{"took":103,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":8,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13895921","_score":17.912128,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against TransUnion for their continued reporting of a fraudulent and unverifiable account from XXXX XXXX, which XXXX has already removed after confirming it could not be verified. It is not only unreasonable but also legally questionable for TransUnion to claim that this same account is somehow verifiable when the original furnisher has yet to provide any legally sufficient documentation, and another major bureau has already confirmed it should not exist on my credit report.\n\nLet me be very clear : there is no possible way this debt could have been verified, because no such debt exists. I do not owe XXXX XXXX. In fact, if anything, they owe mefor the damage caused by their false reporting as well as for not returning my security deposit and for TransUnions continued negligence in handling my disputes. Ive been disputing this account for over a year, and yet TransUnion continues to pull the same sham investigations and stalling tactics, delaying responses until the last possible day, only to mark the account as verified again, without explanation or evidence uploaded to the CFPB portal. This is not a reinvestigation under the lawits a bad-faith attempt to sidestep accountability.\n\nPer the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) requires a reasonable reinvestigation when a consumer disputes an account. There is nothing reasonable about re-verifying an account without proof and despite XXXX removing it. \n15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) mandates that consumer reporting agencies maintain maximum possible accuracy. One bureau has reached opposite conclusionsso accuracy clearly isnt being ensured.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ) ( A ) requires all relevant information to be passed to the furnisher during an investigation. If that were truly done, TransUnion wouldve received the same lack of proof that I did.\n\n15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) requires that all documentation used in the reinvestigation be provided to the consumer. I have not received a single legally binding documentonly a move-out statement, which is woefully insufficient under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ).\n\nI am no longer tolerating this. If TransUnion refuses to remove this account immediately or responds with yet another vague and dismissive verified status, I will be preparing to take full legal action. I will pursue civil penalties for violations of both the FCRA and FDCPA, including failure to conduct a reasonable investigation, negligent misreporting, and continued reporting of inaccurate and unverifiable information. for them to take 60 days and to avoid providing me with what I ask in this portal shows their complete negligence. It is not only unfair. Its unjust and I encourage the CFPB to look into Trans Unions investigation just like they did with XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX needs to deleted permanently from my account and I have attached XXXX this response to my consumer financial protection bureau, so TransUnion please explain your negligence on why and how in the world did you verify this foolishness on my report and Im extremely passionate because I do not let me say it again do not owe this collection agency! Take a look at their reviews there are so many tenants that had a unfit unit that are battling the same exact thing. Im battling with receiving their security deposit back! All of this is retaliatory because of me filing a complaint with my local cities Code enforcement for my unit these apartments being advised by Code enforcement that they would be fine because they were having me in deplorable living conditions and me not renewing my! I would like to add I fully paid for movers to move my things out of this place not only did I pay movers and gave them almost 3 months notice that I would not dare renew my lease with them. They tried to report bogus items on the moveout statement that they genetically typed up that I didnt even own in that apartment. Ive been holding on to my video of me in that apartment office that shows the time I reported the move out statement to see if these investigations go legitimately and clearly they havent and thats why Im so prepared to sue with my final request for deletion! I also have documentation on where the movers went in the location to remove every item out of that apartment that was a left spotless! Please get it together because this is my very last time asking this to be removed before legal action is taken. This is absolutely ridiculous and I wish I could say more on this platform because I am so disgusted, but I have to remain professional get this off of my credit immediately! Dont mail me anything. Talk to me on the consumer financial protection bureaus platformif youre providing a legal and proper investigation just like XXXX did they acknowledged their incorrections and explained their full process please dont overlook the uploaded attachment that they deleted this foolishness off of my credit! Even if they did provide you with any documentation which I highly highly doubt because none exist Im telling you now they were forged and fraudulent and thats why Im so passionate! Ive been keeping this video in my back pocket because I already know what type of non-integrity having people I was dealing with when I decided not to stay in the unit! But there comes a time where enough is enough do the right thing and dont take 60 days after youve already taken almost 400 days of me battling this with you in particular Trans Union !","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-04T12:53:36.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Rental debt","zip_code":"32244","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13895921","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-04T12:24:59.000Z","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 is not only unreasonable but also <em>legally</em> questionable for TransUnion to claim that this same account is somehow verifiable when the original furnisher has yet to provide any <em>legally</em> <em>sufficient</em> <em>documentation</em>, and <em>another</em> <em>major</em> <em>bureau</em> has <em>already</em> <em>confirmed</em> it should not exist on my credit report.\n\nLet me be very clear : there is no possible way this debt could have been verified, because no such debt exists. I do not owe XXXX XXXX."]},"sort":[17.912128,"13895921"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18003824","_score":14.181801,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to formally report that all Synchrony Bankrelated accounts appearing on my credit reports are the result of identity theft, and I am requesting a full investigation under the rights granted to me by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), and all federal regulations governing fraudulent accounts, unauthorized credit activity, and inaccurate reporting. I have already filed an official FTC Identity Theft Report and have taken all reasonable steps to secure my identity, including placing fraud alerts, credit freezes, and repeatedly disputing these fraudulent Synchrony Bank accounts with the major credit reporting agencies. Despite my documented identity theft, these accounts continue to report inaccurate information, harming and misrepresenting my credit profile. \n\nThis statement explains in clear detail what happened, what actions I have already taken, why the accounts are fraudulent, and why Synchrony Bank must comply with federal law and remove these accounts. \n\n1. Identity Theft Discovery and Initial Red Flags I first became aware that my identity had been compromised when I noticed unfamiliar Synchrony Bank accounts appearing on my credit reports. These accounts included several retail credit cards and lines of credit associated with Synchrony Bank-issued partners ( such as XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Synchrony Home XXXX and other store-branded credit accounts ). None of these accounts were legitimately opened by me, and none were authorized, used, or applied for by me. \n\nUpon reviewing the details, I immediately recognized multiple red flags indicating identity theft : The accounts did not match any credit applications I have ever made. \n\nThe accounts had addresses, usage patterns, and spending behaviors inconsistent with my history. \n\nMany accounts showed delinquencies, charge-offs, or collections that I could not have been responsible for. \n\nI had never received any card, billing statements, approval notices, or disclosures for these accounts. \n\nThese indicators confirmed that someone had fraudulently used my personal information to open Synchrony Bank credit accounts without my permission.\n\n2. FTC Identity Theft Report Filed and Documented As soon as I confirmed identity theft, I took immediate legal action. I filed a formal report with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) documenting the identity theft incident. This official FTC Identity Theft Report serves as a sworn statement affirming that all Synchrony Bank accounts reporting under my name are unauthorized, fraudulent, and not connected to me in any way.\n\nUnder FCRA 605B, once a consumer submits an identity theft report ( including an FTC affidavit ), furnishers such as Synchrony Bank are legally obligated to : Block fraudulent information.