries despite <em>being</em> notified of their inaccuracy, <em>TransUnion</em> is in clear violation of this regulation.\n\n3. 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Reinvestigation of Disputed Information The FCRA mandates that <em>TransUnion</em> conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> of disputes concerning the accuracy of the information in my credit file. My disputes regarding the fraudulent inquiries were either ignored or not <em>properly</em> <em>investigated</em>."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[18.812418,"10041150"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10040722","_score":18.77238,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally lodge a complaint regarding TransUnion 's continuous violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), specifically concerning the removal of fraudulent inquiries from my consumer credit file. Despite multiple attempts to resolve this issue directly with TransUnion, they have failed to act in accordance with federal regulations and continue to misrepresent themselves during the process. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I spoke with XXXX different representatives in the Fraud Department at TransUnion, all of whom falsely claimed to be supervisors. These representatives denied that I had ever made disputes regarding XXXX fraudulent inquiries from XXXX XXXX  XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, and again on XX/XX/XXXX. This is categorically untrue, as I have previously submitted disputes regarding these fraudulent inquiries in compliance with FCRA procedures. \n\nThese fraudulent inquiries arose as a result of my Social Security number being exposed in the XXXX XXXX XXXX breach. Despite this, TransUnion has refused to take the necessary steps to remove these inquiries, which continues to harm my credit file. Instead, it appears that TransUnion is profiting by continuing to report and sell this inaccurate and fraudulent information for financial gain, which is a gross violation of their duties under the FCRA. \n\nIn this regard, I would like to highlight the following specific violations of the FCRA and related regulations by TransUnion : XXXX. 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( a ) Block of Information Resulting from Identity Theft Under this provision, upon receipt of appropriate proof of identity theft, TransUnion is required to block the reporting of any information that resulted from the theft of my identity, including the fraudulent inquiries in question. My personal information, including my Social Security number, was compromised during the National Public Data breach, which is directly linked to the fraudulent inquiries from XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. TransUnion has failed to block these inquiries, in violation of this statute. \n\nXXXX. 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) Furnishing of Information with Knowledge of Errors This section of the FCRA imposes an obligation on credit reporting agencies like TransUnion to ensure the accuracy of the information they report. By continuing to report these fraudulent inquiries despite being notified of their inaccuracy, TransUnion is in clear violation of this regulation. \n\nXXXX. 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Reinvestigation of Disputed Information The FCRA mandates that TransUnion conduct a reasonable investigation of disputes concerning the accuracy of the information in my credit file. My disputes regarding the fraudulent inquiries were either ignored or not properly investigated. Additionally, TransUnion 's misrepresentation of their employees as supervisors and denial of my dispute further violate this section of the FCRA, as they failed to provide adequate response or follow up. \n\nXXXX. 12 CFR 1022.43 Investigations and Handling of Fraud Alerts This section requires credit reporting agencies to handle fraud alerts and related disputes in an appropriate and timely manner. TransUnion 's refusal to acknowledge my disputes and failure to act on the fraudulent inquiries also constitute a violation of this regulation. \n\nIn addition to these violations, TransUnion 's actions or inaction constitute a violation of my rights as a consumer, specifically under the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( CFPA ). The failure to protect the accuracy of my credit report after multiple disputes and continued reporting of fraudulent data has caused me undue harm and financial stress. \n\nI respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau investigate TransUnions conduct and take appropriate action to ensure compliance with FCRA regulations. I also ask for the immediate removal of the fraudulent inquiries from my credit report and the enforcement of the necessary corrective measures to prevent such issues from occurring in the future.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-09-06T17:39:18.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"78259","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10040722","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2024-09-06T17:14:47.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX. 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Reinvestigation of Disputed Information The FCRA mandates that <em>TransUnion</em> conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> of disputes concerning the accuracy of the information in my credit file. My disputes regarding the fraudulent inquiries were either ignored or not <em>properly</em> <em>investigated</em>."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[18.77238,"10040722"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10041153","_score":18.767517,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally lodge a complaint regarding TransUnion 's continuous violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), specifically concerning the removal of fraudulent inquiries from my consumer credit file. Despite multiple attempts to resolve this issue directly with TransUnion, they have failed to act in accordance with federal regulations and continue to misrepresent themselves during the process. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I spoke with three different representatives in the Fraud Department at TransUnion, all of whom falsely claimed to be supervisors. These representatives denied that I had ever made disputes regarding two fraudulent inquiries from XXXX  XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, and again on XX/XX/XXXX. This is categorically untrue, as I have previously submitted disputes regarding these fraudulent inquiries in compliance with FCRA procedures. \n\nThese fraudulent inquiries arose as a result of my Social Security number being exposed in the XXXX XXXX XXXX breach. Despite this, TransUnion has refused to take the necessary steps to remove these inquiries, which continues to harm my credit file. Instead, it appears that TransUnion is profiting by continuing to report and sell this inaccurate and fraudulent information for financial gain, which is a gross violation of their duties under the FCRA. \n\nIn this regard, I would like to highlight the following specific violations of the FCRA and related regulations by TransUnion : 1. 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( a ) Block of Information Resulting from Identity Theft Under this provision, upon receipt of appropriate proof of identity theft, TransUnion is required to block the reporting of any information that resulted from the theft of my identity, including the fraudulent inquiries in question. My personal information, including my Social Security number, was compromised during the XXXX XXXX XXXX breach, which is directly linked to the fraudulent inquiries from XXXX  XXXX XXXX. TransUnion has failed to block these inquiries, in violation of this statute. \n\n2. 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) Furnishing of Information with Knowledge of Errors This section of the FCRA imposes an obligation on credit reporting agencies like TransUnion to ensure the accuracy of the information they report. By continuing to report these fraudulent inquiries despite being notified of their inaccuracy, TransUnion is in clear violation of this regulation.\n\n3. 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Reinvestigation of Disputed Information The FCRA mandates that TransUnion conduct a reasonable investigation of disputes concerning the accuracy of the information in my credit file. My disputes regarding the fraudulent inquiries were either ignored or not properly investigated. Additionally, TransUnion 's misrepresentation of their employees as supervisors and denial of my dispute further violate this section of the FCRA, as they failed to provide adequate response or follow up.\n\n4. 12 CFR 1022.43 Investigations and Handling of Fraud Alerts This section requires credit reporting agencies to handle fraud alerts and related disputes in an appropriate and timely manner. TransUnion 's refusal to acknowledge my disputes and failure to act on the fraudulent inquiries also constitute a violation of this regulation.\n\nIn addition to these violations, TransUnion 's actions or inaction constitute a violation of my rights as a consumer, specifically under the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( CFPA ). The failure to protect the accuracy of my credit report after multiple disputes and continued reporting of fraudulent data has caused me undue harm and financial stress. \n\nI respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau investigate TransUnions conduct and take appropriate action to ensure compliance with FCRA regulations. I also ask for the immediate removal of the fraudulent inquiries from my credit report and the enforcement of the necessary corrective measures to prevent such issues from occurring in the future.","date_sent_to_company":"2024-09-06T17:39:33.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"78259","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10041153","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2024-09-06T17:39:29.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["By continuing to report these fraudulent inquiries despite <em>being</em> notified of their inaccuracy, <em>TransUnion</em> is in clear violation of this regulation.\n\n3. 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Reinvestigation of Disputed Information The FCRA mandates that <em>TransUnion</em> conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> of disputes concerning the accuracy of the information in my credit file. My disputes regarding the fraudulent inquiries were either ignored or not <em>properly</em> <em>investigated</em>."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[18.767517,"10041153"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12363768","_score":17.6302,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I am formally filing this complaint to seek urgent regulatory action against Equifax and TransUnion and Experian for repeated violations of my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 16811681x ). \nSummary of Violations : 1. Unlawful Reinsertion of Fraudulent Information ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) ) : * XXXX XXXX account was previously deleted as well of XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and ALL XXXX  accounts following documented proof of identity theft ( FTC Affidavit, police report ). Without required statutory notification, this account has been improperly reinserted, causing significant damage to my credit and mental well-being. \n\n2. Failure to Properly Investigate and Block Fraudulent Items ( FCRA 605B, 611 ) : * Despite submission of comprehensive identity theft documentation ( FTC Identity Theft Affidavit, official Police Report, drivers license, Social Security card, utility bill ), Equifax and TransUnion persistently verify fraudulent accounts ( notably XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). \n* Their investigations fail to meet the standards set by XXXX XXXX Trans Union XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, requiring detailed and credible verification from original creditors. \nXXXX. Obstruction of Consumer Dispute Rights ( FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ) : * TransUnion specifically denies online and telephone dispute access, using erroneous identity verification questions unrelated to me, thus obstructing my statutory rights. \nImpact and Damages : These actions have resulted in extreme financial hardship, emotional distress, frustration, XXXX and harm to my reputation and creditworthiness, limiting my access to credit, housing opportunities, and causing prolonged personal and financial strain. \nRequested CFPB Actions : * Initiate an investigation into Equifaxs and TransUnions handling of my disputes. \n* Require both bureaus to provide concrete evidence of their verification processes for the disputed accounts. \n* Mandate immediate deletion and blocking of fraudulent accounts per FCRA regulations. \n* Enforce punitive measures, including fines, for the intentional and repeated non-compliance demonstrated by these bureaus. \n* Ensure compliance with the CFPB 's previous lawsuit against Experian, holding all CRAs equally accountable to the law. \nI am hopeful that the CFPBs intervention will compel these bureaus to fully comply with their legal obligations and restore accuracy to my credit reports. Your prompt and firm action is crucial in remedying these continuous and serious violations. \nThank you for your immediate attention and assistance. \nRespectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-07T18:49:31.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"482XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12363768","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-07T18:48:59.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Requested CFPB Actions : * Initiate an <em>investigation</em> into Equifaxs and <em>TransUnions</em> <em>handling</em> of my disputes. \n* Require both bureaus to provide concrete evidence of their verification <em>processes</em> for the disputed accounts. \n* Mandate immediate deletion and <em>blocking</em> of fraudulent accounts per FCRA regulations. \n* Enforce punitive measures, including fines, for the intentional and repeated non-compliance demonstrated by these bureaus."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[17.6302,"12363768"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12369664","_score":17.61931,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I am formally filing this complaint to seek urgent regulatory action against Equifax and TransUnion and Experian for repeated violations of my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 16811681x ). \nSummary of Violations : 1. Unlawful Reinsertion of Fraudulent Information ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) ) : * XXXX XXXX account was previously deleted as well of XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and ALL XXXX  accounts following documented proof of identity theft ( FTC Affidavit, police report ). Without required statutory notification, this account has been improperly reinserted, causing significant damage to my credit and mental well-being. \n\n2. Failure to Properly Investigate and Block Fraudulent Items ( FCRA 605B, 611 ) : * Despite submission of comprehensive identity theft documentation ( FTC Identity Theft Affidavit, official Police Report, drivers license, Social Security card, utility bill ), Equifax and TransUnion persistently verify fraudulent accounts ( notably XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). \n* Their investigations fail to meet the standards set by XXXX XXXX Trans Union XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, requiring detailed and credible verification from original creditors. \nXXXX. Obstruction of Consumer Dispute Rights ( FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ) : * TransUnion specifically denies online and telephone dispute access, using erroneous identity verification questions unrelated to me, thus obstructing my statutory rights. \nImpact and Damages : These actions have resulted in extreme financial hardship, emotional distress, frustration, XXXX and harm to my reputation and creditworthiness, limiting my access to credit, housing opportunities, and causing prolonged personal and financial strain. \nRequested CFPB Actions : * Initiate an investigation into Equifaxs and TransUnions handling of my disputes. \n* Require both bureaus to provide concrete evidence of their verification processes for the disputed accounts. \n* Mandate immediate deletion and blocking of fraudulent accounts per FCRA regulations. \n* Enforce punitive measures, including fines, for the intentional and repeated non-compliance demonstrated by these bureaus. \n* Ensure compliance with the CFPB 's previous lawsuit against Experian, holding all CRAs equally accountable to the law. \nI am hopeful that the CFPBs intervention will compel these bureaus to fully comply with their legal obligations and restore accuracy to my credit reports. Your prompt and firm action is crucial in remedying these continuous and serious violations. \nThank you for your immediate attention and assistance. \nRespectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-07T18:49:28.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"482XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12369664","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-03-07T18:32:32.000Z","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":["Requested CFPB Actions : * Initiate an <em>investigation</em> into Equifaxs and <em>TransUnions</em> <em>handling</em> of my disputes. \n* Require both bureaus to provide concrete evidence of their verification <em>processes</em> for the disputed accounts. \n* Mandate immediate deletion and <em>blocking</em> of fraudulent accounts per FCRA regulations. \n* Enforce punitive measures, including fines, for the intentional and repeated non-compliance demonstrated by these bureaus."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[17.61931,"12369664"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12369383","_score":17.61931,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I am formally filing this complaint to seek urgent regulatory action against Equifax and TransUnion and Experian for repeated violations of my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 16811681x ). \nSummary of Violations : 1. Unlawful Reinsertion of Fraudulent Information ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) ) : * XXXX XXXX account was previously deleted as well of XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and ALL XXXX  accounts following documented proof of identity theft ( FTC Affidavit, police report ). Without required statutory notification, this account has been improperly reinserted, causing significant damage to my credit and mental well-being. \n\n2. Failure to Properly Investigate and Block Fraudulent Items ( FCRA 605B, 611 ) : * Despite submission of comprehensive identity theft documentation ( FTC Identity Theft Affidavit, official Police Report, drivers license, Social Security card, utility bill ), Equifax and TransUnion persistently verify fraudulent accounts ( notably XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). \n* Their investigations fail to meet the standards set by XXXX XXXX Trans Union XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, requiring detailed and credible verification from original creditors. \nXXXX. Obstruction of Consumer Dispute Rights ( FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ) : * TransUnion specifically denies online and telephone dispute access, using erroneous identity verification questions unrelated to me, thus obstructing my statutory rights. \nImpact and Damages : These actions have resulted in extreme financial hardship, emotional distress, frustration, XXXX and harm to my reputation and creditworthiness, limiting my access to credit, housing opportunities, and causing prolonged personal and financial strain. \nRequested CFPB Actions : * Initiate an investigation into Equifaxs and TransUnions handling of my disputes. \n* Require both bureaus to provide concrete evidence of their verification processes for the disputed accounts. \n* Mandate immediate deletion and blocking of fraudulent accounts per FCRA regulations. \n* Enforce punitive measures, including fines, for the intentional and repeated non-compliance demonstrated by these bureaus. \n* Ensure compliance with the CFPB 's previous lawsuit against Experian, holding all CRAs equally accountable to the law. \nI am hopeful that the CFPBs intervention will compel these bureaus to fully comply with their legal obligations and restore accuracy to my credit reports. Your prompt and firm action is crucial in remedying these continuous and serious violations. \nThank you for your immediate attention and assistance. \nRespectfully submitted, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-07T18:49:27.