{"took":187,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":85,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7364299","_score":16.597029,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"What started as a quest to recover an attorney fee has turned into something much more with further research. \n\nI am requesting an investigation of XXXX XXXX Cress who has broken FDCPA law. XXXX Cress received my debt of {$280.00} from his client on XX/XX/2022 and filed a suit on XX/XX/2022. My initial contact with Cress was the Notice of the lawsuit received on XX/XX/2022. I also verified this with my phone records. \n\nUnder FDCPA law it is stated that initial contact can not be Legal Pleadings, but that was the initial contact I had from Cress.\n\nI attempted to settle my debt with his office but was informed I was now also responsible for a {$750.00} attorney fee. We could not come to an agreement because I refused to pay the {$750.00} attorney fee as I did not understand how such a fee came to be for a debt less than {$300.00} and no one I spoke with at Cress Law Group could explain the fee. I strongly feel that my case and many others need to be investigated. \n\nThe statute of limitations of 1 year to submit an investigation should not apply to the cases of those affected more than 1 year ago could have them opened and reversed with a Discovery of Fraud. \n\nI now have a better understanding of my rights and realize XXXX Cress has broken FDCPA Law by skipping the most elemental aspect of the Laws by not allowing the debtor to verify the debt or come to terms before accruing an attorney fee by filing a lawsuit nearly immediately. By claiming such extreme fees for relatively small balances they are making the collection process unreasonable for the debtor. \n\nThere are many collections cases represented by XXXX Cress visible through the Mycase.IN.gov website that date back more than 10 years. \n\nSincerely and thank you, XXXX XXXX ADDITIONAL INFO SINCE FIRST REPORTING : Since reporting Cress for FDCPA fraud to local and federal authorities, I have had trouble sleeping, stress manifesting physically, increased paranoia, fear for myself and my wife, and my children. I worry about my kids going to school safely. I fear legal retribution from Cress and my faith in the justice system has been shaken with his more-than-decade long history of dishonesty and fraud. No other lawyers or judges caught him after all that time. Why did it have to be me? I am already not the same person I was. I'm a very sensitive person and I was not mentally prepared to destroy someone. I am a creator by nature and wish to live in peace. A peace that has now been taken from me with my obligation to report XXXX Cress.\n\nThe garnishment for the collection case started right before my daughter is starting XXXX  and my son begins XXXX XXXX. The garnishment plus the added stress of my discovery and consequences is causing me to miss out on this once in a lifetime event with my kids. These are irreparable damages caused by XXXX Cress and his dishonesty. \n\nThis discovery is large and long reaching. I struggle with what I've done in terms of my own way of life. I wonder if I should have let it be to feel safe. However, this needed to be done to prevent the people of Indiana from falling victim to Cress 's criminal collection practices. \n\nXXXX Cress has made a lot of money with his dishonest practice, and with the investigation he may stand to lose a lot of that money. He may not have a criminal record now, but losing large sums of money can change a man. And that's what I'm afraid of. \n\nI truly hope that nothing happens to me or my family.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-09-19T19:10:33.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"46526","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7364299","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Cress Law Group PC","date_received":"2023-08-07T19:02:55.000Z","state":"IN","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I strongly feel that my <em>case</em> and many others need to be <em>investigated</em>. \n\nThe statute of limitations of 1 year to submit an <em>investigation</em> <em>should</em> not <em>apply</em> to the <em>cases</em> of <em>those</em> <em>affected</em> <em>more</em> than 1 year ago could have them opened and reversed with a Discovery of Fraud."]},"sort":[16.597029,"7364299"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"4994837","_score":16.483595,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am XXXX of a small XXXX XXXX XXXX Florida and XXXX out on behalf of our company and many other small businesses around the country who received PPP loans under {$150000.00} from Bank of America and are now blocked by BoA from applying for full forgiveness. \n\nNational Scandal BoA is making decisions that are not in line with SBA rules and apparently no one is holding them accountable. Its a national scandal that has been surfacing in the media around the country and I suspect a lot more will surface in the next month. \n\nRequest My request is that you help us raise awareness that BoA needs to be held accountable immediately to do the right thing. They were given 5 % by the government to disburse and manage PPP loans under {$150000.00} ; not to block them from applying for full forgiveness. \n\nWhats unique about BOA When SBA established a portal for direct forgiveness applications for such PPP loans, BOA decided not to participate. Now, BOA is applying its own set of rules, which is often not in alignment with the SBA rules and intentions. While each business situation may be different, we are all affected by BoA blocking us from applying for full loan forgiveness with the SBA. \n\nMy Situation Our accountant provided all the documentation required for the first PPP loan and we were fully approved for the eligible salaries and health insurance expenses. When it was time to apply for forgiveness, BoA removed the health insurance expense on the online forgiveness application, reducing the loan forgiveness by $ XXXX, claiming that the rules had changed and we are not eligible anymore. They are quoting a paragraph repeatedly, which we believe is being misinterpreted in the Banks favor. \n\nWe confirmed our position by consulting various CPAs, PPP experts and other XXXX business owners regarding our loan. And the conclusion is unanimous. BoA is wrong. According to SBA rules our loan should be entirely forgiven. \n\nIrony 1 ) The irony is that our business would qualify for the full loan amount based on salaries alone, but we can not fill out the application correctly because the BoA online application cant be edited and forces us to agree to the incorrect loan amount.\n\n2 ) The second loan which was done exactly the same ( but reviewed by a different BOA representative ) went through and is now being reviewed by the SBA. \n\n\nHonest mistakes or Lender Fraud BoA is making its decisions apparently without oversight and turning many PPP loans or portions of it ( even though they were used for eligible expenses ) into loan collections. It appears that BoA is profiting from those small business loans people used to pay their employees and 1099s during the pandemic. This practice is putting BoA small business customers at a disadvantage and in some cases out of business. Additionally, I have been told by several business owners that their loans are showing as forgiven in the SBA records while BOA is actively sending collection letters. Thats another breakdown I cant explain and should be investigated. \n\nActions 1 ) BoA - We have raised, elevated, filed complaints with BoA and every call we received ended with the same frustration. Now, the BoA considers our case closed without the SBA even knowing.\n\n2 ) We filed a complaint with SBAXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and left a review on consumer affairs. \n3 ) We joined a group of business owners who are determined to get this resolved 4 ) We have reached out to XXXX XXXX office as well and hope to get his support. \n\nMoving forward At this time, we have no way to appeal the Banks decision and have to accept the incorrect loan amount hoping that we may be able to appeal retroactively with the SBA. \n\nWe need your help to raise awareness so that : 1. Other affected businesses owners can see that they are not alone and join our efforts 2. We get access to the SBA direct loan forgiveness portal 3. Bank of America is held accountable to stop turning eligible PPP grants into loans they can profit from.\n\n4. Generate other ideas to get this resolved for every affected small business in this country.\n\n5. And leave a record about what has happened to us.\n\nthank you.","date_sent_to_company":"2021-12-10T05:51:14.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"33624","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"4994837","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2021-12-10T00:41:53.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It appears that BoA is profiting from <em>those</em> small business loans people used to pay their employees and 1099s during the pandemic. This practice is putting BoA small business customers at a disadvantage and in some <em>cases</em> out of business. Additionally, I have been told by several business owners that their loans are showing as forgiven in the SBA records while BOA is actively sending collection letters. Thats another breakdown I cant explain and <em>should</em> be <em>investigated</em>."]},"sort":[16.483595,"4994837"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6615611","_score":14.062871,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"So I disputed late payments on my mortgage and despite investigating the mortgage companies response created the narrative they want to create did not fully address my claims and left my report as is. The emails and calls to myself and the single point of contact and all other staff including loss mitigation need to be pulled and reviewed. So what the companies email response is stating is that it is ok and they uphold their employee discriminating against me for having a difficult time with my mortgage loan. It was ok for her to chose not to respond to time sensitive questions and situations because I fell on hard times or have family issues. It was ok for their employee to delay paper work processing and filing in addition to providing me the information I needed which is discrimination but I am to blame for her also not notifying them when I initially advised her of my loan still reporting while I was in forbearance. I should have been on a forbearance for 18 months straight but this lady would not file my paper in time knowing that there would be a lapse reported. That is not legal practice that is discrimination and it was allowed for years to happen. I guess they don't care because it's not their credit being affected. If someone working for a mortgage company or any other company feels its ok to judge someone about their payment history or circumstances when they have not idea what that person is dealing with they should find a new field, more importantly for a company to allow employees to conduct themselves this way with no supervising or coaching says a lot to. That is discrimination and since you all want to make it seem as if I was referring to times when I was not in forbearance which I was not. Now please go pull all the emails between myself and the single point of contact over the past few years and see how responsive she was and how many times I begged her for information due to it being time sensitive. See the emails where I tried to update my legal name with her an she informed me she couldn't do that for years you all had the incorrect name and that was illegal only for me to have pull her teeth when I needed to do the loan modification in that was delayed so long because she was refusing to have my name updated in the system. Now had I been trying to beat the system I would have signed the loan with a name that doesn't apply to me and then tried to justify not paying but I pushed for the right and legal thing to be done and you all are still giving me a difficult time after allowing her to discriminate against me and have that negatively affect my credit. I would like the emails to be shared with CFPB so they can see first hand what I have been dealing with and the illegal actions of that person and how it was handled. It should even display when I asked for a supervisor and expressed how she was purposely impacting my credit negatively with her actions. So with it being illegal for you all to knowing falsely report and do things to discriminate now since I wasn't even going to mention those months that lady put me through XXXX. Now I'm requesting that be investigated and my report be completed cleared. And I would like to file a discrimination case now.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-02-26T02:50:09.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30052","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6615611","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2023-02-26T02:50:03.000Z","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":["It <em>should</em> even display when I asked for a supervisor and expressed how she was purposely impacting my credit negatively with her actions. So with it being illegal for you all to knowing falsely report and do things to discriminate now since I wasn't even going to mention <em>those</em> months that lady put me through XXXX. Now I'm requesting that be <em>investigated</em> and my report be completed cleared. And I would like to file a discrimination <em>case</em> now."],"issue":["Problem with a credit reporting company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[14.062871,"6615611"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6615610","_score":14.062871,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"So I disputed late payments on my mortgage and despite investigating the mortgage companies response created the narrative they want to create did not fully address my claims and left my report as is. The emails and calls to myself and the single point of contact and all other staff including loss mitigation need to be pulled and reviewed. So what the companies email response is stating is that it is ok and they uphold their employee discriminating against me for having a difficult time with my mortgage loan. It was ok for her to chose not to respond to time sensitive questions and situations because I fell on hard times or have family issues. It was ok for their employee to delay paper work processing and filing in addition to providing me the information I needed which is discrimination but I am to blame for her also not notifying them when I initially advised her of my loan still reporting while I was in forbearance. I should have been on a forbearance for 18 months straight but this lady would not file my paper in time knowing that there would be a lapse reported. That is not legal practice that is discrimination and it was allowed for years to happen. I guess they don't care because it's not their credit being affected. If someone working for a mortgage company or any other company feels its ok to judge someone about their payment history or circumstances when they have not idea what that person is dealing with they should find a new field, more importantly for a company to allow employees to conduct themselves this way with no supervising or coaching says a lot to. That is discrimination and since you all want to make it seem as if I was referring to times when I was not in forbearance which I was not. Now please go pull all the emails between myself and the single point of contact over the past few years and see how responsive she was and how many times I begged her for information due to it being time sensitive. See the emails where I tried to update my legal name with her an she informed me she couldn't do that for years you all had the incorrect name and that was illegal only for me to have pull her teeth when I needed to do the loan modification in that was delayed so long because she was refusing to have my name updated in the system. Now had I been trying to beat the system I would have signed the loan with a name that doesn't apply to me and then tried to justify not paying but I pushed for the right and legal thing to be done and you all are still giving me a difficult time after allowing her to discriminate against me and have that negatively affect my credit. I would like the emails to be shared with CFPB so they can see first hand what I have been dealing with and the illegal actions of that person and how it was handled. It should even display when I asked for a supervisor and expressed how she was purposely impacting my credit negatively with her actions. So with it being illegal for you all to knowing falsely report and do things to discriminate now since I wasn't even going to mention those months that lady put me through XXXX. Now I'm requesting that be investigated and my report be completed cleared. And I would like to file a discrimination case now.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-02-26T02:50:09.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30052","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6615610","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2023-02-26T02:50:03.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It <em>should</em> even display when I asked for a supervisor and expressed how she was purposely impacting my credit negatively with her actions. So with it being illegal for you all to knowing falsely report and do things to discriminate now since I wasn't even going to mention <em>those</em> months that lady put me through XXXX. Now I'm requesting that be <em>investigated</em> and my report be completed cleared. And I would like to file a discrimination <em>case</em> now."],"issue":["Problem with a credit reporting company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[14.062871,"6615610"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6615609","_score":14.027356,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"So I disputed late payments on my mortgage and despite investigating the mortgage companies response created the narrative they want to create did not fully address my claims and left my report as is. The emails and calls to myself and the single point of contact and all other staff including loss mitigation need to be pulled and reviewed. So what the companies email response is stating is that it is ok and they uphold their employee discriminating against me for having a difficult time with my mortgage loan. It was ok for her to chose not to respond to time sensitive questions and situations because I fell on hard times or have family issues. It was ok for their employee to delay paper work processing and filing in addition to providing me the information I needed which is discrimination but I am to blame for her also not notifying them when I initially advised her of my loan still reporting while I was in forbearance. I should have been on a forbearance for 18 months straight but this lady would not file my paper in time knowing that there would be a lapse reported. That is not legal practice that is discrimination and it was allowed for years to happen. I guess they don't care because it's not their credit being affected. If someone working for a mortgage company or any other company feels its ok to judge someone about their payment history or circumstances when they have not idea what that person is dealing with they should find a new field, more importantly for a company to allow employees to conduct themselves this way with no supervising or coaching says a lot to. That is discrimination and since you all want to make it seem as if I was referring to times when I was not in forbearance which I was not. Now please go pull all the emails between myself and the single point of contact over the past few years and see how responsive she was and how many times I begged her for information due to it being time sensitive. See the emails where I tried to update my legal name with her an she informed me she couldn't do that for years you all had the incorrect name and that was illegal only for me to have pull her teeth when I needed to do the loan modification in that was delayed so long because she was refusing to have my name updated in the system. Now had I been trying to beat the system I would have signed the loan with a name that doesn't apply to me and then tried to justify not paying but I pushed for the right and legal thing to be done and you all are still giving me a difficult time after allowing her to discriminate against me and have that negatively affect my credit. I would like the emails to be shared with CFPB so they can see first hand what I have been dealing with and the illegal actions of that person and how it was handled. It should even display when I asked for a supervisor and expressed how she was purposely impacting my credit negatively with her actions. So with it being illegal for you all to knowing falsely report and do things to discriminate now since I wasn't even going to mention those months that lady put me through XXXX. Now I'm requesting that be investigated and my report be completed cleared. And I would like to file a discrimination case now.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-02-26T02:50:09.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30052","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6615609","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2023-02-26T02:50:03.000Z","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":["It <em>should</em> even display when I asked for a supervisor and expressed how she was purposely impacting my credit negatively with her actions. So with it being illegal for you all to knowing falsely report and do things to discriminate now since I wasn't even going to mention <em>those</em> months that lady put me through XXXX. Now I'm requesting that be <em>investigated</em> and my report be completed cleared. And I would like to file a discrimination <em>case</em> now."],"issue":["Problem with a credit reporting company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[14.027356,"6615609"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6615597","_score":14.026195,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"So I disputed late payments on my mortgage and despite investigating the mortgage companies response created the narrative they want to create did not fully address my claims and left my report as is. The emails and calls to myself and the single point of contact and all other staff including loss mitigation need to be pulled and reviewed. So what the companies email response is stating is that it is ok and they uphold their employee discriminating against me for having a difficult time with my mortgage loan. It was ok for her to chose not to respond to time sensitive questions and situations because I fell on hard times or have family issues. It was ok for their employee to delay paper work processing and filing in addition to providing me the information I needed which is discrimination but I am to blame for her also not notifying them when I initially advised her of my loan still reporting while I was in forbearance. I should have been on a forbearance for 18 months straight but this lady would not file my paper in time knowing that there would be a lapse reported. That is not legal practice that is discrimination and it was allowed for years to happen. I guess they don't care because it's not their credit being affected. If someone working for a mortgage company or any other company feels its ok to judge someone about their payment history or circumstances when they have not idea what that person is dealing with they should find a new field, more importantly for a company to allow employees to conduct themselves this way with no supervising or coaching says a lot to. That is discrimination and since you all want to make it seem as if I was referring to times when I was not in forbearance which I was not. Now please go pull all the emails between myself and the single point of contact over the past few years and see how responsive she was and how many times I begged her for information due to it being time sensitive. See the emails where I tried to update my legal name with her an she informed me she couldn't do that for years you all had the incorrect name and that was illegal only for me to have pull her teeth when I needed to do the loan modification in that was delayed so long because she was refusing to have my name updated in the system. Now had I been trying to beat the system I would have signed the loan with a name that doesn't apply to me and then tried to justify not paying but I pushed for the right and legal thing to be done and you all are still giving me a difficult time after allowing her to discriminate against me and have that negatively affect my credit. I would like the emails to be shared with CFPB so they can see first hand what I have been dealing with and the illegal actions of that person and how it was handled. It should even display when I asked for a supervisor and expressed how she was purposely impacting my credit negatively with her actions. So with it being illegal for you all to knowing falsely report and do things to discriminate now since I wasn't even going to mention those months that lady put me through XXXX. Now I'm requesting that be investigated and my report be completed cleared. And I would like to file a discrimination case now.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-02-26T02:49:57.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30052","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6615597","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","date_received":"2023-02-26T02:27:26.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It <em>should</em> even display when I asked for a supervisor and expressed how she was purposely impacting my credit negatively with her actions. So with it being illegal for you all to knowing falsely report and do things to discriminate now since I wasn't even going to mention <em>those</em> months that lady put me through XXXX. Now I'm requesting that be <em>investigated</em> and my report be completed cleared. And I would like to file a discrimination <em>case</em> now."],"issue":["Problem with a credit reporting company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["Their <em>investigation</em> did not fix an error on your report"]},"sort":[14.026195,"6615597"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6024672","_score":12.710225,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Compliant about : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Mail Inquiries To : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Customer Service XXXX XXXX Late payment for the month of XX/XX/2022. \n\nI have made several complaints to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX in regards to my ONE AND ONLY late payment which was reflected on the month of XX/XX/2022. When I first contacted XXXX XXXX  in regards to this late payment, I was told that the late payment would no longer be reflected on my 3 credit reports any longer. Months have passed, and no changes had been made. So recently a couple days ago on XX/XX/2022 at XXXX, with a conversation lasting 25 minutes from the beginning of the phone call ( as stated on XXXX ). I was told that according to consumer reporting policies, they would not be able to dispute and remove the late payment at all, and under any circumstances. I mentioned the fact that I have disputed with other more REPUTABLE XXXX XXXX XXXX in the past that hold much more leverage in the financial markets for consumer credit and those more reputable financial institutions have indeed been able to remove past late payments due to the exact same reason I am disputing this late payment. \n\nIn XX/XX/2022, I was late on my XXXX payment solely due to the fact that I was infected with XXXX ( XXXX  XXXX ) which is considered a part of a natural disaster under the CARES Act, approved by Congress, Senate and the President of the United States. \n\nAs stated on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau website : The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security ( CARES ) Act has forbearance and credit reporting requirements that may apply to your situation.