\n\nStop reporting inaccurate accounts.\n\nConduct a reasonable investigation.\n\nRemove unverifiable or fraudulent tradelines.\n\nDespite this, the fraudulent Synchrony Bank accounts remain on my credit file, creating ongoing harm.\n\n3. Summary of All Synchrony Bank Accounts Involved To be clear, every single Synchrony Bank account appearing on my credit report is fraudulent. These include, but may not be limited to : Any Synchrony-issued XXXX account Any Synchrony-issued XXXX Credit account Any Synchrony-issued retail store cards ( e.g., furniture stores, jewelry stores, electronics retailers, home improvement stores, etc. ) Any Synchrony-issued CareCredit or medical financing accounts Any Synchrony-issued credit lines under store-partner brands I do not own, recognize, or have any relationship with these accounts. Any account Synchrony Bank is reporting under my profile is the product of identity theft.\n\nThese fraudulent accounts have harmed my credit by reporting : Charge-offs Late payments Delinquencies High credit utilization Collections Closed derogatory statuses None of these delinquent or derogatory entries reflect my credit behavior. They reflect the actions of an unknown identity thief.\n\n4. Actions I Have Already Taken to Resolve This I have taken every appropriate step a responsible consumer can take when victimized by identity theft : A. Filed an FTC Identity Theft Report This is an official federal document confirming the fraudulent activity.\n\nB. Filed a police report ( when applicable ) I have documented the identity theft with local law enforcement.\n\nC. Placed fraud alerts with all three major bureaus This notifies lenders that my identity has been compromised.\n\nD. Initiated multiple disputes with Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion I formally disputed each Synchrony Bank account as fraudulent.\n\nE. Froze my credit with all bureaus This prevents further fraudulent applications.\n\nF. Requested validation and verification from Synchrony Bank I requested that Synchrony Bank provide : Original signed applications IP addresses used to apply Recorded phone calls ( if any ) Proof of identity used Delivery addresses Transaction history Any contract or agreement bearing my signature Not only has Synchrony Bank failed to provide any original documentation, they have continued to report the fraudulent accounts, violating my rights under the FCRA.\n\n5. Synchrony Bank Failed to Provide Verification or Documentation Under FCRA 611 and FCRA 623, Synchrony Bank is required to verify the accuracy of the information they furnish. When a consumer files an identity theft report, the furnisher must : Conduct a reasonable reinvestigation.\n\nReview all evidence submitted by the consumer.\n\nProvide validation of the account.\n\nRemove information that can not be verified.\n\nSynchrony Bank has not provided : A signed credit application Proof of identity used in account creation Transaction summaries Delivery addresses Evidence showing I opened or benefited from these accounts Because no evidence exists, the accounts must be removed. Continuing to report them violates the FCRA and FDCPA.\n\n6. Synchrony Bank Reporting Has Caused Serious and Ongoing Harm Because of Synchrony Banks continued reporting of these fraudulent accounts, I have suffered measurable, documented harm : Lowered credit scores due to false delinquencies Increased interest rates on existing credit Difficulty obtaining new credit Denials for financial products Stress, anxiety, and emotional distress Damage to my financial reputation Every second that these fraudulent Synchrony Bank accounts remain on my credit file, the damage worsens.\n\n7. Synchrony Bank Failed Its Duty Under the Red Flags Rule The FACT Act Red Flags Rule requires financial institutions to identify, detect, and respond to patterns of identity theft. Synchrony Bank allowed someone to open accounts in my name : Without identity verification With mismatched personal information With suspicious application characteristics Without alerting me Without detecting the fraud This indicates a failure of Synchrony Banks internal controls for detecting and preventing identity theft.\n\n8. Synchrony Bank Automated Verification Through e-Oscar Is Not Legally Sufficient When I disputed these accounts with the credit bureaus, Synchrony Bank responded through the e-Oscar automated system, which simply confirmed the account exists in their system.\n\nUnder the FCRA, this type of investigation is legally inadequate because : It does not examine underlying documentation It does not verify identity It does not evaluate fraud indicators It does not involve a human review It does not confirm authenticity of the application A proper investigation requires reviewing actual evidencenot clicking a verification button.\n\n9. Synchrony Bank Has a Legal Obligation to Block Fraudulent Information Per FCRA 605B, when a consumer submits an identity theft report, a furnisher must : Block the reporting of fraudulent information within 4 business days Stop reporting the account to the credit bureaus Notify the credit bureaus to delete the information Provide documentation of compliance Synchrony Bank did none of these things.\n\n10. Requested Documentation That Synchrony Bank Has Failed to Provide As part of my disputes, I requested that Synchrony Bank produce : Original contracts bearing my signature IP logs from the application submission Device IDs tied to the fraudulent applications Copies of identification allegedly used Address history connected to the accounts Dates of account opening Proof that I activated or used any card Delivery locations of cards, purchases, or statements Synchrony Bank has not produced any such documentation, because these accounts were not opened by me and no legitimate verification materials exist.\n\n11. My Identity Theft Case Meets All FTC and FCRA Legal Standards To legally classify a case as identity theft, the consumer must provide : A signed FTC Identity Theft Report A statement that the accounts are unauthorized Evidence of fraudulent activity I have fulfilled all federal requirements. Synchrony Bank is legally obligated to delete the fraudulent accounts.\n\n12. Synchrony Banks Failure to Remove the Accounts Violates Federal Law By continuing to furnish information it can not verify, Synchrony Bank has violated : FCRA 602 ( A ) accuracy and fairness FCRA 607 ( B ) requirement to follow reasonable procedures FCRA 611 ( a ) reinvestigation failure FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) duty to report disputes accurately FCRA 623 ( b ) duty of furnishers to investigate FDCPA 807 ( 8 ) reporting false credit information Each day the accounts remain is another violation.\n\n13. I Have Never Had Any Relationship with Synchrony Bank To reiterate clearly : I have never applied for, opened, used, or benefited from any Synchrony Bank account, whether : Retail cards Store financing Promotional financing Credit lines Joint accounts Co-signed accounts I have never authorized Synchrony Bank to open credit in my name. Any accounts currently reporting are fraudulent.\n\n14. Synchrony Bank Must Cease All Reporting Until Verification Is Provided Under the FCRA, a furnisher may not continue reporting information it knows or should know is inaccurate or unverified.\n\nSince Synchrony Bank has produced no proof, further reporting constitutes negligent and willful noncompliance.\n\n15. The Fraudulent Synchrony Bank Accounts Must Be Deleted Immediately Given : The identity theft The FTC report The absence of verification The failure of internal controls The continued inaccurate reporting The harm done to my credit The only appropriate and lawful response is the immediate deletion of all Synchrony Bank accounts from all credit bureaus.\n\n16. Conclusion I have fully documented my identity theft, filed the required reports, disputed every fraudulent account, and requested verification that Synchrony Bank can not provide. Every Synchrony Bank account on my file is the result of identity theft. No evidence exists to validate them. Synchrony Bank has not complied with its obligations under the FCRA.\n\nThese accounts must be deleted.\n\nThey are fraudulent.\n\nI do not own them.\n\nI am an identity theft victim.\n\nI am requesting that the CFPB require Synchrony Bank to take the corrective action required by federal law and remove all fraudulent accounts immediately.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-04T18:37:06.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"10801","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18003824","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","date_received":"2025-12-04T18:28:16.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Synchrony Bank Automated Verification Through e-Oscar Is Not <em>Legally</em> <em>Sufficient</em> When I disputed these accounts with the credit <em>bureaus</em>, Synchrony Bank responded through the e-Oscar automated system, which simply <em>confirmed</em> the account exists in their system."]