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"482XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12369383","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-07T18:48:59.000Z","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":["Requested CFPB Actions : * Initiate an <em>investigation</em> into Equifaxs and <em>TransUnions</em> <em>handling</em> of my disputes. \n* Require both bureaus to provide concrete evidence of their verification <em>processes</em> for the disputed accounts. \n* Mandate immediate deletion and <em>blocking</em> of fraudulent accounts per FCRA regulations. \n* Enforce punitive measures, including fines, for the intentional and repeated non-compliance demonstrated by these bureaus."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[17.61931,"12369383"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6617968","_score":17.378557,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"After years of not looking at my credit or utilizing it in any way, I had decided to purchase a home for my family. I knew my credit would play a factor in my ability to purchase a home. I went ahead and pulled my TransUnion credit report only to find out I had been a victim of identity theft and there were fraudulent accounts reporting on my consumer report without my knowledge, consent, or authorization. Over the past several months, I have initiated disputes with TransUnion to handle this situation and remove the accounts as they are fraudulent and un-belonging to me. I have asked for validation of debt, original contract with my wet-ink signature, every statement from the opening of the fraudulent account to the supposed closure date. I also asked for day, time, location, and method of credit account opening for these fraudulent accounts, all of which the furnishers of these fraudulent accounts being XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX have not provided since I started the dispute process almost a year ago. They have not sent any correspondence via mail with validation of debt or that it belonged to me, yet TransUnion blindly continued reporting the account as accurate knowing I placed fraud alerts on my consumer report and that I was a victim of identity theft as mentioned several times over multiple disputes. After realizing TransUnion was not investigating properly, my attorney advised that I complete an identity theft police report mentioning the two fraudulently opened charge-off accounts by XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX and that TransUnion, according to the law, must remove the accounts that were involved in identity theft and subsequently block any attempt from XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX or XXXXXXXX XXXX to re-report the fraudulent accounts under my name and social security number. So I went ahead and filed the identity theft police report and mentioning both the XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX fraudulent accounts. As TransUnion has not sent me any correspondence or consumer reports after many disputes, I attached a credit report from XXXX that lists the same two accounts and is reported fraudulently just as TransUnion is. I ask that the CFPB force TransUnion to abide by the law and remove both fraudulent accounts from my TransUnion credit report and update my consumer report to reflect the changes of the removals of both fraudulent charge-off accounts by XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX TransUnion has turned a blind eye on disputes updating them as accurate without properly investigating or ensuring that XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX thoroughly review and investigate my valid disputes. I will attach all documentation I have including a submitted identity theft police report, an approved identity theft police report, my California drivers license, my signed SSN card, a current credit card statement showing my only and current address as well as the account numbers of the two fraudulent accounts listed on my TransUnion consumer report, which can also be found on the attached police report with my XXXX credit report showing the same two fraudulent accounts.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-02-26T19:01:45.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"91606","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6617968","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2023-02-26T18:31:50.000Z","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":["After realizing <em>TransUnion</em> was not <em>investigating</em> <em>properly</em>, my attorney advised that I complete an identity theft police report mentioning the two fraudulently opened charge-off accounts by XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXX XXXX and that <em>TransUnion</em>, according to the law, must remove the accounts that were involved in identity theft and subsequently <em>block</em> any attempt from XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX or XXXXXXXX XXXX to re-report the fraudulent accounts under my name and social security number."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[17.378557,"6617968"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12230942","_score":16.645872,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Formal Complaint Against TransUnion for FCRA Violations and XXXX XXXX Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am filing this formal complaint against TransUnion for failure to properly investigate my dispute, failure to block fraudulent accounts, and deceptive practices in handling my credit report. Despite my submission of an FTC Identity Theft Affidavit, a police report, a government-issued ID, my Social Security card , and proof of residence, TransUnion has refused to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), violating multiple provisions of federal law. \nXXXX. Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( XXXX ) ) TransUnion claims that it conducted an investigation and verified the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX accounts as accurate. However, they failed to provide : * Any documentary evidence from the furnishers proving that these accounts belong to me. \n* Any explanation of how the verification was conducted. \n* The specific method of verification, as required under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( XXXX ). \nWithout providing concrete evidence supporting their verification, TransUnion has failed to meet its statutory obligation under the FCRA to conduct a proper reinvestigation. \nXXXX. Failure to XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) Under 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2, a consumer reporting agency must block identity theft-related information upon receiving appropriate documentation. Despite my submission of an FTC Identity Theft Affidavit and a police report, TransUnion has refused to block fraudulent accounts, claiming my documentation was \" not acceptable '' without explanation. \n* This is a clear violation of federal law, as no additional verification should be required beyond what was submitted. \n* TransUnion has no authority to override a police report or FTC Identity Theft Affidavit. \nThis noncompliance has resulted in ongoing harm to my credit profile and financial well-being. \nXXXX. Deceptive Practices and Unfair Treatment ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2, 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) TransUnion has engaged in deceptive and unfair practices by : * Reinserting deleted items without proper notification, violating 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( B ). \n* Providing misleading statements regarding their investigation process. \n* Refusing to allow me access to my report online or via telephone, stating they \" can not verify me '' despite my personal information being correct. \nTransUnions repeated failures demonstrate willful noncompliance with the FCRA. Courts have ruled that such negligence constitutes a legal violation ( XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ), where credit bureaus were found liable for failing to conduct reasonable investigations. \nXXXX. XXXX  and XXXX XXXX  Due to TransUnions Negligence As a direct result of TransUnions refusal to remove fraudulent accounts and correct my credit report : * I have been denied credit opportunities due to false information. \n* My credit score has been negatively impacted, leading to higher interest rates and financial loss. \n* I have suffered emotional distress and frustration, spending significant time and effort trying to correct these errors. \nDemands for XXXX XXXX I demand that TransUnion comply with federal law and immediately take the following actions : XXXX. Immediately block fraudulent accounts, including XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX, as required under 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2. \nXXXX. Provide a detailed method of verification for any information TransUnion claims to have verified ( as required under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( XXXX ) ). \nXXXX. Remove all unverifiable or inaccurate items from my credit report, as required under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ). \nXXXX. Provide a full explanation of why my valid identity theft documentation was rejected. \nIf this matter is not resolved promptly, I will pursue legal action under FCRA XXXX for willful noncompliance, seek monetary damages, and escalate this complaint to the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) and my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nI trust that the CFPB will hold TransUnion accountable for its deceptive practices. I expect a prompt resolution within the XXXX timeframe required by law. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-26T16:55:54.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"482XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12230942","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-02-26T16:27:22.000Z","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":["Subject : Formal Complaint Against <em>TransUnion</em> for FCRA Violations and XXXX XXXX Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am filing this formal complaint against <em>TransUnion</em> for failure to <em>properly</em> <em>investigate</em> my dispute, failure to <em>block</em> fraudulent accounts, and deceptive practices in <em>handling</em> my credit report."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[16.645872,"12230942"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11339071","_score":16.47874,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Complaint Against TransUnion, XXXX, and XXXX for Violations of FCRA and Mishandling of Identity Theft Claims To : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Summary of Complaint : This complaint addresses the repeated failures by TransUnion, XXXX, and XXXX to comply with theFair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and other applicable laws in their handling of my identity theft claims. Despite submitting the required documents, including aPolice Report, FTC Identity Theft Report, Utility Bill, Drivers License, andSocial Security Card, these agencies have : XXXX. Refused to Accept Valid Documentation : Rejected legitimate documentation without justification or explanation. \nXXXX. Failed to Block Fraudulent Information : Did not block or remove information stemming from identity theft, including : * Negative accounts * Unauthorized inquiries * Inaccurate phone numbers XXXX. Did Not Follow Up or Remove Disputed Items : Failed to properly investigate and remove disputed items as required by law. \nXXXX. Engaged in Deceptive Practices : Obstructed the dispute process by rejecting valid documentation and refusing to provide clear explanations. \nApplicable U.S. Laws and Codes XXXX. FCRA 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) : Requires credit reporting agencies to block information resulting from identity theft upon receipt of : * Valid proof of identity * FTC Identity Theft Report * Police Report 2. FCRA 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) : Mandates a reasonable reinvestigation of disputed information and correction or deletion of unverifiable information. \nXXXX. FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Requires credit reporting agencies to ensure maximum possible accuracy of reported information. \nXXXX. FCRA 604 ( c ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) : Prohibits credit reporting agencies from using or sharing consumer information without permissible purpose. \nXXXX. 15 U.S.C. 1692d-f ( FDCPA ) : Prohibits unfair or deceptive practices related to the collection and reporting of debt. \nHarm Caused : * Financial Harm : Denial of credit opportunities due to inaccurate information. \n* Emotional Distress : Prolonged stress caused by the agencies failure to resolve disputes. \n* Loss of Time and Resources : Repeatedly submitting documents only to have them ignored or improperly handled.\n\nResolution Sought : XXXX. Immediate Acceptance of Documentation : Accept the submitted Police Report, FTC Identity Theft Report, Utility Bill, Drivers License, and Social Security Card as valid documentation. \nXXXX. Immediate Blocking and Removal of Fraudulent Items : * Fraudulent accounts such as XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX. \n* Unauthorized inquiries. \n* Inaccurate phone numbers. \nXXXX. Full Compliance with FCRA and FDCPA : Conduct proper investigations and ensure maximum accuracy in my credit reports. \nXXXX. Monetary Compensation : I request compensation of XXXX XXXXfor the financial and emotional harm caused by the agencies non-compliance and obstructive behavior. \nXXXX. Detailed Written Explanation : Provide clear, written explanations of why my documentation was rejected and the internal processes used to make such determinations. \nSupporting Documents : * FTC Identity Theft Report * Police Report * Proof of Identity ( Drivers License, Social Security Card, Utility Bill ) * Highlighted Credit Reports Showing Disputed Items * Prior Correspondence with TransUnion, XXXX, and XXXX Conclusion I respectfully request that the CFPB investigate these practices and take appropriate action to ensure that TransUnion, XXXX, and XXXX comply with federal laws governing credit reporting and identity theft. The current situation has caused significant harm to my financial standing and emotional well-being. \nThank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your assistance in achieving a fair resolution.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-01T22:38:12.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"482XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11339071","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-01T22:09:46.000Z","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":["Failed to <em>Block</em> Fraudulent Information : Did not <em>block</em> or remove information stemming from identity theft, including : * Negative accounts * Unauthorized inquiries * Inaccurate phone numbers XXXX. Did Not Follow Up or Remove Disputed Items : Failed to <em>properly</em> <em>investigate</em> and remove disputed items as required by law. \nXXXX. Engaged in Deceptive Practices : Obstructed the dispute <em>process</em> by rejecting valid documentation and refusing to provide clear explanations. \nApplicable U.S."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[16.47874,"11339071"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12385404","_score":15.486778,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Formal Complaint Against TransUnion and XXXX XXXX XXXX for FCRA and FDCPA Violations Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am filing a formal complaint against TransUnion and XXXX XXXX XXXX for their failure to adhere to the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). Despite my lawful disputes, TransUnion has neglected its duty to conduct a proper investigation, and XXXX XXXX XXXX has failed to provide the required validation of the alleged debt. \nUnauthorized Reporting & Violation of My Privacy ( FCRA 1681 ) TransUnion and XXXX XXXX XXXX have reported an account on my credit file without my authorization. Under FCRA 1681b, a credit bureau is only permitted to include information when there is a legally valid purpose. I never authorized this debt to be reported, making this an unlawful action. This constitutes identity theft under FCRA 1681c-2. \nAdditionally, per FCRA 1681a, consumer reports should not contain financial transactions or experiences that have not been explicitly authorized. Since I never consented to this collection account being reported, it should not be there. No consent means identity theft, and under FCRA 1681c-2, this account should be immediately and permanently removed.\n\nTransUnion Failed to Conduct an Independent Investigation ( FCRA 1681i & FDCPA 1692g ) I previously disputed the XXXX XXXX XXXX account, which is linked to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. Below are the account details : Debt Collector : Portfolio Recovery Associates Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nAccount Number : XXXX  Balance : {$530.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXXXXXX  Status : Collection account, past due as of XX/XX/XXXXXXXX  TransUnion is required under FCRA 1681i to conduct a detailed, independent investigation. This does not mean simply accepting the word of the furnisher. Proper verification includes : Third-party verification from an independent source A comprehensive review of original signed agreements Direct interviews and supporting documentation TransUnion has failed to produce any proof that this investigation took place, violating FCRA 1681i. \nSimilarly, under FDCPA 1692g, XXXX XXXX XXXX had 30 days to provide : A contract with my signature proving I agreed to this debt. \nA clear breakdown of how the balance was determined. \nDocuments proving their legal authority to collect this debt. \nNeither TransUnion nor XXXX XXXX XXXX has met these requirements, meaning this account is inaccurate, unverified, and must be removed immediately per federal law. \nViolation of Accuracy Standards ( FCRA 1681e ( b ) ) The FCRA mandates that consumer reporting agencies must maintain maximum accuracy in reporting. Since TransUnion has failed to prove that this account is correctly verified, they are in direct violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ).\n\nFurthermore, retaining an unverified collection account on my credit report harms the credibility of the financial system. Errors in reporting damage consumer access to credit and financial stability. \nConsumers Must Have Confidence in Their Credit Reports The way credit reports are handled should reflect the same level of care and security as a financial institution handling sensitive banking data. Credit bureaus like TransUnion should be held accountable when they fail to ensure accuracy and fairness. \nDespite my legal disputes, TransUnion and XXXX XXXX XXXX continue to report unverifiable and inaccurate data, undermining consumer trust in the credit reporting system. \nThe CFPB Must Ensure Compliance with Consumer Protection Laws The FCRA explicitly requires credit bureaus to handle consumer data fairly and in a way that respects privacy rights. If I did not give permission for this account to be reported, it is a direct violation of my federally protected rights. \nCongress has also classified consumer reporting agencies as essential to the financial system. However, by disregarding proper investigation standards, TransUnion has failed in its duty under federal law.\n\nTransUnions Improper Use of E-OSCAR TransUnion does not have my permission to process this dispute through E-OSCAR. Automated dispute resolution systems do not satisfy the legal requirement for an independent investigation under FCRA 1681i. By relying on E-OSCAR instead of conducting a legitimate, independent verification, TransUnion is violating my rights under federal law.\n\nIdentity Theft Report is Attached I am including my Identity Theft Report as further proof that this collection account was placed on my credit report without my consent. Under FCRA 1681c-2, a credit bureau must block and remove any fraudulent account once an identity theft report is submitted. TransUnion and XXXX XXXX XXXX have no legal right to continue reporting or verifying this account. \nRequested Actions I am requesting the CFPB to take the following corrective actions : 1. Order TransUnion to delete this collection account immediately for failure to properly verify the debt. \n2. Order XXXX XXXX XXXX to stop collection efforts and remove the account due to lack of validation. \n3. Hold TransUnion and XXXX XXXX XXXX accountable for violating federal laws and impose financial penalties. \n4. Provide written confirmation that this account has been removed permanently from my credit report. \nIf this issue is not resolved in a timely manner, I am prepared to take further legal action, including filing a lawsuit under FCRA 1681n, which allows consumers to seek {$1000.00} per violation.