\n\nAs with other natural disasters and emergencies, your creditors or lenders may be willingand in some case are requiredto provide forbearance, loan extensions, a reduction in interest rates, and/or other flexibilities for repayment. Some lenders are also saying they will not report late payments to credit reporting agencies or are waiving late fees for borrowers due to this pandemic. Under the CARES Act, in certain situations, lenders are required to report your accounts as current. \n\nYou can reach out to your lender or creditor and find out what options or programs are available. These programs are sometimes called \" hardship '' or \" relief programs. '' These programs may allow you to enter into an agreement to : Defer or pause one or more payments Make a partial payment Forbear ( temporarily stop paying ) any delinquent amounts Modify a loan or contract Receive a suspension for federal student loan payments Other assistance or relief The CARES Act calls these agreements accommodations. \n\nI feel as if XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX is not only avoiding my complaint as negligent, but also as discriminatory towards the fact that this is a well known global epidemic that is still continuing to this very day. This is the ONLY LATE PAYMENT Ive had with this trade line or any other trade line on my credit reports, because this account does not have automatic bill pay and every time Ive used my main XXXX  account, it does not allow me to use it. I did not have the energy, the focus and the ability to make a payment due to being affected by XXXX and I feel like its more important for everyone to be aware that a SECURED CREDIT CARD THAT ISNT EVEN A REAL CREDIT CARD BECAUSE THEY USE THE CONSUMERS MONEY AGAINST THE CONSUMER FOR CREDIT REPORTING SERVICES TO BUILD A CONSUMERS CREDIT REPORT IS DISCRIMINATORY TOWARDS THOSE IMPACTED BY THE XXXX XXXX. \n\nThis is irresponsible, against federal laws enacted by both the legislature and executive branches of the United States, is a virus recognized by the : XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ), WHO ( World Health Organization ), XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX ), US Federal Reserve, USA ( United States of America ), XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and pretty much every nation, agency, consumer providing company, corporation, lender, financial institution across the world. \n\nI demand an immediate reversal of this trend and behavior with XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX on all three major credit reporting agencies : XXXX TransUnion XXXX And other agencies : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Preferred not only in regards to my specific account, but with anyones complaints in regards to those impacted by XXXX who were unable to make financial obligations while impacted by XXXX XXXX XXXX which takes more precedence for life and health, before a payment made to a secured credit card payment where they use the consumers money against the consumers credit report. \n\nThey are violating the CARES Act and should be investigated and reasonably penalized by the Federal Government for making such adjustments not possible under Federal Law.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-09-27T20:30:14.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"80134","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6024672","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2022-09-27T20:30:07.000Z","state":"CO","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem with personal statement of dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["They are violating the CARES Act and <em>should</em> be <em>investigated</em> and reasonably penalized by the Federal Government for making such adjustments not possible under Federal Law."],"issue":["Problem with a credit reporting company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"]},"sort":[12.710225,"6024672"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6024671","_score":12.710225,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Compliant about : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Mail Inquiries To : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Customer Service XXXX XXXX Late payment for the month of XX/XX/2022. \n\nI have made several complaints to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX in regards to my XXXX AND ONLY late payment which was reflected on the month of XX/XX/2022. When I first contacted XXXX Bank in regards to this late payment, I was told that the late payment would no longer be reflected on my 3 credit reports any longer. Months have passed, and no changes had been made. So recently a couple days ago on XX/XX/2022 at XXXX, with a conversation lasting 25 minutes from the beginning of the phone call ( as stated on XXXX ). I was told that according to consumer reporting policies, they would not be able to dispute and remove the late payment at all, and under any circumstances. I mentioned the fact that I have disputed with other more REPUTABLE consumer financial services in the past that hold much more leverage in the financial markets for consumer credit and those more reputable financial institutions have indeed been able to remove past late payments due to the exact same reason I am disputing this late payment. \n\nIn XX/XX/2022, I was late on my XXXX payment solely due to the fact that I was infected with XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX ) which is considered a part of a natural disaster under the CARES Act, approved by XXXX, XXXX and the President of the United States.\n\nAs stated on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau website : The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security ( CARES ) Act has forbearance and credit reporting requirements that may apply to your situation.\n\nAs with other natural disasters and emergencies, your creditors or lenders may be willingand in some case are requiredto provide forbearance, loan extensions, a reduction in interest rates, and/or other flexibilities for repayment. Some lenders are also saying they will not report late payments to credit reporting agencies or are waiving late fees for borrowers due to this pandemic. Under the CARES Act, in certain situations, lenders are required to report your accounts as current. \n\nYou can reach out to your lender or creditor and find out what options or programs are available. These programs are sometimes called \" hardship '' or \" relief programs. '' These programs may allow you to enter into an agreement to : Defer or pause one or more payments Make a partial payment Forbear ( temporarily stop paying ) any delinquent amounts Modify a loan or contract Receive a suspension for federal student loan payments Other assistance or relief The CARES Act calls these agreements accommodations. \n\nI feel as if XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX is not only avoiding my complaint as negligent, but also as discriminatory towards the fact that this is a well known global epidemic that is still continuing to this very day. This is the ONLY LATE PAYMENT Ive had with this trade line or any other trade line on my credit reports, because this account does not have automatic bill pay and every time Ive used my main XXXX  account, it does not allow me to use it. I did not have the energy, the focus and the ability to make a payment due to being affected by XXXX and I feel like its more important for everyone to be aware that a SECURED CREDIT CARD THAT ISNT EVEN A REAL CREDIT CARD BECAUSE THEY USE THE CONSUMERS MONEY AGAINST THE CONSUMER FOR CREDIT REPORTING SERVICES TO BUILD A CONSUMERS CREDIT REPORT IS DISCRIMINATORY TOWARDS THOSE IMPACTED BY THE XXXXXXXX XXXX \n\nThis is irresponsible, against federal laws enacted by both the legislature and executive branches of the United States, is a virus recognized by the : XXXX ( XXXX XXXX )XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ), US Federal Reserve, USA ( United States of America ), XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and pretty much every nation, agency, consumer providing company, corporation, lender, financial institution across the world. \n\nI demand an immediate reversal of this trend and behavior with XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on all three major credit reporting agencies : XXXX XXXX Equifax And other agencies : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Preferred not only in regards to my specific account, but with anyones complaints in regards to those impacted by XXXX who were unable to make financial obligations while impacted by THE DEADLY virus which takes more precedence for life and health, before a payment made to a secured credit card payment where they use the consumers money against the consumers credit report. \n\nThey are violating the CARES Act and should be investigated and reasonably penalized by the Federal Government for making such adjustments not possible under Federal Law.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-09-27T20:30:14.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"80134","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6024671","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2022-09-27T20:30:07.000Z","state":"CO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Problem with personal statement of dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["They are violating the CARES Act and <em>should</em> be <em>investigated</em> and reasonably penalized by the Federal Government for making such adjustments not possible under Federal Law."],"issue":["Problem with a credit reporting company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"]},"sort":[12.710225,"6024671"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6024662","_score":12.710225,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Compliant about : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Mail Inquiries To : XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Customer Service XXXX XXXX Late payment for the month of XX/XX/2022. \n\nI have made several complaints to XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX in regards to my ONE AND ONLY late payment which was reflected on the month of XX/XX/2022. When I first contacted XXXX Bank in regards to this late payment, I was told that the late payment would no longer be reflected on my 3 credit reports any longer. Months have passed, and no changes had been made. So recently a couple days ago on XX/XX/2022 at XXXX, with a conversation lasting 25 minutes from the beginning of the phone call ( as stated on XXXX ). I was told that according to consumer reporting policies, they would not be able to dispute and remove the late payment at all, and under any circumstances. I mentioned the fact that I have disputed with other more REPUTABLE consumer financial services in the past that hold much more leverage in the financial markets for consumer credit and those more reputable financial institutions have indeed been able to remove past late payments due to the exact same reason I am disputing this late payment. \n\nIn XX/XX/2022, I was late on my XXXX payment solely due to the fact that I was infected with XXXX ( XXXX  XXXX ) which is considered a part of a natural disaster under the CARES Act, approved by Congress, Senate and the President of the United States. \n\nAs stated on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau website : The XXXX Aid, Relief, and Economic Security ( CARES ) Act has forbearance and credit reporting requirements that may apply to your situation.\n\nAs with other natural disasters and emergencies, your creditors or lenders may be willingand in some case are requiredto provide forbearance, loan extensions, a reduction in interest rates, and/or other flexibilities for repayment. Some lenders are also saying they will not report late payments to credit reporting agencies or are waiving late fees for borrowers due to this pandemic. Under the CARES Act, in certain situations, lenders are required to report your accounts as current.\n\nYou can reach out to your lender or creditor and find out what options or programs are available. These programs are sometimes called \" hardship '' or \" relief programs. '' These programs may allow you to enter into an agreement to : Defer or pause one or more payments Make a partial payment Forbear ( temporarily stop paying ) any delinquent amounts Modify a loan or contract Receive a suspension for federal student loan payments Other assistance or relief The CARES Act calls these agreements accommodations. \n\nI feel as if XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX is not only avoiding my complaint as negligent, but also as discriminatory towards the fact that this is a well known global epidemic that is still continuing to this very day. This is the ONLY LATE PAYMENT Ive had with this trade line or any other trade line on my credit reports, because this account does not have automatic bill pay and every time Ive used my main XXXX  account, it does not allow me to use it. I did not have the energy, the focus and the ability to make a payment due to being affected by XXXX and I feel like its more important for everyone to be aware that a SECURED CREDIT CARD THAT ISNT EVEN A REAL CREDIT CARD BECAUSE THEY USE THE CONSUMERS MONEY AGAINST THE CONSUMER FOR CREDIT REPORTING SERVICES TO BUILD A CONSUMERS CREDIT REPORT IS DISCRIMINATORY TOWARDS THOSE IMPACTED BY THE XXXXXXXX XXXX \n\nThis is irresponsible, against federal laws enacted by both the legislature and XXXX branches of the United States, is a virus recognized by the : XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ), WHO XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ), XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX ), US Federal Reserve, USA ( United States of America ), XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and pretty much every nation, agency, consumer providing company, corporation, lender, financial institution across the world. \n\nI demand an immediate reversal of this trend and behavior with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on all three major credit reporting agencies : Experian XXXX XXXX And other agencies : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX VIP Preferred not only in regards to my specific account, but with anyones complaints in regards to those impacted by COVID-19 who were unable to make financial obligations while impacted by THE DEADLY virus which takes more precedence for life and health, before a payment made to a secured credit card payment where they use the consumers money against the consumers credit report. \n\nThey are violating the CARES Act and should be investigated and reasonably penalized by the Federal Government for making such adjustments not possible under Federal Law.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-09-27T20:30:14.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"80134","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6024662","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2022-09-27T20:30:07.000Z","state":"CO","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Problem with personal statement of dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["They are violating the CARES Act and <em>should</em> be <em>investigated</em> and reasonably penalized by the Federal Government for making such adjustments not possible under Federal Law."],"issue":["Problem with a credit reporting company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"]},"sort":[12.710225,"6024662"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3234742","_score":11.774742,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"Please be advised of the submission of the attached police report for the pending criminal charges against XXXX XXXX XXXX for the XXXX XXXX card theft on the above account along with two other accounts. This account was reported to your office as fraud in XX/XX/2019 as was improperly cited as a civil matter after Mr. XXXX attempted unsuccessfully to negotiate the repayment of these cards on both his behalf and the affected cards behalf as well for full restitution and to avoid criminal prosecution. These attempts were unsuccessful after Ms. XXXX missed every promised repayment date and as such, the case has been referred to the DAs office for criminal charges. As directed by the Chase Executive Office,  this claim is being resubmitted to you with the police report attached for processing of this claim as fraudulent. \nNo further payments will be made on this account by Mr. XXXX as this account has been properly documented and reported as fraudulent to your company. Any attempts to collect this debt or require Mr. XXXX to make payments with threat of lawsuits, negative credit impacts, or garnishments or liens will be met with civil action. This complaint and accompanying police report are also being submitted to the North Carolina Attorney Generals Office and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau due to the failure to thoroughly investigate this claim as fraud and writing the account off as civil citing the victim allowed the perpetrator access to his cards because they lived together. This statement was NEVER made by Mr. XXXX and is a falsehood created by the Chase fraud department to prevent alleviating Mr. XXXX burden placed upon him by the fraudulent charges on this account. Mr. XXXX has never made any statement that Ms. XXXX was allowed to use his cards, nor has he told you as much. This narrative was created by your own department and explained to Mr. XXXX by telephone that our system had no option to notate your account, so we had to put in there you provide access to your cards. This notation must also be removed as it is both incorrect and was NEVER stated by Mr. XXXX. This creates confusion and inaccurate information by anyone new who looks at this account and falsely assumes Mr. XXXX allowed Ms. XXXX access to his cards. This is not true as Mr. XXXX has stated in his complaint, Ms. XXXX took these cards from his wallet and dresser drawers without his knowledge or permission as well as recorded all his account numbers, security codes, expiration dates, and personal information in a notebook and used these without his permission. This notation on his account is false and must be removed immediately. \n\n\nLastly, no Statute, Federally or at the NC State level, allows for the commission of a crime to be civil for XXXX card theft simply because the victim and the criminal live in the same home. This would negate any purpose of authorized users, credit reports, or even the requirement to sign for authorization on purchases if anyone in the same household could use another persons credit card without their permission. It would also make the zero fraud liability your company advertises completely useless as you would simply claim anyone who used anothers card without their knowledge is civil, as you are trying to do to Mr. XXXX, simply because they resided in the home. \nYour argument is now that any family member, friend, roommate, or overnight guest could then illegally take the card holders credit card and use it without fear of any financial or legal consequences. Obviously, this is NOT the case and your company is well aware that no such law or statute exists, yet, you are attempting to use this as your justification for denial of Mr. XXXX fraud claim. I strongly recommend you take this fraud claim seriously at stop the ridiculous claim that this fraud is his responsibility to payback when you have all of the necessary evidence to support this claim as fraud. Simply stating to Mr. XXXX Our company is a financial institution and does not want to take this as a financial loss is NOT Mr. XXXX responsibility. Your company promotes a zero-fraud liability and must adhere to those promises once documentation has been provided that Mr. XXXX is NOT responsible for these charges. \nYour company is now in possession of Mr. XXXX statement of who the perpetrator is, her contact information, a copy of all fraudulent charges, and lastly a police report showing the charges for XXXX XXXX Transaction Card Fraud being filed by Officer XXXX XXXX of the XXXX Police Department on XX/XX/2019 after Mr. XXXX was unsuccessful in recovering these stolen funds himself on behalf of your company through negotiations with Ms. XXXX. Mr. XXXX has shown good faith in his actions and responsibility in his attempts to resolve this matter on his own prior to submitting this case to your company for fraud. \nIt has also been your own companys admission to mistakenly calculating the initial refund to Mr. XXXX account and then informing him this money was his to use on the card at his leisure because it was his refunded charges, even submitting a request to have a paper check cut in the amount of {$2500.00} sent by mail for his remaining refund so that he could cash the remaining refund out all at once without having to use the card to access the refunded money, then abruptly claiming this account is NOT fraud and instead civil and demanding all money to be returned after giving him access to these funds. This miscalculation on the refundable amount is not the fault of Mr. XXXX as your company and your company alone calculated the refund amount and then gave Mr. XXXX the access to these funds. The burden of your error is entirely upon your company and Mr. XXXX owes no further payments to your company. While Mr. XXXX is not demanding the excess money from the miscalculation, it is his stance that failure of an international banking institution to accurately provide the right refunded amount on his account is not his responsibility. It is the responsibility of Chase to ensure their employees are able to calculate simple mathematical equations and then properly apply those calculations to consumer accounts. With millions of transactions completed every day, a typical consumer such as Mr. XXXX should feel confident in the accuracy of the calculations and refunds provided since Chase has the more experienced and educated personnel on staff who do this exclusively on a daily basis. To attempt to require Mr. XXXX be held liable for your companies mistake in applying a refunded amount above what you intended is simply asinine and is a cost of doing business on behalf of your company. This should serve as a learning lesson to make sure that your company checks for accuracy before sending money to customers and then informing them they may spend this refund as it is theirs to do as they please. Mr. XXXX is not responsible for double checking your math, nor did he have the knowledge or the ability to do so as your company is attempting to argue. Should a client make a similar mistake and overpay on their intended minimum payment to Chase, I have no doubt that Chase would simply say It is not our responsibility to ensure the accuracy of how much money you pay us, so why would you expect something different from your customer, or in this case? I expect a full review of this account and all disputed charges submitted as fraudulent to be removed as promised.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-05-07T17:27:18.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"27530","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3234742","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","date_received":"2019-05-07T17:12:01.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["It is the responsibility of Chase to ensure their employees are able to calculate simple mathematical equations and then properly <em>apply</em> <em>those</em> calculations to consumer accounts. With millions of transactions completed every day, a typical consumer such as Mr. XXXX <em>should</em> feel confident in the accuracy of the calculations and refunds provided since Chase has the <em>more</em> experienced and educated personnel on staff who do this exclusively on a daily basis. To attempt to require Mr."]},"sort":[11.774742,"3234742"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7392847","_score":10.78126,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"My loan was originally serviced by XXXX. In XXXX, while my account was still serviced by XXXX, I contracted covid twice within a 6 month period. This. combined with my severe XXXX requiring daily inhaler usage, caused me to be unable to work full time while recovering. This led to a substantial decrease in income and the need to request a covid forbearance with XXXX. XXXX approved the forbearance and extended it numerous times as well. \n\nWhile preparing for the forbearance to end, XXXX informed me of a program with the Ohio XXXX XXXX XXXX that provided government funded assistance to homeowners like myself and my situation. I applied for the assistance, which was approved. XXXX approved funding to catch up the loan, as well as 6 months of future payments beginning in XX/XX/XXXX and running through XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nIn XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX Mortgage purchased the account from XXXX. It is important to note this took place AFTER XXXX agreed to the XXXX assistance, so it was already in place at that time. \n\nIn XXXX of XXXX I noticed the information related to the account balance and payments looked incorrect on XXXX website. I contacted them, explained the info above, and was assured it would be worked out. I informed them they should contact XXXX to work out the details of the XXXX payments, and also submitted documents to XXXX explaining the transfer of the loan servicing. \n\nFor several months I monitored the XXXX site, checking on the status of payments. While they were never on schedule, the money seemed to always show up from XXXX. In XXXX of XXXX, I knew I would start making the payments again starting with XXXX and prepared to do so. However, because XXXX had not worked out the details with XXXX, the online portal was showing it would apply my XXXX payment to a month prior to XXXX. I waited several days to see if it would correct itself, and when it did not, I made my payment anyways on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI also called XXXX, now that I was making payments monthly again, and tried to determine what was going on. I was advised that once they received the money from XXXX the account would be updated. I continued to make my monthly payments in full from that point to the current day. \n\nIn XXXX of XXXX, I made another monthly payment and AGAIN noticed that the online system said I still had a past due balance from XX/XX/XXXX for XXXX. The system was still behind from the late XXXX payments. Within a couple days of that, I started to receive credit alerts that XXXX had reported the mortgage as past due to the credit reporting agencies. \n\nI immediately called XXXX. The rep, although helpful, first reported that on their end, they had a balance of 2 months of past due balances. I can not fathom how I was logged into their system and could see a completely different balance from a customer side! I explained that her system was incorrect and I would gladly send over my bank statements showing full payments from XXXX through XXXX. \nThe rep also suggested that I contact XXXX to have them send XXXX the money. I explained that although I would do so since I am negatively affected, that I found it ridiculous that I have to negotiate/seek payment terms on Roundpoints behalf because they failed to due diligence/track the loan they purchased. \n\nI then emailed over supporting documents, including XXXX statements, bank statements, and transaction log of funds deposited to XXXX, to an email address provided to me by the rep. I received a confirmation of receipt the next day. The rep informed me they made an internal case and would investigate, but that they could not reverse the negative remarks on my credit report. \n\nSeveral days later, I called back to XXXX to follow up after hearing nothing back. I again was informed that their system still has not registered the payment I made in XXXX almost XXXX weeks prior to this phone call. I was also informed that their investigation would take more than several days but that their system could not tell them a suggested resolution timeframe. \n\nAt this point I am filing this complaint. I have made all of my payments on time, and have XXXX other negative remarks on my credit report. I have worked extremely hard to have that. I should not be harmed like this because XXXX internal system can not track payments properly. Even more so, I should not be harmed because XXXX is refusing to abide by the initial terms and forbearance protections- extended to me by XXXX and federal/state covid laws- and agreed to by XXXX prior XXXX XXXX purchasing the loan. XXXX also needs to disperse the government assistance funds in a timely manner. I also think it is ridiculous for XXXX to ask me to contact XXXX to direct payments as this should have been worked out between those XXXX parties when the loan was sold/purchased. \n\nI am uncluding a pdf containing copies of several pieces of \" evidence. '' XXXX. Screenshot of the XXXX XXXX, showing the balance and date as I see it upon login. \nXXXX. Message from XXXX detailing payment schedule and reiterating approved funding. \nXXXX. Copies of personal checking account records showing payments since XX/XX/XXXX to date. \nXXXX records XXXX payments sent to XXXX. \nXXXX. XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX email from XXXX reiterating funding ends after XX/XX/XXXX.