},"sort":[14.181801,"18003824"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15255788","_score":12.680041,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I have been corresponding with Experian to XXXX XXXX of exhaustion for nearly XXXX year regarding a trade line on my credit report that is a result of identity theft from XXXX Bank XXXX I initially learned of the process prescribed in the FCRA to have information blocked in ones credit report that resulted from identity theft approximately XXXX year ago. I filed an Identity Theft Affidavit with a federal law enforcement agency, the Federal Trade Commission, gathered supporting documentation and submitted the block request to all XXXX major credit bureaus. Both XXXX  and XXXX  immediately complied and blocked the information within XXXX days. Experian refused to block the information citing insufficient documentation and requested additional documents. At first, I thought this could be resolved easily, as the initial request was for a utility bill or government-issued ID card to verify my identity to proceed. \n\nUnfortunately, this began almost an entire year of going back and forth with Experian regarding my ID Theft Block request. Upon submitting identity validation documents as requested, Experian would go back and request the FTC affidavit again, as if providing them additional documents started a whole new case. Id provide them with the affidavit again, then would receive another email refusing the block due to lack of utility bill or ID. It even got to the point where Experian accused me of fabricating the FTC affidavit and requested an email confirmation from the FTC that confirmed the report was filed. I immediately provided this confirmation email to them, when they denied to block the information again, requesting the original affidavit, as if they are incapable of attaching XXXX document to an existing case. \n\nThis loop went around and around for about XXXX XXXX, until I finally got frustrated and sent a legal notice to Experian about XXXX XXXX ago, stating that if they did not comply with the FCRA and block the information in my credit report within XXXX XXXX, that I would pursue civil litigation against them for irreparable financial damage and breach of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. \n\nAn important point I made to Experian around this time was that their document upload service only accepts XXXX documents at a time, so it was physically impossible to upload all required documents they requested in XXXX session, attaching them all to XXXX case to fulfill all their requirements. \n\nOnce I committed to legal action, and notified Experian that their system intentionally doesnt allow every requested document to be uploaded together, thus starting a new dispute each time that inevitably lacked a requested document causing the ID Theft Block request to be denied, I finally made progress about XXXX weeks ago. Finally, after pushing Experian to look back and combine together all documents requested from the previous cases to create XXXX full dispute, the trade line was deleted. I was so relieved that this trade line I had fought so hard to remove, that resulted from identity theft, was gone. I could finally move on and make plans to purchase a new car, or eventually a home without that item damaging my credit report and financing prospects. \n\nJust as I finally thought this absolutely awful disgrace of a process to get Experian to comply with federal law was over, today I wake up to check my email and find a notice from Experian. After nearly XXXX year correspondence regarding the block of this trade line, attempting so diligently to fulfill their requirements of requested documents being submitted, in a manner sufficient to them, and also reaching the point of a Notice of Intent to Sue having to be sent that eventually helped to push them into compliance with the FCRA, they informed me via random email today that they have reinserted the deleted trade line into my credit report after new information was presented showing somehow I made the request in error or that I knew or should have known that I received goods or money from the use of this credit card account. \n\nNo new information to support their claim was provided, and I cant possibly begin to imagine what new information could have been suddenly discovered after this trade line was researched for nearly a year while working to get the initial block that could provide them with reasonable grounds to rescind the ID Theft Block in accordance with the FCRA. The rescinding of an ID Theft Block per federal law must be on actual reasonable grounds based on new information not previously known to Experian prior to the initial block. That information simply does not exist, as I never received any goods from the use of a XXXX Credit Card. It is simply inconceivable that after such a struggle to meet their requirements to block this trade line, that should have been blocked within XXXX XXXX nearly a year ago when I initially requested it, that the block would be rescinded and place my credit report back where it was before the start of this process, reintroducing fraudulent information into my credit file, knowing full well that there is no grounds to do that. \n\nThis has only reopened Experian to legal liability and further monetary damages beyond what could have initially been sued for. This is negligence, breach of the FCRA and as cliche as it is to say, emotional distress. If Experian does not make this right and block the trade line as they did a few weeks ago, I will pursue legal action and I reserve the right to use the entire period of time that this negligence has gone on to seek damages in court. This must be made right. \n\nI also want to note, for the Experian staff reviewing this complaint, you already have all the requested documents related to this ID Theft Block request on file, so there should be absolutely no delay in rectifying this by placing the block back on the XXXX XXXX  account XXXX I will not allow you to continue to claim new documents must be submitted any time this case is brought up simply in your attempt to maliciously delay and deny a legitimate ID Theft Block request. XXXX  and XXXX  have never caused this large of a problem and you should follow suit.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-13T21:21:01.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"27858","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15255788","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-08-13T20:28:53.000Z","state":"NC","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 filed an Identity Theft Affidavit with a federal law enforcement agency, the Federal Trade Commission, gathered supporting <em>documentation</em> and submitted the block request to all XXXX <em>major</em> credit <em>bureaus</em>. Both XXXX  and XXXX  immediately complied and blocked the information within XXXX days. Experian refused to block the information citing insufficient <em>documentation</em> and requested additional documents."]},"sort":[12.680041,"15255788"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13563112","_score":12.061987,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"As a consumer, I have spent months battling to ensure the accuracy and integrity of my credit profilesomething that should be a fundamental right, not a relentless uphill fight. I have filed multiple disputes, provided detailed evidence, and communicated directly with both the original creditor and the credit bureauonly to be met with continued misinformation, negligence, and willful disregard for the truth. \n\nThis is more than a dispute over numbers on a credit report ; it is a matter of basic fairness, legal compliance, and financial justice. My credit profile directly impacts my ability to access housing, transportation, employment, and essential financial services. When false, outdated, or unverifiable information is knowingly left on my report, it is not just an inconvenienceit is a violation of my rights under federal law and a clear example of how credit reporting systems often work against the very consumers they are supposed to serve. \n\nIt should not take repeated complaints, legal citations, and escalating efforts to compel accuracy. The burden of proof should not fall entirely on the consumer when the credit bureaus and furnishers have both the data and the legal obligation to report truthfully. What I have experienced is not only unacceptableit is systemic negligence. I am calling on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to intervene, enforce the law, and restore fairness to this process. \n\nAs of XX/XX/XXXX, TransUnion continues to report this account as charged off with a balance of {$2900.00} and reflects ongoing derogatory reporting under the name XXXX. This is factually inaccurate, materially misleading, and directly contradicted by documentation provided by the furnisher itself. \n\nContradictory Evidence and Violations : XXXX. Falsified Account Status and XXXX TransUnion reports the account as placed in collections in XX/XX/XXXX, which under FCRA ( XXXX XXXX Code XXXX ( a ) ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX guidelines, should have triggered the account to be marked closed and updated to reflect {$0.00} balance with no further delinquency reporting from that date. \nHowever, TransUnion lists the account as closed in XX/XX/XXXX, deliberately inflating the delinquency timeline and falsely extending the appearance of ongoing default. \nThis is not just a clerical errorit is a misrepresentation of the accounts status in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which requires maximum possible accuracy in consumer reporting. \nA data furnisher and credit bureau can not arbitrarily select reporting dates to worsen a consumers credit standing. Doing so constitutes willful negligence and intentional harm designed to misrepresent the consumers risk profile. \nThe creditor and credit bureau are both obligated under federal law to report truthful, timely, and consistent information. Manipulating closure dates or status updates to keep an account derogatory for longer than permitted is a direct violation of FCRA and Metro 2 compliance and reflects an abuse of the credit reporting system. \n\nXXXX. Contradictory Payment Data TransUnion reports the last payment date as XX/XX/XXXX, yet the account status is marked as XXXX for XX/XX/XXXX. This is factually and procedurally impossibleif no payment was made in XXXX, the account should not reflect a current or satisfactory status for that month. \nThis type of inconsistency directly violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S. Code 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), which mandates that furnishers of credit data 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\nMoreover, TransUnion has an obligation under FCRA 1681i ( a ) to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation when a consumer disputes information. Continuing to report contradictory payment history after a formal dispute and documented error demonstrates a failure to meet that standard.