\n\nPlease confirm receipt of this complaint and provide an update on the next steps in the investigation. I expect a timely resolution of this matter. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-09T15:48:11.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"76116","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12385404","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-09T15:43:07.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["However, by disregarding proper <em>investigation</em> standards, <em>TransUnion</em> has failed in its duty under federal law.\n\n<em>TransUnions</em> Improper Use of E-OSCAR <em>TransUnion</em> does not have my permission to <em>process</em> this dispute through E-OSCAR. Automated dispute resolution systems do not satisfy the legal requirement for an independent <em>investigation</em> under FCRA 1681i. By relying on E-OSCAR instead of conducting a legitimate, independent verification, <em>TransUnion</em> is violating my rights under federal law."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[15.486778,"12385404"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12389595","_score":15.4081,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Formal Complaint Against TransUnion and XXXX , XXXX for FCRA and FDCPA Violations Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am filing a formal complaint against TransUnion and XXXX , XXXX for their ongoing violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). Despite my valid disputes, TransUnion has failed to properly investigate the matter, and XXXX , XXXX has not provided the necessary debt validation as required under federal law. \nUnauthorized Reporting & Identity Theft ( FCRA 1681 ) TransUnion and XXXX, XXXX have placed an account on my credit file without my permission. Under FCRA 1681b, a credit bureau is only allowed to report information when there is a legally permissible purpose. I did not authorize this debt to appear on my credit report, which means its inclusion is unlawful. This qualifies as identity theft under FCRA 1681c-2.\n\nFurthermore, FCRA 1681a explicitly states that consumer reports should not contain financial transactions or experiences that have not been expressly authorized. Since I never consented to this account being reported, it should not be on my credit file. No consent equates to identity theft, and under FCRA 1681c-2, this account must be permanently removed. \nTransUnions Failure to Conduct a Proper Investigation ( FCRA 1681i & FDCPA 1692g ) I previously disputed the XXXX, XXXX account associated with XXXX XXXX XXXX. Below are the account details : Debt Collector : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nOriginal Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number : XXXX Balance : {$12000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Status : Collection account, past due as of XX/XX/XXXX Under FCRA 1681i, TransUnion is required to conduct an independent and thorough investigation rather than blindly accepting information from the debt collector. Proper verification should include : Third-party verification through an independent source A review of original signed contracts Personal interviews and supporting documentation TransUnion has failed to provide any evidence that such an investigation took place. This is a clear violation of FCRA 1681i.\n\nSimilarly, under FDCPA 1692g, XXXX, XXXX was required to provide debt validation within 30 days of my request, including : A signed contract proving I agreed to this debt. \nA complete breakdown of how the balance was calculated. \nDocumentation proving their legal authority to collect this debt. \nSince neither TransUnion nor XXXX , XXXX has met these requirements, the account is inaccurate and unverifiable, meaning it must be removed immediately under federal law. \nViolation of Accuracy Requirements ( FCRA 1681e ( b ) ) The FCRA mandates that consumer reporting agencies must ensure the maximum possible accuracy of the information they report. Since TransUnion has not provided concrete proof that this account is accurate, they are in direct violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ). \nAdditionally, keeping an unverified collection account on my credit report damages the reliability of the financial system. If the information reported by TransUnion is not verified, it creates unnecessary financial hardship and negatively impacts my ability to access credit. \nCredit Reports Must Be Managed with Integrity Consumers rely on credit reporting agencies to fairly and accurately report their financial history. Just as people monitor their bank accounts for errors, they should be able to trust that their credit reports reflect only legitimate, verifiable information. However, TransUnion and XXXX XXXX XXXX continue to report inaccurate data, compromising consumer trust in the credit system. \nThe CFPBs Role in Enforcing Fair Credit Practices The FCRA mandates that credit bureaus handle consumer data fairly and in accordance with privacy laws. If I did not authorize this account to be reported, then TransUnion is in direct violation of my federally protected privacy rights. \nCongress has established that consumer reporting agencies are critical to the financial industry. However, by failing to investigate disputes properly, TransUnion has neglected its responsibility under federal law. I expect the CFPB to take immediate action. \nTransUnions Improper Use of E-OSCAR TransUnion does not have my consent to process this dispute through E-OSCAR. The law requires a legitimate, independent investigation under FCRA 1681i. Automated dispute resolution systems like E-OSCAR fail to meet this standard because they rely only on the furnishers word rather than conducting an actual review. By using E-OSCAR in this case, TransUnion is violating my rights under the FCRA. \nIdentity Theft Report is Attached I am submitting my Identity Theft Report as further proof that this collection account was placed on my credit report without my authorization. Under FCRA 1681c-2, once a credit bureau receives an identity theft report, they must block and remove the fraudulent account. TransUnion and XXXX, XXXX have no legal grounds to continue verifying or reporting this debt. \nWhat I Am Demanding I request that the CFPB take the following corrective actions : 1. Order TransUnion to delete this collection account immediately due to failure to verify it properly. \n2. Order XXXX, XXXX to cease all collection attempts and remove the account due to lack of validation. \n3. Hold TransUnion and XXXX, XXXX accountable for failing to comply with federal law and impose financial penalties. \n4. Provide written confirmation that this account has been permanently removed from my credit file. \nIf this matter is not resolved in a timely manner, I am prepared to escalate my legal actions, including filing a lawsuit under FCRA 1681n, which allows me to seek {$1000.00} per violation in damages. \nPlease confirm receipt of this complaint and provide an update on the next steps in the investigation. I expect a timely and full resolution of this issue. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-09T15:31:17.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"76116","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12389595","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-09T15:23:32.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["However, by failing to <em>investigate</em> disputes <em>properly</em>, <em>TransUnion</em> has neglected its responsibility under federal law. I expect the CFPB to take immediate action. \n<em>TransUnions</em> Improper Use of E-OSCAR <em>TransUnion</em> does not have my consent to <em>process</em> this dispute through E-OSCAR. The law requires a legitimate, independent <em>investigation</em> under FCRA 1681i."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[15.4081,"12389595"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11801337","_score":14.686935,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear TransUnion Consumer Relations, I am writing to formally address your decision to decline my fraud block request for the account referenced as XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Account Number : XXXX ), as detailed in your correspondence dated XX/XX/XXXX. I strongly disagree with your decision and believe your findings are inconsistent with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and applicable regulations. \n\nPoints of Contention : Section 605B of the FCRA Improper Denial of Fraud Block : Under Section 605B of the FCRA, credit reporting agencies are required to block information resulting from identity theft when a consumer submits the necessary documentation. I provided the following documents : An official police report outlining the fraud. \nProof of my identity and address. \nA detailed dispute letter requesting the removal of this fraudulent account. \nYour response indicates that the fraud block request has been declined because the account \" reflected a history of previous payments made '' or \" was opened prior to when the fraud was reported to have occurred. '' This reasoning is flawed for the following reasons : A creditor may not treat a payment as late for any purpose unless the creditor has adopted reasonable procedures to ensure that each periodic statement, including the information required by 15 U.S. Code 1637 ( b ), is mailed or delivered to the consumer no later than 21 days before the payment due date.\n\nIn my previous dispute, I specifically requested the necessary information that must be provided by law for you to report a payment as late. This request is made pursuant to Rule 1002. \nTo properly report information as \" verified, '' the furnisher ( in this case, your company ) must have sufficient evidence to support the conclusion that the information is accurate. This includes ensuring compliance with 15 U.S. Code 1666b.\n\nYou have failed to provide the required documentation to show that the conditions necessary for reporting the payment as late were met. Specifically, you did not provide proof that the periodic statement containing the information required by 15 U.S. Code 1637 ( b ) was mailed or delivered at least 21 days before the due date. \nIt has now been over 30 days since my initial dispute, and you have not provided the necessary verification of this information. According to Black 's Law Dictionary ( 11th ed.\n\n2019 ), the term verify means \" [ t ] o prove to be true ; to confirm or establish the truth or truthfulness of ; to authenticate. '' Importantly, under the law, a furnisher is required to report a disputed item as \" unverifiable '' if it can not be conclusively determined whether the information is accurate. \nXXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) holds that if the furnisher can not verify the accuracy of the disputed information, it must report that the information can not be verified. If you are unable to verify that I missed a payment, you are obligated to delete any inaccurate information regarding the late payment from my credit report. \nRequest for Deletion : As you have not provided sufficient evidence to verify the accuracy of the late payment, I request that you immediately delete the late payment information from my credit report. \n\nThe presence of payments or an account history does not negate identity theft, as fraudulent accounts can involve payments made by the fraudster to maintain the account temporarily. \nThe timing of when the fraud occurred does not exempt the account from being fraudulent or subject to investigation. \nFailure to Comply with FCRA Section 611 ( a ) : As a credit reporting agency, you are required to conduct a reasonable investigation into disputed information. However, your response does not demonstrate that you thoroughly investigated this account or requested supporting validation from the furnisher ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ). If the furnisher can not verify the ownership and legitimacy of the account, the information must be removed from my credit report. \n\nInconsistent Justification and Lack of Supporting Evidence : Your assertion that my block request is a \" misrepresentation of material fact '' is unfounded and without basis. You have not provided any evidence to substantiate this claim, nor have you addressed my requests for validation of the debt by the furnisher. \n\nFailure to Act in Good Faith : Your response indicates that I may submit \" additional information, such as a letter from the data furnisher ( s ) or court document. '' However, I have already submitted all required documentation per Section 605B, including a police report and proof of identity. Placing an additional burden on me to obtain documentation from the data furnisher is unreasonable and contrary to the protections provided under the FCRA. \n\nRequested Actions : Reopen and Reevaluate the Fraud Block Request : Given the documentation I have already provided, I request that you immediately reevaluate my fraud block request and remove the XXXX XXXX XXXX account from my credit report in compliance with Section 605B of the FCRA. \n\nProvide Supporting Documentation for Your Decision : If you continue to deny my request, I demand that you provide me with all evidence you relied upon to determine that my fraud block request was made in error. \n\nRemove Inaccurate Information : If the furnisher ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) can not validate the account with original documentation, including proof of ownership and a signed agreement, the account must be removed from my credit report. \n\nAdhere to Regulatory Obligations : TransUnion is required to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of consumer credit reports under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). Continuing to report inaccurate and unverifiable information is a violation of this obligation and exposes TransUnion to legal liability under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 1681o for willful and negligent noncompliance.\n\n1. Failure to Properly Investigate Your Dispute ( FCRA Section 611, 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ) : Requirement : Credit reporting agencies ( CRAs ) are required to conduct a reasonable investigation upon receipt of a consumer 's dispute regarding inaccurate information on their credit report. \nViolation : By declining your fraud block request without conducting a full and proper investigation, TransUnion failed to satisfy their obligation to ensure the accuracy of the information. \nDetails : They appear to have relied solely on the furnisher 's ( XXXX 's ) response or pre-existing account history without independently verifying the accuracy or legitimacy of the account. \n2. Failure to Block Information in a Fraud Case ( FCRA Section 605B, 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) : Requirement : Section 605B requires CRAs to block fraudulent information from a credit report if the consumer provides the necessary documentation, including : Proof of identity A police report or fraud affidavit A written statement identifying the fraudulent information Violation : TransUnion declined to block the information even though you provided the required documentation. Their reasoning ( that the account showed a history of payments or predated the reported fraud ) is not a valid exception under the law. \nXXXX. Failure to Provide Supporting Evidence ( FCRA Section 611, 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ) : Requirement : When a consumer disputes information, the CRA must provide a written response explaining the investigation results and including documentation relied upon if the information is \" verified. '' Violation : TransUnion did not provide any documentation or evidence to justify why they declined your fraud block request or how they verified the disputed account 's accuracy. \n4. Reporting Inaccurate Information ( FCRA Section 623, 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ) : Requirement : The FCRA requires both CRAs and furnishers to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of reported information. \nViolation : By continuing to report the account without properly verifying its accuracy, TransUnion may have violated their obligation to ensure accuracy and avoid reporting unverifiable information. \nXXXX. Failure to Notify of Negative Reporting ( FCRA Section 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 7 ) ) : Requirement : Before reporting negative information, furnishers must notify consumers in writing within 30 days. \nViolation : If XXXX XXXX XXXX did not notify you before reporting the account as negative, and TransUnion did not verify this notification was given, they both may have violated this provision.\n\n6. Misrepresentation of Investigation ( FCRA Section 1681e ( b ) ) : Requirement : CRAs must use reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of the information included in consumer credit reports. \nViolation : By declining your fraud block request and continuing to report information without reasonable verification, TransUnion may have failed to meet this standard.\n\n7. Failure to Provide Adequate Notice Regarding Your Rights ( FCRA Section 609, 15 U.S.C. 1681g ) : Requirement : When a consumer disputes information, the CRA must clearly communicate their rights and the reason for any decisions made. \nViolation : TransUnion 's response does not adequately explain why your fraud block request was declined, nor does it provide any substantiating documentation for the decision. \n8. Re-Aging Debt ( Improper Reporting Practices ) : Requirement : Credit reporting agencies and furnishers are prohibited from re-aging debts to make them appear newer than they are or to extend the reporting timeline artificially. \nViolation : If TransUnion or XXXX has manipulated the \" Date of Last Activity '' or \" Date Opened '' to make the debt appear active despite being transferred or sold, this is a form of re-aging and a violation of the FCRA. \nXXXX. Violation of the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( CFPA ) : Requirement : Under 12 U.S.C. 5531, credit reporting agencies are prohibited from engaging in \" unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices '' ( UDAAP ).\n\nViolation : By providing misleading information, failing to investigate thoroughly, and improperly declining your fraud block request, TransUnion 's actions may constitute unfair or deceptive practices. \n\n1. Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation ( FCRA Section 611, 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ) : Requirement : When a consumer disputes information on their credit report, CRAs are obligated to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine the accuracy of the information. This includes obtaining evidence or documentation from the furnisher of the information ( e.g., XXXX ). \nViolation : By failing to properly reinvestigate and relying solely on XXXX 's unverified claims without requesting or reviewing adequate evidence, the CRAs are in violation of Section XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ). They can not \" verify '' information without substantiating documentation. \nXXXX. Failure to Provide Supporting Evidence ( FCRA XXXX XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) and XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ) : Requirement : After completing a reinvestigation, CRAs are required to provide a consumer with written notice of the results of the investigation and a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy of the disputed information. This includes any documentation used to verify the information. \nViolation : By refusing to provide documentation or evidence of their investigation, the CRAs are in violation of this section. Their response to the dispute lacks transparency and fails to explain how the account was verified. \nXXXX. Reporting Unverifiable Information ( FCRA XXXX XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ) : Requirement : If the CRA can not verify the disputed information, they are required to delete it from the credit report. \nViolation : If the CRAs continue to report the account despite their inability or refusal to provide documentation that verifies the accuracy, they are violating this provision. Reporting unverifiable information is prohibited under the FCRA. \nXXXX. Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy ( FCRA XXXX XXXX ( b ) ) : Requirement : XXXX must maintain reasonable procedures to ensure the maximum possible accuracy of the information included in consumer credit reports. \nViolation : By failing to substantiate the account with proper documentation and refusing to provide evidence, the CRAs are not taking reasonable steps to ensure accuracy. This also implies they are prioritizing the furnishers claims over consumer rights without justification. \nXXXX. Improper Stalling or Unreasonable Delays in Investigation ( FCRA XXXX XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ) : Requirement : XXXX must complete their reinvestigation within 30 days ( 45 days if additional information is provided by the consumer ). \nViolation : Delaying the process without providing evidence and claiming the investigation is complete while still withholding substantiating documentation constitutes an unreasonable delay in violation of the time limits under the FCRA. \nXXXX. Engaging in Unfair, Deceptive, or Abusive Acts or Practices ( CFPBs Authority under the Consumer Financial Protection Act, 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) : Requirement : The CFPB prohibits CRAs from engaging in unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices ( UDAAP ), which includes misleading consumers about their rights, delaying investigations, or providing conflicting information. \nViolation : By claiming the account is verified but refusing to provide documentation to support their claim, the CRAs may be engaging in deceptive practices. Their actions create confusion and undermine the consumer dispute process.\n\n7. Refusal to Properly Address Consumer Disputes ( FCRA Section 1681i ( a ) ) : Requirement : Consumers have the right to dispute inaccurate or incomplete information as often as necessary until the matter is resolved. CRAs can not refuse to address disputes or fail to conduct proper reinvestigations for subsequent disputes. \nViolation : Refusing to thoroughly address your disputes or investigate them properly violates your rights under the FCRA. The CFPB has explicitly addressed these issues in past enforcement actions. \nXXXX. Failure to Remove Information After Inadequate Investigation : Requirement : If the CRA can not validate the accuracy of the information, it must delete or correct the disputed item. \nViolation : By continuing to report the account without sufficient evidence from XXXX or proper investigation, the CRAs are willfully reporting inaccurate or unverifiable information. \n\nViolation of Permissible Purpose for Reporting ( FCRA XXXX XXXX ) Requirement : A company reporting information on your credit report must have a permissible purpose, such as being the current creditor or owner of the debt. \nViolation : If XXXX has transferred the debt to collections, they no longer have a permissible purpose to report or update the account on your credit report. XXXX continued reporting of this account under Nissans name without validation is a violation of your rights. \n\nI demand that TransUnion answer the following questions : Who verified the account? \nDid XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX provide verification, or did you contact the collection agency now handling the account? \n\nWhat documentation was used? \nProvide a copy of the specific documents you relied upon to verify the accuracy of this account. If no documentation was provided, explain how you determined the account is accurate. \n\nWhy is XXXX reporting this account if it has been sold? \nIf XXXX no longer owns the debt, why is it being reported under their name, and why was this not updated or removed from my credit report? \n\nHow was ownership confirmed? \nProvide evidence that you confirmed the current ownership of the debt and verified the balance, status, and reporting rights of the furnisher XXXX and XXXX Notice : If this issue is not resolved promptly, I will take the following actions : File formal complaints with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) regarding TransUnions noncompliance with the FCRA. \nEscalate this matter to my state attorney generals office for review under state consumer protection laws. \nPursue legal remedies for damages under the FCRA.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-27T21:45:40.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"398XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11801337","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-27T21:28:20.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Failure to <em>Properly</em> <em>Investigate</em> Your Dispute ( FCRA Section 611, 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ) : Requirement : Credit reporting agencies ( CRAs ) are required to conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> upon receipt of a consumer 's dispute regarding inaccurate information on their credit report. \nViolation : By declining your fraud <em>block</em> request without conducting a full and proper <em>investigation</em>, <em>TransUnion</em> failed to satisfy their obligation to ensure the accuracy of the information."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[14.686935,"11801337"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12498341","_score":13.863113,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Sent via CFPB Complaint Portal Complaint Against : TransUnion Consumer Solutions XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : Immediate Removal of Fraudulent Reporting & Monetary Settlement Pending Federal Lawsuit Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), I am submitting this formal complaint against TransUnion Consumer Solutions for their failure to remove a fraudulent account from my credit report, despite multiple disputes, an FTC Identity Theft Report, and a police report confirming identity theft. I am also attaching XXXX XXXX XXXX to this complaint, as they are the original furnisher of false information and have failed to correct the fraudulent reporting. \n\nAs a verified victim of the XXXX Equifax Data Breach and a participant in the Federal Witness Victim Program, my personal information was severely compromised, increasing my risk of identity theft. The continued reporting of fraudulent information by TransUnion and XXXX has resulted in severe financial harm, emotional distress, and medical complications. \n\nI am actively in the process of purchasing a home and do not wish for a fraud alert to be placed on my credit file. However, I demand the immediate removal of this fraudulent charge-off, as it has caused housing displacement, financial hardship, and mortgage denials since XX/XX/XXXX when my lease ended. \n\nAdditionally, I have recorded phone calls with XXXX representatives, which further prove their failure to investigate or properly handle my fraud claims. Furthermore, I have incurred medical expenses totaling {$22000.00} due to the extreme stress and hardship this situation has caused, including necessary therapy sessions due to the financial and housing instability they have inflicted upon me. My previous rental home was put up for sale, forcing me into a hotel, which has worsened my health conditions. \n\nI have been actively looking for a home since XX/XX/XXXX and have been displaced due to fraudulent accounts on my credit report, which have directly impacted my ability to secure stable housing for myself and my XXXX children. As a XXXX XXXX XXXX at the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), this situation has also forced me to take a break from my education, preventing me from XXXX  on time due to the mental stress and emotional toll of dealing with these fraudulent accounts. \n\nFraudulent Account Details : Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number : XXXX Credit Limit : {$2500.00} Reported Balance : {$7700.00} Status : Charge-off / Profit & Loss Write-Off Amount Past Due : {$1000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date Closed : XX/XX/XXXX Account Disputed : TransUnion incorrectly reports No , despite multiple disputes. \n\nFailure to Mark the Account as Disputed : TransUnion and XXXX never marked this account as disputed, violating my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. \n\nFederal Violations by TransUnion XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Violation of FCRA Section 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) Failure to Block Fraudulent Account I submitted an FTC Identity Theft Report and a police report verifying identity theft. \n\nTransUnion was required to block this account within 4 business days but failed to do so.\n\n2. Violation of FCRA Section 623 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) Furnishing False Information XXXX continues to report false, inaccurate, and misleading information to TransUnion. \n\nTransUnion continues to publish false data after being notified. \n\nXXXX. Violation of FCRA Section 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) Failure to Investigate My Dispute TransUnion failed to conduct a reasonable investigation and remove the fraudulent charge-off. \n\nTransUnion and XXXX failed to mark the account as disputed during their so-called investigation. \n\nXXXX. Violation of FCRA Section 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy TransUnion knowingly maintains false information about my account. \n\nXXXX. Negligence & Breach of Duty of Care Both companies had a duty to ensure accurate credit reporting but failed, leading to my financial and emotional distress. \n\nHow This Has Harmed Me : Loss of {$480000.00} Mortgage Loan This fraudulent charge-off caused my mortgage application to be denied. \n\nForced Into Temporary Housing I was displaced and forced to move into a hotel after my previous home was listed for sale. \n\nSevere Emotional Distress This has caused XXXX, XXXX, and financial stress. \n\nMedical Complications As a person with XXXX XXXX XXXX, this prolonged stress has led to XXXX XXXX XXXX, requiring XXXX XXXX  totaling {$22000.00}. \n\nXXXX XXXX I have required XXXX  XXXX  due to the severe mental toll caused by this situation. \n\nEducational Disruption As a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, I had to take a break from my studies, delaying my XXXX  and future career plans due to the mental stress caused by this fraudulent reporting. \n\nWhat I Am Demanding : TransUnion must immediately remove the fraudulent account from my credit report and update all bureaus ( Equifax & XXXX ). \n\nTransUnion and XXXX must provide written confirmation that this account has been permanently deleted. \n\nI am demanding a settlement of {$480000.00} from TransUnion and {$300000.00} from XXXX XXXX XXXX for financial losses, emotional distress, medical bills, XXXX  expenses, and educational disruption. \n\nIf this matter is not resolved within 14 days, I will proceed with a federal lawsuit seeking actual, statutory, and punitive damages.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-15T21:53:48.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30005","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12498341","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-15T21:53:17.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Violation of FCRA Section 623 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) Furnishing False Information XXXX continues to report false, inaccurate, and misleading information to <em>TransUnion</em>. \n\n<em>TransUnion</em> continues to publish false data after <em>being</em> notified. \n\nXXXX. Violation of FCRA Section 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) Failure to <em>Investigate</em> My Dispute <em>TransUnion</em> failed to conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> and remove the fraudulent charge-off."]},"sort":[13.863113,"12498341"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12498231","_score":13.828285,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Sent via CFPB Complaint Portal Complaint Against : TransUnion Consumer Solutions XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : Immediate Removal of Fraudulent Reporting & Monetary Settlement Pending Federal Lawsuit Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), I am submitting this formal complaint against TransUnion Consumer Solutions for their failure to remove a fraudulent account from my credit report, despite multiple disputes, an FTC Identity Theft Report, and a police report confirming identity theft. I am also attaching XXXX XXXX XXXX to this complaint, as they are the original furnisher of false information and have failed to correct the fraudulent reporting. \n\nAs a verified victim of the XXXX Equifax Data Breach and a participant in the Federal Witness Victim Program, my personal information was severely compromised, increasing my risk of identity theft. The continued reporting of fraudulent information by TransUnion and XXXX has resulted in severe financial harm, emotional distress, and medical complications. \n\nI am actively in the process of purchasing a home and do not wish for a fraud alert to be placed on my credit file. However, I demand the immediate removal of this fraudulent charge-off, as it has caused housing displacement, financial hardship, and mortgage denials since XX/XX/XXXX when my lease ended. \n\nAdditionally, I have recorded phone calls with XXXX representatives, which further prove their failure to investigate or properly handle my fraud claims. Furthermore, I have incurred medical expenses totaling {$22000.00} due to the extreme stress and hardship this situation has caused, including necessary therapy sessions due to the financial and housing instability they have inflicted upon me. My previous rental home was put up for sale, forcing me into a hotel, which has worsened my health conditions. \n\nI have been actively looking for a home since XX/XX/XXXX and have been displaced due to fraudulent accounts on my credit report, which have directly impacted my ability to secure stable housing for myself and my XXXX children. As a XXXX XXXX XXXX at the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), this situation has also forced me to take a break from my education, preventing me from XXXX  on time due to the mental stress and emotional toll of dealing with these fraudulent accounts. \n\nFraudulent Account Details : Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number : XXXX Credit Limit : {$2500.00} Reported Balance : {$7700.00} Status : Charge-off / Profit & Loss Write-Off Amount Past Due : {$1000.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date Closed : XX/XX/XXXX Account Disputed : TransUnion incorrectly reports No , despite multiple disputes. \n\nFailure to Mark the Account as Disputed : TransUnion and XXXX never marked this account as disputed, violating my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. \n\nFederal Violations by TransUnion XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Violation of FCRA Section 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) Failure to Block Fraudulent Account I submitted an FTC Identity Theft Report and a police report verifying identity theft. \n\nTransUnion was required to block this account within 4 business days but failed to do so.\n\n2. Violation of FCRA Section 623 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) Furnishing False Information XXXX continues to report false, inaccurate, and misleading information to TransUnion. \n\nTransUnion continues to publish false data after being notified. \n\nXXXX. Violation of FCRA Section 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) Failure to Investigate My Dispute TransUnion failed to conduct a reasonable investigation and remove the fraudulent charge-off. \n\nTransUnion and XXXX failed to mark the account as disputed during their so-called investigation. \n\nXXXX. Violation of FCRA Section 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy TransUnion knowingly maintains false information about my account. \n\nXXXX. Negligence & Breach of Duty of Care Both companies had a duty to ensure accurate credit reporting but failed, leading to my financial and emotional distress. \n\nHow This Has Harmed Me : Loss of {$480000.00} Mortgage Loan This fraudulent charge-off caused my mortgage application to be denied. \n\nForced Into Temporary Housing I was displaced and forced to move into a hotel after my previous home was listed for sale. \n\nSevere Emotional Distress This has caused XXXX, XXXX, and financial stress. \n\nMedical Complications As a person with XXXX XXXX XXXX, this prolonged stress has led to XXXX XXXX XXXX, requiring XXXX XXXX  totaling {$22000.00}. \n\nXXXX XXXX I have required XXXX  XXXX  due to the severe mental toll caused by this situation. \n\nEducational Disruption As a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, I had to take a break from my studies, delaying my XXXX  and future career plans due to the mental stress caused by this fraudulent reporting. \n\nWhat I Am Demanding : TransUnion must immediately remove the fraudulent account from my credit report and update all bureaus ( Equifax & XXXX ). \n\nTransUnion and XXXX must provide written confirmation that this account has been permanently deleted. \n\nI am demanding a settlement of {$480000.00} from TransUnion and {$300000.00} from XXXX XXXX XXXX for financial losses, emotional distress, medical bills, XXXX  expenses, and educational disruption. \n\nIf this matter is not resolved within 14 days, I will proceed with a federal lawsuit seeking actual, statutory, and punitive damages.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-15T21:53:46.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30005","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12498231","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-15T21:25:42.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Violation of FCRA Section 623 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ) Furnishing False Information XXXX continues to report false, inaccurate, and misleading information to <em>TransUnion</em>. \n\n<em>TransUnion</em> continues to publish false data after <em>being</em> notified. \n\nXXXX. Violation of FCRA Section 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) Failure to <em>Investigate</em> My Dispute <em>TransUnion</em> failed to conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> and remove the fraudulent charge-off."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[13.828285,"12498231"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17282467","_score":13.515621,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Complainant : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Address : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX CA XXXX Email : XXXX Phone : ( XXXX ) XXXX Summary of Complaint I am filing a formal complaint against XXXX XXXX XXXX Exeter Finance LLC XXXX and XXXX XXXX for serious violations in connection with XXXX vehicle purchase transactions. These violations include premature and unauthorized credit inquiries, material misrepresentation during the sales process, failure to provide accurate disclosures, predatory pricing practices, mishandling of financing terms, and refusal to acknowledge or properly process my lawful rescission notice. \n\nThese actions have caused financial harm, emotional distress, and negative impacts to my credit file. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Background of the Transactions On XXXX separate dates, I purchased XXXX vehicles through XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX, California : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( financed through XXXX XXXX ) XXXX Chevrolet Bolt EV ( financed through Exeter Finance LLC ) Both transactions were handled by the same dealership. I was alone at the time of purchase, and as a female consumer, I relied fully on the dealerships representations, disclosures, and competence. Instead, I was subjected to misinformation, pressure, undisclosed credit pulls, and contract inconsistencies. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Premature and Unauthorized Credit Inquiries Before any contract was signed, the dealership ran multiple credit inquiries without : proper disclosure consent necessity clarity of purpose This constitutes misuse of personal identifying information and unfair credit practices. \n\nBoth XXXX XXXX and Exeter Finance LLC eventually reported hard inquiries that were tied to these improper dealership actions. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Misrepresentation and Unfair Sales Practices The dealership failed to : explain XXXX terms provide accurate pricing disclose add-ons show the market value comparison properly explain financing provide adequate time for review produce consistent contract documentation In both transactions, I was rushed, pressured, and given misleading or incomplete information. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Violation of Disclosure Requirements The dealership did not properly disclose : the true cost of the vehicles the finance charges the total amount financed the difference between advertised price vs actual contract price the inflated APR add-on products added without consent This violates consumer protection standards. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Legal Rescission Notices Provided After identifying these issues, I exercised my right to rescission. \n\nOn separate dates, I mailed certified letter packets to : XXXX XXXX Exeter Finance LLC XXXX XXXX XXXX packet included : formal rescission statement of facts request for cancellation request for {$0.00} balance request for deletion of tradelines request for cease of all billing and collection request for XXXX XXXX All parties received these notices ( I have XXXX proof of delivery, tracking, and green card signatures ). \n\n\n\nXXXX. Improper Response From Exeter Finance Instead of acknowledging or processing my rescission, Exeter Finance sent me a XXXX percent settlement offer, which suggests : they can not defend the validity of the contract they are attempting to collect despite rescission they are trying to secure funds before being forced to remove the account This is improper, deceptive, and an attempt to circumvent federal and state consumer protection laws. \n\n\n\nXXXX. Current Harm The lenders continue to : report these accounts maintain balances send billing or collection notices ignore rescission deadlines obstruct the correction of my credit This has caused : damaged credit score blocked access to fair lending emotional distress unnecessary financial pressure XXXX. Requested Resolution I am asking the CFPB to require : For XXXX XXXX XXXX the XXXX Trax LS account with a XXXX balance Delete the XXXX XXXX XXXX Delete all related inquiries Issue XXXX XXXX Cease all billing, reporting, and communication For Exeter Finance LLC Close the XXXX Trax LS account with a XXXX balance Delete the Exeter tradeline Delete all related inquiries Issue XXXX XXXX Cease all billing, reporting, and communication For XXXX XXXX Address the sales misconduct Retrain compliance staff Investigate misrepresentation and unauthorized credit pulls Additionally Removal of all negative or inaccurate information from Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion Written confirmation of corrective actions Enforcement action for failure to respond to my formal notices XXXX. Attachments/ Evidence Available I will provide upon request : Certified mail receipts XXXX delivery confirmations Green-card signatures Copies of rescission notices Copies of XXXX final demands Dealership documents Lender correspondence ( including settlement demand letter ) Screenshots of credit inquiries Photos of the mailed packets Conclusion I respectfully request that the CFPB investigate these issues and compel XXXX XXXX, Exeter XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX to comply with legal requirements, correct my accounts, and cease improper practices.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-16T22:48:17.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"90706","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17282467","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Exeter Finance, LLC.","date_received":"2025-11-16T22:47:53.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["These violations include premature and unauthorized credit inquiries, material misrepresentation during the sales <em>process</em>, failure to provide accurate disclosures, predatory pricing practices, mishandling of financing terms, and refusal to acknowledge or <em>properly</em> <em>process</em> my lawful rescission notice. \n\nThese actions have caused financial harm, emotional distress, and negative impacts to my credit file. \n\n\n\nXXXX."]},"sort":[13.515621,"17282467"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11558605","_score":13.3909025,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally dispute the handling of two fraudulent XXXX  accounts that have appeared on my TransUnion credit report. These accounts were reported as fraudulent, yet they continue to be removed and then re-added by TransUnion. Additionally, XXXX has repeatedly changed the status of these accounts between collections and charge-off, which appears to be a deliberate attempt to manipulate the statute of limitations and negatively impact my credit score.\n\nThis ongoing issue has caused my credit score to drop significantly by XXXX points and constitutes a direct violation of several laws : 1. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : Under 611 of the FCRA, TransUnion is required to conduct a proper investigation of disputed information and notify me of the results. The repeated re-reporting of these accounts without proper verification violates this requirement.\n\n623 prohibits furnishers of credit information ( e.g., XXXX  ) from knowingly reporting inaccurate or incomplete information.\n\n605 ( c ) establishes rules for the length of time adverse items can remain on a credit report, and manipulating account statuses to reset the statute of limitations violates this provision.\n\nI received mail from TransUnion stating these two accounts were removed from my report. TransUnion did not remove them. They also responded to the complaint yesterday, stating they removed them, but it has not been removed from my report. TransUnion has not provided any proof or anything to keep this on my report, while I have provided police reports, ID theft reports, SSN card, ID, drivers license, passports, bank statements, and everything they have asked me for. They also did not follow any of the resolution requests. TransUnion has not provided any details, documentation, or proof of their verification process. - Federal Trade Commission Act ( FTC Act ), Section 5 This law prohibits businesses, including credit bureaus, from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices. Failing to investigate disputes properly, provide verification, or remove fraudulent accounts after evidence is submitted could constitute an unfair or deceptive practice under this act. - I am writing to formally dispute several issues with my Transunion credit report that require immediate attention. I have been contacting Transunion for almost 2-3 years regarding two XXXX accounts on my credit report that are fraudulent. Despite my numerous attempts to dispute these accounts, Transunion has failed to take appropriate action or assist me. Every time I submit a dispute and contact Transunion, they dismiss my evidence, claiming it is invalid, even though I have provided the required documents, including : Identity theft report Social Security card Bank statement Drivers license Police report When I send in all the required documents, they respond by saying they do not accept them, claim they are invalid, and then ask for the same reports again. These documents come from official and appropriate sources, yet they refuse to acknowledge them. This repeated cycle of denial and excuses is unjustifiable. Transunion also does not provide any proof or evidence to support its decisions. Instead, they simply respond that the accounts were not removed without actually investigating my case. How are they verifying this information with a company ( XXXX ) that does not respond and has stated in a XXXX response that they do not have my information? I am a victim of identity theft. My personal information was compromised in the XXXX data breach, exposed on the dark web as reported by XXXX, and widely shared on social media. I have also had accounts and emails hacked. I was without proper identification until this year ( XXXX  ) and only recently obtained copies of my documents. My credit report is riddled with inaccuracies, including incorrect addresses, names, and birthdates. These fraudulent XXXX accounts were opened while I was out of the country. I worked at XXXX for less than two weeks, and during that time, I did not have the credit score, employment history, or financial standing required to open such accounts. Other creditors, such as XXXX and XXXX XXXX, have investigated and confirmed fraud, removing the accounts from my reports. However, Transunion continues to refuse to act, despite these accounts being absent from my other credit reports ( XXXX and XXXX ). Furthermore, these accounts are inaccurately reported on my Transunion credit report : One account alternates between showing late and no data. Another is reported as 120 days past due on Transunion but not on other credit reports and They have been constantly opening and closing the accounts to purposely affect my report!! FCRA Section 623 ( a ) - Duty of Furnishers of Information This section requires companies furnishing information to credit reporting agencies to report accurate and complete data. Repeatedly opening and closing fraudulent accounts is a violation of their duty to ensure accuracy, especially if youve already provided proof that the accounts are fraudulent. FCRA Section 605 ( a ) - Reporting Periods Credit reporting agencies are prohibited from including outdated or inaccurate information on credit reports. Opening and closing accounts repeatedly to manipulate their appearance may violate this section as it creates inaccuracies and ongoing harm to your credit report. I have sent countless documents to Transunion since these accounts first appeared, yet they have failed to assist me. This has severely damaged my credit score and affected my ability to secure a car, apartment, or any form of creditall due to accounts I did not open. There is constant ongoing fraud on my report and these credit bureaus take no effort to help me. I have had to get over 5 fraudulent acccounts removed from my reports and I am having a major issue removing 2 of them from TransUnion. 1. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : Section 609 ( e ) : Right to Obtain Information on Fraudulent Transactions Credit bureaus and creditors must provide documentation proving I authorized the accounts. If they can not, the accounts must be removed. Section 611 ( a ) : Duty to Investigate Disputes Credit reporting agencies are required to conduct a reasonable investigation of disputed accounts. If the information can not be verified, it must be removed or corrected. TransUnions lack of investigation violates this section. Section 605 ( b ) : Blocking Information Resulting from Identity Theft Credit bureaus must block fraudulent accounts within four business days of receiving an identity theft report. I have provided this report, making their refusal to act a violation of this law. 2. Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act ( ITADA ) : Requires companies and institutions to assist identity theft victims in resolving fraudulent accounts. XXXX refusal to respond violates this law. 3. Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act ( FACTA ) : Fraud Alerts and Credit Freezes : I have the right to place fraud alerts or security freezes on my credit reports to prevent further fraudulent activity. Right to Dispute Inaccurate Information : Credit bureaus must correct inaccuracies promptly after disputes. TransUnions delays and refusal to act violate this law. 4. Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act ( ICFA ) : This state law prohibits deceptive practices by businesses, including credit bureaus. TransUnions refusal to investigate or provide proof of verification violates ICFA. 5. Illinois Identity Theft Law ( 815 ILCS 505/2QQ ) : Provides additional protections for Illinois identity theft victims, including the right to have fraudulent information corrected and to receive assistance from creditors and reporting agencies. 6. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Guidance : The CFPB enforces the FCRA and FACTA, ensuring that credit bureaus comply with their legal obligations. TransUnions failure to investigate or remove these accounts may warrant CFPB enforcement actions. Request for Action : I am asking the CFPB to take the following steps : Investigate XXXX failure to comply with federal and state laws, including their refusal to conduct a reasonable investigation and remove fraudulent accounts. Enforce compliance with FCRA Section 605 ( b ) to block the fraudulent accounts immediately. Ensure XXXX  provides documentation of their verification process or removes these accounts as required under FCRA Section 609 ( e ). This situation has caused immense hardship, and I hope the CFPB can assist in ensuring my rights are upheld.\n\nI am requesting the following immediate actions : 1. Permanent Removal : TransUnion must permanently remove these fraudulent XXXX  accounts from my credit report. \n2. Investigation : Both TransUnion and XXXX must conduct a thorough investigation into this matter and provide me with a detailed explanation of their findings. \n3. Cease Negative Reporting : XXXX  must immediately cease altering the status of these accounts to manipulate the statute of limitations and harm my credit score. \n\n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-17T15:18:24.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"60628","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11558605","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-17T14:54:46.000Z","state":"IL","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":["Section 611 ( a ) : Duty to <em>Investigate</em> Disputes Credit reporting agencies are required to conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> of disputed accounts. If the information can not be verified, it must be removed or corrected. <em>TransUnions</em> lack of <em>investigation</em> violates this section. Section 605 ( b ) : <em>Blocking</em> Information Resulting from Identity Theft Credit bureaus must <em>block</em> fraudulent accounts within four business days of receiving an identity theft report."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[13.3909025,"11558605"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11558373","_score":13.3909025,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to formally dispute the handling of two fraudulent XXXX accounts that have appeared on my TransUnion credit report. These accounts were reported as fraudulent, yet they continue to be removed and then re-added by TransUnion. Additionally, XXXX has repeatedly changed the status of these accounts between collections and charge-off, which appears to be a deliberate attempt to manipulate the statute of limitations and negatively impact my credit score. \n\nThis ongoing issue has caused my credit score to drop significantly by XXXX points and constitutes a direct violation of several laws : 1. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : Under 611 of the FCRA, TransUnion is required to conduct a proper investigation of disputed information and notify me of the results. The repeated re-reporting of these accounts without proper verification violates this requirement. \n623 prohibits furnishers of credit information ( e.g., XXXX ) from knowingly reporting inaccurate or incomplete information.\n\n605 ( c ) establishes rules for the length of time adverse items can remain on a credit report, and manipulating account statuses to reset the statute of limitations violates this provision.\n\nI received mail from TransUnion stating these two accounts were removed from my report. TransUnion did not remove them. They also responded to the complaint yesterday, stating they removed them, but it has not been removed from my report. TransUnion has not provided any proof or anything to keep this on my report, while I have provided police reports, ID theft reports, SSN card, ID, drivers license, passports, bank statements, and everything they have asked me for. They also did not follow any of the resolution requests. TransUnion has not provided any details, documentation, or proof of their verification process. - Federal Trade Commission Act ( FTC Act ), Section 5 This law prohibits businesses, including credit bureaus, from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices. Failing to investigate disputes properly, provide verification, or remove fraudulent accounts after evidence is submitted could constitute an unfair or deceptive practice under this act. - I am writing to formally dispute several issues with my Transunion credit report that require immediate attention. I have been contacting Transunion for almost 2-3 years regard\ning two XXXX accounts on my credit report that are fraudulent. Despite my numerous attempts to dispute these accounts, Transunion has failed to take appropriate action or assist me. Every time I submit a dispute and contact Transunion, they dismiss my evidence, claiming it is invalid, even though I have provided the required documents, including : Identity theft report Social Security card Bank statement Drivers license Police report When I send in all the required documents, they respond by saying they do not accept them, claim they are invalid, and then ask for the same reports again. These documents come from official and appropriate sources, yet they refuse to acknowledge them. This repeated cycle of denial and excuses is unjustifiable. Transunion also does not provide any proof or evidence to support its decisions. Instead, they simply respond that the accounts were not removed without actually investigating my case. How are they verifying this information with a company ( XXXX ) that does not respond and has stated in a BBB response that they do not have my information? I am a victim of identity theft. My personal information was compromised in the XXXX data breach, exposed on the dark web as reported by XXXX, and widely shared on social media. I have also had accounts and emails hacked. I was without proper identification until this year ( 2024 ) and only recently obtained copies of my documents. My credit report is riddled with inaccuracies, including incorrect addresses, names, and birthdates. These fraudulent XXXX accounts were opened while I was out of the country. I worked at XXXX for less than two weeks, and during that time, I did not have the credit score, employment history, or financial standing required to open such accounts. Other creditors, such as XXXX and XXXX XXXX, have investigated and confirmed fraud, removing the accounts from my reports. However, Transunion continues to refuse to act, despite these accounts being absent from my other credit reports ( XXXX and XXXX ). Furthermore, these accounts are inaccurately reported on my Transunion credit report : One account alternates between showing late and no data. Another is reported as 120 days past due on Transunion but not on other credit reports and They have been constantly opening and closing the accounts to purposely affect my report!! FCRA Section 623 ( a ) - Duty of Furnishers of Information This section requires companies furnishing information to credit reporting agencies to report accurate and complete data. Repeatedly opening and closing fraudulent accounts is a violation of their duty to ensure accuracy, especially if youve already provided proof that the accounts are fraudulent. FCRA Section 605 ( a ) - Reporting Periods Credit reporting agencies are prohibited from including outdated or inaccurate information on credit reports. Opening and closing accounts repeatedly to manipulate their appearance may violate this section as it creates inaccuracies and ongoing harm to your credit report. I have sent countless documents to Transunion since these accounts first appeared, yet they have failed to assist me. This has severely damaged my credit score and affected my ability to secure a car, apartment, or any form of creditall due to accounts I did not open. There is constant ongoing fraud on my report and these credit bureaus take no effort to help me. I have had to get over 5 fraudulent acccounts removed from my reports and I am having a major issue removing 2 of them from TransUnion. 1. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : Section 609 ( e ) : Right to Obtain Information on Fraudulent Transactions Credit bureaus and creditors must provide documentation proving I authorized the accounts. If they can not, the accounts must be removed. Section 611 ( a ) : Duty to Investigate Disputes Credit reporting agencies are required to conduct a reasonable investigation of disputed accounts. If the information can not be verified, it must be removed or corrected. TransUnions lack of investigation violates this section. Section 605 ( b ) : Blocking Information Resulting from Identity Theft Credit bureaus must block fraudulent accounts within four business days of receiving an identity theft report. I have provided this report, making their refusal to act a violation of this law. 2. Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act ( ITADA ) : Requires companies and institutions to assist identity theft victims in resolving fraudulent accounts. XXXX refusal to respond violates this law. XXXX. Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act ( FACTA ) : Fraud Alerts and Credit Freezes : I have the right to place fraud alerts or security freezes on my credit reports to prevent further fraudulent activity. Right to Dispute Inaccurate Information : Credit bureaus must correct inaccuracies promptly after disputes. TransUnions delays and refusal to act violate this law. 4. Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act ( ICFA ) : This state law prohibits deceptive practices by businesses, including credit bureaus. TransUnions refusal to investigate or provide proof of verification violates ICFA. 5. Illinois Identity Theft Law ( 815 ILCS 505/2QQ ) : Provides additional protections for Illinois identity theft victims, including the right to have fraudulent information corrected and to receive assistance from creditors and reporting agencies. 6. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Guidance : The CFPB enforces the FCRA and FACTA, ensuring that credit bureaus comply with their legal obligations. TransUnions failure to investigate or remove these accounts may warrant CFPB enforcement actions. Request for Action : I am asking the CFPB to take the following steps : Investigate XXXX failure to comply with federal and state laws, including their refusal to conduct a reasonable investigation and remove fraudulent accounts. Enforce compliance with FCRA Section 605 ( b ) to block the fraudulent accounts immediately. Ensure XXXX provides documentation of their verification process or removes these accounts as required under FCRA Section 609 ( e ). This situation has caused immense hardship, and I hope the CFPB can assist in ensuring my rights are upheld.\n\nI am requesting the following immediate actions : 1. Permanent Removal : TransUnion must permanently remove these fraudulent XXXX accounts from my credit report.\n\n2. Investigation : Both TransUnion and XXXX must conduct a thorough investigation into this matter and provide me with a detailed explanation of their findings.\n\n3. Cease Negative Reporting : XXXX must immediately cease altering the status of these accounts to manipulate the statute of limitations and harm my credit score. \n\n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-17T15:18:44.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"60628","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11558373","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-17T15:18:37.000Z","state":"IL","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":["Section 611 ( a ) : Duty to <em>Investigate</em> Disputes Credit reporting agencies are required to conduct a reasonable <em>investigation</em> of disputed accounts. If the information can not be verified, it must be removed or corrected. <em>TransUnions</em> lack of <em>investigation</em> violates this section. Section 605 ( b ) : <em>Blocking</em> Information Resulting from Identity Theft Credit bureaus must <em>block</em> fraudulent accounts within four business days of receiving an identity theft report."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[13.3909025,"11558373"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13089719","_score":13.298561,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this formal complaint against the three nationwide credit bureaus TransUnion, for willful and repeated violations of federal consumer protection laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). Despite my numerous disputes, the Bureaus removed certain fraudulent accounts from my credit reports only to unlawfully reinsert them without proper verification or notice. This conduct violates FCRAs reinsertion provisions ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) ) which prohibit a credit reporting agency TRANSUNION from reinserting previously deleted information unless the furnisher certifies its accuracy and the CRA notifies the consumer within 5 business days. The Bureaus failed to meet these requirements. They also failed to ensure maximum possible accuracy of my reports ( FCRA 1681e ( b ) ), did not properly reinvestigate my disputes within 30 days ( FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ), and ignored my requests for validation and verification in violation of both FCRA and FDCPA. In short, the transunion actions ( and inactions ) have allowed inaccurate, fraudulent accounts to persist and even reappear on my credit file, causing significant harm. \nXXXX. Background of Disputed Accounts I am a victim of identity theft, which I have documented through an FTC Identity Theft Report and police report ( copies provided to the Bureaus ). Unauthorized accounts and inquiries were added to my credit reports without my consent. I exercised my rights under FCRA and FDCPA to dispute these items and to request their validation : Fraudulent Accounts : XXXX CARD : XXXX that I never opened or authorized. After my initial disputes, some of these accounts were deleted as invalid. However, the transunion later reinserted XXXX CARD : XXXX without notifying me in writing within five days, as required by 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) ( ii ). No certification of accuracy was provided to me upon reinsertion, indicating the process did not comply with the law. Reinserting previously removed debts without proper validation also implicates FDCPA 809 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) ), since a debt collector must cease reporting a debt if it can not verify it. The Bureaus effectively allowed debt collectors to continue collection by credit reporting, even after disputes, without ever providing me verification. \nUnauthorized Inquiries : Numerous hard inquiries appeared on my reports from lenders I never applied to ( XXXX  XXXX ). This inquiry lack a permissible purpose under FCRA 604 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) and should have been removed. Reporting inquiries without consent is illegal, yet the Bureaus did not delete them despite my disputes.\n\nIncorrect Personal Information : My credit file shows wrong names ( e.g., variations of my name I have never used ) and addresses in states Ive never lived. This indicates failure to assure maximum possible accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) and potentially mixed-file issues. I requested correction or removal of this data, but the Bureaus have not fully complied. \nDespite sending formal dispute letters ( via certified mail ) to transunion including documentation of fraud ( identity theft reports, ID, proof of address ) the Bureaus either failed to respond in a timely manner or conducted perfunctory investigations that did not actually verify the debts. Notably, more than 30 days have passed since my disputes with no adequate verification provided ( violating FCRA 1681is 30-day limit and 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) duty to report results ). They have also failed to block the fraudulent accounts after receiving my identity theft reports, contrary to FCRA 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( a ) ), which requires CRAs to block such information within 4 business days of receiving proof of identity theft.\n\nIII. Detailed Violations of Law The Bureaus actions ( and failures to act ) violate multiple provisions of federal law, as detailed below : FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation within 30 days of my dispute. I notified the Bureaus of inaccuracies ; under FCRA they must reinvestigateor delete the item within 30 days of receiving the dispute. They did not complete proper investigations in this timeframe, nor did they delete all unverified information.\n\nFCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Failure to delete inaccurate or unverified information. By law, if an item is inaccurate or the furnisher fails to verify it, the CRA must promptly delete or correct that item. Here, furnishers failed to verify the debts ( no contracts or signatures were produced ), yet the accounts remain or were reinserted.\n\nFCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) Unlawful reinsertion of previously deleted information without required certification and notice. Federal law prohibits a CRA from reinserting a deleted item unless the furnisher certifies its accuracy, and even then the CRA must notify the consumer within 5 business days of reinsertion with the furnishers contact details. The Bureaus put deleted fraudulent accounts back on my report without notifying me at all, which is an egregious FCRA violation. I only discovered the reappearance by checking my reports. This denied me the chance to dispute immediately or add a consumer statement, as is my right.\n\nFCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) Failure to maintain reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy. The recurring inaccurate information on my reports ( fraudulent account, incorrect personal data ) shows the Bureaus procedures are inadequate. In fact, the CFPB has noted that Experian lacked basic matching tools to prevent reinsertions by a new debt collector, causing consumers to see the same inaccurate information reappearwithout explanation under the name of a new furnisher. XXXX  was likewise found to have failed ] to prevent the improper reinsertion of previously deleted information in violation of FCRA. My experience mirrors these findings.\n\nFCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( a ) Failure to block information resulting from identity theft. I provided the Bureaus with an identity theft report identifying specific fraudulent accounts. Under FCRA 605B, a CRA must block those items from my credit file within four business days and notify the furnisher. Any subsequent attempt to reinsert or report that blocked info is unlawful. The Bureaus did not honor this mandatory block, as the accounts continued to report even after they had my theft report. Moreover, if a CRA declines or rescinds a block, it must notify the consumer within 5 days ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ( c ) ) ; I received no such notices. The CFPBs recent enforcement action against XXXX  confirms that failing to block identity theft accounts ( and failing to notify the consumer of any unblocking ) is a serious violation. \nFCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) Failure to provide me the results of reinvestigation and verification details. I was entitled to a written notice of the investigation results within 5 business days of completion, including a revised credit report and information on how it was verified or why it was unchanged. Instead, I either received no response or generic form letters that did not explain the outcome. The CFPB found Experian was sending consumers notices that fail to inform them of the investigation results and provided confusing or incorrect information, which is exactly what I experienced. I also requested method of verification details ( e.g. copies of any documents or contracts that prove I owe the debts ), which the Bureaus failed to supply violating FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) and 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ). \nFDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( a ) & ( b ) XXXX XXXX  : XXXX Failure of debt collectors to provide validation of the debts and ceasing collection. I notified the furnishers ( collection agencies ) that these accounts were fraudulent and requested validation under FDCPA. Debt collectors must send verification of the debt and original creditor upon request ( and initially advise me of this right ) per 1692g ( a ) ( 4 ) - ( 5 ). None of the collectors provided valid documentation. Moreover, once I disputed and sought validation, they should cease collection activities until providing proof ( 1692g ( b ) ). Reporting a debt to a CRA is considered a collection activity ; by continuing to report or re-report these accounts without validation, the collectors violated FDCPA. Thus, the Bureaus by extension are reporting debts that are legally unvalidated and uncollectible. \nFDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( 8 ) Communication of false credit information by debt collectors. If a debt is disputed or is the result of identity theft, a collector must mark it as disputed in any reporting. If any collector re-reported the debt under a different account or failed to note my dispute, that is a false representation of the debts status. The reinserted tradelines appeared under new account numbers/names, giving the impression of a new debt. This deceptive practice violates 1692e and 1692e ( 8 ). \nIn summary, the Bureaus have failed to follow the law at multiple steps of the process meant to protect consumers. Instead of performing legitimate investigations, they appear to rely on automated, perfunctory processes that parrot whatever their furnishers respond with, regardless of evidence. Notably, the National Consumer Law Center observes that credit bureaus often engage in sham dispute investigations, always deferring to the creditor or collector a practice called parroting. This bias undermines my rights under FCRAs dispute provisions and has occurred in my case.\n\nIV. Pattern of Non-Compliance CFPB Enforcement Evidence My experience is not isolated ; it reflects systemic problems that the CFPB and courts have recognized and acted upon. I cite the following recent enforcement actions and cases to underscore the severity of these violations and the need for CFPB intervention : CFPB Lawsuit against XXXX  ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : The CFPB sued XXXX  for failing to properly investigate consumer disputes and for reinserting errors on credit reports. The Bureau alleges XXXX  conducted sham investigations and routinely ignored evidence submitted by consumers. Instead of fixing errors, XXXX  allowed deleted inaccuracies to reappear under different furnishers, harming consumers credit access. CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX noted this misconduct can have serious consequences and that credit reporting giants must follow the law This lawsuit seeks to halt XXXX  unlawful practices and impose penalties. My case involves the very same practices poor dispute handling and improper reinsertion now under CFPB litigation. \nXXXX Settlement with TransUnion ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : TransUnion and a subsidiary agreed to pay {$15.00} XXXX to settle charges of failing to ensure report accuracy. In that case ( involving tenant screening reports ), TransUnion failed to remove inaccurate or incomplete records, which hurt consumers ability to obtain housing. While focused on tenant data, the settlement highlights the Bureaus obligations under FCRAs maximum possible accuracy standard. It shows regulators will impose multi-million dollar penalties when CRAs allow faulty data to remain, reinforcing that the issues in my complaint rise to the level of enforcement. \nCFPB Action against XXXX  ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : The CFPB issued an order against XXXX  for widespread FCRA violations in its dispute handling processes. The Bureau found XXXX  failed to properly conduct reinvestigations, failed to prevent improper reinsertions, and failed to block information resulting from identity theft, among other violations. XXXX  also neglected to send consumers adequate results of investigations. XXXX  was ordered to pay a {$15.00} XXXX civil penalty and fix its procedures. According to XXXX, XXXX  ignored consumer documents and evidence, allowed previously flagged inaccuracies to return to credit reports. This is precisely what I have endured across all three Bureaus. The CFPBs action against XXXX  underscores that reinsertion of disputed data and ignoring identity theft claims are unlawful and punishable. My complaint seeks similar scrutiny and relief with respect to XXXX, XXXX, and TransUnions conduct in my case. \nCase Law : Courts have long interpreted the FCRA to require meaningful dispute investigations by CRAs, not just automated formality. In XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, the Third Circuit held that a CRA must go beyond the original source [ the creditor ] and can not simply rely on whatever the furnisher says if that approach yields no resolution doing so would violate the FCRAs reinvestigation duty ( XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) ). Similarly, in XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX ), the XXXX XXXX emphasized that furnishers of information ( and by extension CRAs ) have a responsibility to investigate and correct disputed information, especially when there are indicia of identity theft or fraud. These cases support that the Bureaus cursory handling of my disputes effectively rubber-stamping the erroneous information falls short of FCRAs requirements and exposes them to liability. Moreover, failure to notify a consumer of reinsertion has been found to violate the FCRA and supports damages ; e.g., XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ( CRAs lack of notice of reinsertion was a breach of FCRA 1681i ). In sum, there is ample legal precedent that the Bureaus actions are illegal and harmful. \nXXXX Impact on Consumer ( Harm Caused ) Due to these violations, I have suffered serious negative consequences : my credit score plummeted because of the reinserted bogus accounts and numerous hard inquiries. I have been denied credit and faced higher interest rates on loans. The stress of dealing with identity theft was exacerbated by the Bureaus failure to correct the record. Ive spent countless hours sending disputes, making phone calls, and seeking relief, to little avail. These inaccuracies also jeopardize opportunities for employment and housing ( since many employers and landlords check credit ). The continued presence of fraudulent debt on my reports is a constant source of anxiety and constitutes ongoing damage to my reputation and finances. All of this harm is directly attributable to the Bureaus non-compliance with consumer protection laws. \nVI. Relief Requested I respectfully request the CFPBs assistance to enforce the law and obtain the following relief : Immediate Deletion/Blocking of Fraudulent Data : The CFPB should compel XXXX, TransUnion, and XXXX  to permanently delete all fraudulent accounts and inquiries from my credit files across all bureaus. In addition, any information identified in my identity theft report must be blocked from reappearing, per 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2. This includes the specific accounts I have disputed ( detailed in my correspondence with the Bureaus ) and any related listings by different collection agencies. The bureaus must ensure these items do not reinsert under any name or form unless strict FCRA prerequisites are met.\n\nCompliance Verification : The Bureaus should be required to provide written confirmation that the deletions and blocks have been implemented, along with updated copies of my credit reports showing a clean record. Furthermore, I request that the CFPB review the\nBureaus internal reinvestigation documentation for my disputes how they handled my dispute letters, whether they forwarded my evidence to furnishers, and how the improper reinsertions occurred. If they failed to forward my documents or made only cursory checks, that should be noted as part of enforcement ( as the CFPB has alleged happened in other cases ).\n\nInvestigation into Furnishers : I urge the CFPB to also consider enforcement against the furnishers ( creditors/debt collectors ) who supplied these fraudulent accounts. If a debt collector failed to conduct a reasonable investigation after notice of dispute from the CRA ( violating 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ) or re-reported a debt without validating it to me ( violating FDCPA and potentially FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 8 ) ), they should be held accountable. The CFPBs Circular 2022-07 makes clear that regulators can take action against furnishers who do not properly investigate disputes. Such action will complement the relief in my individual case by addressing the source of the erroneous data.\n\nCivil Penalties and Consumer Redress : Given the willful nature of these violations the Bureaus were alerted multiple times and yet persisted maximum penalties are warranted. The CFPB should impose appropriate civil money penalties on each Bureau for these breaches ( consistent with recent fines : e.g. {$15.00} XXXX against XXXX  ). I also seek any available monetary relief for the harm Ive suffered, which the CFPB can facilitate through its complaint resolution process or enforcement action. Under FCRA, I have private rights to damages ( statutory, actual, and punitive under 15 U.S.C. 1681n, 1681o ), but I am first seeking resolution through the CFPBs intervention to hopefully avoid litigation.\n\nSystemic Reforms : Beyond my case, I ask the CFPB to mandate that the Bureaus review and fix their dispute handling systems : specifically, to stop any automated rejection of disputes without human investigation ( ensuring no dispute is improperly labeled frivolous without a valid reason and notice to the consumer ), to integrate fraud report information across all bureaus ( perhaps via the automated system required by FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( D ) for sharing dispute results, and to implement the basic matching protocols that would prevent deleted items from sneaking back in under slightly different details. The goal is to force improvements so that no other consumer faces the same nightmare of recurring fraudulent entries.\n\nVII. Conclusion The facts demonstrate clear violations of federal law by, TransUnion, in concert with certain furnishers. The Bureau have ignored their duties under FCRA and FDCPA, even after multiple notices, to the severe detriment of my financial well-being. I urge the CFPB to use its authority to investigate this matter, ensure the fraudulent data is removed and blocked, and to take enforcement action as needed. The CFPBs own statements recognize that when companies fail to investigate disputed information, consumers are left paying higher costs and face greater difficulty in life. That is exactly my situation ; I am counting on CFPB to uphold my rights and restore the accuracy and integrity of my credit reports. \nThank you for your attention to this urgent complaint. I am available to provide any additional information or documentation needed. I have attached copies of relevant dispute letters, identity theft reports, and prior correspondence for your reference. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-22T01:11:18.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"34746","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13089719","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-22T00:24:04.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["CFPB Action against XXXX  ( XX/XX/XXXX ) : The CFPB issued an order against XXXX  for widespread FCRA violations in its dispute <em>handling</em> <em>processes</em>. The Bureau found XXXX  failed to <em>properly</em> conduct reinvestigations, failed to prevent improper reinsertions, and failed to <em>block</em> information resulting from identity theft, among other violations. XXXX  also neglected to send consumers adequate results of <em>investigations</em>. XXXX  was ordered to pay a {$15.00} XXXX civil penalty and fix its procedures."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[13.298561,"13089719"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12646259","_score":13.095415,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX To : Transunion Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ) Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ) Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( OCC ) National Association of Attorneys General ( NAAG ) U.S. Department of Justice ( DOJ ) Civil Division DOJ Consumer Protection Branch ( CPB ) RE : Request for Immediate Federal and Multi-State Enforcement Against TransUnion for Systemic Violations of Federal and State Consumer Protection Laws and Obstruction of FCRA Rights I am submitting this formal enforcement referral regarding TransUnion for violating federal and state consumer protection statutes through fraudulent suppression of disputes, evasion of regulatory timelines, failure to properly process consumer dispute claims, and provision of deceptive and misleading responsesall in violation of their statutory obligations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Consumer Financial Protection Act ( CFPA ), and corresponding D.C., Pennsylvania, Illinois, and New York consumer protection laws.\n\nThis referral is supported by an attached, sworn and notarized Affidavit of Truth ( AOT ), which affirms under penalty of perjury the factual accuracy of the allegations and evidentiary timeline presented, and by a formal Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) Fraud Report, filed to document TransUnions systemic deception and noncompliance under 15 U.S.C. 45. These documents are included to establish factual basis, sworn attestation, and prior regulatory notification. \nAlso attached are letters, received from TransUnion on XX/XX/XXXX in the same envelope, labeled here as XXXX and XXXX, serve as critical evidence of ongoing violations. \nTransUnions Deliberate Failure to Link Communications to Specific Disputes Both Letter XXXX ( Re : Dispute Status ) and Letter XXXX ( Re : Explanation of the Inquiries on Your Credit Report ) were received by me on the same day in the same envelope but fail to identify which dispute or CFPB Complaint ID they address. This is not a clerical oversightit is a recurring practice that : 1. Obstructs consumer understanding of dispute outcomes under FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ), which mandates that CRAs clearly disclose the results of each reinvestigation.\n\n2. Denies procedural transparency by omitting essential identifiers such as : o Dispute subject ( e.g., creditor name or inquiry source ), o Filing date, o Outcome reasoning, o Reinsertion notifications or suppression confirmations.\n\nBy sending generic, ambiguous letters disconnected from any specific complaint, TransUnion has : Frustrated regulatory oversight by making it impossible for agencies like the CFPB to trace outcomes back to specific complaints. \nCompromised consumer recordkeeping, which is essential to maintaining accountability and exercising legal remedies. \nConstructively evaded enforcement by preventing both consumers and regulators from matching TransUnions responses to statutory timelines or legal obligations under pending complaints.\n\nThis lack of linkage directly violates : FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) : Failure to describe the procedure used for each reinvestigation.\n\n15 U.S.C. 45 : As a deceptive business practice that creates the illusion of compliance without actual transparency.\n\nState-level statutory requirements in D.C., Pennsylvania, Illinois, and New York , all of which recognize misrepresentation and omission as violations of consumer protection laws.\n\nThis is especially egregious given that I currently have four active CFPB complaints pending against TransUnion : XXXX ( submitted XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX ( submitted XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX ( submitted XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX ( submitted XX/XX/XXXX ) Their responses reflect no effort to identify which, if any, of those complaints they purport to resolvedespite statutory obligations and federal mandates requiring such disclosures in dispute communications. \nAccordingly, I request that this pattern be investigated as a systemic obstruction of due process and be treated as an aggravating factor in any penalties, injunctive relief, or criminal referrals imposed by your offices. \nBreakdown of TransUnion 's Letters and Conduct Letter XXXX : \" Re : Dispute Status '' TransUnion asserts that an item I disputed does not currently appear on my credit report and offers no additional details as to : What item was under review.\n\nWhether any investigation took place. \nWhether the item was previously present, deleted, or never existed.\n\nNo dispute summary, reinvestigation process, or conclusion was disclosed, despite this being required by law.\n\nViolations : 1. FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) : TransUnion failed to clearly communicate the results of the reinvestigation. The response is conclusory, vague, and materially omits the substance of the outcome.\n\n2. FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) : TransUnion failed to provide a description of the procedure used to investigate the dispute.\n\n3. 15 U.S.C. 45 ( FTC Act ) : The response constitutes a deceptive business practice, creating the illusion of compliance while omitting material facts.\n\n4. D.C. CPPA 28-3904 ( f ) & ( e ) : This conduct involves material omissions and misrepresentations about the status and handling of a consumer complaint.\n\n5. Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. 201-2 ( 4 ) ( v ), ( xxi ) : Misleading or deceptive conduct likely to confuse a reasonable consumer about their rights or TransUnion 's obligations.\n\n6. Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, 815 ILCS 505/2 : TransUnion engaged in unfair and deceptive conduct by failing to properly identify what was being investigated.\n\n7. New York General Business Law 349 : TransUnions failure to disclose dispute findings misleads consumers regarding their credit records and legal rights. \nLetter XXXX : \" Re : Explanation of the Inquiries on Your Credit Report '' TransUnion defended the presence of inquiries based on permissible purpose under FCRA, without identifying the creditor, account, inquiry date, or the basis for assuming authorization. This is a generic form response without tailoring or acknowledgment of the specific dispute submitted.\n\nNotably, TransUnion refused to investigate the inquiry, despite having received a formal dispute that challenged an inquirys legitimacy, see CFPB Complaint ID XXXX. \nViolations : 1. FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) : Failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation into disputed inquiries.\n\n2. FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ) : Failure to forward all relevant information about the dispute to the furnisher of the inquiry.\n\n3. FCRA 1681c-2 ( a ) : Failure to block information resulting from fraud, where identity misattribution was raised.\n\n4. FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy where the source or legitimacy of inquiries remains unclear or contested.\n\n5. D.C. CPPA 28-3904 ( f ) & ( e ) : Misrepresenting rights related to dispute of inquiries and permissible purpose.\n\n6. Pennsylvania 73 P.S. 201-2 ( 4 ) ( v ), ( xxi ) : TransUnions refusal to investigate potential unauthorized inquiries constitutes deceptive conduct.\n\n7. Illinois 815 ILCS 505/2 : Failure to explain the inquiry in context constitutes concealment and misrepresentation of consumer credit activity.\n\n8. New York GBL 349 : TransUnions refusal to properly handle a dispute concerning inquiries misrepresents the consumers right to challenge inaccuracies.\n\nLegal Basis for Enforcement Federal Statutory Violations : FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ), ( 2 ), ( 6 ), ( 7 ), 1681e ( b ), 1681c-2 ( a ) 15 U.S.C. 1681n ( willful noncompliance ), 1681o ( negligent noncompliance ) 15 U.S.C. 45 ( unfair and deceptive acts and practices under the FTC Act ) Criminal Conduct Warranting DOJ Review : 18 U.S.C. 1001 : False statements or material omissions in regulatory disclosures.\n\n18 U.S.C. 1343 ( Wire Fraud ) : Communications made with intent to defraud through omissions or deceptive resolution letters.\n\n18 U.S.C. 1962 ( RICO ) : Pattern of deceptive conduct and evasion of lawful regulatory process with commercial gain.\n\nPattern of Evasion, Misrepresentation, and Systemic Risk TransUnions conduct reflects more than isolated oversightit reveals a deliberate and coordinated pattern of regulatory evasion, legal misdirection, and procedural suppression of consumer rights. The companys repeated failure to provide dispute results that are linked, transparent, or complete represents not only noncompliance with statutory mandates, but an intentional effort to frustrate consumer remedies and obstruct regulatory scrutiny. \nBy sending vague, unlinked letters in response to active legal complaintseach omitting dispute identifiers, outcomes, or investigation detailsTransUnion is : Creating the false appearance of compliance while actively circumventing FCRA and CFPA procedural obligations.\n\nAvoiding accountability by denying consumers and regulators the ability to audit or verify whether statutory timelines and investigation duties were met.\n\nSuppressing dispute clarity in a way that weakens the CFPBs ability to monitor patterns across complaints and undermines multi-agency oversight.\n\nThis behavior is not unique to a single incidentit has emerged across multiple complaints, through multiple letters, involving distinct issues such as inquiry legitimacy, personal information suppression, and permissible purpose disputes. When paired with sworn documentation ( Affidavit of Truth ), an FTC fraud report, and active CFPB complaints, this reveals a structure of willful obstruction and legal misrepresentation that can not be resolved through informal channels alone. \nGiven the volume of unresolved complaints, the absence of meaningful engagement, and the critical role TransUnion plays in the national financial infrastructure, these violations expose both consumers and institutions to systemic risk. Enforcement is not merely appropriateit is required to preserve the integrity of the credit reporting system.\n\nPrior Enforcement History and Regulatory Pattern TransUnions current conduct can not be viewed in isolation. In 2017, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issued a Consent Order against TransUnion for engaging in deceptive marketing practices and misrepresentations about the usefulness and cost of credit scores and reports. That action resulted in {$13.00} million in restitution and a {$3.00} million civil penalty. More recently, TransUnion has also faced repeated scrutiny for its handling of disputes, failure to maintain accurate consumer information, and use of evasive communications to avoid accountability.\n\nThe pattern of conduct I am reportinggeneric responses, failure to tie dispute outcomes to specific CFPB complaint IDs, suppression of reinvestigation detail, and misrepresentation of permissible purposeis not new. It reflects a continued and willful disregard for statutory compliance, even after having been placed under consent decree and federal supervision. \nGiven this history, I respectfully request that regulators treat this matter as part of an ongoing systemic noncompliance pattern, and not as a one-off violation. Enforcement actions should reflect that TransUnion has had ample opportunity to correct its processes and has instead doubled down on opaque, deceptive, and obstructive tactics.\n\nSupporting Case Law The following federal appellate and district court decisions reinforce the legal arguments presented above and confirm that the conduct exhibited by TransUnionranging from failure to reinvestigate to deceptive dispute communicationshas been previously adjudicated as unlawful under the FCRA. These cases establish binding and persuasive precedent that : 1. Willful and negligent violations of the FCRA carry statutory and compensatory liability ; 2. Reinvestigations must be meaningful, not perfunctory ; and 3. Patterned noncompliance and vague responses constitute actionable failures that expose CRAs to enforcement and judicial remedy.\n\nEach case cited below illustrates the legal threshold for compliance and underscores how TransUnions actions meet or exceed the level of misconduct required to justify regulatory and judicial intervention. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) Willful FCRA violations include reckless disregard for legal duties. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX Trans Union XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) Reinvestigation must go beyond parroting the furnishers response. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) Negligent or minimal FCRA reinvestigation procedures result in liability. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) CRA must ensure accuracy under 1681e ( b ). \nXXXX. XXXX v. Trans Union XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) Pattern of inaccuracies supports systemic noncompliance. \nXXXX. XXXX v. XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( C.D. XXXX. XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) Failure to block disputed data under FCRA 1681c-2 ( a ) was actionable. \nXXXX. XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ) Vague or generic response letters violate reinvestigation obligations.\n\nRequest for Immediate Action Based on the conduct described in TransUnions letters and its failure to meet its legal obligations under federal and state law, I request the following : 1. A m\nulti-agency investigation into TransUnions systemic FCRA and CFPA violations.\n\n2. Civil monetary penalties and injunctive relief imposed under the CFPBs UDAAP authority and the FTC Act.\n\n3. Referral to DOJ for potential criminal charges under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and 18 U.S.C. 1343 based on deceptive regulatory correspondence.\n\n4. State Attorney General coordination through NAAG to evaluate violations under D.C., PA, IL, and NY consumer protection statutes.\n\n5. Review by the SEC regarding TransUnions public disclosures and risk reports, in light of growing FCRA liabilities.\n\n6. FCC inquiry into misuse of consumer data across communication channels, particularly if auto-dispute responses originate from third-party integrations.\n\n7. An order compelling TransUnion to lawfully fulfill its statutory obligations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and Consumer Financial Protection Act by issuing complete, timely, and specific responses to my currently open CFPB complaints : XXXX ( submitted XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX ( submitted XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX ( submitted XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX0 ( submitted XXXX XXXX XXXX ), This includes : i ) Identification of each disputed item, ii ) A clear statement of the outcome, iii ) A description of the reinvestigation procedures used, and iv ) Delivery of these results within the mandated statutory timeframe.\n\n( a ) TransUnions failure to do so constitutes an ongoing violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) and 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ), and further obstructs regulatory review by the CFPB and other oversight bodies.\n\nI am prepared to submit additional documentation, sworn statements, and certified dispute filings supporting each claim described herein. I am also willing to cooperate with any federal or state agency conducting further review. \nRespectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX Attachments : Sworn and Notarized Affidavit of Truth FTC Fraud Report : XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-24T09:14:23.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"20008","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12646259","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-24T09:10:32.000Z","state":"DC","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Was not notified of investigation status or results"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. 201-2 ( 4 ) ( v ), ( xxi ) : Misleading or deceptive conduct likely to confuse a reasonable consumer about their rights or <em>TransUnion</em> 's obligations.\n\n6. Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, 815 ILCS 505/2 : <em>TransUnion</em> engaged in unfair and deceptive conduct by failing to <em>properly</em> identify what was <em>being</em> <em>investigated</em>.\n\n7."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Was not notified of <em>investigation</em> status or results"]},"sort":[13.095415,"12646259"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"10128520","_score":12.180937,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I am submitting a formal complaint against TransUnion for willfully violating 15 U.S. Code 1681i - Compliance procedures by failing to conduct a reasonable investigation and 15 U.S. Code 1681e ( b ) - Accuracy of report for failing to assure maximum possible accuracy.\n\nI believe the evidence provided substantiates that not only was TransUnion in violation of 15 U.S. Code 168o ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 2 ) for being negligent and non-compliant in their handling this claim, but also violated 15 U.S. Code 1681n ( a ), as they clearly demonstrated willful recklessness throughout the process. This is my final attempt to request that TransUnion resolve this matter, or I have no choice but to exercise my private right of action in Federal Court.\n\nOverview : I mailed TransUnion a dispute letter via certified mail on XX/XX/XXXX, and provided 60 pages of evidence, including receipts and official documentation, asking them to investigate inaccurate information reporting on my credit file regarding an erroneous debt of {$4700.00} furnished by DFAS. ( see Exhibit I : TransUnion Certified Mail Dispute XXXX ) My letter explained that not only was this debt a mistake on the part of DFAS ( with irrefutable evidence to back it up ), but in addition, I pointed out multiple other errors associated with this account which were reporting inaccurately ( causing adverse action ), and asked TransUnion to investigate the errors and to correct the inaccuracies or delete the account.\n\nAs youll find in Exhibit I, I provided TransUnion a detailed overview of why the account is inaccurate and started by explaining that I had already contacted DFAS directly regarding the account back in XX/XX/XXXX, and they still hadnt responded to my dispute, so I was asking for TransUnion to please investigate the matter directly.