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-08-13T14:38:36.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"44720","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7392847","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"RoundPoint Mortgage Servicing LLC","date_received":"2023-08-13T14:25:22.000Z","state":"OH","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Even <em>more</em> so, I <em>should</em> not be harmed because XXXX is refusing to abide by the initial terms and forbearance protections- extended to me by XXXX and federal/state covid laws- and agreed to by XXXX prior XXXX XXXX purchasing the loan. XXXX also needs to disperse the government assistance funds in a timely manner. I also think it is ridiculous for XXXX to ask me to contact XXXX to direct payments as this <em>should</em> have been worked out between <em>those</em> XXXX parties when the loan was sold/purchased."]},"sort":[10.78126,"7392847"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2732780","_score":10.1328535,"_source":{"product":"Credit card or prepaid card","complaint_what_happened":"I opened a \" XXXX XXXX XXXX Business Credit Card '' through American Express on XX/XX/XXXX. My fiance had watched me open the account and confirmed the signup bonus. American Express was running a promotion for this card - all applicants who apply beforeXX/XX/XXXX receive the following terms : \" Earn XXXX bonus starpoints after you use your new card to make {$5000.00} in purchases within the first 3 months and an extra XXXX bonus starpoints after you make an additional {$3000.00} in purchases within the first 6 months. '' I spent {$5000.00} within 3 months and I received the XXXX starwood points as promised - this posted on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX. I completed the {$8000.00} spending requirement on XXXX XXXX and waited for my statement day of XXXX XXXX to see if anything had posted - it had not. I created a case in late XXXX / XXXX XXXX with American Express. After the hours of efforts I have spent via chat and several phones calls with XXXX to try to resolve, I have gotten nowhere. they claim that the XXXX promotional bonus was not attached to my account, but I have a screenshot of the application page before I submit that says otherwise. They will not accept the screenshot though, so it appears I am out of luck. \n\nThe thing is, I applied on XXXX XXXX via a referral link - i still have the link if required. I have been following this promotion very closely as I had really wanted this credit card. The promotion was started XXXX time and ran through XXXX XXXX. Being so late in the promotional period, the only possible links generated - affiliate, referral, or otherwise - was the XXXX offer. The fact that I do n't have the XXXX offer attached to my account is beyond me. After searching the internet, I have found several other instances of American Express XXXX XXXX XXXX Business credit card account holders who applied in late XXXX having a similar issue with their second bonuses posting. There is even a blog post about it : XXXX XXXX XXXX I can attach any more details, statements, screenshots, or instances of other people on the internet i have found having similar issues. \n\nThe XXXX supervisor I discussed with pretty much flat out said I was lying and was asking how I knew more about the card than she did. I mentioned I do n't, but I do n't open credit cards lightly and I did a ton of research before and after getting the card, and all the issues other people had. The person who referred me HAD to have referred me with a XXXX link because he previously sent me a XXXX referral link that had expired and he had to regenerate a brand new link to show XXXX for me. \n\nI feel lied to about the partnership and trust I put in Amex and XXXX. And again, I 'm not the only one having a similar issue. In addition to the blog post above, see all of the research and datapoints of other people having the issues with the XXXX XXXX cards. See below in Appendix. \n\nI understand that the extra XXXX points are a lot to ask for here, but I feel that American Express should have a vested interest in ensuring that their loyal customers have their rights honored and given the benefit of the doubt in the wake of all the confusion and issues. From all the research and other data points provided, I feel there has there is reason enough to believe that American Express has some glitch or technical issue in their database that is capturing the wrong signup bonuses for these XXXX cards. \n\nIf the full XXXX points are n't obtainable, can we please reach some sort of compromise for goodwill and good faith? \n\nI also reached out to American Express as I was told I could write in and ask for a copy of my application to prove what signup and terms I signed up under. After getting a notarized affidavit and several weeks of waiting, the only thing I received in the mail was my basic information that I used when signing up ( ie : name, date of birth, phone number, SSN, etc. ) and my IP address. There was nothing that would prove to me one way or the other that the signup bonus that I signed up under was honored or not. \n\nHonestly, I just want this to be over and am looking for any reasonable resolution. I definitely would not be spending all this time if I did n't think I had a good case. I love Amex and XXXX, but I always get a bad taste in my mouth when I see this card in my wallet now from the situation. \n\nThank you kindly, XXXX XXXX : See research below of other people 's issues : whencanwedothisagain They told me to wait 2 more weeks to see if they show up in my XXXX account. So much for using these points for my trip next month. \nAs of today it shows I have earned the correct number of points on the Amex site but the additional XXXX points are not in my XXXX account. What a mess. \nChecked again today and they said it 's still with the back end team to check back in 2 more weeks. Unreal.\nthemickstar Typically Amex is faster because they post it right after the charges post but I think something has been going on with some business bonuses. Our XXXX bonus was attached fine and posted just a few days ago. \n\nXXXX Yeah I 'm beginning to think that the massive influx of applications for the XXXX cards towards the end of that XXXX offer caused a lot of IT issues for Amex. \nYou 'd think their IT would be able to handle it but more and more they 're proving to be more like Citi. \n\nrovitm Signed up with XXXX offer, only getting XXXX to post nigson Taking 3 months to post XXXX ( in full ) whencanwedothisagain After disputing with Amex for 3 months I finally got my XXXX bonus on my business SPG for the XXXX offer. Win. Then I logged into my SPG account and in addition to my XXXX bonus there was a XXXX and XXXX from Amex. I did not realize Amex could remove points from my XXXX account. \nOne of the reps told me it was a glitch on their end and there had been other disputes filed. No explanation as to what caused the glitch though. \n\nrovitm So I referred my wife to the XXXX XXXX. I used the referral link on Amex.com. My wife applied, was approved and met the XXXX spend. She was denied the bonus. We put in an investigation and was denied. They said they will put in another investigation. I called and spoke to a supervisor. She said the regular and business SPG card are considered the same and that she is not entitled to the bonus. She said on some cards and especially with the Platinum they are considered different products, but for this offer it is not. Has anyone been told this before? I assume many here have used the referral links on XXXX and have not had a problem. I think I will wait a few days and call again. Any suggestions are appreciated. \n\nencin Just followed up with amex on my missing spg biz points from when I met min spend on XXXX for the XXXX offer. This is the second case I opened with them, they decided to just close the first case with no apparent action. \nThe CSR just mentioned that the second case which I opened on XXXX was closed on XXXX, and apparently they confirmed a glitch on their end that did n't properly attach the sign-up promotion code to my account. They verified that I do qualify and that I should be receiving the points, but did n't get give a timeline. I think he mentioned something about this being remediated in a batch or something ... .last time I called I got them to give me XXXX courtesy points for all the calls I put in the last few months ... .. \nI had called so many times, and I was really upset they had closed the previous case I created 8 weeks before with no resolution and she just said she had to create a new case and it would be another 6-8 weeks. I was like how do I know they are n't just going to close this in two weeks and keep telling me the same bs and I demanded something in return. I was hoping for more points but settled for XXXX - she was n't willing to negotiate there mwwalk My wife got the XXXX business back when it was available for XXXX points. We hit the spend immediately and then never received any of the signup bonus points. In XXXX I chatted and they could see the points had not posted despite completing spend so they opened a ticket. I chatted again ever couple weeks and they could never do anything and were really annoying ( and lazy ). Today, the bonus points finally posted. Thank goodness. For those that will want to know, they never called or emailed to ask questions. A significant portion of the $ XXXX MSR was done with MS , probably about 65 % of it. But none of it at Level 3 data supplying stores and I put in a bunch of other smaller charges as well - genuinely used it for everyday spend except meals/travel. Several charges were {$500.00} from XXXX because I got lazy so it would be pretty obvious what they were, but did n't seem to matter. Yay! If you 're still waiting, have hope. \n\nnetscooby I had signed up for the XXXX XXXX card with the XXXX bonus. After meeting the XXXX spend back in early XXXX with no MS and never having the card, I never received the bonus, not even the XXXX for the XXXX spend. A couple support calls and they finally sent my case to the mysterious back office a couple weeks ago. Follow up today and they stated that I 'm still good and do qualify, but this is a \" Known issue '' for this card. \nAnyone else experiencing this? I would think there would be others experiencing the same thing if this was truly a known issue they are having. \n\nreachforthemiles Yes, there 's many people in the same situation, myself included. Over five calls now with the same answer \" It 's Amex 's fault and we 've opened a case, we 're working on it! \". But never any resolution. The travelcodex link that XXXX [ +4 ] mentioned has additional people in the same situation. \n\nXXXX XXXX : It is known that there was a glitch attaching signup bonuses to applications for the XXXX cards, but I 'm speculating that it may have affected additional product lines during the same time period. The timeframe of the glitch appears to be approximately XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX. ( Please provide any DPs to prove me wrong/right. ) Evidence : 1 ) My XXXX application was XXXX and bonus has n't posted after 8 weeks. I opened an AmEx investigation and CFPB case and response so far is : \" We have identified an issue which, regrettably, may have impacted your account. '' 2 )  XXXX is waiting on a XXXX bonus from first week of XXXX. \n3 ) XXXX had trouble getting a XXXX bonus to post. Not sure of his application date, but possibly around then. \n4 ) Users XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX on the Travel Codex post are reporting issues from around that time frame on the XXXX Surpass upgrade offer ( I know it 's an upgrade offer, but still maybe related ). \n5 ) Maybe unrelated, but XXXX is missing XXXX XXXX bonus. Do n't know application date, but similar time frame. \n6 ) Obviously many DPs on SPG offer and time frame is at least XXXX XXXX - XXXX XXXX. My application was XXXX XXXX, XXXX was XXXX XXXX, XXXX was XXXX XXXX, XXXX [ +4 ] was XXXX XXXX, and XXXX [ +2 ] was XXXX XXXX. \n7 ) Since the XXXX higher bonuses ended XXXX and many people applied in the final days, we are mostly seeing SPG missing, but I theorize that is just selection bias and the glitch affects other product lines too. \n\nnigson Affected timeline dp : Got my biz SPG XXXX and was waiting quite a while for the bonus to post. Still waiting for it on the SPG website, but at least it 's there in the Amex side. My personal XXXX applied XXXX ( approved XXXX ) bonus posted on time automatically. \nXXXX Add me in as a DP : Applied and approved on XXXX for biz SPG. Hit {$5000.00} + {$3000.00} in XXXX statement. No bonus, and nothing posted in Amex. Chatted and spoke with CSRs that confirmed I passed the threshold, no discussion of any sort of technical glitch. \nXXXX I opened my business spg on XXXX and had problems with the bonus posting. I hit {$5000.00} within the first statement. My XXXX points did not post until about 2 weeks ago.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-11-18T06:55:56.000Z","issue":"Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"53705","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2732780","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","date_received":"2017-11-18T01:44:18.000Z","state":"WI","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive advertised or promotional terms"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["This is the second <em>case</em> I opened with them, they decided to just close the first <em>case</em> with no apparent action. \nThe CSR just mentioned that the second <em>case</em> which I opened on XXXX was closed on XXXX, and apparently they confirmed a glitch on their end that did n't properly attach the sign-up promotion code to my account. They verified that I do qualify and that I <em>should</em> be receiving the points, but did n't get give a timeline."]},"sort":[10.1328535,"2732780"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17387758","_score":9.996633,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Permissible Purpose : The law says no one can report information about me without a permissible purpose and my authorization. These accounts and inquiries have neither. There's no written agreement, no verifiable consent, nothing proving I authorized them. Continuing to report them is unlawful.On XX/XX/year>, I sent a formal dispute to Experian about unauthorized and inaccurate information on my credit report. I wasn't just making a casual complaint- I sent them everything they needed, including my FTC Report ( Case No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \nThat was over 30 days ago. More than enough time for them to investigate and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore. This is non-compliance with federal law. Experian had a legal obligation to investigate my dispute and remove information they couldn't verify. They didn't do it. \nI've done everything right. I followed their process, sent documentation, gave them the legal timeframe. They've done nothing. That's why I'm coming to the CFPB - because a credit bureau that won't follow the law needs to be held accountable. \n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS : I've researched the Fair Credit Reporting Act extensively, and I understand what Experian was legally required to do. Here 's what they've violated : Section 604 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) - No P Section 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) - Maximum Possible Accuracy : Credit bureaus are required to maintain \" maximum possible accuracy. '' Keeping unverified items on my file after I've disputed them with documentation doesn't meet that standard. They're misrepresenting my credit history and they know it. \nSection 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) - Duty to Reinvestigate : When they received my dispute, they were required by law to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and delete anything they couldn't verify with proper documentation. It's been over 30 days. That's more than enough time. They either didn't investigate at all, or they did and couldn't verify it but left it on my report anyway. Either way, that's a violation. \nSection 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) - The 4-Day Blocking Rule : This one is really clear. Once I submitted a valid police report documenting identity issues, Experian was legally required to block and delete the disputed information within FOUR business days. Not 30 days. Not 60 days. Four business days. \nIt's been way longer than that, and the items are still on my report. That's a direct, documented violation of this section. \nSection 1681a ( 4 ) - Privacy Protection : I have a right to privacy of my non-public personal information. Keeping unauthorized data in my file is an improper intrusion into my privacy and causes real harm to my financial reputation. \nMetro 2 and XXXX Standards : Beyond the FCRA, all credit reporting is supposed to meet Metro 2 standards- meaning the data has to be complete, accurate, and current. These accounts and inquiries fail all those tests because there's no documentation supporting them and no permissible purpose for their inclusion. \n\nTHE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING ON MY LIFE : This isn't just about numbers on a report. This is about my actual life being affected every single day by information that shouldn't be there : Because of this continued non-compliance, my credit score stays artificially low. I've been denied legitimate credit applications- cards I needed, loans I qualified for - all because of accounts that aren't even mine. \nWhen I do get approved for something, I'm charged interest rates that are way higher than what I should be paying. That's real money coming out of my pocket every month because Experian won't follow the law. \nI've faced embarrassment applying for housing. I had to explain to landlords why my credit looks bad, knowing the whole time that it's because of fraudulent information that a credit bureau is illegally keeping on my file. \nThis situation has caused me genuine stress and frustration. I wake up thinking about it. I've spent hours dealing with this - hours I could have spent with my family or focusing on my work. It goes far beyond a \" clerical error. '' This has real effects on my daily life and financial stability. \n\nWHY I'M COMING TO THE CFPB : I've acted in good faith throughout this entire process. I filed my dispute properly. I sent documentation. I gave them the legal timeframe to investigate. I followed every rule. \nExperian has failed to do the same. They've ignored their legal obligations under the FCRA, and they're continuing to harm me by keeping inaccurate information on my report. \nI'm now asking for the CFPB 's intervention because this is exactly why your agency exists- to protect consumers when credit bureaus refuse to follow federal law. I need you to ensure compliance and stop this ongoing harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-20T15:59:52.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77504","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17387758","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-11-20T15:59:26.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I wasn't just making a casual complaint- I sent them everything they needed, including my FTC Report ( <em>Case</em> No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \nThat was over 30 days ago. <em>More</em> than enough time for them to <em>investigate</em> and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore."],"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":[9.996633,"17387758"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17210689","_score":9.996633,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Permissible Purpose : The law says no one can report information about me without a permissible purpose and my authorization. These accounts and inquiries have neither. There's no written agreement, no verifiable consent, nothing proving I authorized them. Continuing to report them is unlawful. \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, I sent a formal dispute to Equifax about unauthorized and inaccurate information on my credit report. I wasn't just making a casual complaint - I sent them everything they needed, including my Police Report ( Case No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine.\n\nThat was over 30 days ago. More than enough time for them to investigate and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life.\n\nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore. This is non-compliance with federal law. Equifax had a legal obligation to investigate my dispute and remove information they couldn't verify. They didn't do it.\n\nI've done everything right. I followed their process, sent documentation, gave them the legal timeframe. They've done nothing. That's why I'm coming to the CFPB - because a credit bureau that won't follow the law needs to be held accountable.\n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS : I've researched the Fair Credit Reporting Act extensively, and I understand what Equifax was legally required to do. Here 's what they've violated : Section 604 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) - No Permissible Purpose : The law clearly states that a consumer 's credit file may only contain information obtained for a lawful permissible purpose. The inclusion of this account and related inquiries without authorization violates this section.\n\nSection 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) - Maximum Possible Accuracy : Credit bureaus are required to maintain \" maximum possible accuracy. '' Keeping unverified items on my file after I've disputed them with documentation doesn't meet that standard. They're misrepresenting my credit history and they know it.\n\nSection 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) - Duty to Reinvestigate : When they received my dispute, they were required by law to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and delete anything they couldn't verify with proper documentation. It's been over 30 days. That's more than enough time. They either didn't investigate at all, or they did and couldn't verify it but left it on my report anyway. Either way, that's a violation.\n\nSection 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) - The 4-Day Blocking Rule : This one is really clear. Once I submitted a valid police report documenting identity issues, Equifax was legally required to block and delete the disputed information within FOUR business days. Not 30 days. Not 60 days. Four business days.\n\nIt's been way longer than that, and the items are still on my report. That's a direct, documented violation of this section.\n\nSection 1681a ( 4 ) - Privacy Protection : I have a right to privacy of my non-public personal information. Keeping unauthorized data in my file is an improper intrusion into my privacy and causes real harm to my financial reputation.\n\nMetro 2 and CDIA Standards : Beyond the FCRA, all credit reporting is supposed to meet Metro 2 standards- meaning the data has to be complete, accurate, and current. These accounts and inquiries fail all those tests because there's no documentation supporting them and no permissible purpose for their inclusion.\n\nTHE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING ON MY LIFE : This isn't just about numbers on a report. This is about my actual life being affected every single day by information that shouldn't be there : Because of this continued non-compliance, my credit score stays artificially low. I've been denied legitimate credit applications- cards I needed, loans I qualified for - all because of accounts that aren't even mine.\n\nWhen I do get approved for something, I'm charged interest rates that are way higher than what I should be paying. That's real money coming out of my pocket every month because Equifax won't follow the law.\n\nI've faced embarrassment applying for housing. I had to explain to landlords why my credit looks bad, knowing the whole time that it's because of fraudulent information that a credit bureau is illegally keeping on my file.\n\nThis situation has caused me genuine stress and frustration. I wake up thinking about it. I've spent hours dealing with this - hours I could have spent with my family or focusing on my work. It goes far beyond a \" clerical error. '' This has real effects on my daily life and financial stability.\n\nWHY I'M COMING TO THE CFPB : I've acted in good faith throughout this entire process. I filed my dispute properly. I sent documentation. I gave them the legal timeframe to investigate. I followed every rule.\n\nEquifax has failed to do the same. They've ignored their legal obligations under the FCRA, and they're continuing to harm me by keeping inaccurate information on my report.\n\nI'm now asking for the CFPB 's intervention because this is exactly why your agency exists- to protect consumers when credit bureaus refuse to follow federal law. I need you to ensure compliance and stop this ongoing harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-13T00:57:25.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33607","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17210689","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-13T00:56:58.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I wasn't just making a casual complaint - I sent them everything they needed, including my Police Report ( <em>Case</em> No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine.\n\nThat was over 30 days ago. <em>More</em> than enough time for them to <em>investigate</em> and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life.\n\nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["<em>Investigation</em> took <em>more</em> than 30 days"]},"sort":[9.996633,"17210689"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17388676","_score":9.993672,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Permissible Purpose : The law says no one can report information about me without a permissible purpose and my authorization. These accounts and inquiries have neither. There's no written agreement, no verifiable consent, nothing proving I authorized them. Continuing to report them is unlawful.On XX/XX/year>, I sent a formal dispute to TransUnion about unauthorized and inaccurate information on my credit report. I wasn't just making a casual complaint- I sent them everything they needed, including my FTC Report ( Case No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \nThat was over 30 days ago. More than enough time for them to investigate and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore. This is non-compliance with federal law. TransUnion had a legal obligation to investigate my dispute and remove information they couldn't verify. They didn't do it. \nI've done everything right. I followed their process, sent documentation, gave them the legal timeframe. They've done nothing. That's why I'm coming to the CFPB - because a credit bureau that won't follow the law needs to be held accountable. \n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS : I've researched the Fair Credit Reporting Act extensively, and I understand what TransUnion was legally required to do. Here 's what they've violated : Section 604 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) - No P Section 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) - Maximum Possible Accuracy : Credit bureaus are required to maintain \" maximum possible accuracy. '' Keeping unverified items on my file after I've disputed them with documentation doesn't meet that standard. They're misrepresenting my credit history and they know it. \nSection 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) - Duty to Reinvestigate : When they received my dispute, they were required by law to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and delete anything they couldn't verify with proper documentation. It's been over 30 days. That's more than enough time. They either didn't investigate at all, or they did and couldn't verify it but left it on my report anyway. Either way, that's a violation. \nSection 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) - The 4-Day Blocking Rule : This one is really clear. Once I submitted a valid police report documenting identity issues, TransUnion was legally required to block and delete the disputed information within FOUR business days. Not 30 days. Not 60 days. Four business days. \nIt's been way longer than that, and the items are still on my report. That's a direct, documented violation of this section. \nSection 1681a ( 4 ) - Privacy Protection : I have a right to privacy of my non-public personal information. Keeping unauthorized data in my file is an improper intrusion into my privacy and causes real harm to my financial reputation. \nMetro 2 and XXXX Standards : Beyond the FCRA, all credit reporting is supposed to meet Metro 2 standards- meaning the data has to be complete, accurate, and current. These accounts and inquiries fail all those tests because there's no documentation supporting them and no permissible purpose for their inclusion. \n\nTHE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING ON MY LIFE : This isn't just about numbers on a report. This is about my actual life being affected every single day by information that shouldn't be there : Because of this continued non-compliance, my credit score stays artificially low. I've been denied legitimate credit applications- cards I needed, loans I qualified for - all because of accounts that aren't even mine. \nWhen I do get approved for something, I'm charged interest rates that are way higher than what I should be paying. That's real money coming out of my pocket every month because TransUnion won't follow the law. \nI've faced embarrassment applying for housing. I had to explain to landlords why my credit looks bad, knowing the whole time that it's because of fraudulent information that a credit bureau is illegally keeping on my file. \nThis situation has caused me genuine stress and frustration. I wake up thinking about it. I've spent hours dealing with this - hours I could have spent with my family or focusing on my work. It goes far beyond a \" clerical error. '' This has real effects on my daily life and financial stability. \n\nWHY I'M COMING TO THE CFPB : I've acted in good faith throughout this entire process. I filed my dispute properly. I sent documentation. I gave them the legal timeframe to investigate. I followed every rule. \nTransUnion has failed to do the same. They've ignored their legal obligations under the FCRA, and they're continuing to harm me by keeping inaccurate information on my report. \nI'm now asking for the CFPB 's intervention because this is exactly why your agency exists- to protect consumers when credit bureaus refuse to follow federal law. I need you to ensure compliance and stop this ongoing harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-20T15:42:20.