\n\nThese contradictions undermine the accuracy and integrity of the credit report and appear to be either grossly negligent or intentionally misleading, both of which are unlawful under federal reporting standards. \n\nXXXX. Illegal Balance Reporting TransUnion is reporting a charge-off balance that exceeds the original credit limit, which is a direct violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), XXXX U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), which prohibits furnishing information that is known or should be known to be inaccurate. \nThe creditor claims this inflated balance is due to late fees and interest, yet these fees were allegedly added after the account was already in collections and should have been closed. This is an improper and deceptive practice that violates both federal law and Metro 2 reporting standards.\n\nAs a credit bureau, TransUnion has an independent obligation under FCRA 1681e ( b ) to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy. TransUnion should know that post-collection fee stacking is not permissible for charge-off reporting, especially when the account has been sold or closed.\n\nAdditionally, this reporting violates Metro 2 guidelines, which require that the Charge-Off Amount must not exceed the High Credit or Credit Limit unless the increase is clearly supported by itemized and contractually authorized fees. In this case, no such documentation has been provided or disclosed.\n\nBy continuing to report a balance greater than the limit without substantiated detail, both the creditor and TransUnion are engaging in material misrepresentation, credit report manipulation, and unfair and abusive practices under the Consumer Financial Protection Act ( UDAAP 12 U.S.C. 5531 ).\n\nMy challenge to their justification is outlined below, with each point supported by federal law, Metro 2 guidelines, and consumer protection regulations : The creditor has not provided itemized documentation to justify the fees that exceed the credit limit, violating FCRA 623 and Metro 2 standards.\n\nFees or interest applied after the account was placed in collections or charged off are not permitted unless clearly disclosed and contractually authorizedwhich they have failed to do.\n\nA creditor can not continue to accrue or report additional charges once the account is sold or closed, as this falsely inflates the balance and misrepresents my credit profile.\n\nGeneral references to account terms do not satisfy legal requirements without specific proof of when and how each charge was applied.\n\nReporting a charge-off balance that exceeds the credit limit without proper justification is a violation of Metro 2 , FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), and may be deemed deceptive and abusive under UDAAP ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ).\n\nTransUnion is also responsible under FCRA 1681e ( b ) for ensuring the accuracy of this information and should not report unverifiable or inflated balances.\n\n4. Conflicting and Inaccurate Remarks The Pay Status field shows the account as both Charged Off and Transferred, which is internally inconsistent and factually misleading. An account can not simultaneously be in both statusesonce transferred or sold, it must no longer be reported as charged off by the original creditor.\n\nThe Remarks field is even more contradictory, stating the account was : Transferred to another lender, Paid in full, and Charge-off.\n\nThese remarks can not all be accurate, and together they paint a deliberately confusing and damaging picture of the accounts status. Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), furnishers must not report information that they know or have reasonable cause to believe is inaccurate.\n\nThis type of inconsistent reporting also violates Metro 2 guidelines, which require that the account status, remarks, and payment fields must align and reflect the true lifecycle of the accountespecially once it has been sold or closed.\n\nContinuing to report these contradictory statuses misleads creditors and scoring models, unfairly portraying me as a higher credit risk and causing material harm to my financial reputation.\n\nFurthermore, reporting an account as paid in full and charged off at the same time, while also stating it was transferred, is not only inaccurateit is reckless and deceptive, constituting an unfair practice under UDAAP ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ).\n\n5. Intentional Harm and Reckless Disregard TransUnion has continued to furnish this account with knowingly false, outdated, and derogatory data, even after receiving clear documentation that the account was sold and should no longer be reported.\n\nSpecifically, TransUnion was provided with : A debt sale notice from XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX, confirming that the account was sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nA formal response from the creditor confirming that all ownership, servicing, and reporting responsibilities were relinquished as of XX/XX/XXXX, and that no further information would be furnished to the credit bureaus. \nDespite this, TransUnion continued reporting the account for nearly two additional months after it was placed in collections, which is a direct violation of Metro 2 guidelines and FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). Once notified that the furnisher no longer owns or services the debt, the credit reporting agency is obligated to stop furnishing or updating that tradeline.\n\nMore troubling is that these inaccurate updates were not corrected until after multiple formal disputes were submitted by me as the consumer. If the tradeline were properly verified from the beginning, it would not have taken months of repeated disputes and evidence submissions to address these errors.\n\nAs a consumer, I should not have to exhaust time, energy, and resources to correct obvious inaccuraciesespecially after the credit bureau and furnisher were provided with all necessary documentation. This reflects a complete failure of the credit bureaus duty to ensure maximum possible accuracy under FCRA 1681e ( b ) and constitutes a pattern of neglect that erodes public trust in the credit reporting system.\n\nThe prolonged failure to correct these known errorscombined with contradictory account remarks, inflated balances, and inaccurate reporting datesdemonstrates reckless disregard for the truth and violates core consumer protections.\n\nThis conduct also constitutes an unfair and abusive act or practice under UDAAP ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ), as it results in foreseeable consumer harm, misrepresents the accounts current status, and inflicts unjustified damage to my creditworthiness.\n\n6. Grounds for Complete Removal Under Federal Law Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), credit bureaus are required to report information with maximum possible accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ). When information is proven to be inaccurate, incomplete, unverifiable, or misleading, the credit reporting agency must either correct or delete the information within 30 days of receiving notice of dispute ( 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) ).\n\nIn this case, the reporting by TransUnion remains factually incorrect, internally inconsistent, and legally unsupportedeven after repeated disputes and verified documentation were provided.\n\nThe account includes : Contradictory statuses ( e.g., charged off, paid in full, and transferred ), A charge-off balance exceeding the credit limit without itemized support, Inaccurate payment history, Improper reporting after the account was sold, And remarks that misrepresent the nature and resolution of the account.\n\nThe Metro 2 credit reporting guidelinesused by all major credit bureausrequire clear, consistent, and verifiable reporting. This account fails to meet those standards on multiple fronts.\n\nBecause TransUnion has failed to correct these errors after multiple disputesand because the information remains materially harmful, misleading, and unverifiablecomplete removal of the tradeline is not only justified but legally required.\n\nContinued reporting of an account that violates FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ( inaccurate furnishing ) and FCRA 1681e ( b ) ( failure to maintain accuracy procedures ) exposes both the credit bureau and furnisher to regulatory enforcement and civil liability.