\n\nI also explained that I had never received any letters or notices from DFAS regarding this debt. Instead, I discovered it while reviewing my credit report. To this day, DFAS has still not sent me any letters or correspondence regarding the reason for this alleged debt. I explained that I discovered the debt while randomly reviewing my credit report and saw that it was reporting. I explained that after reaching out to multiple departments within DFAS, I finally spoke with a representative named XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, who said her ID Number was XXXX. She was able to pull up the alleged debt and said it was regarding an overpayment due to the weight of a military household goods move from XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX and that DFAS sent the notice of indebtedness letter to that invalid address in XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nI explained to TransUnion that this was clearly a mistake by DFAS because I was NOT in the military in XXXX, nor did I live in XXXX  or have any association with that address in XXXX. I explained that XXXX is a one-party consent state and that I recorded the entire call with DFAS. During this call, I had the DFAS representative, XXXX XXXX, admit that the call was being recorded on her end as well ; however, when I told her the conversation was also being recorded on my end, she put me on hold and then abruptly hung up. ( See Exhibit II : DFAS Recorded Call Transcript XXXX ). I then pointed out specific evidence to TransUnion, which I included within the 60 pages of attachments, and explained there is no possible way this alleged debt could be accurate for the following reasons : 1. The XXXX and military separation documents I included, validate that I was medically separated from the military in XX/XX/XXXX, NOT in XX/XX/XXXX, and I was located in XXXXXXXX XXXX NOT in XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\n2. I also included all the documents from the military pertaining to my household goods move from when I separated in XX/XX/XXXX ( to include all the receipts from that move that were returned by mail ), clearly indicating that I relocated from XXXX XXXX  to my home of record address in XXXXXXXX XXXX Additionally, I pointed out that block 19a of my XXXX specifically lists my post-separation mailing address ( Mailing Address After XXXX  ) as the Home of Record Address in XXXXXXXX XXXX, and Block 19b ( Nearest Relative ) has the same address.\n\nAfter pointing out this evidence, I asked TransUnion how it would be possible for me to owe money for an alleged military households good move that took place two years and seven months after I had already XXXX XXXX the military, from an address in a state where, according to their own records, they I knew didnt live? I also asked them, why would DFAS mail the notice to an address that I am not associated with, in a state they know I dont live in, when according to their own records, they have my mailing address documented as the Home of Record Address in XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ? Not only does this clearly indicate that the debt DFAS is alleging I owe not valid, but its downright not even possible. Therefor I asked TransUnion to please delete the account.\n\nAlthough this shouldve been more than enough to substantiate my dispute, I proceeded with pointing out several additional errors regarding this account, asking TransUnion to investigate and correct the following incomplete or inaccurate information : If this was for an alleged charge in XX/XX/XXXX, then why does the Date Opened, say XX/XX/XXXX, and states the estimated month and year this item will be removed is XXXX/XXXX, without accurately reflecting the original date of the alleged overpayment, which DFAS claims is XX/XX/XXXX? Wouldnt this be considered illegally re-aging the debt by improperly making it appear more recent? \nHow is the Account Type listed as an Open Account with a Date Closed of XX/XX/XXXX? An Open Account can not have a Date Closed. \nHow is the High Balance only {$4600.00} when the Balance is {$4700.00}? Shouldnt the High Balance be more?\n\nHow is the Past Due amount {$4700.00} more than the High Balance {$4600.00}?\n\nWhy isnt anything listed in the payment history data on the bottom except for an X indicating Unknow\nn according to your rating key for XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX? \n\nI did my due diligence and spent a lot of time and effort to ensure I provided TransUnion with all the evidence they could possibly need to conduct a reasonable investigation. I took the time to ensure everything was organized and presented so that any layperson investigating could look at the evidence and quickly determine this account was not only full of errors but that the debt itself was not valid and needed to be deleted. I then spent over {$40.00} on a mailing service to ensure TransUnion properly received all 60 pages in a neat and organized manner via certified mail.\n\nResponse From TransUnion : I received a letter in the mail from TransUnion dated XX/XX/XXXX. The letter stated the following : We investigated the information you disputed and the disputed information was verified as accurate ; however, we updated ; Date Closed ; Rating. ( See Exhibit III. Transunion Dispute Results for DFAS XXXX. I believe it's important to mention that courts have ruled that Credit Reporting Agencies are required to do more than merely make a cursory investigation to verify disputed information and relying solely on automatic dispute systems, such as the XXXX, to verify an account is accurate, while ignoring evidence provided by the consumer is considered willful.\n\nIt is evident that TransUnion merely parroted the information that DFAS provided and ignored all my evidence with reckless disregard, so I decided to call the XXXX number they provided in the letter. I recorded the phone call, including Transunion 's permission, stating, \" All calls may be recorded. '' I also had that recording transcribed and attached it here for your review. ( See Exhibit IV. Transunion Recording Transcript XXXX ). After waiting on hold for 35 minutes, I was finally transferred to a dispute department representative. I explained why I was calling and questioned her on how TransUnion reasonably determined that this account was verified as accurate when I provided an abundance of evidence that clearly proved otherwise. After explaining the circumstances, the TransUnion representative even agreed on the recorded line that the account should be DELETED, please refer to Exhibit IV, starting at time stamp XXXX to XXXX. She stated that she would delete the account if she could, but shes only able to delete certain types of information, such as inquiries. I asked if she could resubmit the dispute, and she said I needed to call XXXX instead. She said that was the direct line to Transunions Special Handling Team and assured me that if I called that number, they could delete the account for me directly. I even asked if she could transfer me instead, and she replied by saying You need to contact them directly because even if I were to transfer, you hold for a long time. So, it's better way call directly. Which you can see in Exhibit IV, Timestamp XXXX. \n\nAfter spending nearly an hour on the phone, I called the XXXX number the TransUnion representative had given me to contact the Special Handling Team and discovered it was a non-working number. So, after calling the number that TransUnion specifically provided on my dispute results and wasting an hour on the call, the representative not only stated that she was unable to resubmit the dispute request but also deliberately provided a fake number and stated she was unable to transfer me, and I have the whole thing recorded. I dont know how much more willful it gets than that.\n\n15 U.S. Code 1681c ( h ) Notice of discrepancy in address Another interesting fact regarding this account is that the address where DFAS allegedly mailed the notice of this erroneous debt was a very old, inaccurate XXXX XXXX, XXXX, address that I had already disputed and deleted from my TransUnion, XXXX, and XXXX credit files long before this account was ever reported. Youll see that XXXX, who happens to be another Credit Reporting Agency that furnishes information to the larger CRAs ( such as TransUnion ), sent me a random letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, stating they updated that same inaccurate XXXX XXXX XXXX address on my credit file, even though I had an active security freeze on my XXXX file, which they acknowledged in that same letter. ( See Exhibit V. XXXX Certified Mail Dispute XXXX ) It's also worth pointing out that I submitted the same dispute to XXXX, and they DELETED the account right away. ( See Enclosure VI. XXXX  DFAS Account Removed ). How is it possible that when XXXX conducted a reasonable investigation, they determined the account was inaccurate? However, TransUnion claims to have reinvestigated the same account and \" verified it was accurate ''. Shouldn't they follow the same industry standard when investigating disputes for incomplete or inaccurate information? \n\nAccording to my most recent TransUnion Credit File ( File Number XXXX ), pulled on XX/XX/XXXX, these inaccuracies are still reporting ( See Exhibit VII. XXXX TransUnion DFAS Reporting XXXX ). As you can see, TransUnion is still reporting a date open of XX/XX/XXXX and states the estimated month and year this item will be removed is XXXX/XXXX. This clearly indicates that the account has been re-aged, and despite all the evidence Ive provided, TransUnion is illegally reporting this account as new. The Account Type is still reporting as an Open Account ; however, it also lists a Date Closed of XX/XX/XXXX. How does an Open Account have a Date Closed? Also, the Balance and the Past Due both report {$4700.00}, which is higher than the High Balance, which reports {$4600.00}. As mentioned in my original dispute, how can the balance or the past due be higher than the high balance?\n\nSummary : In summary, TransUnion blatantly failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation, then displayed gross misconduct and willful negligence by refusing to resubmit my dispute via phone and deliberately providing me with a fake number, knowing I spent nearly an hour on the phone already. The evidence is clear and unmistakable, and I firmly believe that TransUnion put itself in a bad situation by displaying this unethical behavior.\n\nIf TransUnion is going to report information on me, its their responsibility to ensure the data is being reported with maximum possible accuracy. Had TransUnion taken a few minutes to read my certified letter and review the overwhelming evidence I provided, they wouldve immediately seen that it would be virtually impossible for me to owe this debt, and even if I did ( which I do not ), they are illegally reporting inaccurate details and dates, making it appear as a new debt, when in fact even if it were legitimate ( which it is not ), it would be from XX/XX/XXXX, not XX/XX/XXXX. I have made every possible effort to resolve this amicably, yet TransUnion chose to willfully violate their congressionally mandated duties.\n\nMy final request is for TransUnion to do the right thing : conduct a reasonable investigation, weigh the evidence I provided, and either correct the inaccuracies or delete the account. Also please provide me with a copy of my Full & Complete File Disclosure. As much as I would love for TransUnion to do the right thing here, it would be naive to think that they will. If this doesnt resolve the issue, I fully intend to exercise my private right of action in Federal Court .\n\nViolations : 1. Inaccurate Reporting ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) 2. Failure to Correct Errors ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) 3. Failure to Conduct Proper Reinvestigation ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) 4. Re-aging the Debt ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c ) 5. Notice of Discrepancy in Address ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( h ) ) 6. Civil Liability for Negligent Noncompliance ( 15 U.S. Code 168o ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 2 ) ) 7. Civil Liability for Willful Noncompliance ( 15 U.S. Code 168n ) Exhibits : Exhibit I. TransUnion Certified Mail Dispute XXXX Exhibit II. DFAS Recorded Call Transcript XXXX Exhibit III. TransUnion Dispute Results for DFAS XXXX Exhibit IV. Transunion Recording Transcript XXXX Exhibit V. XXXX Certified Mail Dispute XXXX Exhibit VI. XXXX  DFAS Account Removed","date_sent_to_company":"2024-09-15T06:30:28.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"148XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"10128520","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2024-09-15T06:17:13.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Code 168o ( a ) ( 1 ) - ( 2 ) for <em>being</em> negligent and non-compliant in their <em>handling</em> this claim, but also violated 15 U.S. Code 1681n ( a ), as they clearly demonstrated willful recklessness throughout the <em>process</em>. This is my final attempt to request that <em>TransUnion</em> resolve this matter, or I have no choice but to exercise my private right of action in Federal Court."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[12.180937,"10128520"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15253484","_score":11.840154,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Formal Dispute and Demand for Deletion Account Number : XXXX FCRA Violation Dear Sir or Madam, The purpose of this letter is to dispute the accuracy and reporting practices of the referenced account. The account is currently reported on the credit report from TransUnion as a \" Collection / Charge-Off '' and is repeatedly updated monthly. This account is listed with the remark \" Account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements. '' The continuous and frequent reporting, including monthly updates, of a charged-off collection account, particularly one with the remark \" account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements, '' may violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). This includes the accuracy and completeness of information and the reasonable investigation of disputes under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) and FCRA 623 ( b ). The continuous re-verification and monthly updating of a charged-off debt raises concerns about whether a proper and thorough reinvestigation is truly occurring with each update, as required under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ).\n\nA thorough and reasonable reinvestigation into the validity and accuracy of this account is requested, including all reporting dates and statuses. Cease the monthly updating of this charged-off collection account if it can not be fully verified as accurate and compliant with all FCRA provisions. If verifiable proof of the debt and its accurate reporting as per FCRA requirements can not be provided, demand the immediate and permanent deletion of this account from the credit report with all three major credit bureaus ( XXXX XXXX, and TransUnion ). \nA response and the results of the investigation within the timeframes mandated by the FCRA are expected. Failure to address these concerns and rectify the potentially inaccurate or improperly reported information may result in legal remedies. \n\nFederal Trade Commission ( XXXX ) fair-credit-reporting-act-611.pdf | Consumer Advice Federal Trade Commission XXXX XXXX ) Fair Credit Reporting Act Section 611 - Federal Trade Commission Federal Trade Commission XXXX XXXX ) See all The continuous monthly reporting of a disputed charged-off account, especially one bearing the \" Account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements '' remark, could potentially violate several specific sections of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), primarily related to the duties of furnishers of information and consumer reporting agencies ( CRAs ) in handling disputed data.\n\nKey FCRA Sections Potentially Violated : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Duty of Furnishers to Provide Accurate Information : This section broadly prohibits furnishers from reporting information they know or have reasonable cause to believe is inaccurate. If the continuous monthly reporting involves re-verifying or re-inserting information without a thorough and reasonable investigation into the consumer 's dispute, it could be argued that the furnisher is not ensuring the accuracy and completeness of the information being reported, especially if the dispute points to inaccuracies.\n\nFCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) Duties After Notice of Dispute from Consumer : If a consumer notifies a furnisher directly that they dispute the completeness or accuracy of reported information, the furnisher \" may not subsequently report that information to a CRA without providing notice of the dispute ''. While the image states the account is noted as disputed, the concern lies in whether the subsequent reporting is continually compliant with the FCRA 's requirements for re-verification and accuracy of disputed information, especially if the dispute challenges the very nature or validity of the debt, or the furnisher has failed to properly investigate the dispute.\n\nFCRA 623 ( b ) Duties of Furnishers Upon Notice of Dispute from CRA : This section outlines the duties of a furnisher when a CRA notifies them of a consumer dispute, including conducting a reasonable investigation, reviewing relevant information, reporting the results to the CRA, and modifying, deleting, or blocking the reporting of information found to be inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable. Continuous monthly reporting of a charged-off account that is under dispute could suggest a failure to adequately investigate or to promptly modify/delete the information if it's found to be inaccurate or unverifiable.\n\nFCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Reinvestigations by Consumer Reporting Agencies : This section requires CRAs to conduct a \" reasonable reinvestigation '' of disputed information in a consumer 's file when notified by the consumer. While the dispute is noted, continuous monthly updates of a charged-off account, despite an ongoing dispute, might raise questions about the thoroughness or sufficiency of the reinvestigations conducted by the CRA based on information provided by the furnisher. If the monthly updates are merely a re-reporting of the same disputed information without evidence of a re-investigation and validation process, it may be a violation.\n\nIn essence, while reporting a charged-off account is permissible under the FCRA for a certain period, the key issue here is the continuous monthly updates of an account explicitly noted as disputed, which necessitates robust and ongoing compliance with the FCRA 's duties related to accuracy, completeness, and thorough reinvestigation by both the furnisher and the CRA.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-14T03:56:56.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"75237","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15253484","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-08-14T03:34:41.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["If the monthly updates are merely a re-reporting of the same disputed information without evidence of a re-<em>investigation</em> and validation <em>process</em>, it may be a violation."],"company":["<em>TRANSUNION</em> INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC."]},"sort":[11.840154,"15253484"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":41,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":41}]}},"product":{"doc_count":41,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":35,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":35}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":2}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":41,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":14,"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":11},{"key":"Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone","doc_count":1},{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":1},{"key":"Was not notified of investigation status or results","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":11,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":8},{"key":"Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":11,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":7},{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":2}]}},{"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":"Credit monitoring or identity theft protection services","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Billing dispute for services","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":41,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":41}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":41,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":23},{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":18}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":41,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":41}]}},"company":{"doc_count":41,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":28},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":6},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":5},{"key":"Exeter Finance, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":41,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"MI","doc_count":8},{"key":"TX","doc_count":7},{"key":"FL","doc_count":6},{"key":"GA","doc_count":6},{"key":"NY","doc_count":4},{"key":"CA","doc_count":3},{"key":"IL","doc_count":2},{"key":"OH","doc_count":2},{"key":"DC","doc_count":1},{"key":"MO","doc_count":1},{"key":"SC","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":41,"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":34}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":41,"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":{"2":[11.841305,"15253484"]}}}