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77504","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17388676","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-20T15:12:29.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I wasn't just making a casual complaint- I sent them everything they needed, including my FTC Report ( <em>Case</em> No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \nThat was over 30 days ago. <em>More</em> than enough time for them to <em>investigate</em> and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore."],"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":[9.993672,"17388676"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18084162","_score":9.986999,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Permissible Purpose : The law says no one can report information about me without a permissible purpose and my authorization. These accounts and inquiries have neither. There's no written agreement, no verifiable consent, nothing proving I authorized them. Continuing to report them is unlawful. On XX/XX/year>, I sent a formal dispute to Transunion about unauthorized and inaccurate information on my credit report. I wasn't just making a casual complaint- I sent them everything they needed, including my FTC Report ( Case No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \nThat was over 30 days ago. More than enough time for them to investigate and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore. This is non-compliance with federal law. Transunion had a legal obligation to investigate my dispute and remove information they couldn't verify. They didn't do it. \nI've done everything right. I followed their process, sent documentation, gave them the legal timeframe. They've done nothing. That's why I'm coming to the CFPB - because a credit bureau that won't follow the law needs to be held accountable. \n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS : I've researched the Fair Credit Reporting Act extensively, and I understand what Transunion was legally required to do. Here 's what they've violated : Section 604 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) - No P Section 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) - Maximum Possible Accuracy : Credit bureaus are required to maintain \" maximum possible accuracy. '' Keeping unverified items on my file after I've disputed them with documentation doesn't meet that standard. They're misrepresenting my credit history and they know it.\n\nSection 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) - Duty to Reinvestigate : When they received my dispute, they were required by law to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and delete anything they couldn't verify with proper documentation. It's been over 30 days. That's more than enough time. They either didn't investigate at all, or they did and couldn't verify it but left it on my report anyway. Either way, that's a violation. \nSection 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) - The 4-Day Blocking Rule : This one is really clear. Once I submitted a valid police report documenting identity issues, Transunion was legally required to block and delete the disputed information within FOUR business days. Not 30 days. Not 60 days. Four business days.\n\nIt's been way longer than that, and the items are still on my report. That's a direct, documented violation of this section.\n\nSection 1681a ( 4 ) - Privacy Protection : I have a right to privacy of my non-public personal information. Keeping unauthorized data in my file is an improper intrusion into my privacy and causes real harm to my financial reputation.\n\nMetro 2 and CDIA Standards : Beyond the FCRA, all credit reporting is supposed to meet Metro 2 standards- meaning the data has to be complete, accurate, and current. These accounts and inquiries fail all those tests because there's no documentation supporting them and no permissible purpose for their inclusion. \n\nTHE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING ON MY LIFE : This isn't just about numbers on a report. This is about my actual life being affected every single day by information that shouldn't be there : Because of this continued non-compliance, my XXXX XXXX stays artificially low. I've been denied legitimate credit applications- cards I needed, loans I qualified for - all because of accounts that aren't even mine. \nWhen I do get approved for something, I'm charged interest rates that are way higher than what I should be paying. That's real money coming out of my pocket every month because Transunion won't follow the law. \nI've faced embarrassment applying for housing. I had to explain to landlords why my credit looks bad, knowing the whole time that it's because of fraudulent information that a credit bureau is illegally keeping on my file. \nThis situation has caused me genuine stress and frustration. I wake up thinking about it. I've spent hours dealing with this - hours I could have spent with my family or focusing on my work. It goes far beyond a \" clerical error. '' This has real effects on my daily life and financial stability. \n\nWHY I'M COMING TO THE CFPB : I've acted in good faith throughout this entire process. I filed my dispute properly. I sent documentation. I gave them the legal timeframe to investigate. I followed every rule. \nTransunion has failed to do the same. They've ignored their legal obligations under the FCRA, and they're continuing to harm me by keeping inaccurate information on my report. \nI'm now asking for the CFPB 's intervention because this is exactly why your agency exists- to protect consumers when credit bureaus refuse to follow federal law. I need you to ensure compliance and stop this ongoing harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-16T19:40:19.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"34758","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18084162","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-16T19:39:51.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I wasn't just making a casual complaint- I sent them everything they needed, including my FTC Report ( <em>Case</em> No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \nThat was over 30 days ago. <em>More</em> than enough time for them to <em>investigate</em> and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["<em>Investigation</em> took <em>more</em> than 30 days"]},"sort":[9.986999,"18084162"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17210687","_score":9.986999,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Permissible Purpose : The law says no one can report information about me without a permissible purpose and my authorization. These accounts and inquiries have neither. There's no written agreement, no verifiable consent, nothing proving I authorized them. Continuing to report them is unlawful. \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, I sent a formal dispute to Equifax about unauthorized and inaccurate information on my credit report. I wasn't just making a casual complaint - I sent them everything they needed, including my Police Report ( Case No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine.\n\nThat was over 30 days ago. More than enough time for them to investigate and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life.\n\nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore. This is non-compliance with federal law. Equifax had a legal obligation to investigate my dispute and remove information they couldn't verify. They didn't do it.\n\nI've done everything right. I followed their process, sent documentation, gave them the legal timeframe. They've done nothing. That's why I'm coming to the CFPB - because a credit bureau that won't follow the law needs to be held accountable.\n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS : I've researched the Fair Credit Reporting Act extensively, and I understand what Equifax was legally required to do. Here 's what they've violated : Section 604 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) - No Permissible Purpose : The law clearly states that a consumer 's credit file may only contain information obtained for a lawful permissible purpose. The inclusion of this account and related inquiries without authorization violates this section.\n\nSection 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) - Maximum Possible Accuracy : Credit bureaus are required to maintain \" maximum possible accuracy. '' Keeping unverified items on my file after I've disputed them with documentation doesn't meet that standard. They're misrepresenting my credit history and they know it.\n\nSection 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) - Duty to Reinvestigate : When they received my dispute, they were required by law to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and delete anything they couldn't verify with proper documentation. It's been over 30 days. That's more than enough time. They either didn't investigate at all, or they did and couldn't verify it but left it on my report anyway. Either way, that's a violation.\n\nSection 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) - The 4-Day Blocking Rule : This one is really clear. Once I submitted a valid police report documenting identity issues, Equifax was legally required to block and delete the disputed information within FOUR business days. Not 30 days. Not 60 days. Four business days.\n\nIt's been way longer than that, and the items are still on my report. That's a direct, documented violation of this section.\n\nSection 1681a ( 4 ) - Privacy Protection : I have a right to privacy of my non-public personal information. Keeping unauthorized data in my file is an improper intrusion into my privacy and causes real harm to my financial reputation.\n\nMetro 2 and CDIA Standards : Beyond the FCRA, all credit reporting is supposed to meet Metro 2 standards- meaning the data has to be complete, accurate, and current. These accounts and inquiries fail all those tests because there's no documentation supporting them and no permissible purpose for their inclusion.\n\nTHE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING ON MY LIFE : This isn't just about numbers on a report. This is about my actual life being affected every single day by information that shouldn't be there : Because of this continued non-compliance, my credit score stays artificially low. I've been denied legitimate credit applications- cards I needed, loans I qualified for - all because of accounts that aren't even mine.\n\nWhen I do get approved for something, I'm charged interest rates that are way higher than what I should be paying. That's real money coming out of my pocket every month because Equifax won't follow the law.\n\nI've faced embarrassment applying for housing. I had to explain to landlords why my credit looks bad, knowing the whole time that it's because of fraudulent information that a credit bureau is illegally keeping on my file.\n\nThis situation has caused me genuine stress and frustration. I wake up thinking about it. I've spent hours dealing with this - hours I could have spent with my family or focusing on my work. It goes far beyond a \" clerical error. '' This has real effects on my daily life and financial stability.\n\nWHY I'M COMING TO THE CFPB : I've acted in good faith throughout this entire process. I filed my dispute properly. I sent documentation. I gave them the legal timeframe to investigate. I followed every rule.\n\nEquifax has failed to do the same. They've ignored their legal obligations under the FCRA, and they're continuing to harm me by keeping inaccurate information on my report.\n\nI'm now asking for the CFPB 's intervention because this is exactly why your agency exists- to protect consumers when credit bureaus refuse to follow federal law. I need you to ensure compliance and stop this ongoing harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-13T00:57:25.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33607","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17210687","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-13T00:56:58.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I wasn't just making a casual complaint - I sent them everything they needed, including my Police Report ( <em>Case</em> No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine.\n\nThat was over 30 days ago. <em>More</em> than enough time for them to <em>investigate</em> and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life.\n\nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["<em>Investigation</em> took <em>more</em> than 30 days"]},"sort":[9.986999,"17210687"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17184495","_score":9.986999,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Permissible Purpose : The law says no one can report information about me without a permissible purpose and my authorization. These accounts and inquiries have neither. There's no written agreement, no verifiable consent, nothing proving I authorized them. Continuing to report them is unlawful. \n\nOn XXXX XXXX, I sent a formal dispute to Experian about unauthorized and inaccurate information on my credit report. I wasn't just making a casual complaint - I sent them everything they needed, including my Police Report ( Case No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \n\nThat was over 30 days ago. More than enough time for them to investigate and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \n\nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore. This is non-compliance with federal law. Experian had a legal obligation to investigate my dispute and remove information they couldn't verify. They didn't do it. \n\nI've done everything right. I followed their process, sent documentation, gave them the legal timeframe. They've done nothing. That's why I'm coming to the CFPB - because a credit bureau that won't follow the law needs to be held accountable. \n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS : I've researched the Fair Credit Reporting Act extensively, and I understand what Experian was legally required to do. Here 's what they've violated : Section 604 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) - No Permissible Purpose : The law clearly states that a consumer 's credit file may only contain information obtained for a lawful permissible purpose. The inclusion of this account and related inquiries without authorization violates this section.\n\nSection 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) - Maximum Possible Accuracy : Credit bureaus are required to maintain \" maximum possible accuracy. '' Keeping unverified items on my file after I've disputed them with documentation doesn't meet that standard. They're misrepresenting my credit history and they know it.\n\nSection 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) - Duty to Reinvestigate : When they received my dispute, they were required by law to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and delete anything they couldn't verify with proper documentation. It's been over 30 days. That's more than enough time. They either didn't investigate at all, or they did and couldn't verify it but left it on my report anyway. Either way, that's a violation.\n\nSection 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) - The 4-Day Blocking Rule : This one is really clear. Once I submitted a valid police report documenting identity issues, Experian was legally required to block and delete the disputed information within FOUR business days. Not 30 days. Not 60 days. Four business days.\n\nIt's been way longer than that, and the items are still on my report. That's a direct, documented violation of this section.\n\nSection 1681a ( 4 ) - Privacy Protection : I have a right to privacy of my non-public personal information. Keeping unauthorized data in my file is an improper intrusion into my privacy and causes real harm to my financial reputation. \n\nMetro 2 and CDIA Standards : Beyond the FCRA, all credit reporting is supposed to meet Metro 2 standards- meaning the data has to be complete, accurate, and current. These accounts and inquiries fail all those tests because there's no documentation supporting them and no permissible purpose for their inclusion. \n\nTHE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING ON MY LIFE : This isn't just about numbers on a report. This is about my actual life being affected every single day by information that shouldn't be there : Because of this continued non-compliance, my credit score stays artificially low. I've been denied legitimate credit applications- cards I needed, loans I qualified for - all because of accounts that aren't even mine. \n\nWhen I do get approved for something, I'm charged interest rates that are way higher than what I should be paying. That's real money coming out of my pocket every month because Experian won't follow the law. \n\nI've faced embarrassment applying for housing. I had to explain to landlords why my credit looks bad, knowing the whole time that it's because of fraudulent information that a credit bureau is illegally keeping on my file. \n\nThis situation has caused me genuine stress and frustration. I wake up thinking about it. I've spent hours dealing with this - hours I could have spent with my family or focusing on my work. It goes far beyond a \" clerical error. '' This has real effects on my daily life and financial stability. \n\nWHY I'M COMING TO THE CFPB : I've acted in good faith throughout this entire process. I filed my dispute properly. I sent documentation. I gave them the legal timeframe to investigate. I followed every rule. \n\nExperian has failed to do the same. They've ignored their legal obligations under the FCRA, and they're continuing to harm me by keeping inaccurate information on my report. \n\nI'm now asking for the CFPB 's intervention because this is exactly why your agency exists- to protect consumers when credit bureaus refuse to follow federal law. I need you to ensure compliance and stop this ongoing harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-13T01:11:23.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33607","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17184495","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-11-13T01:10:57.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I wasn't just making a casual complaint - I sent them everything they needed, including my Police Report ( <em>Case</em> No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \n\nThat was over 30 days ago. <em>More</em> than enough time for them to <em>investigate</em> and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \n\nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["<em>Investigation</em> took <em>more</em> than 30 days"]},"sort":[9.986999,"17184495"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18084159","_score":9.986512,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Permissible Purpose : The law says no one can report information about me without a permissible purpose and my authorization. These accounts and inquiries have neither. There's no written agreement, no verifiable consent, nothing proving I authorized them. Continuing to report them is unlawful. On XX/XX/year>, I sent a formal dispute to Transunion about unauthorized and inaccurate information on my credit report. I wasn't just making a casual complaint- I sent them everything they needed, including my FTC Report ( Case No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \nThat was over 30 days ago. More than enough time for them to investigate and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore. This is non-compliance with federal law. Transunion had a legal obligation to investigate my dispute and remove information they couldn't verify. They didn't do it. \nI've done everything right. I followed their process, sent documentation, gave them the legal timeframe. They've done nothing. That's why I'm coming to the CFPB - because a credit bureau that won't follow the law needs to be held accountable. \n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS : I've researched the Fair Credit Reporting Act extensively, and I understand what Transunion was legally required to do. Here 's what they've violated : Section 604 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) - No P Section 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) - Maximum Possible Accuracy : Credit bureaus are required to maintain \" maximum possible accuracy. '' Keeping unverified items on my file after I've disputed them with documentation doesn't meet that standard. They're misrepresenting my credit history and they know it.\n\nSection 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) - Duty to Reinvestigate : When they received my dispute, they were required by law to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and delete anything they couldn't verify with proper documentation. It's been over 30 days. That's more than enough time. They either didn't investigate at all, or they did and couldn't verify it but left it on my report anyway. Either way, that's a violation. \nSection 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) - The 4-Day Blocking Rule : This one is really clear. Once I submitted a valid police report documenting identity issues, Transunion was legally required to block and delete the disputed information within FOUR business days. Not 30 days. Not 60 days. Four business days.\n\nIt's been way longer than that, and the items are still on my report. That's a direct, documented violation of this section.\n\nSection 1681a ( 4 ) - Privacy Protection : I have a right to privacy of my non-public personal information. Keeping unauthorized data in my file is an improper intrusion into my privacy and causes real harm to my financial reputation.\n\nMetro 2 and CDIA Standards : Beyond the FCRA, all credit reporting is supposed to meet Metro 2 standards- meaning the data has to be complete, accurate, and current. These accounts and inquiries fail all those tests because there's no documentation supporting them and no permissible purpose for their inclusion. \n\nTHE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING ON MY LIFE : This isn't just about numbers on a report. This is about my actual life being affected every single day by information that shouldn't be there : Because of this continued non-compliance, my XXXX XXXX stays artificially low. I've been denied legitimate credit applications- cards I needed, loans I qualified for - all because of accounts that aren't even mine. \nWhen I do get approved for something, I'm charged interest rates that are way higher than what I should be paying. That's real money coming out of my pocket every month because Transunion won't follow the law. \nI've faced embarrassment applying for housing. I had to explain to landlords why my credit looks bad, knowing the whole time that it's because of fraudulent information that a credit bureau is illegally keeping on my file. \nThis situation has caused me genuine stress and frustration. I wake up thinking about it. I've spent hours dealing with this - hours I could have spent with my family or focusing on my work. It goes far beyond a \" clerical error. '' This has real effects on my daily life and financial stability. \n\nWHY I'M COMING TO THE CFPB : I've acted in good faith throughout this entire process. I filed my dispute properly. I sent documentation. I gave them the legal timeframe to investigate. I followed every rule. \nTransunion has failed to do the same. They've ignored their legal obligations under the FCRA, and they're continuing to harm me by keeping inaccurate information on my report. \nI'm now asking for the CFPB 's intervention because this is exactly why your agency exists- to protect consumers when credit bureaus refuse to follow federal law. I need you to ensure compliance and stop this ongoing harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-16T19:40:18.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"34758","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18084159","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-12-16T19:18:40.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I wasn't just making a casual complaint- I sent them everything they needed, including my FTC Report ( <em>Case</em> No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \nThat was over 30 days ago. <em>More</em> than enough time for them to <em>investigate</em> and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["<em>Investigation</em> took <em>more</em> than 30 days"]},"sort":[9.986512,"18084159"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17386861","_score":9.986512,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Permissible Purpose : The law says no one can report information about me without a permissible purpose and my authorization. These accounts and inquiries have neither. There's no written agreement, no verifiable consent, nothing proving I authorized them. Continuing to report them is unlawful.On XX/XX/year>, I sent a formal dispute to TransUnion about unauthorized and inaccurate information on my credit report. I wasn't just making a casual complaint- I sent them everything they needed, including my FTC Report ( Case No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \nThat was over 30 days ago. More than enough time for them to investigate and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore. This is non-compliance with federal law. TransUnion had a legal obligation to investigate my dispute and remove information they couldn't verify. They didn't do it. \nI've done everything right. I followed their process, sent documentation, gave them the legal timeframe. They've done nothing. That's why I'm coming to the CFPB - because a credit bureau that won't follow the law needs to be held accountable. \n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS : I've researched the Fair Credit Reporting Act extensively, and I understand what TransUnion was legally required to do. Here 's what they've violated : Section 604 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) - No P Section 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) - Maximum Possible Accuracy : Credit bureaus are required to maintain \" maximum possible accuracy. '' Keeping unverified items on my file after I've disputed them with documentation doesn't meet that standard. They're misrepresenting my credit history and they know it. \nSection 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) - Duty to Reinvestigate : When they received my dispute, they were required by law to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and delete anything they couldn't verify with proper documentation. It's been over 30 days. That's more than enough time. They either didn't investigate at all, or they did and couldn't verify it but left it on my report anyway. Either way, that's a violation. \nSection 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) - The 4-Day Blocking Rule : This one is really clear. Once I submitted a valid police report documenting identity issues, TransUnion was legally required to block and delete the disputed information within FOUR business days. Not 30 days. Not 60 days. Four business days. \nIt's been way longer than that, and the items are still on my report. That's a direct, documented violation of this section. \nSection 1681a ( 4 ) - Privacy Protection : I have a right to privacy of my non-public personal information. Keeping unauthorized data in my file is an improper intrusion into my privacy and causes real harm to my financial reputation. \nMetro 2 and XXXX Standards : Beyond the FCRA, all credit reporting is supposed to meet Metro 2 standards- meaning the data has to be complete, accurate, and current. These accounts and inquiries fail all those tests because there's no documentation supporting them and no permissible purpose for their inclusion. \n\nTHE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING ON MY LIFE : This isn't just about numbers on a report. This is about my actual life being affected every single day by information that shouldn't be there : Because of this continued non-compliance, my credit score stays artificially low. I've been denied legitimate credit applications- cards I needed, loans I qualified for - all because of accounts that aren't even mine. \nWhen I do get approved for something, I'm charged interest rates that are way higher than what I should be paying. That's real money coming out of my pocket every month because TransUnion won't follow the law. \nI've faced embarrassment applying for housing. I had to explain to landlords why my credit looks bad, knowing the whole time that it's because of fraudulent information that a credit bureau is illegally keeping on my file. \nThis situation has caused me genuine stress and frustration. I wake up thinking about it. I've spent hours dealing with this - hours I could have spent with my family or focusing on my work. It goes far beyond a \" clerical error. '' This has real effects on my daily life and financial stability. \n\nWHY I'M COMING TO THE CFPB : I've acted in good faith throughout this entire process. I filed my dispute properly. I sent documentation. I gave them the legal timeframe to investigate. I followed every rule. \nTransUnion has failed to do the same. They've ignored their legal obligations under the FCRA, and they're continuing to harm me by keeping inaccurate information on my report. \nI'm now asking for the CFPB 's intervention because this is exactly why your agency exists- to protect consumers when credit bureaus refuse to follow federal law. I need you to ensure compliance and stop this ongoing harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-20T15:42:19.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77504","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17386861","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-20T15:41:52.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I wasn't just making a casual complaint- I sent them everything they needed, including my FTC Report ( <em>Case</em> No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine. \nThat was over 30 days ago. <em>More</em> than enough time for them to <em>investigate</em> and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life. \nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore."],"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":[9.986512,"17386861"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17206293","_score":9.986512,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Permissible Purpose : The law says no one can report information about me without a permissible purpose and my authorization. These accounts and inquiries have neither. There's no written agreement, no verifiable consent, nothing proving I authorized them. Continuing to report them is unlawful. \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, I sent a formal dispute to Equifax about unauthorized and inaccurate information on my credit report. I wasn't just making a casual complaint - I sent them everything they needed, including my Police Report ( Case No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine.\n\nThat was over 30 days ago. More than enough time for them to investigate and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life.\n\nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore. This is non-compliance with federal law. Equifax had a legal obligation to investigate my dispute and remove information they couldn't verify. They didn't do it.\n\nI've done everything right. I followed their process, sent documentation, gave them the legal timeframe. They've done nothing. That's why I'm coming to the CFPB - because a credit bureau that won't follow the law needs to be held accountable.\n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS : I've researched the Fair Credit Reporting Act extensively, and I understand what Equifax was legally required to do. Here 's what they've violated : Section 604 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ) - No Permissible Purpose : The law clearly states that a consumer 's credit file may only contain information obtained for a lawful permissible purpose. The inclusion of this account and related inquiries without authorization violates this section.\n\nSection 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) - Maximum Possible Accuracy : Credit bureaus are required to maintain \" maximum possible accuracy. '' Keeping unverified items on my file after I've disputed them with documentation doesn't meet that standard. They're misrepresenting my credit history and they know it.\n\nSection 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) - Duty to Reinvestigate : When they received my dispute, they were required by law to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and delete anything they couldn't verify with proper documentation. It's been over 30 days. That's more than enough time. They either didn't investigate at all, or they did and couldn't verify it but left it on my report anyway. Either way, that's a violation.\n\nSection 605B ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2 ) - The 4-Day Blocking Rule : This one is really clear. Once I submitted a valid police report documenting identity issues, Equifax was legally required to block and delete the disputed information within FOUR business days. Not 30 days. Not 60 days. Four business days.\n\nIt's been way longer than that, and the items are still on my report. That's a direct, documented violation of this section.\n\nSection 1681a ( 4 ) - Privacy Protection : I have a right to privacy of my non-public personal information. Keeping unauthorized data in my file is an improper intrusion into my privacy and causes real harm to my financial reputation.\n\nMetro 2 and CDIA Standards : Beyond the FCRA, all credit reporting is supposed to meet Metro 2 standards- meaning the data has to be complete, accurate, and current. These accounts and inquiries fail all those tests because there's no documentation supporting them and no permissible purpose for their inclusion.\n\nTHE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING ON MY LIFE : This isn't just about numbers on a report. This is about my actual life being affected every single day by information that shouldn't be there : Because of this continued non-compliance, my credit score stays artificially low. I've been denied legitimate credit applications- cards I needed, loans I qualified for - all because of accounts that aren't even mine.\n\nWhen I do get approved for something, I'm charged interest rates that are way higher than what I should be paying. That's real money coming out of my pocket every month because Equifax won't follow the law.\n\nI've faced embarrassment applying for housing. I had to explain to landlords why my credit looks bad, knowing the whole time that it's because of fraudulent information that a credit bureau is illegally keeping on my file.\n\nThis situation has caused me genuine stress and frustration. I wake up thinking about it. I've spent hours dealing with this - hours I could have spent with my family or focusing on my work. It goes far beyond a \" clerical error. '' This has real effects on my daily life and financial stability.\n\nWHY I'M COMING TO THE CFPB : I've acted in good faith throughout this entire process. I filed my dispute properly. I sent documentation. I gave them the legal timeframe to investigate. I followed every rule.\n\nEquifax has failed to do the same. They've ignored their legal obligations under the FCRA, and they're continuing to harm me by keeping inaccurate information on my report.\n\nI'm now asking for the CFPB 's intervention because this is exactly why your agency exists- to protect consumers when credit bureaus refuse to follow federal law. I need you to ensure compliance and stop this ongoing harm.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-13T00:57:29.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33607","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17206293","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-13T00:45:37.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I wasn't just making a casual complaint - I sent them everything they needed, including my Police Report ( <em>Case</em> No. XXXX ), which is official documentation proving these accounts aren't mine.\n\nThat was over 30 days ago. <em>More</em> than enough time for them to <em>investigate</em> and fix this. But when I checked my credit report recently, nothing has changed. The unauthorized information is still there, still damaging my credit, still affecting my life.\n\nThis isn't just a delay or an oversight anymore."],"issue":["Problem with a company's <em>investigation</em> into an existing problem"],"sub_issue":["<em>Investigation</em> took <em>more</em> than 30 days"]},"sort":[9.986512,"17206293"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6917662","_score":9.926019,"_source":{"product":"Checking or savings account","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX Problem repeated XX/XX/XXXX XXXX Print complaint OPEN Submitted STATUS Submitted to the CFPB on XX/XX/XXXX PRODUCT Checking or savings account ISSUE Managing an account We received your complaint. Thank you. \n\nWe will review your complaint. Depending on what we find, we will typically : Send your complaint to the company for a response ; or Send your complaint to another state or federal agency, or help you get in touch with your state or local consumer protection office ; or Let you know if we need more information to continue our work. \nYOUR COMPLAINT When bank didnt cancel the fraudulent duplicate payment criminally processed through my account or through technical error, I called and informed them of such lack of oversight on XX/XX/XXXX. I received a nonsensical approach to the matter that diverted from their normal business practices that requested that I call back once the transaction was done processing after a week. There are different categories of bank accounts and such balances required do not always exceed {$15000.00}. However, in my case, two duplicate charges of {$10000.00} usually causes a phone call or something more extreme, such as cancelling or voiding the transaction, which can also upset me when the transactions are intended. However, in this case they were not and they expected me to simply mask this lack of oversight and support with requesting that I call the lender to request a refund of the duplicate charge. The lender in question is never interested in such since this is not the first time that the lender has received more than two payments exceeding three to four times the minimum amount due. Furthermore, the following messages were also sent to XXXX. -- -- -- -- -- Forwarded message -- -- -- -- -- From : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : Friday, XX/XX/XXXX Subject : Frequency of Cyber-Enabled Financial Crimes Fraud After Filing Reports with CFPB To : XXXX XXXX : XXXX, XXXX Good morning, Bank of America would not dispute the transaction according to normal business conduct, instead they are waiting a week and my concern is that they will not put their response in any type of writing, reflecting past criminal activities where my account was affected in this manner that resembled sting operation training with no basis for prosecution rather than just going through the process in form, and in the meantime ensuring the consequences of such misuse to my account, which would include, rejecting any transactions coming through to my account. Thank you for your attention. Respectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX -- -- -- -- -- Forwarded message -- -- -- -- - From : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : Fri, XXXX XXXX, XXXX at XXXX Subject : Re : Your available account balance is low To : XXXX, XXXX Good morning, This message is to report that when I called at approximately XXXX AM PST that Bank of America customer service agaiXXXX misinformed me that the second duplicate Online Bill Payment in the amount of {$10000.00} that was pending on XX/XX/XXXX could not be disputed although it cleared this morning on XX/XX/XXXX. It was communicated to me on XX/XX/XXXX that once the transaction cleared, that it could be disputed. Having XXXX simply refund the amount only looks as if I overpaid any amount due, which would be the case, and would not treat the transaction as a fraudulent transaction or technological error, both produced through Bank of America in their error, including allowing a third party to access online bill pay for such illegal means, while making it difficult to access such online features for myself. This type of activity would not be new to Bank of America, as reported yesterday. -- -- -- -- -- Forwarded message -- -- -- -- - From : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date : Thu, XXXX XXXX, XXXX at XXXX Subject : Re : Frequency of Cyber-Enabled Financial Crimes Fraud After Filing Reports with CFPB To : XXXX Cc : XXXX, XXXX Good afternoon, Please see the attached picture of such duplicate transaction created by the fraudulent security project. Again the concern here is moving me to the front of the line for an activity that I would otherwise be selected for at random, and having the ability to do that numerous times. Thank you. Respectfully, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX On Thu, XXXX XXXX, XXXX at XXXX Vernica XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote : Good afternoon, The following incidents were reported to the CFPB, and the fraudulence in such arising security projects, aside from aggressive tactics in other forms, arose right before the third incident, while evidence that such predatory practices of illegitimate purposes were well underway and within the timeline of activities in corresponding services made through the bank and the CFPB after the second incident. At this point, after the lack of success involving the third incident, and other activities associated with my CFPB account that remained unresolved or temporarily, such as the XXXX XXXX case that was overturned and reinvestigated several times or the XXXX XXXX case that did not go anywhere, I do not believe that initiating an additional case with the CFPB will be successful but that this activity, as the FTC states is within the role of such bureau to receive, even if ineffective or damaging to the claimant. The fraudulent security project that took a retaliatory step in including my account for such reason now a fourth time, with the third time being the time that I had to open a new checking account to have my funds transferred from this account, because such fraudulent security projects involved me in their investigation scams and fr [ oze ] my funds outside of any legitimate investigation leading to prosecution, and such has been the case since XXXX, aside from allowing the mismanagement of my information for inspection by XXXX XXXX representatives for inclusion in their advertising and marketing events. I have completely no knowledge. They all come across as legitimate bank errors or security investigations, i.e. when law enforcement seizes funds under a legitimate investigation. However, there is no reason for prosecution, and I have waited for such prosecution and none occurred. ( XXXX ) My current account allowed the [ Dept of Education ] to withdraw a payment not within the terms of my contract that placed it into an overdrawn status without notification that such occurred ; Bank of America and the Department of Education would have records of the transaction that was in dispute around XXXX. ( 2 ) My current account was frozen sometime between XXXX XXXX ; Bank of America would have information on the first seizure ( freezing ) of the account. ( 3 ) At the time my current account had to be closed because the funds were frozen and were allowed to be released into a different bank account ; Even in the case where I was told I needed to transfer to a new bank account, when it came time to dispute the related charges for such recommended activity because the bank could not protect my information, they then spoke in the context that I had freely selected such action outside of the context for the reason of opening such account, i.e. irrespective of the fraudulent temporary seizure of my funds. Bank of America would have records of the seizure affecting my current account and the date the second account was opened ( 4 ) XX/XX/XXXX : The second duplicate bill pay transaction was a product of a technical error that I believe was produced out of malic [ e ] and fraud related to the credit condition that would stand after its payment, and that because such stance would be positive, such error was created to create a delinquent view o [ f my ] finances. When I called the customer service center twice, I was not able to quickly report and process this second transaction, and was juggled not only by the automated answering service, but I also experienced technical errors when speaking to both customer service agents, one in that the first could not hear me and needed each piece of information duplicated and the second stated that she could simply not dispute the second bill pay amount. Bank of America, NXXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX, would have information regarding the XX/XX/XXXX transaction in dispute. Technical Errors Affecting Routing of Calling System I received fast busy signals XXXX times when calling the XXXX and was automatically treated like a regular bank account status request call instead of a transaction dispute or security and fraud investigation request. https : XXXX Report fraudulent or suspicious activity Credit card charges Log into Online Banking and follow the instructions. ATM or debit charges XXXX Mortgage accounts XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( local time ) Home equity accounts XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( local time ) Online Banking XXXX All other XXXX XXXX ( international collect ; cell phone roaming charges may apply ) MonFri XXXX XXXX XXXX ( local time ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( local time ) Spanish XXXX MonFri XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( local time ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( local time ) I was offered the following phone number for Online Bill Pay Fraud, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and such number was never disclosed on the Bank of America website, and this may be the number that the first and second customer service agent transferred me to, but I could not connect to a live person to explain my dispute through their transfer, or through calling the numbers associated with Online Bill Pay through either of those means. The second phone number that she provided during the second customer service call was XXXX and such number presented the same prompts as XXXX XXXX XXXX before it attempted to direct me to the general account services phone number voice prompts, and then it did. I could not receive adequate support for this specific issue on the account. I received the same type of general account services support that I would receive for a debit card transaction that did not apply to this transaction, and not one that would go into specific detail about the fraudulent security project that took a retaliatory step in including my account for such reason now a fourth time, with the third time being the time that I had to open a new checking account to have my funds transferred from this account, because such fraudulent security projects involved me in their investigation scams and fr [ oze ] my funds outside of any legitimate investigation leading to prosecution, and such has been the case since XXXX, aside from allowing the mismanagement of my information for inspection by XXXX XXXX representatives for inclusion in their advertising and marketing events. Notice : This message and any attachments may only be intended for the named and/ or addressed recipient ( s ). Its contents ( including any attachments ) may be legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure by law, confidential and/or proprietary information about XXXX, or its customers, which XXXX, does not intend to disclose to the public. Unauthorized use, copying, distribution or disclosure of any of it may be unlawful and is strictly prohibited. The owner of this account assumes no responsibility to persons other than the intended named and addressed recipient ( s ), no responsibility to any persons in cases of unsolicited electronic junk or spam messages sent using the address of this account or use of the account without authorization of its owner, and does not accept liability for any errors or omissions which are a result of email transmission. If you have received this message by mistake, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and confirm that the original message and any attachments and copies have been destroyed and deleted from your system. \n\nView full complaint Sent to company STATUS Sent to company on XX/XX/XXXX We've sent your complaint to the company, and we will let you know when they respond. \n\nTheir response should include the steps they took, or will take, to address your complaint. \n\nCompanies generally respond in 15 days. In some cases, the company will let you know their response is in progress and provide a final response in 60 days.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-05-02T17:50:12.000Z","issue":"Managing an account","sub_product":"Checking account","zip_code":"91789","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6917662","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2023-05-02T17:46:37.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Banking errors"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Their response <em>should</em> include the steps they took, or will take, to address your complaint. \n\nCompanies generally respond in 15 days. In some <em>cases</em>, the company will let you know their response is in progress and provide a final response in 60 days."]},"sort":[9.926019,"6917662"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7624637","_score":9.879448,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This organization is in violation of the following laws : 15 Usc 1681 which states- ( a ) Accuracy and fairness of credit reporting The Congress makes the following findings : ( 1 ) The banking system is dependent upon fair and accurate credit reporting. Inaccurate credit reports directly impair the efficiency of the banking system, and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the public confidence which is essential to the continued functioning of the banking system.\n\n( 2 ) An elaborate mechanism has been developed for investigating and evaluating the credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, and general reputation of consumers.\n\n( 3 ) Consumer reporting agencies have assumed a vital role in assembling and evaluating consumer credit and other information on consumers.\n\n( 4 ) There is a need to insure that consumer reporting agencies exercise their grave responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and a respect for the consumers right to privacy.\n\n( b ) Reasonable procedures It is the purpose of this subchapter to require that consumer reporting agencies adopt reasonable procedures for meeting the needs of commerce for consumer credit, personnel, insurance, and other information in a manner which is fair and equitable to the consumer, with regard to the confidentiality, accuracy, relevancy, and proper utilization of such information in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter.\n\n12 CFR 1016.7 which states- ( 1 ) Form of opt out notice. If you are required to provide an opt out notice under 1016.10 ( a ), you must provide a clear and conspicuous notice to each of your consumers that accurately explains the right to opt out under that section. The notice must state : ( i ) That you disclose or reserve the right to disclose nonpublic personal information about your consumer to a nonaffiliated third party ; ( ii ) That the consumer has the right to opt out of that disclosure; and ( iii ) A reasonable means by which the consumer may exercise the opt out right.\n\n( 2 ) Examples ( i ) Adequate opt out notice. You provide adequate notice that the consumer can opt out of the disclosure of nonpublic personal information to a nonaffiliated third party if you : ( A ) Identify all of the categories of nonpublic personal information that you disclose or reserve the right to disclose, and all of the categories of nonaffiliated third parties to which you disclose the information, as described in 1016.6 ( a ) ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) of this part, and state that the consumer can opt out of the disclosure of that information; and ( B ) Identify the financial products or services that the consumer obtains from you, either singly or jointly, to which the opt out direction would apply.\n\n( ii ) Reasonable opt out means. You provide a reasonable means to exercise an opt out right if you : ( A ) Designate check-off boxes in a prominent position on the relevant forms with the opt out notice ; ( B ) Include a reply form together with the opt out notice that, in the case of financial institutions described in 1016.3 ( l ) ( 3 ) of this part, includes the address to which the form should be mailed ; ( C ) Provide an electronic means to opt out, such as a form that can be sent via electronic mail or a process at your Web site, if the consumer agrees to the electronic delivery of information ; or ( D ) Provide a toll-free telephone number that consumers may call to opt out.\n\n( iii ) Unreasonable opt out means. You do not provide a reasonable means of opting out if : ( A ) The only means of opting out is for the consumer to write his or her own letter to exercise that opt out right; or ( B ) The only means of opting out as described in any notice subsequent to the initial notice is to use a check-off box that you provided with the initial notice but did not include with the subsequent notice.\n\n( iv ) Specific opt out means. You may require each consumer to opt out through a specific means, as long as that means is reasonable for that consumer.\n\n( b ) Same form as initial notice permitted. You may provide the opt out notice together with or on the same written or electronic form as the initial notice you provide in accordance with 1016.4.\n\n( c ) Initial notice required when opt out notice delivered subsequent to initial notice. If you provide the opt out notice later than required for the initial notice in accordance with 1016.4 of this part, you must also include a copy of the initial notice with the opt out notice in writing or, if the consumer agrees, electronically.\n\n( d ) Joint relationships in the case of financial institutions other than credit unions and covered entities subject to FTC enforcement jurisdiction. For purposes of this paragraph ( d ), you is limited to financial institutions other than credit unions and financial institutions described in 1016.3 ( l ) ( 3 ) of this part.\n\n( 1 ) If two or more consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service from you, you may provide a single opt out notice. Your opt out notice must explain how you will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in paragraph ( d ) ( 5 ) of this section ).\n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out. You may either : ( i ) Treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer as applying to all of the associated joint consumers; or ( ii ) Permit each joint consumer to opt out separately.\n\n( 3 ) If you permit each joint consumer to opt out separately, you must permit one of the joint consumers to opt out on behalf of all of the joint consumers. \n\n( 4 ) You may not require all joint consumers to opt out before you implement any opt out direction. \n\n( 5 ) Example. If XXXX and XXXX have a joint checking account with you and arrange for you to send statements to XXXX 's address, you may do any of the following, but you must explain in your opt out notice which opt out policy you will follow : ( i ) Send a single opt out notice to XXXX 's address, but you must accept an opt out direction from either XXXX or XXXX. \n\n( ii ) Treat an opt out direction by either XXXX or XXXX as applying to the entire account. If you do so, and XXXX opts out, you may not require XXXX to opt out as well before implementing XXXX 's opt out direction. \n\n( iii ) Permit XXXX and XXXX to make different opt out directions. If you do so : ( A ) You must permit XXXX and XXXX to opt out for each other; ( B ) If both opt out, you must permit both to notify you in a single response ( such as on a form or through a telephone call ) ; and ( C ) If XXXX opts out and XXXX does not, you may only disclose nonpublic personal information about XXXX, but not about XXXX and not about XXXX and XXXX jointly. \n\n( e ) Joint relationships in the case of credit unions.\n\n( 1 ) If two or more consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service, other than a loan, from a credit union, the credit union may provide only a single opt out notice. The opt out notice must explain how the credit union will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in the examples in paragraph ( e ) ( 5 ) of this section ).\n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out. A credit union may either : ( i ) Treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer to apply to all of the associated joint consumers; or ( ii ) Permit each joint consumer to opt out separately.\n\n( 3 ) If a credit union permits each joint consumer to opt out separately, the credit union must permit one of the joint consumers to opt out on behalf of all of the joint consumers.\n\n( 4 ) A credit union may not require all joint consumers to opt out before the credit union implements any opt out direction. \n\n( 5 ) Example. If XXXX and XXXX have a joint share account with a credit union and arrange for the credit union to send statements to XXXX 's address, the credit union may do any of the following, but it must explain in its opt out notice which opt out policy it will follow : ( i ) Send a single opt out notice to XXXX 's address, but it must accept an opt out direction from either XXXX or XXXX. \n\n( ii ) Treat an opt out direction by either XXXX or XXXX as applying to the entire account. If it does so, and XXXX opts out, it may not require XXXX to opt out as well before implementing XXXX 's opt out direction. \n\n( iii ) Permit John and XXXX to make different opt out directions. If it does so, and if XXXX and XXXX both opt out, it must permit one or both of them to notify it in a single response ( such as on a form or through a telephone call ). \n\n( 6 ) Special rule for loans. \n\n( i ) A credit union is required to provide an initial opt out notice to a borrower or guarantor on a loan if it shares his or her nonpublic personal information with nonaffiliated third parties other than for purposes under 1016.13, 1016.14, and 1016.15. \n\n( ii ) A credit union may satisfy its annual opt out notice requirement by providing one notice to those borrowers and guarantors jointly. \n\n( f ) Joint relationships in the case of covered entities subject to FTC enforcement jurisdiction. For purposes of this paragraph ( f ), you is limited to the financial institutions described in 1016.3 ( l ) ( 3 ). \n\n( 1 ) If two or more consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service from you, you may provide a single opt out notice, unless one or more of those consumers requests a separate opt out notice. Your opt out notice must explain how you will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in paragraph ( f ) ( 5 ) of this section ).\n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out. You may either : ( i ) Treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer as applying to all of the associated joint consumers; or ( ii ) Permit each joint consumer to opt out separately.\n\n( 3 ) If you permit each joint consumer to opt out separately, you must permit one of the joint consumers to opt out on behalf of all of the joint consumers.\n\n( 4 ) You may not require all joint consumers to opt out before you implement any opt out direction. \n\n( 5 ) Example. If XXXX and XXXX have a joint credit card account with you and arrange for you to send statements to XXXX 's address, you may do any of the following, but you must explain in your opt out notice which opt out policy you will follow : ( i ) Send a single opt out notice to XXXX 's address, but you must accept an opt out direction from either XXXX or XXXX. \n\n( ii ) Treat an opt out direction by either XXXX or XXXX as applying to the entire account. If you do so, and XXXX opts out, you may not require XXXX to opt out as well before implementing XXXXXXXX XXXX opt out direction. \n\n( iii ) Permit XXXX and XXXX to make different opt out directions. If you do so : ( A ) You must permit XXXX and XXXX to opt out for each other; ( B ) If both opt out, you must permit both to notify you in a single response ( such as on a form or through a telephone call ) ; and ( C ) If XXXX opts out and XXXX does not, you may only disclose nonpublic personal information about XXXX, but not about XXXX and not about XXXX and XXXX jointly. \n\n( g ) Time to comply with opt out. You must comply with a consumer 's opt out direction as soon as reasonably practicable after you receive it. \n\n( h ) Continuing right to opt out. A consumer may exercise the right to opt out at any time. \n\n( i ) Duration of consumer 's opt out direction. \n\n( 1 ) A consumer 's direction to opt out under this section is effective until the consumer revokes it in writing or, if the consumer agrees, electronically. \n\n( 2 ) When a customer relationship terminates, the customer 's opt out direction continues to apply to the nonpublic personal information that you collected during or related to that relationship. If the individual subsequently establishes a new customer relationship with you, the opt out direction that applied to the former relationship does not apply to the new relationship. \n\n( j ) Delivery. When you are required to deliver an opt out notice by this section, you must deliver it according to 1016.9 of this part. \n\n( k ) Model privacy form. Pursuant to 1016.2 ( a ) of this part, a model privacy form that meets the notice content requirements of this section is included in the appendix to this part.\n\n15 USC 1681e which states ( a ) Identity and purposes of credit users Every consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable procedures designed to avoid violations of section 1681c of this title and to limit the furnishing of consumer reports to the purposes listed under section 1681b of this title. These procedures shall require that prospective users of the information identify themselves, certify the purposes for which the information is sought, and certify that the information will be used for no other purpose. Every consumer reporting agency shall make a reasonable effort to verify the identity of a new prospective user and the uses certified by such prospective user prior to furnishing such user a consumer report. No consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report to any person if it has reasonable grounds for believing that the consumer report will not be used for a purpose listed in section 1681b of this title.\n\n( b ) Accuracy of report Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates.\n\n( c ) Disclosure of consumer reports by users allowed A consumer reporting agency may not prohibit a user of a consumer report furnished by the agency on a consumer from disclosing the contents of the report to the consumer, if adverse action against the consumer has been taken by the user based in whole or in part on the report.\n\n( d ) Notice to users and furnishers of information ( 1 ) Notice requirement A consumer reporting agency shall provide to any person ( A ) who regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to the agency with respect to any consumer ; or ( B ) to whom a consumer report is provided by the agency ; a notice of such persons responsibilities under this subchapter.\n\n( 2 ) Content of notice The Bureau shall prescribe the content of notices under paragraph ( 1 ), and a consumer reporting agency shall be in compliance with this subsection if it provides a notice under paragraph ( 1 ) that is substantially similar to the Bureau prescription under this paragraph.\n\n( e ) Procurement of consumer report for resale ( 1 ) Disclosure A person may not procure a consumer report for purposes of reselling the report ( or any information in the report ) unless the person discloses to the consumer reporting agency that originally furnishes the report ( A ) the identity of the end-user of the report ( or information ) ; and ( B ) each permissible purpose under section 1681b of this title for which the report is furnished to the end-user of the report ( or information ).\n\n( 2 ) Responsibilities of procurers for resale A person who procures a consumer report for purposes of reselling the report ( or any information in the report ) shall ( A ) establish and comply with reasonable procedures designed to ensure that the report ( or information ) is resold by the person only for a purpose for which the report may be furnished under section 1681b of this title, including by requiring that each person to which the report ( or information ) is resold and that resells or provides the report ( or information ) to any other person ( i ) identifies each end user of the resold report ( or information ) ; ( ii ) certifies each purpose for which the report ( or information ) will be used ; and ( iii ) certifies that the report ( or information ) will be used for no other purpose ; and ( B ) before reselling the report, make reasonable efforts to verify the identifications and certifications made under subparagraph ( A ).\n\n( 3 ) Resale of consumer report to a Federal agency or department Notwithstanding paragraph ( 1 ) or ( 2 ), a person who procures a consumer report for purposes of reselling the report ( or any information in the report ) shall not disclose the identity of the end-user of the report under paragraph ( 1 ) or ( 2 ) if ( A ) the end user is an agency or department of the United States Government which procures the report from the person for purposes of determining the eligibility of the consumer concerned to receive access or continued access to classified information ( as defined in section 1681b ( b ) ( 4 ) ( E ) ( i ) [ 1 ] of this title ) ; and ( B ) the agency or department certifies in writing to the person reselling the report that nondisclosure is necessary to protect classified information or the safety of persons employed by or contracting with, or undergoing investigation for work or contracting with the agency or department.\n\n15 USC 1681c which states ( a ) Information excluded from consumer reports Except as authorized under subsection ( b ), no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information : ( 1 ) Cases under title 11 or under the Bankruptcy Act that, from the date of entry of the order for relief or the date of adjudication, as the case may be, antedate the report by more than 10 years.\n\n( 2 ) Civil suits, civil judgments, and records of arrest that, from date of entry, antedate the report by more than seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period.\n\n( 3 ) Paid tax liens which, from date of payment, antedate the report by more than seven years.\n\n( 4 ) Accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss which antedate the report by more than seven years.\n\n( 5 ) Any other adverse item of information, other than records of convictions of crimes which antedates the report by more than seven years.\n\n( 6 ) The name, address, and telephone number of any medical information furnisher that has notified the agency of its status, unless ( A ) such name, address, and telephone number are restricted or reported using codes that do not identify, or provide information sufficient to infer, the specific provider or the nature of such services, products, or devices to a person other than the consumer; or ( B ) the report is being provided to an insurance company for a purpose relating to engaging in the business of insurance other than property and casualty insurance.\n\n( 7 ) With respect to a consumer reporting agency described in section 1681a ( p ) of this title, any information related to a veterans medical debt if the date on which the hospital care, medical services, or extended care services was rendered relating to the debt antedates the report by less than 1 year if the consumer reporting agency has actual knowledge that the information is related to a veterans medical debt and the consumer reporting agency is in compliance with its obligation under section 302 ( c ) ( 5 ) of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act.\n\n( 8 ) With respect to a consumer reporting agency described in section 1681a ( p ) of this title, any information related to a fully paid or settled veterans medical debt that had been characterized as delinquent, charged off, or in collection if the consumer reporting agency has actual knowledge that the information is related to a veterans medical debt and the consumer reporting agency is in compliance with its obligation under section 302 ( c ) ( 5 ) of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act.\n\n( b ) Exempted cases The provisions of paragraphs ( 1 ) through ( 5 ) of subsection ( a ) are not applicable in the case of any consumer credit report to be used in connection with ( 1 ) a credit transaction involving, or which may reasonably be expected to involve, a principal amount of {$150000.00} or more ; ( 2 ) the underwriting of life insurance involving, or which may reasonably be expected to involve, a face amount of {$150000.00} or more; or ( 3 ) the employment of any individual at an annual salary which equals, or which may reasonably be expected to equal {$75000.00}, or more.\n\n( c ) Running of reporting period ( 1 ) In general The 7-year period referred to in paragraphs ( 4 ) and ( 6 ) of subsection ( a ) shall begin, with respect to any delinquent account that is placed for collection ( internally or by referral to a third party, whichever is earlier ), charged to profit and loss, or subjected to any similar action, upon the expiration of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the commencement of the delinquency which immediately preceded the collection activity, charge to profit and loss, or similar action. \n\n( 2 ) Effective date Paragraph ( 1 ) shall apply only to items of information added to the file of a consumer on or after the date that is 455 days after XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n( d ) Information required to be disclosed ( 1 ) Title 11 information Any consumer reporting agency that furnishes a consumer report that contains information regarding any case involving the consumer that arises under title 11 shall include in the report an identification of the chapter of such title 11 under which such case arises if provided by the source of the information. If any case arising or filed under title 11 is withdrawn by the consumer before a final judgment, the consumer reporting agency shall include in the report that such case or filing was withdrawn upon receipt of documentation certifying such withdrawal. \n\n( 2 ) Key factor in credit score information Any consumer reporting agency that furnishes a consumer report that contains any credit score or any other risk score or predictor on any consumer shall include in the report a clear and conspicuous statement that a key factor ( as defined in section 1681g ( f ) ( 2 ) ( B ) of this title ) that adversely affected such score or predictor was the number of enquiries, if such a predictor was in fact a key factor that adversely affected such score. This paragraph shall not apply to a check services company, acting as such, which issues authorizations for the purpose of approving or processing negotiable instruments, electronic fund transfers, or similar methods of payments, but only to the extent that such company is engaged in such activities. \n\n( e ) Indication of closure of account by consumer If a consumer reporting agency is notified pursuant to section 1681s2 ( a ) ( 4 ) of this title that a credit account of a consumer was voluntarily closed by the consumer, the agency shall indicate that fact in any consumer report that includes information related to the account.\n\n( f ) Indication of dispute by consumer If a consumer reporting agency is notified pursuant to section 1681s2 ( a ) ( 3 ) of this title that information regarding a consumer who [ 1 ] was furnished to the agency is disputed by the consumer, the agency shall indicate that fact in each consumer report that includes the disputed information.\n\n( g ) Truncation of credit card and debit card numbers ( 1 ) In general Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, no person that accepts credit cards or debit cards for the transaction of business shall print more than the last 5 digits of the card number or the expiration date upon any receipt provided to the cardholder at the point of the sale or transaction.\n\n( 2 ) Limitation This subsection shall apply only to receipts that are electronically printed, and shall not apply to transactions in which the sole means of recording a credit card or debit card account number is by handwriting or by an imprint or copy of the card. \n\n( 3 ) Effective date This subsection shall become effective ( A ) 3 years after XX/XX/XXXX, with respect to any cash register or other machine or device that electronically prints receipts for credit card or debit card transactions that is in use before XX/XX/XXXX ; and ( B ) 1 year after XX/XX/XXXX, with respect to any cash register or other machine or device that electronically prints receipts for credit card or debit card transactions that is first put into use on or after XX/XX/XXXX. \n( h ) Notice of discrepancy in address ( 1 ) In general If a person has requested a consumer report relating to a consumer from a consumer reporting agency described in section 1681a ( p ) of this title, the request includes an address for the consumer that substantially differs from the addresses in the file of the consumer, and the agency provides a consumer report in response to the request, the consumer reporting agency shall notify the requester of the existence of the discrepancy.\n\n( 2 ) Regulations ( A ) Regulations required The Bureau shall,, [ 2 ] in consultation with the Federal banking agencies, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and the Federal Trade Commission,, [ 2 ] prescribe regulations providing guidance regarding reasonable policies and procedures that a user of a consumer report should employ when such user has received a notice of discrepancy under paragraph ( 1 ). \n\n( B ) Policies and procedures to be included The regulations prescribed under subparagraph ( A ) shall describe reasonable policies and procedures for use by a user of a consumer report ( i ) to form a reasonable belief that the user knows the identity of the person to whom the consumer report pertains; and ( ii ) if the user establishes a continuing relationship with the consumer, and the user regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to the consumer reporting agency from which the notice of discrepancy pertaining to the consumer was obtained, to reconcile the address of the consumer with the consumer reporting agency by furnishing such address to such consumer reporting agency as part of information regularly furnished by the user for the period in which the relationship is established. \n15 USC 1681s 2 ( A ) 1 Which states - ( a ) Duty of furnishers of information to provide accurate information ( 1 ) Prohibition ( A ) Reporting information with actual knowledge of errors A person shall not furnish any information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting agency if the person knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the information is inaccurate.\n\n15 USC 1681C ( a ) ( 5 ) - Any other adverse item of information, other than records of convictions of crimes which antedates the report by more than seven years.\n\n15 USC 6802 ( b ) ( c ) - the consumer is given an explanation of how the consumer can exercise that nondisclosure option.\n\n15 USC 1681 section 604 a section 2- allows CRAs to furnish consumer reports in accord with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates 15 USC 6801- ( a ) Privacy obligation policy It is the policy of the Congress that each financial institution has an affirmative and continuing obligation to respect the privacy of its customers and to protect the security and confidentiality of those customers nonpublic personal information.\n\n( b ) Financial institutions safeguards In furtherance of the policy in subsection ( a ), each agency or authority described in section 6805 ( a ) of this title, other than the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, shall establish appropriate standards for the financial institutions subject to their jurisdiction relating to administrative, technical, and physical safeguards ( 1 ) to insure the security and confidentiality of customer records and information ; ( 2 ) to protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such records ; and ( 3 ) to protect against unauthorized access to or use of such records or information which could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-09-28T21:18:48.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"389XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7624637","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2023-09-28T21:18:43.000Z","state":"MS","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["( 1 ) If two or <em>more</em> consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service from you, you may provide a single opt out notice, unless one or <em>more</em> of <em>those</em> consumers requests a separate opt out notice. Your opt out notice must explain how you will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in paragraph ( f ) ( 5 ) of this section ).\n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out."]},"sort":[9.879448,"7624637"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7617978","_score":9.879448,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This organization is in violation of the following laws : 15 Usc 1681 which states- ( a ) Accuracy and fairness of credit reporting The Congress makes the following findings : ( 1 ) The banking system is dependent upon fair and accurate credit reporting. Inaccurate credit reports directly impair the efficiency of the banking system, and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the public confidence which is essential to the continued functioning of the banking system.\n\n( 2 ) An elaborate mechanism has been developed for investigating and evaluating the credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, and general reputation of consumers.\n\n( 3 ) Consumer reporting agencies have assumed a vital role in assembling and evaluating consumer credit and other information on consumers.\n\n( 4 ) There is a need to insure that consumer reporting agencies exercise their grave responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and a respect for the consumers right to privacy.\n\n( b ) Reasonable procedures It is the purpose of this subchapter to require that consumer reporting agencies adopt reasonable procedures for meeting the needs of commerce for consumer credit, personnel, insurance, and other information in a manner which is fair and equitable to the consumer, with regard to the confidentiality, accuracy, relevancy, and proper utilization of such information in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter.\n\n12 CFR 1016.7 which states- ( 1 ) Form of opt out notice. If you are required to provide an opt out notice under 1016.10 ( a ), you must provide a clear and conspicuous notice to each of your consumers that accurately explains the right to opt out under that section. The notice must state : ( i ) That you disclose or reserve the right to disclose nonpublic personal information about your consumer to a nonaffiliated third party ; ( ii ) That the consumer has the right to opt out of that disclosure; and ( iii ) A reasonable means by which the consumer may exercise the opt out right.\n\n( 2 ) Examples ( i ) Adequate opt out notice. You provide adequate notice that the consumer can opt out of the disclosure of nonpublic personal information to a nonaffiliated third party if you : ( A ) Identify all of the categories of nonpublic personal information that you disclose or reserve the right to disclose, and all of the categories of nonaffiliated third parties to which you disclose the information, as described in 1016.6 ( a ) ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) of this part, and state that the consumer can opt out of the disclosure of that information; and ( B ) Identify the financial products or services that the consumer obtains from you, either singly or jointly, to which the opt out direction would apply.\n\n( ii ) Reasonable opt out means. You provide a reasonable means to exercise an opt out right if you : ( A ) Designate check-off boxes in a prominent position on the relevant forms with the opt out notice ; ( B ) Include a reply form together with the opt out notice that, in the case of financial institutions described in 1016.3 ( l ) ( 3 ) of this part, includes the address to which the form should be mailed ; ( C ) Provide an electronic means to opt out, such as a form that can be sent via electronic mail or a process at your Web site, if the consumer agrees to the electronic delivery of information ; or ( D ) Provide a toll-free telephone number that consumers may call to opt out.\n\n( iii ) Unreasonable opt out means. You do not provide a reasonable means of opting out if : ( A ) The only means of opting out is for the consumer to write his or her own letter to exercise that opt out right; or ( B ) The only means of opting out as described in any notice subsequent to the initial notice is to use a check-off box that you provided with the initial notice but did not include with the subsequent notice.\n\n( iv ) Specific opt out means. You may require each consumer to opt out through a specific means, as long as that means is reasonable for that consumer.\n\n( b ) Same form as initial notice permitted. You may provide the opt out notice together with or on the same written or electronic form as the initial notice you provide in accordance with 1016.4.\n\n( c ) Initial notice required when opt out notice delivered subsequent to initial notice. If you provide the opt out notice later than required for the initial notice in accordance with 1016.4 of this part, you must also include a copy of the initial notice with the opt out notice in writing or, if the consumer agrees, electronically.\n\n( d ) Joint relationships in the case of financial institutions other than credit unions and covered entities subject to FTC enforcement jurisdiction. For purposes of this paragraph ( d ), you is limited to financial institutions other than credit unions and financial institutions described in 1016.3 ( l ) ( 3 ) of this part.\n\n( 1 ) If two or more consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service from you, you may provide a single opt out notice. Your opt out notice must explain how you will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in paragraph ( d ) ( 5 ) of this section ).\n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out. You may either : ( i ) Treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer as applying to all of the associated joint consumers; or ( ii ) Permit each joint consumer to opt out separately.\n\n( 3 ) If you permit each joint consumer to opt out separately, you must permit one of the joint consumers to opt out on behalf of all of the joint consumers. \n\n( 4 ) You may not require all joint consumers to opt out before you implement any opt out direction. \n\n( 5 ) Example. If XXXX and XXXX have a joint checking account with you and arrange for you to send statements to XXXXXXXX XXXX  address, you may do any of the following, but you must explain in your opt out notice which opt out policy you will follow : ( i ) Send a single opt out notice to XXXXXXXX XXXX address, but you must accept an opt out direction from either XXXX or XXXX. \n\n( ii ) Treat an opt out direction by either XXXX or XXXX as applying to the entire account. If you do so, and XXXX opts out, you may not require XXXX to opt out as well before implementing XXXXXXXX XXXX opt out direction. \n\n( iii ) Permit XXXX and XXXX to make different opt out directions. If you do so : ( A ) You must permit XXXX and XXXX to opt out for each other; ( B ) If both opt out, you must permit both to notify you in a single response ( such as on a form or through a telephone call ) ; and ( C ) If XXXX opts out and XXXX does not, you may only disclose nonpublic personal information about XXXX, but not about XXXX and not about XXXX and XXXX jointly. \n\n( e ) Joint relationships in the case of credit unions. \n\n( 1 ) If two or more consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service, other than a loan, from a credit union, the credit union may provide only a single opt out notice. The opt out notice must explain how the credit union will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in the examples in paragraph ( e ) ( 5 ) of this section ). \n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out. A credit union may either : ( i ) Treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer to apply to all of the associated joint consumers; or ( ii ) Permit each joint consumer to opt out separately. \n\n( 3 ) If a credit union permits each joint consumer to opt out separately, the credit union must permit one of the joint consumers to opt out on behalf of all of the joint consumers.\n\n( 4 ) A credit union may not require all joint consumers to opt out before the credit union implements any opt out direction. \n\n( 5 ) Example. If XXXX and XXXX have a joint share account with a credit union and arrange for the credit union to send statements to XXXX 's address, the credit union may do any of the following, but it must explain in its opt out notice which opt out policy it will follow : ( i ) Send a single opt out notice to XXXX 's address, but it must accept an opt out direction from either XXXX or XXXX. \n\n( ii ) Treat an opt out direction by either XXXX or XXXX as applying to the entire account. If it does so, and XXXX opts out, it may not require XXXX to opt out as well before implementing XXXX 's opt out direction. \n\n( iii ) Permit XXXX and XXXX to make different opt out directions. If it does so, and if XXXX and XXXX both opt out, it must permit one or both of them to notify it in a single response ( such as on a form or through a telephone call ). \n\n( 6 ) Special rule for loans. \n\n( i ) A credit union is required to provide an initial opt out notice to a borrower or guarantor on a loan if it shares his or her nonpublic personal information with nonaffiliated third parties other than for purposes under 1016.13, 1016.14, and 1016.15. \n\n( ii ) A credit union may satisfy its annual opt out notice requirement by providing one notice to those borrowers and guarantors jointly. \n\n( f ) Joint relationships in the case of covered entities subject to FTC enforcement jurisdiction. For purposes of this paragraph ( f ), you is limited to the financial institutions described in 1016.3 ( l ) ( 3 ). \n\n( 1 ) If two or more consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service from you, you may provide a single opt out notice, unless one or more of those consumers requests a separate opt out notice. Your opt out notice must explain how you will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in paragraph ( f ) ( 5 ) of this section ).\n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out. You may either : ( i ) Treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer as applying to all of the associated joint consumers; or ( ii ) Permit each joint consumer to opt out separately.\n\n( 3 ) If you permit each joint consumer to opt out separately, you must permit one of the joint consumers to opt out on behalf of all of the joint consumers.\n\n( 4 ) You may not require all joint consumers to opt out before you implement any opt out direction. \n\n( 5 ) Example. If XXXX and XXXX have a joint credit card account with you and arrange for you to send statements to XXXX 's address, you may do any of the following, but you must explain in your opt out notice which opt out policy you will follow : ( i ) Send a single opt out notice to XXXX 's address, but you must accept an opt out direction from either XXXX or XXXX. \n\n( ii ) Treat an opt out direction by either XXXX or XXXX as applying to the entire account. If you do so, and XXXX opts out, you may not require XXXX to opt out as well before implementing XXXX 's opt out direction. \n\n( iii ) Permit XXXX and XXXX to make different opt out directions. If you do so : ( A ) You must permit XXXX and XXXX to opt out for each other; ( B ) If both opt out, you must permit both to notify you in a single response ( such as on a form or through a telephone call ) ; and ( C ) If XXXX opts out and XXXX does not, you may only disclose nonpublic personal information about XXXX, but not about XXXX and not about XXXX and XXXX jointly. \n\n( g ) Time to comply with opt out. You must comply with a consumer 's opt out direction as soon as reasonably practicable after you receive it. \n\n( h ) Continuing right to opt out. A consumer may exercise the right to opt out at any time. \n\n( i ) Duration of consumer 's opt out direction. \n\n( 1 ) A consumer 's direction to opt out under this section is effective until the consumer revokes it in writing or, if the consumer agrees, electronically.\n\n( 2 ) When a customer relationship terminates, the customer 's opt out direction continues to apply to the nonpublic personal information that you collected during or related to that relationship. If the individual subsequently establishes a new customer relationship with you, the opt out direction that applied to the former relationship does not apply to the new relationship.\n\n( j ) Delivery. When you are required to deliver an opt out notice by this section, you must deliver it according to 1016.9 of this part.\n\n( k ) Model privacy form. Pursuant to 1016.2 ( a ) of this part, a model privacy form that meets the notice content requirements of this section is included in the appendix to this part.\n\n15 USC 1681e which states ( a ) Identity and purposes of credit users Every consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable procedures designed to avoid violations of section 1681c of this title and to limit the furnishing of consumer reports to the purposes listed under section 1681b of this title. These procedures shall require that prospective users of the information identify themselves, certify the purposes for which the information is sought, and certify that the information will be used for no other purpose. Every consumer reporting agency shall make a reasonable effort to verify the identity of a new prospective user and the uses certified by such prospective user prior to furnishing such user a consumer report. No consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report to any person if it has reasonable grounds for believing that the consumer report will not be used for a purpose listed in section 1681b of this title.\n\n( b ) Accuracy of report Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates.\n\n( c ) Disclosure of consumer reports by users allowed A consumer reporting agency may not prohibit a user of a consumer report furnished by the agency on a consumer from disclosing the contents of the report to the consumer, if adverse action against the consumer has been taken by the user based in whole or in part on the report.\n\n( d ) Notice to users and furnishers of information ( 1 ) Notice requirement A consumer reporting agency shall provide to any person ( A ) who regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to the agency with respect to any consumer ; or ( B ) to whom a consumer report is provided by the agency ; a notice of such persons responsibilities under this subchapter.\n\n( 2 ) Content of notice The Bureau shall prescribe the content of notices under paragraph ( 1 ), and a consumer reporting agency shall be in compliance with this subsection if it provides a notice under paragraph ( 1 ) that is substantially similar to the Bureau prescription under this paragraph.\n\n( e ) Procurement of consumer report for resale ( 1 ) Disclosure A person may not procure a consumer report for purposes of reselling the report ( or any information in the report ) unless the person discloses to the consumer reporting agency that originally furnishes the report ( A ) the identity of the end-user of the report ( or information ) ; and ( B ) each permissible purpose under section 1681b of this title for which the report is furnished to the end-user of the report ( or information ).\n\n( 2 ) Responsibilities of procurers for resale A person who procures a consumer report for purposes of reselling the report ( or any information in the report ) shall ( A ) establish and comply with reasonable procedures designed to ensure that the report ( or information ) is resold by the person only for a purpose for which the report may be furnished under section 1681b of this title, including by requiring that each person to which the report ( or information ) is resold and that resells or provides the report ( or information ) to any other person ( i ) identifies each end user of the resold report ( or information ) ; ( ii ) certifies each purpose for which the report ( or information ) will be used ; and ( iii ) certifies that the report ( or information ) will be used for no other purpose ; and ( B ) before reselling the report, make reasonable efforts to verify the identifications and certifications made under subparagraph ( A ).\n\n( 3 ) Resale of consumer report to a Federal agency or department Notwithstanding paragraph ( 1 ) or ( 2 ), a person who procures a consumer report for purposes of reselling the report ( or any information in the report ) shall not disclose the identity of the end-user of the report under paragraph ( 1 ) or ( 2 ) if ( A ) the end user is an agency or department of the United States Government which procures the report from the person for purposes of determining the eligibility of the consumer concerned to receive access or continued access to classified information ( as defined in section 1681b ( b ) ( 4 ) ( E ) ( i ) [ 1 ] of this title ) ; and ( B ) the agency or department certifies in writing to the person reselling the report that nondisclosure is necessary to protect classified information or the safety of persons employed by or contracting with, or undergoing investigation for work or contracting with the agency or department.\n\n15 USC 1681c which states ( a ) Information excluded from consumer reports Except as authorized under subsection ( b ), no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information : ( 1 ) Cases under title 11 or under the Bankruptcy Act that, from the date of entry of the order for relief or the date of adjudication, as the case may be, antedate the report by more than 10 years.\n\n( 2 ) Civil suits, civil judgments, and records of arrest that, from date of entry, antedate the report by more than seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period.\n\n( 3 ) Paid tax liens which, from date of payment, antedate the report by more than seven years.\n\n( 4 ) Accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss which antedate the report by more than seven years.\n\n( 5 ) Any other adverse item of information, other than records of convictions of crimes which antedates the report by more than seven years.\n\n( 6 ) The name, address, and telephone number of any medical information furnisher that has notified the agency of its status, unless ( A ) such name, address, and telephone number are restricted or reported using codes that do not identify, or provide information sufficient to infer, the specific provider or the nature of such services, products, or devices to a person other than the consumer; or ( B ) the report is being provided to an insurance company for a purpose relating to engaging in the business of insurance other than property and casualty insurance.\n\n( 7 ) With respect to a consumer reporting agency described in section 1681a ( p ) of this title, any information related to a veterans medical debt if the date on which the hospital care, medical services, or extended care services was rendered relating to the debt antedates the report by less than 1 year if the consumer reporting agency has actual knowledge that the information is related to a veterans medical debt and the consumer reporting agency is in compliance with its obligation under section 302 ( c ) ( 5 ) of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act.\n\n( 8 ) With respect to a consumer reporting agency described in section 1681a ( p ) of this title, any information related to a fully paid or settled veterans medical debt that had been characterized as delinquent, charged off, or in collection if the consumer reporting agency has actual knowledge that the information is related to a veterans medical debt and the consumer reporting agency is in compliance with its obligation under section 302 ( c ) ( 5 ) of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act.\n\n( b ) Exempted cases The provisions of paragraphs ( 1 ) through ( 5 ) of subsection ( a ) are not applicable in the case of any consumer credit report to be used in connection with ( 1 ) a credit transaction involving, or which may reasonably be expected to involve, a principal amount of {$150000.00} or more ; ( 2 ) the underwriting of life insurance involving, or which may reasonably be expected to involve, a face amount of {$150000.00} or more; or ( 3 ) the employment of any individual at an annual salary which equals, or which may reasonably be expected to equal {$75000.00}, or more.\n\n( c ) Running of reporting period ( 1 ) In general The 7-year period referred to in paragraphs ( 4 ) and ( 6 ) of subsection ( a ) shall begin, with respect to any delinquent account that is placed for collection ( internally or by referral to a third party, whichever is earlier ), charged to profit and loss, or subjected to any similar action, upon the expiration of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the commencement of the delinquency which immediately preceded the collection activity, charge to profit and loss, or similar action. \n\n( 2 ) Effective date Paragraph ( 1 ) shall apply only to items of information added to the file of a consumer on or after the date that is 455 days after XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n( d ) Information required to be disclosed ( 1 ) Title 11 information Any consumer reporting agency that furnishes a consumer report that contains information regarding any case involving the consumer that arises under title 11 shall include in the report an identification of the chapter of such title 11 under which such case arises if provided by the source of the information. If any case arising or filed under title 11 is withdrawn by the consumer before a final judgment, the consumer reporting agency shall include in the report that such case or filing was withdrawn upon receipt of documentation certifying such withdrawal. \n\n( 2 ) Key factor in credit score information Any consumer reporting agency that furnishes a consumer report that contains any credit score or any other risk score or predictor on any consumer shall include in the report a clear and conspicuous statement that a key factor ( as defined in section 1681g ( f ) ( 2 ) ( B ) of this title ) that adversely affected such score or predictor was the number of enquiries, if such a predictor was in fact a key factor that adversely affected such score. This paragraph shall not apply to a check services company, acting as such, which issues authorizations for the purpose of approving or processing negotiable instruments, electronic fund transfers, or similar methods of payments, but only to the extent that such company is engaged in such activities. \n\n( e ) Indication of closure of account by consumer If a consumer reporting agency is notified pursuant to section 1681s2 ( a ) ( 4 ) of this title that a credit account of a consumer was voluntarily closed by the consumer, the agency shall indicate that fact in any consumer report that includes information related to the account. \n\n( f ) Indication of dispute by consumer If a consumer reporting agency is notified pursuant to section 1681s2 ( a ) ( 3 ) of this title that information regarding a consumer who [ 1 ] was furnished to the agency is disputed by the consumer, the agency shall indicate that fact in each consumer report that includes the disputed information. \n\n( g ) Truncation of credit card and debit card numbers ( 1 ) In general Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, no person that accepts credit cards or debit cards for the transaction of business shall print more than the last 5 digits of the card number or the expiration date upon any receipt provided to the cardholder at the point of the sale or transaction.\n\n( 2 ) Limitation This subsection shall apply only to receipts that are electronically printed, and shall not apply to transactions in which the sole means of recording a credit card or debit card account number is by handwriting or by an imprint or copy of the card. \n\n( 3 ) Effective date This subsection shall become effective ( A ) 3 years after XX/XX/XXXX, with respect to any cash register or other machine or device that electronically prints receipts for credit card or debit card transactions that is in use before XX/XX/XXXXXXXX  ; and ( B ) 1 year after XX/XX/XXXX, with respect to any cash register or other machine or device that electronically prints receipts for credit card or debit card transactions that is first put into use on or after XX/XX/XXXX. \n( h ) Notice of discrepancy in address ( 1 ) In general If a person has requested a consumer report relating to a consumer from a consumer reporting agency described in section 1681a ( p ) of this title, the request includes an address for the consumer that substantially differs from the addresses in the file of the consumer, and the agency provides a consumer report in response to the request, the consumer reporting agency shall notify the requester of the existence of the discrepancy.\n\n( 2 ) Regulations ( A ) Regulations required The Bureau shall,, [ 2 ] in consultation with the Federal banking agencies, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and the Federal Trade Commission,, [ 2 ] prescribe regulations providing guidance regarding reasonable policies and procedures that a user of a consumer report should employ when such user has received a notice of discrepancy under paragraph ( 1 ). \n\n( B ) Policies and procedures to be included The regulations prescribed under subparagraph ( A ) shall describe reasonable policies and procedures for use by a user of a consumer report ( i ) to form a reasonable belief that the user knows the identity of the person to whom the consumer report pertains; and ( ii ) if the user establishes a continuing relationship with the consumer, and the user regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to the consumer reporting agency from which the notice of discrepancy pertaining to the consumer was obtained, to reconcile the address of the consumer with the consumer reporting agency by furnishing such address to such consumer reporting agency as part of information regularly furnished by the user for the period in which the relationship is established. \n15 USC 1681s 2 ( A ) 1 Which states - ( a ) Duty of furnishers of information to provide accurate information ( 1 ) Prohibition ( A ) Reporting information with actual knowledge of errors A person shall not furnish any information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting agency if the person knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the information is inaccurate.\n\n15 USC 1681C ( a ) ( 5 ) - Any other adverse item of information, other than records of convictions of crimes which antedates the report by more than seven years.\n\n15 USC 6802 ( b ) ( c ) - the consumer is given an explanation of how the consumer can exercise that nondisclosure option.\n\n15 USC 1681 section 604 a section 2- allows CRAs to furnish consumer reports in accord with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates 15 USC 6801- ( a ) Privacy obligation policy It is the policy of the Congress that each financial institution has an affirmative and continuing obligation to respect the privacy of its customers and to protect the security and confidentiality of those customers nonpublic personal information.\n\n( b ) Financial institutions safeguards In furtherance of the policy in subsection ( a ), each agency or authority described in section 6805 ( a ) of this title, other than the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, shall establish appropriate standards for the financial institutions subject to their jurisdiction relating to administrative, technical, and physical safeguards ( 1 ) to insure the security and confidentiality of customer records and information ; ( 2 ) to protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such records ; and ( 3 ) to protect against unauthorized access to or use of such records or information which could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-09-28T21:18:38.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"389XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7617978","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2023-09-28T20:41:14.000Z","state":"MS","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":["( 1 ) If two or <em>more</em> consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service from you, you may provide a single opt out notice, unless one or <em>more</em> of <em>those</em> consumers requests a separate opt out notice. Your opt out notice must explain how you will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in paragraph ( f ) ( 5 ) of this section ).\n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out."]},"sort":[9.879448,"7617978"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7623563","_score":9.875765,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"This organization is in violation of the following laws : 15 Usc 1681 which states- ( a ) Accuracy and fairness of credit reporting The Congress makes the following findings : ( 1 ) The banking system is dependent upon fair and accurate credit reporting. Inaccurate credit reports directly impair the efficiency of the banking system, and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the public confidence which is essential to the continued functioning of the banking system. \n( 2 ) An elaborate mechanism has been developed for investigating and evaluating the credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, and general reputation of consumers. \n( 3 ) Consumer reporting agencies have assumed a vital role in assembling and evaluating consumer credit and other information on consumers. \n( 4 ) There is a need to insure that consumer reporting agencies exercise their grave responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and a respect for the consumers right to privacy. \n( b ) Reasonable procedures It is the purpose of this subchapter to require that consumer reporting agencies adopt reasonable procedures for meeting the needs of commerce for consumer credit, personnel, insurance, and other information in a manner which is fair and equitable to the consumer, with regard to the confidentiality, accuracy, relevancy, and proper utilization of such information in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter. \n12 CFR 1016.7 which states- ( 1 ) Form of opt out notice. If you are required to provide an opt out notice under 1016.10 ( a ), you must provide a clear and conspicuous notice to each of your consumers that accurately explains the right to opt out under that section. The notice must state : ( i ) That you disclose or reserve the right to disclose nonpublic personal information about your consumer to a nonaffiliated third party ; ( ii ) That the consumer has the right to opt out of that disclosure; and ( iii ) A reasonable means by which the consumer may exercise the opt out right.\n\n( 2 ) Examples ( i ) Adequate opt out notice. You provide adequate notice that the consumer can opt out of the disclosure of nonpublic personal information to a nonaffiliated third party if you : ( A ) Identify all of the categories of nonpublic personal information that you disclose or reserve the right to disclose, and all of the categories of nonaffiliated third parties to which you disclose the information, as described in 1016.6 ( a ) ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) of this part, and state that the consumer can opt out of the disclosure of that information; and ( B ) Identify the financial products or services that the consumer obtains from you, either singly or jointly, to which the opt out direction would apply. \n\n( ii ) Reasonable opt out means. You provide a reasonable means to exercise an opt out right if you : ( A ) Designate check-off boxes in a prominent position on the relevant forms with the opt out notice ; ( B ) Include a reply form together with the opt out notice that, in the case of financial institutions described in 1016.3 ( l ) ( 3 ) of this part, includes the address to which the form should be mailed ; ( C ) Provide an electronic means to opt out, such as a form that can be sent via electronic mail or a process at your Web site, if the consumer agrees to the electronic delivery of information ; or ( D ) Provide a toll-free telephone number that consumers may call to opt out. \n\n( iii ) Unreasonable opt out means. You do not provide a reasonable means of opting out if : ( A ) The only means of opting out is for the consumer to write his or her own letter to exercise that opt out right; or ( B ) The only means of opting out as described in any notice subsequent to the initial notice is to use a check-off box that you provided with the initial notice but did not include with the subsequent notice. \n\n( iv ) Specific opt out means. You may require each consumer to opt out through a specific means, as long as that means is reasonable for that consumer.\n\n( b ) Same form as initial notice permitted. You may provide the opt out notice together with or on the same written or electronic form as the initial notice you provide in accordance with 1016.4.\n\n( c ) Initial notice required when opt out notice delivered subsequent to initial notice. If you provide the opt out notice later than required for the initial notice in accordance with 1016.4 of this part, you must also include a copy of the initial notice with the opt out notice in writing or, if the consumer agrees, electronically.\n\n( d ) Joint relationships in the case of financial institutions other than credit unions and covered entities subject to FTC enforcement jurisdiction. For purposes of this paragraph ( d ), you is limited to financial institutions other than credit unions and financial institutions described in 1016.3 ( l ) ( 3 ) of this part.\n\n( 1 ) If two or more consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service from you, you may provide a single opt out notice. Your opt out notice must explain how you will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in paragraph ( d ) ( 5 ) of this section ).\n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out. You may either : ( i ) Treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer as applying to all of the associated joint consumers; or ( ii ) Permit each joint consumer to opt out separately.\n\n( 3 ) If you permit each joint consumer to opt out separately, you must permit one of the joint consumers to opt out on behalf of all of the joint consumers. \n\n( 4 ) You may not require all joint consumers to opt out before you implement any opt out direction.\n\n( 5 ) Example. If XXXX and XXXX have a joint checking account with you and arrange for you to send statements to XXXX 's address, you may do any of the following, but you must explain in your opt out notice which opt out policy you will follow : ( i ) Send a single opt out notice to XXXX 's address, but you must accept an opt out direction from either XXXX or XXXX. \n\n( ii ) Treat an opt out direction by either XXXX or XXXX as applying to the entire account. If you do so, and XXXX opts out, you may not require XXXX to opt out as well before implementing XXXX 's opt out direction. \n\n( iii ) Permit XXXX and XXXX to make different opt out directions. If you do so : ( A ) You must permit XXXX and XXXX to opt out for each other; ( B ) If both opt out, you must permit both to notify you in a single response ( such as on a form or through a telephone call ) ; and ( C ) If XXXX opts out and XXXX does not, you may only disclose nonpublic personal information about XXXX, but not about XXXX and not about XXXX and XXXX jointly. \n\n( e ) Joint relationships in the case of credit unions. \n\n( 1 ) If two or more consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service, other than a loan, from a credit union, the credit union may provide only a single opt out notice. The opt out notice must explain how the credit union will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in the examples in paragraph ( e ) ( 5 ) of this section ). \n\n( XXXX ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out. A credit union may either : ( i ) Treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer to apply to all of the associated joint consumers; or ( ii ) Permit each joint consumer to opt out separately.\n\n( 3 ) If a credit union permits each joint consumer to opt out separately, the credit union must permit one of the joint consumers to opt out on behalf of all of the joint consumers.\n\n( 4 ) A credit union may not require all joint consumers to opt out before the credit union implements any opt out direction. \n\n( 5 ) Example. If XXXX and XXXX have a joint share account with a credit union and arrange for the credit union to send statements to XXXX 's address, the credit union may do any of the following, but it must explain in its opt out notice which opt out policy it will follow : ( i ) Send a single opt out notice to XXXX 's address, but it must accept an opt out direction from either XXXX or XXXX. \n\n( ii ) Treat an opt out direction by either XXXX or XXXX as applying to the entire account. If it does so, and XXXX opts out, it XXXX not require XXXX to opt out as well before implementing XXXX 's opt out direction. \n\n( iii ) Permit XXXX and XXXX to make different opt out directions. If it does so, and if XXXX and XXXX both opt out, it must permit XXXX or both of them to notify it in a single response ( such as on a form or through a telephone call ). \n\n( 6 ) Special rule for loans.\n\n( i ) A credit union is required to provide an initial opt out notice to a borrower or guarantor on a loan if it shares his or her nonpublic personal information with nonaffiliated third parties other than for purposes under 1016.13, 1016.14, and 1016.15.\n\n( ii ) A credit union may satisfy its annual opt out notice requirement by providing one notice to those borrowers and guarantors jointly.\n\n( f ) Joint relationships in the case of covered entities subject to FTC enforcement jurisdiction. For purposes of this paragraph ( f ), you is limited to the financial institutions described in 1016.3 ( l ) ( 3 ).\n\n( 1 ) If two or more consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service from you, you may provide a single opt out notice, unless one or more of those consumers requests a separate opt out notice. Your opt out notice must explain how you will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in paragraph ( f ) ( 5 ) of this section ).\n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out. You may either : ( i ) Treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer as applying to all of the associated joint consumers; or ( ii ) Permit each joint consumer to opt out separately.\n\n( 3 ) If you permit each joint consumer to opt out separately, you must permit one of the joint consumers to opt out on behalf of all of the joint consumers. \n\n( 4 ) You may not require all joint consumers to opt out before you implement any opt out direction. \n\n( 5 ) Example. If XXXX and XXXX have a joint credit card account with you and arrange for you to send statements to XXXX 's address, you XXXX do any of the following, but you must explain in your opt out notice which opt out policy you will follow : ( i ) Send a single opt out notice to XXXX 's address, but you must accept an opt out direction from either XXXX or XXXX. \n\n( ii ) Treat an opt out direction by either XXXX or XXXX as applying to the entire account. If you do so, and XXXX opts out, you may not require XXXX to opt out as well before implementing XXXX 's opt out direction. \n\n( iii ) Permit XXXX and XXXX to make different opt out directions. If you do so : ( A ) You must permit XXXX and XXXX to opt out for each other; ( B ) If both opt out, you must permit both to notify you in a single response ( such as on a form or through a telephone call ) ; and ( C ) If XXXX opts out and XXXX does not, you may only disclose nonpublic personal information about XXXX, but not about XXXX and not about XXXX and XXXX jointly. \n\n( g ) Time to comply with opt out. You must comply with a consumer 's opt out direction as soon as reasonably practicable after you receive it. \n\n( h ) Continuing right to opt out. A consumer may exercise the right to opt out at any time. \n\n( i ) Duration of consumer 's opt out direction. \n\n( 1 ) A consumer 's direction to opt out under this section is effective until the consumer revokes it in writing or, if the consumer agrees, electronically. \n\n( 2 ) When a customer relationship terminates, the customer 's opt out direction continues to apply to the nonpublic personal information that you collected during or related to that relationship. If the individual subsequently establishes a new customer relationship with you, the opt out direction that applied to the former relationship does not apply to the new relationship. \n\n( j ) Delivery. When you are required to deliver an opt out notice by this section, you must deliver it according to 1016.9 of this part. \n\n( k ) Model privacy form. Pursuant to 1016.2 ( a ) of this part, a model privacy form that meets the notice content requirements of this section is included in the appendix to this part.\n\n15 USC 1681e which states ( a ) Identity and purposes of credit users Every consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable procedures designed to avoid violations of section 1681c of this title and to limit the furnishing of consumer reports to the purposes listed under section 1681b of this title. These procedures shall require that prospective users of the information identify themselves, certify the purposes for which the information is sought, and certify that the information will be used for no other purpose. Every consumer reporting agency shall make a reasonable effort to verify the identity of a new prospective user and the uses certified by such prospective user prior to furnishing such user a consumer report. No consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report to any person if it has reasonable grounds for believing that the consumer report will not be used for a purpose listed in section 1681b of this title. \n\n( b ) Accuracy of report Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. \n\n( c ) Disclosure of consumer reports by users allowed A consumer reporting agency may not prohibit a user of a consumer report furnished by the agency on a consumer from disclosing the contents of the report to the consumer, if adverse action against the consumer has been taken by the user based in whole or in part on the report. \n\n( d ) Notice to users and furnishers of information ( 1 ) Notice requirement A consumer reporting agency shall provide to any person ( A ) who regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to the agency with respect to any consumer ; or ( B ) to whom a consumer report is provided by the agency ; a notice of such persons responsibilities under this subchapter. \n( 2 ) Content of notice The Bureau shall prescribe the content of notices under paragraph ( 1 ), and a consumer reporting agency shall be in compliance with this subsection if it provides a notice under paragraph ( 1 ) that is substantially similar to the Bureau prescription under this paragraph.\n\n( e ) Procurement of consumer report for resale ( 1 ) Disclosure A person may not procure a consumer report for purposes of reselling the report ( or any information in the report ) unless the person discloses to the consumer reporting agency that originally furnishes the report ( A ) the identity of the end-user of the report ( or information ) ; and ( B ) each permissible purpose under section 1681b of this title for which the report is furnished to the end-user of the report ( or information ). \n( 2 ) Responsibilities of procurers for resale A person who procures a consumer report for purposes of reselling the report ( or any information in the report ) shall ( A ) establish and comply with reasonable procedures designed to ensure that the report ( or information ) is resold by the person only for a purpose for which the report may be furnished under section 1681b of this title, including by requiring that each person to which the report ( or information ) is resold and that resells or provides the report ( or information ) to any other person ( i ) identifies each end user of the resold report ( or information ) ; ( ii ) certifies each purpose for which the report ( or information ) will be used ; and ( iii ) certifies that the report ( or information ) will be used for no other purpose ; and ( B ) before reselling the report, make reasonable efforts to verify the identifications and certifications made under subparagraph ( A ).\n\n( 3 ) Resale of consumer report to a Federal agency or department Notwithstanding paragraph ( 1 ) or ( 2 ), a person who procures a consumer report for purposes of reselling the report ( or any information in the report ) shall not disclose the identity of the end-user of the report under paragraph ( 1 ) or ( 2 ) if ( A ) the end user is an agency or department of the United States Government which procures the report from the person for purposes of determining the eligibility of the consumer concerned to receive access or continued access to classified information ( as defined in section 1681b ( b ) ( 4 ) ( E ) ( i ) [ 1 ] of this title ) ; and ( B ) the agency or department certifies in writing to the person reselling the report that nondisclosure is necessary to protect classified information or the safety of persons employed by or contracting with, or undergoing investigation for work or contracting with the agency or department.\n\n15 USC 1681c which states ( a ) Information excluded from consumer reports Except as authorized under subsection ( b ), no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information : ( 1 ) Cases under title 11 or under the Bankruptcy Act that, from the date of entry of the order for relief or the date of adjudication, as the case may be, antedate the report by more than 10 years.\n\n( 2 ) Civil suits, civil judgments, and records of arrest that, from date of entry, antedate the report by more than seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period.\n\n( 3 ) Paid tax liens which, from date of payment, antedate the report by more than seven years.\n\n( 4 ) Accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss which antedate the report by more than seven years.\n\n( 5 ) Any other adverse item of information, other than records of convictions of crimes which antedates the report by more than seven years.\n\n( 6 ) The name, address, and telephone number of any medical information furnisher that has notified the agency of its status, unless ( A ) such name, address, and telephone number are restricted or reported using codes that do not identify, or provide information sufficient to infer, the specific provider or the nature of such services, products, or devices to a person other than the consumer; or ( B ) the report is being provided to an insurance company for a purpose relating to engaging in the business of insurance other than property and casualty insurance.\n\n( 7 ) With respect to a consumer reporting agency described in section 1681a ( p ) of this title, any information related to a veterans medical debt if the date on which the hospital care, medical services, or extended care services was rendered relating to the debt antedates the report by less than 1 year if the consumer reporting agency has actual knowledge that the information is related to a veterans medical debt and the consumer reporting agency is in compliance with its obligation under section 302 ( c ) ( 5 ) of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act.\n\n( 8 ) With respect to a consumer reporting agency described in section 1681a ( p ) of this title, any information related to a fully paid or settled veterans medical debt that had been characterized as delinquent, charged off, or in collection if the consumer reporting agency has actual knowledge that the information is related to a veterans medical debt and the consumer reporting agency is in compliance with its obligation under section 302 ( c ) ( 5 ) of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act.\n\n( b ) Exempted cases The provisions of paragraphs ( 1 ) through ( 5 ) of subsection ( a ) are not applicable in the case of any consumer credit report to be used in connection with ( 1 ) a credit transaction involving, or which may reasonably be expected to involve, a principal amount of {$150000.00} or more ; ( 2 ) the underwriting of life insurance involving, or which may reasonably be expected to involve, a face amount of {$150000.00} or more; or ( 3 ) the employment of any individual at an annual salary which equals, or which may reasonably be expected to equal {$75000.00}, or more.\n\n( c ) Running of reporting period ( 1 ) In general The 7-year period referred to in paragraphs ( 4 ) and ( 6 ) of subsection ( a ) shall begin, with respect to any delinquent account that is placed for collection ( internally or by referral to a third party, whichever is earlier ), charged to profit and loss, or subjected to any similar action, upon the expiration of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the commencement of the delinquency which immediately preceded the collection activity, charge to profit and loss, or similar action. \n\n( 2 ) Effective date Paragraph ( 1 ) shall apply only to items of information added to the file of a consumer on or after the date that is 455 days after XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n( d ) Information required to be disclosed ( 1 ) Title 11 information Any consumer reporting agency that furnishes a consumer report that contains information regarding any case involving the consumer that arises under title 11 shall include in the report an identification of the chapter of such title 11 under which such case arises if provided by the source of the information. If any case arising or filed under title 11 is withdrawn by the consumer before a final judgment, the consumer reporting agency shall include in the report that such case or filing was withdrawn upon receipt of documentation certifying such withdrawal. \n\n( 2 ) Key factor in credit score information Any consumer reporting agency that furnishes a consumer report that contains any credit score or any other risk score or predictor on any consumer shall include in the report a clear and conspicuous statement that a key factor ( as defined in section 1681g ( f ) ( 2 ) ( B ) of this title ) that adversely affected such score or predictor was the number of enquiries, if such a predictor was in fact a key factor that adversely affected such score. This paragraph shall not apply to a check services company, acting as such, which issues authorizations for the purpose of approving or processing negotiable instruments, electronic fund transfers, or similar methods of payments, but only to the extent that such company is engaged in such activities.\n\n( e ) Indication of closure of account by consumer If a consumer reporting agency is notified pursuant to section 1681s2 ( a ) ( 4 ) of this title that a credit account of a consumer was voluntarily closed by the consumer, the agency shall indicate that fact in any consumer report that includes information related to the account.\n\n( f ) Indication of dispute by consumer If a consumer reporting agency is notified pursuant to section 1681s2 ( a ) ( 3 ) of this title that information regarding a consumer who [ 1 ] was furnished to the agency is disputed by the consumer, the agency shall indicate that fact in each consumer report that includes the disputed information.\n\n( g ) Truncation of credit card and debit card numbers ( 1 ) In general Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, no person that accepts credit cards or debit cards for the transaction of business shall print more than the last 5 digits of the card number or the expiration date upon any receipt provided to the cardholder at the point of the sale or transaction.\n\n( 2 ) Limitation This subsection shall apply only to receipts that are electronically printed, and shall not apply to transactions in which the sole means of recording a credit card or debit card account number is by handwriting or by an imprint or copy of the card. \n\n( 3 ) Effective date This subsection shall become effective ( A ) 3 years after XX/XX/XXXX, with respect to any cash register or other machine or device that electronically prints receipts for credit card or debit card transactions that is in use before XX/XX/XXXX ; and ( B ) 1 year after XX/XX/XXXX, with respect to any cash register or other machine or device that electronically prints receipts for credit card or debit card transactions that is first put into use on or after XX/XX/XXXX. \n( h ) Notice of discrepancy in address ( 1 ) In general If a person has requested a consumer report relating to a consumer from a consumer reporting agency described in section 1681a ( p ) of this title, the request includes an address for the consumer that substantially differs from the addresses in the file of the consumer, and the agency provides a consumer report in response to the request, the consumer reporting agency shall notify the requester of the existence of the discrepancy.\n\n( 2 ) Regulations ( A ) Regulations required The Bureau shall,, [ 2 ] in consultation with the Federal banking agencies, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and the Federal Trade Commission,, [ 2 ] prescribe regulations providing guidance regarding reasonable policies and procedures that a user of a consumer report should employ when such user has received a notice of discrepancy under paragraph ( 1 ). \n\n( B ) Policies and procedures to be included The regulations prescribed under subparagraph ( A ) shall describe reasonable policies and procedures for use by a user of a consumer report ( i ) to form a reasonable belief that the user knows the identity of the person to whom the consumer report pertains; and ( ii ) if the user establishes a continuing relationship with the consumer, and the user regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to the consumer reporting agency from which the notice of discrepancy pertaining to the consumer was obtained, to reconcile the address of the consumer with the consumer reporting agency by furnishing such address to such consumer reporting agency as part of information regularly furnished by the user for the period in which the relationship is established. \n15 USC 1681s 2 ( A ) 1 Which states - ( a ) Duty of furnishers of information to provide accurate information ( 1 ) Prohibition ( A ) Reporting information with actual knowledge of errors A person shall not furnish any information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting agency if the person knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the information is inaccurate.\n\n15 USC 1681C ( a ) ( 5 ) - Any other adverse item of information, other than records of convictions of crimes which antedates the report by more than seven years.\n\n15 USC 6802 ( b ) ( c ) - the consumer is given an explanation of how the consumer can exercise that nondisclosure option.\n\n15 USC 1681 section 604 a section 2- allows CRAs to furnish consumer reports in accord with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates 15 USC 6801- ( a ) Privacy obligation policy It is the policy of the Congress that each financial institution has an affirmative and continuing obligation to respect the privacy of its customers and to protect the security and confidentiality of those customers nonpublic personal information.\n\n( b ) Financial institutions safeguards In furtherance of the policy in subsection ( a ), each agency or authority described in section 6805 ( a ) of this title, other than the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, shall establish appropriate standards for the financial institutions subject to their jurisdiction relating to administrative, technical, and physical safeguards ( 1 ) to insure the security and confidentiality of customer records and information ; ( 2 ) to protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such records ; and ( 3 ) to protect against unauthorized access to or use of such records or information which could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer.","date_sent_to_company":"2023-09-28T21:18:48.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"389XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7623563","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2023-09-28T21:18:43.000Z","state":"MS","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":["( 1 ) If two or <em>more</em> consumers jointly obtain a financial product or service from you, you may provide a single opt out notice, unless one or <em>more</em> of <em>those</em> consumers requests a separate opt out notice. Your opt out notice must explain how you will treat an opt out direction by a joint consumer ( as explained in paragraph ( f ) ( 5 ) of this section ).\n\n( 2 ) Any of the joint consumers may exercise the right to opt out."]},"sort":[9.875765,"7623563"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":85,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":85}]}},"product":{"doc_count":85,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":36,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":35},{"key":"Other personal consumer report","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":16,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":16}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":15,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":8},{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":2},{"key":"Mortgage debt","doc_count":2},{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":2},{"key":"Federal student loan debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":8,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":6},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Store credit card","doc_count":2},{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card or prepaid card","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":2,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Checking or savings account","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Checking account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Payday loan, title loan, or personal loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Personal line of credit","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Federal student loan servicing","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":85,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":21,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":21}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":12,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":6},{"key":"Problem with personal statement of dispute","doc_count":3},{"key":"Was not notified of investigation status or results","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":11,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":7},{"key":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":10,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":9},{"key":"Debt was paid","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":8,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":6},{"key":"Information is missing that should be on the report","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":3,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue related to modification, forbearance, short sale, deed-in-lieu, bankruptcy, or foreclosure","doc_count":2},{"key":"Foreclosure","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Closing on a mortgage","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Changes in loan terms during or after closing","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Getting a credit card","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Application denied","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Repossession","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan balance remaining after the vehicle is repossessed and sold","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Seized or attempted to seize your property","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Advertising and marketing, including promotional offers","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive advertised or promotional terms","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Closing your account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Can't close your account","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Communication tactics","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"You told them to stop contacting you, but they keep trying","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"False statements or representation","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempted to collect wrong amount","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Managing an account","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Banking errors","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with cash advance","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Struggling to repay your loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with forgiveness, cancellation, or discharge","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":85,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":83},{"key":"No","doc_count":2}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":85,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":59},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":26}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":85,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":85}]}},"company":{"doc_count":85,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":17},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":14},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":12},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":4},{"key":"RAS LaVrar, LLC","doc_count":4},{"key":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Hayt Hayt & Landau, P.L. (FL)","doc_count":2},{"key":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","doc_count":2},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":2},{"key":"AES/PHEAA","doc_count":1},{"key":"AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"Aldridge PIte Haan, LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Aldridge Pite, LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Auto Credit of Virginia Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Cress Law Group PC","doc_count":1},{"key":"DISCOVER BANK","doc_count":1},{"key":"FC HoldCo LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"GOLDMAN SACHS BANK USA","doc_count":1},{"key":"GreenSky, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Groves Capital, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.","doc_count":1},{"key":"LAKEVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"LEXISNEXIS","doc_count":1},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"Navient Solutions, LLC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"PARAMOUNT RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE GROUP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rausch Sturm LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Real Time Group, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"RoundPoint Mortgage Servicing LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Shellpoint Partners, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Source Receivables Management LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Specialized Loan Servicing Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":85,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"FL","doc_count":20},{"key":"CA","doc_count":11},{"key":"GA","doc_count":11},{"key":"IL","doc_count":7},{"key":"TX","doc_count":5},{"key":"NC","doc_count":4},{"key":"NY","doc_count":4},{"key":"CO","doc_count":3},{"key":"MS","doc_count":3},{"key":"VA","doc_count":3},{"key":"MA","doc_count":2},{"key":"MD","doc_count":2},{"key":"PA","doc_count":2},{"key":"WI","doc_count":2},{"key":"HI","doc_count":1},{"key":"IN","doc_count":1},{"key":"NH","doc_count":1},{"key":"NV","doc_count":1},{"key":"OH","doc_count":1},{"key":"OK","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":85,"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":44},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":5}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":85,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Older American","doc_count":14},{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":8}]}}},"_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":[9.876571,"7623563"],"3":[7.0133204,"7624731"],"4":[5.7336254,"10391880"]}}}