\n\nTherefore, I am formally requesting the immediate and permanent deletion of this account from my TransUnion credit file in accordance with my rights under the FCRA.\n\n7. Failure to Validate Debt and Provide Legal Chain of Title While XXXX has confirmed in writing that this account was sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX d/b/a Structured Settlement on XX/XX/XXXX, neither XXXX nor the alleged new owner has provided a complete and legally sufficient chain of title to establish rightful ownership of the debt. \nAs it stands, no party has produced documentation tracing the full legal assignment of the account, such as a bill of sale, assignment contract, or any itemized documentation showing the lawful transfer of ownership from originator to collector. \nUnder the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. 1692g ), consumers have the right to request validation of a debt, which includes not just a statement of the amount owed, but proof that the party seeking to collect or report the debt has legal standing to do so.\n\nAn email or letter simply stating that the debt was sold is not sufficient under federal law. If XXXX has relinquished all rights to the debt and XXXX XXXX XXXX has failed to provide the full chain of title, then there is currently no verifiable party with legal authority to collect or report this debt. \nReporting a debt to a credit bureau without establishing legal ownership or valid assignment is a violation of both the FCRA and FDCPA. It is considered an unfair and deceptive practice under UDAAP ( 12 U.S.C. 5531 ) and undermines the consumers right to a transparent and lawful dispute process.\n\nTherefore, if neither the creditor nor the debt collector can demonstrate clear, documented legal ownership of the account, it must be removed entirely from my credit report as an unverifiable tradeline that does not meet the legal threshold for credit reporting or collection activity.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-17T02:40:30.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"483XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13563112","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-17T02:29:19.000Z","state":"MI","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Failure to Validate Debt and Provide <em>Legal</em> Chain of Title While XXXX has <em>confirmed</em> in writing that this account was sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX d/b/a Structured Settlement on XX/XX/XXXX, neither XXXX nor the alleged new owner has provided a complete and <em>legally</em> <em>sufficient</em> chain of title to establish rightful ownership of the debt."]},"sort":[12.061987,"13563112"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3653903","_score":8.988541,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"The following is a list of events that have occurred with National Credit Systems Inc. between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. Recordings of conversations, pictures, and other documentation are available to you to support our statements. If you need any of this information in order to further assist with this case, we would be more than happy to provide it. \n\nNational Credit Systems ( NCS ) contacted us ( two roommates ) on XX/XX/XXXX in an attempt to collect a debt of {$880.00} on behalf of XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX. This debt is in regards to claims of unpaid services and damages that XXXX XXXX is alleging we owe. {$97.00} of this debt is legitimate and we paid this on XX/XX/XXXX. The majority of the claimed debt has been fabricated by XXXX XXXX. Our case representative told us if we do not pay this owed debt that it would be reported to the three major credit agencies. When asked how long we have until it would be reported, he indicated that it may be on the XXXX of XXXX ( 3 days later ). Additionally, our representative told us that XXXX XXXX claimed that we were not present during the move-out inspection and that we had not provided a forwarding address, both of which are untrue. He then informed us we will be sent an email with information on how we may submit documents to dispute the claims against us. \n\nThat same day we called NCS back attempting to get information on receiving a Debt Validation letter in order to see the exact charges and how to dispute the debt. Our case representative stated that he does not review the evidence since that was the role of the client services department and they would email us at an undisclosed time. We were then transferred to the operations manager : the case representatives supervisor, he was unavailable so we left him our contact information. Additionally we attempted to email NCS on XX/XX/XXXX to request a debt validation letter, but their email address inbox was full. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, we called our case representative to get information on the Debt Validation letter as well as how to dispute the debt since we had not received any contact from him, his supervisor, or the Client Services department. He stated again that we would receive an email from their client services department on how to dispute the debt, and how to provide them relevant documentation. He gave us the mailing address of a P.O. box, but when we asked to get a valid email for us to provide our documentation he began interrupting us and over forty seconds wouldn't let us speak until we hung up. \n\nWe called NCS again on XX/XX/XXXX and were transferred to a different account representative who we informed we still have not received any information on how to go about disputing the debt. We were informed that our account was officially marked as disputed and that she would send us to the department that deals with the dispute process. She said that our representative should have already requested for this department to contact us, and that we should hear from them before the end of the week, we did not. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, we printed the evidence and documentation we would provide to NCS to dispute the alleged charges. The evidence included a highlighted section of our lease showing the pet fee of ( {$300.00} ) was not owed, and our move-in checklist showing a broken blind and dirty carpets we were charged (  {$25.00} ) and ( {$160.00} ) for respectively. Additionally we provided the move-out statement signed by us and a XXXX XXXX staff member on XX/XX/XXXX proving that we were present during the move-out inspection and what our forwarding address would be. Also, we did not dump bulk items in the trash compactor ( {$150.00} XXXX ; XXXX XXXX accuses us of doing so since they found a box in the recycling with one of our names on it, which is circumstantial evidence at best. We wrote three pages outlining why the charges were invalid and the burden of proof should not be on us. XXXX XXXX also failed to apply our security deposit of XXXX {$150.00} XXXX to this balance ; we provided NCS  with a document proving we paid this security deposit upon moving in in XX/XX/XXXX. We then mailed the letter and documentation to the P.O. box provided to us by our case representative along with the aforementioned documents. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, we called our case representative again and were informed that our dispute letter was received and that insufficient/no evidence was provided to them in the letter. They also stated that our dispute information and evidence was sent to XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX and they were waiting to hear back. During the call with our case representative, we asked specifically who investigates the evidence for the account since we wished to discuss the evidence with them. He did not answer our question, and said we did not provide sufficient evidence. He proceeded to change the subject by reiterating the consequences of not paying the balance owed, but does not provide any information about how and when this will be reported. We asked to speak uninterrupted and asked again about who actually investigates the evidence and how the decision was made that we provided insufficient evidence. He interrupts us, does not answer the question, and changes the subject. We ask a third time, who is reviewing the evidence and if we can speak with them to see how these decisions were made. He interrupted us again and transferred us to his supervisor without our consent. His supervisor was not there, so we left another message requesting information on who reviews the evidence and how they determine if a debt is actually owed. We stated this was the third time we have attempted to contact him specifically and still not received any response. \n\nAt this point ( XX/XX/XXXX ) we attempted to pay the portion of the debt that was rightfully owed, {$97.00} for utilities and damages/wear & tear to the apartment that was not notated on our move-in checklist. The NCS website asks for two of three fields in order to log into our account : the account number, the total debt owed, or a social security number. We attempted to log in twice with valid information and were then locked out of the account due to incorrect information. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, we called NCS since we had not received a phone call from them since XX/XX/XXXX. We connected with our case representative again and we requested an update on our account. We mention that we still have not heard back from his supervisor who we have left several messages for. After asking again, if we can talk to the investigator, he told us that he can not tell us who to talk to at this time. Additionally he states that our account has been marked as do not call, related to COVID-19. We explicitly stated that we want NCS to contact us. The case representative then states that we have 90 days from XX/XX/XXXX, before the account is reported on our credit. This was the first time we had heard this from him, even though we had requested this information multiple times. \n\nHe continues by stating XXXX XXXX has already reported us to the Rental History Bureau and if the account is settled, they would ensure that the report was removed. We expressed that we have attempted to pay {$97.00} of the debt, but the NCS website did not allow us access to the account. He tried to walk us through accessing the site, but we still could not access our account. He gives us the option to pay the amount of ( {$97.00} ) over the phone, I pay the amount and get a confirmation number. We ask again why NCS is not allowed to call us and that can be changed, since we would like to stay as updated as possible. He offers to transfer us to his supervisor 's voicemail as we remind him that this is now the fourth time we have left him a message with no response. He doesnt give us any reason as to why we arent being contacted by his supervisor and transfers us to leave yet another message. \n\nOur last call with NCS was on XX/XX/XXXX, when our case representative called us asking if we were ready to pay the remainder of what we owe. This indicates that he forgot about our dispute of the charges due to a lack of competency or that he was attempting to pressure us into paying the debt. He then informs us that XXXX XXXX had responded to our dispute as of XX/XX/XXXX, and that they provided pictures of all relevant damages and restated that the debt is valid. \nWhen asked specifically what was provided that proved the validity of the debt he put us on hold before he told us an email was sent with all of the relevant evidence XXXX XXXX provided. We still have not received this email. \n\nAt this point in the conversation he began monologuing about how to pay the remainder of the debt and without us being able to speak he put us on hold again. Once he returns we explain that we would like to review the evidence that XXXX XXXX provided while he is on the line. He said we could review it and call him back since he has two calls waiting. We reiterate that we would like to speak with the investigator handling our case. He tells us that we can not speak with the investigator but he will transfer us to his supervisor. We express our frustration about not receiving contact back from his supervisor, but he says there is nothing more he can do. We argue this is an unfair process if we are required to prove our innocence while not even being allowed to speak with the investigator handling our case. He says he is sorry we feel that way and hangs up.\n\nOur case representative has made clear that he has no idea whether or not we legitimately owe this debt and that his job is to solely enforce the collection of this debt. He has not given us any information on how our dispute is handled and who handles it. Without this and the ability to speak with the investigator handling our case, we are not capable of fairly refuting the charges against us. We have contacted the Operations Manager for NCS a total of five times without speaking to him or receiving any contact back. NCS claims to have a fair process of collecting debt, but as we have clearly shown, it is  anything but. \n\nFinally, we would like to make you aware of our ongoing legal dispute with XXXX XXXX that we believe has bearing on this debt. In XXXX of XXXX, we were living at one of XXXX XXXX properties and we had begun to notice wet/moldy carpet in the basement area of the townhouse. We made several attempts to have XXXX XXXX address this with little to no attempt to remedy the situation on their part. In XXXX of XXXX groundwater flooded the basement and caused thousands of dollars in damages to our belongings. At this point, XXXX XXXX finally decided to take the matter seriously and began addressing the situation. In early XXXX they attempted to force us to move into another one of their townhomes three months before our lease ended without compensation for damages or moving expenses. We expressed our desires to be released from our contracts ; XXXX XXXX attempted to pressure us into signing an NDA and release of liability within a 24 hour period. After stating that we needed more time to review the legal document, XXXX XXXX charged us and threatened to evict us over an alleged pet and extra roommate. At this point the lease was terminated and we moved out on XX/XX/XXXX. Since then we have had a lawyer submit a demand letter to XXXX XXXX with compensation for damages related to groundwater flooding and confirmed toxic blackmold due to their gross negligence. XXXX XXXX refused to pay our demands and sent our alleged charges to NCS for collection. We believe XXXX XXXX has fabricated these charges in retaliation to our refusal to abide by their demands and to profit from us as much as they can.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-05-15T18:34:23.000Z","issue":"False statements or representation","sub_product":"Other debt","zip_code":"27560","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3653903","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"National Credit Systems,Inc.","date_received":"2020-05-15T17:57:56.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Attempted to collect wrong amount"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["She said that our representative should have <em>already</em> requested for this department to contact us, and that we should hear from them before the end of the week, we did not. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, we printed the evidence and <em>documentation</em> we would provide to NCS to dispute the alleged charges."]},"sort":[8.988541,"3653903"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21861416","_score":7.438789,"_source":{"product":"Credit card","complaint_what_happened":"FORMAL DISPUTE, FRAUD CLAIM, AND NOTICE OF REGULATORY ESCALATION Unauthorized Balance Transfer and Associated Fees I am writing to formally dispute an unauthorized balance transfer in the amount of {$17000.00}, along with an associated transaction fee of {$690.00}, posted to my credit card account ending in XXXX. \n\nThis transaction was not authorized by me, occurred without my knowledge or consent, and took place during a documented XXXX  XXXX attack and coordinated fraud attempt targeting my accounts. \n\nThe funds were transferred to an XXXX XXXX issued by XXXX XXXX ( account ending in XXXX ), with which I have no affiliation and no corresponding account on my credit reports ( see XXXX  XXXX ). \n\nI am also formally disputing the handling of my claim, which has now been closed multiple times without explanation, without evidence review, and while I was actively attempting to submit documentation. \n\nXXXX. CONTEXT : COORDINATED FRAUD PATTERN Beginning XX/XX/XXXX, I was subjected to a large-scale spam attack, coinciding with repeated fraudulent attempts to transfer funds to external Apple Card accounts : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in XXXX ) This demonstrates a persistent and evolving fraud attempt, not an isolated event. \n\nXXXX. CRITICAL FACTS ESTABLISHING FRAUD I have never conducted a balance transfer of this magnitude and any transfers I have done recently have been to pay off my Bank of America cards I have no relationship with either account ( XXXX or XXXX ) Neither account appears on my credit reports ( Exhibit XXXX ) No new accounts or inquiries exist I have never carried a balance remotely approaching {$17000.00} Most critically : A fraudulent balance transfer attempt on XX/XX/XXXX was made using a newly reissued card that had not been opened, accessed, or activated by me. \nThis confirms the activity was not initiated by me and could not have been authorized through normal account access. \n\nDetailed Chronological Timeline of Events XX/XX/XXXX Spam Bombing Attack Begins/ Credit Bureaus Frozen On XX/XX/XXXX, I began experiencing what appeared to be a coordinated spam bombing attack against my email account. I was receiving an overwhelming volume of spam emails, which appeared designed to obscure legitimate communications and interfere with my ability to monitor account activity. \n\nIn response, I immediately took protective action and froze my accounts with all three major credit bureaus. \n\nSupporting XXXX  : XXXX  XXXX Credit Bureau Freeze Confirmations XX/XX/XXXX IT Security Review/ Password and Account Protection On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted my IT department and explained that I was being targeted by a spam bombing attack. My IT department advised me on immediate steps to secure my accounts and helped me implement spam filters until the attack stopped. He also permanently deleted the spam emails from XX/XX/XXXX while he was working on my account hence no XX/XX/XXXX email evidence. To be clear, we did a THOROUGH review of the emails to find any suspicious emails or transaction alerts before doing so. \n\nHe can be contacted at : XXXX : XXXX to corroborate. \n\nPer his suggestion, I also checked XXXX Password Checkup and XXXX Password Security to determine whether any of my passwords had been involved in a security breach. Some passwords were flagged as compromised, but based on the available information, my Bank of America credentials were not identified as compromised. \n\nI changed the compromised passwords and continued monitoring my accounts closely. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX IT Security Measures email request XXXX  XXXX Sworn Declaration of whereabouts ( XX/XX/XXXX ) XX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Balance Transfer Posts WITH NO FRAUD ALERT On XX/XX/XXXX, an unauthorized balance transfer in the amount of {$17000.00} was processed on my Bank of America credit card account ending in XXXX. A related transaction fee of {$690.00} was also charged. \n\nThe transfer was made to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank, account ending in XXXX. \nI did not authorize this transaction. I have no affiliation with this XXXX XXXX account, and no such card or corresponding account appears on my credit reports. \n\nMost concerning, I received no fraud alert, text message, email notification, or verification request for this large and highly unusual transaction. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX Account Statement Showing Unauthorized Balance Transfer and Transaction Fee XX/XX/XXXX Fraud Alerts Received for Attempted Transfers to XXXX XXXX Ending in XXXX XXXX XXXX, I received a text message from Bank of America XXXX XXXX XXXX stating that a balance transfer had been attempted to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, account ending in XXXX. I was taking my children to school at the time. \nXXXX XXXX, I received another fraud notification regarding attempted activity. I responded NO to confirm that I did not authorize the attempted balance transfer. \n\nI immediately called Bank of America to cancel the card and report that I was being targeted. I specifically informed the representative that I had been experiencing spam bombing attacks and that I believed someone was actively attempting to defraud me. \n\nDuring this call, no one informed me that an unauthorized {$17000.00} balance transfer had already been charged the day before, on XX/XX/XXXX, to the same XXXX XXXX account ending in XXXX. The representative did not mention any suspicious transactions or connect the XX/XX/XXXX attempted transfer alerts to the XX/XX/XXXX transaction. \n\nThis is one of the most troubling facts : Bank of America sent alerts for attempted transfers on XX/XX/XXXX, but did not send any alert for the larger transfer that actually went through on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nSupporting Exhibits : XXXX  XXXX Screenshot of XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX  Fraud Alert Text Referencing Apple Card Ending in XXXX Exhibit XXXX Screenshot of XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX  Fraud Alert and NO Response XX/XX/XXXX Unauthorized Charges Discovered / Card Canceled and Reissued On XX/XX/XXXX, I checked my Bank of America accounts and saw that the balance on my card ending in XXXX was over {$20000.00}. \n\nI then discovered two unauthorized charges that had posted on XX/XX/XXXX : {$17000.00} unauthorized balance transfer {$690.00} transaction fee These charges were connected to the unauthorized balance transfer to : Transaction Type : Balance Transfers Offer ID : XXXX Reference number : XXXX Merchant Name : Balance Transfer Apple CA I immediately contacted Bank of America. I explained that I did not authorize the transaction, that I had already reported suspicious activity on XX/XX/XXXX, and that I had been experiencing spam bombing attacks. \nBank of America canceled my card and sent a replacement card. I was told that I would need to complete and return a letter that would be sent to me, and that I needed to return it within 10 days. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX Account Snapshot Showing Unauthorized Charges XX/XX/XXXX Credit Reports Reviewed / No Matching Accounts or Balances I logged into my credit reports ( all three bureaus ) to confirm whether any new accounts had been opened in my name. \n\nThe reports showed : No new accounts opened in my name No new inquiries No XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account ending in XXXX No XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX account ending in XXXX No outside credit card balances large enough to justify a balance transfer of this size I have been carrying low balances outside of Bank of America for a long time. Nothing in my credit reports supports or explains a transfer of this amount. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX Credit Reports Showing No Matching Apple Card Accounts, No New Accounts, No Inquiries, and No Balances Supporting the Transfer XX/XX/XXXX FTC Identity Theft Report Filed On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed an identity theft report with the Federal Trade Commission. \n\nThis report was filed because the unauthorized balance transfer, spam bombing attack, and repeated attempted transfers strongly indicated that I was the victim of coordinated identity theft and fraud. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX FTC Identity Theft Report XX/XX/XXXX Police Report Filed With XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Department On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed a police report with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Department, XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nAn officer came to my home, and I showed him the information and documentation I had gathered, including the suspicious activity, the spam attack, and the fraudulent balance transfer. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX Police Report XX/XX/XXXX Bank of America Claim Closed Before Evidence Was Submitted By XX/XX/XXXX, I had not received the letter in the mail that Bank of America told me would be sent after my XX/XX/XXXX call. I also had not received a temporary credit for the fraudulent transaction that was promised on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nI called Bank of America again. The representative placed me on hold for a long time and stated that I should have received my credit by then. \n\nDuring this call, I was told that my claim had been closed, even though I had not submitted my evidence yet and had not received the letter I had been told to expect. \n\nThe representative reopened or reissued the claim and stated that I should receive the letter shortly. She also told me that I would have to return the letter within 10 days of receiving it, not 10 days from the claim date. This was confusing because I had previously been told I had 10 days, but I had not yet received anything that would allow me to submit my documentation properly. \n\nThis was the first point at which it became clear that my claim was being handled inconsistently and possibly closed without a proper review. \n\n\nXX/XX/XXXX New Fraud Attempt on Reissued, Unactivated Card On XX/XX/XXXX, I received another alert regarding an attempted balance transfer. \nThis time, the attempted transfer was for {$17000.00} to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, account ending in XXXX. \n\nThis was especially alarming because the request was made on my newly reissued Bank of America card, which had been issued due to the prior fraud. I had not opened the envelope containing the new card, had not accessed the new card, and had not activated it. \n\nThis is a critical fact. A balance transfer request was attempted on a reissued card that I had not opened or activated. This further confirms that the fraudulent activity was not initiated by me and could not have resulted from my normal use of the card. \n\nFor this attempted transfer, I received both a text alert and an email alert from Bank of America. This contrasts sharply with the XX/XX/XXXX unauthorized transfer, for which I received no alert despite the much larger and successful transaction. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Fraud Alert for Attempted Transfer to XXXX XXXX Ending in XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Immediate Call to BofA / Agent Accuses Me of Liability and Locks Me Out Immediately after receiving the XX/XX/XXXX attempted balance transfer alert, I called Bank of America. \n\nI explained the full situation again, including : The ongoing spam bombing attack The prior unauthorized balance transfer The XX/XX/XXXX attempted fraud alerts The fact that I had already filed a claim The fact that this new attempted transfer was made on a reissued card that had not been opened or activated During this call, the agent told me that my claim had been closed and that I had been found liable for the transfer. \n\nI was horrified. When I asked for details, the agent was rude and told me she could not talk to me. She then locked me out of my accounts and told me I would have no access until I went into a financial center and showed two forms of identification. \n\nThis was deeply distressing because I was calling to report another active fraud attempt, and instead of receiving help, I was locked out of my accounts and accused of being liable for a transaction I did not authorize. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX In-Person Visit to Bank of America XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX and XXXX Immediately after being locked out, I went in person to the Bank of America XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX and XXXX in XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nI worked with XXXX XXXX. \n\nAt the branch : I explained the full fraud situation again I provided two forms of identification I entered my PIN when my debit card was swiped I explained that I had been spam attacked I explained that I had already reported the fraud I explained that the new attempted transfer was made on a reissued card that had not been opened or activated XXXX XXXX eventually called the Bank of America fraud department. \n\nWe spoke with a male fraud department representative who told me that my claim had been closed and that I had been found liable. \n\nI argued that this made no sense because : I had not uploaded all of my evidence I had not received the letter in the mail I had not been given an alternate way to submit documentation I had reported the fraud immediately I had received alerts for related attempted transfers I had no relationship with the XXXX XXXX  accounts involved The latest attempt occurred on a reissued, unactivated card After a very confusing conversation and a very long period of time, the fraud representative stated that he had reopened my claim and unlocked my card so I could access the claim online. \nI checked my phone while still at the branch and confirmed that the claim was accessible again. However, there was no link to upload additional documents. \n\nWhen I pointed this out, the representative placed me on hold again for a long time. He eventually came back and told me that it could take up to 24 hours for the upload link to appear and that I should be able to upload my documentation the next day. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX Email to XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX, I also emailed XXXX to report the fraudulent transfer request and to document that fraud attempts were continuing. \n\nI also changed my Bank of America password online. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX Email to XXXX Regarding Fraudulent Transfer Request XX/XX/XXXX Ongoing Spam Bombing Attack Also on XX/XX/XXXX, I continued to experience an active spam bombing attack. \n\nBetween approximately XXXX XXXX  and XXXX XXXX  XXXX, I received : Over 1,600 spam emails to my spam folder Over 30 spam emails that made it into my inbox This was happening at the same time I received the Bank of America notification regarding the attempted balance transfer. \n\nThe spam bombing was ongoing and directly overlapped with the fraud attempt. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX Spam Attack Screenshots and Logs Showing XXXX Spam Emails and XXXX Inbox Emails XX/XX/XXXX Claim Closed Again Overnight Despite Being Reopened the Prior Day On the morning of XX/XX/XXXX, I saw that I had received an email from Bank of America XXXX XXXX XXXX  the night before stating that my claim had been closed again. \n\nThis was shocking because on XX/XX/XXXX I had spent hours : Calling Bank of America Going in person to the financial center Providing two forms of ID Entering my PIN Speaking with the branch representative Speaking with the fraud department Having the claim reopened Being told I would be able to upload evidence the next day The XX/XX/XXXX email made it appear as if everything that happened on XX/XX/XXXX had never occurred. \n\nAt this point, I felt as though Bank of America was actively preventing me from defending myself against fraud. I had repeatedly attempted to provide evidence, but my claim was closed before I could upload it, reopened only after significant effort, and then closed again overnight before the upload function was made available. \n\nThis sequence made me feel gaslit, mistreated, and obstructed in my attempt to resolve a clearly fraudulent transaction. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX Claim Closed Again / Escalation to Supervisor / Continued Obstruction On the morning of XX/XX/XXXX, after discovering that my claim had been closed again at XXXX XXXX  the prior evening ( see XXXX  XXXX ), and at XXXX XXXX  ( see XXXX XXXX ) I received an email that stated that a final review was done and my claim was declined! \n\nI immediately called Bank of America again to seek clarification and escalation. \n\nRequest for Supervisor and Escalation During this call, I specifically requested to speak with a fraud claims supervisor. I was transferred to an individual identified as XXXX from XXXX. \n\nI then retold the entire sequence of events once again, including : The spam bombing attack beginning XX/XX/XXXX The unauthorized XX/XX/XXXX balance transfer The XX/XX/XXXX fraud alerts that I declined The fact that I never received a notification for the actual fraudulent transaction The XX/XX/XXXX attempted transfer on a reissued, unactivated card The branch visit where I spent hours verifying my identity and reopening the claim The repeated assurances from multiple Bank of America representatives that : o I would receive a letter o I would receive an upload link to submit evidence o My claim had been reopened o My accounts were secured At this point in the call, I was extremely distressed and crying uncontrollably, as I had now spent weeks attempting to resolve what is clearly a fraudulent transaction and had instead been : Given conflicting and inconsistent information Passed repeatedly between departments Prevented from submitting evidence Locked out of my accounts Told I was liable for a transaction I did not authorize Concerns Expressed During Call I clearly expressed to XXXX that : There has been a complete failure of customer service and fraud protection I do not understand how a fraudulent transaction of this magnitude was approved without alerting me I do not understand how multiple employees are providing contradictory information about the claims process I feel that I am being passed from department to department to avoid resolution I do not understand how a newly issued, unactivated replacement card could immediately be compromised again I do not feel that my finances are safe at Bank of America I further explained that : I have no involvement whatsoever with the fraudulent transaction I have provided and attempted to provide documentation demonstrating this I am being prevented from properly defending myself Response from Fraud Supervisor ( XXXX ) XXXX was professional and empathetic ; however, he confirmed that : My claim had been closed He was unable to confirm whether the claim had actually been reopened the prior day during my in-branch visit This was particularly concerning because I had : Spent hours in person at a branch Verified my identity with two forms of ID and PIN entry Been explicitly told by a fraud representative that everything was being taken care of and the claim was reopened Further Instructions Given XXXX provided me with a phone number for the fraud claim reviewing department and instructed me to call them on Monday, as they were not open at the time of the call. \n\nHe further instructed me that I would need to : Repeat the entire situation again Request that they provide me with a way to submit documentation demonstrating that I am not involved in this fraudulent transaction, as they have been actively trying to accuse me and hold me liable for a crime I did not commit. \n\nResulting Impact and Ongoing Harm At this point, the process had become circular and non-functional. I expressed clearly that : I feel like I am on a hamster wheel, being asked to repeat the same facts over and over without resolution I no longer have confidence that anything I am told by the bank is accurate or reliable I feel that I am being defrauded twice : o First by the individual ( s ) who stole my money o Second by the institution that allowed the transaction and is failing to correct it I also raised fundamental questions that remain unanswered : Why has a basic investigation not determined this was fraud? \nCan the bank not : o Trace where the funds were transferred?\n\no Confirm that the receiving account does not belong to me?\n\no Identify the origin location of the transfer and compare it to my actual location on XX/XX/XXXX? \no Recall or freeze the transferred funds? \n\nNotice of Further Action I informed XXXX that : I am prepared to file a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission I am prepared to engage legal counsel My husband, XXXX XXXX, and I are prepared to withdraw substantial funds ( approaching $ XXXX combined ) from Bank of America and move our banking and mortgage relationship elsewhere Personal and Professional Impact I also explained the real-world consequences of this failure : I have a scheduled mental wellness retreat in XXXX beginning Sunday through Wednesday ( XX/XX/XXXX ), which is now overshadowed by this unresolved issue Instead of resolution after nearly three weeks, I am now forced to carry this stress into that time To reiterate : I am raising two small children I work in a high-demand executive role as Senior Vice President at Entertainment Media Ventures I have just launched a new company, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, where I serve as XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX  I do not have ANY TIME as it is, and Bank of America has wasted dozens of hours of my time, taking away from critical work projects and time with my family Despite this, I have been : Treated dismissively Denied clear answers Prevented from submitting evidence And at times made to feel as though I am being treated as responsible for criminal activity rather than the victim of it Conclusion of XX/XX/XXXX Events At the conclusion of this call, there was still : No resolution No confirmed active claim under proper review No ability to submit evidence No assurance that my accounts are secure This situation is completely unacceptable, and I am demanding immediate resolution. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank of America Sent at XXXX XXXX  Stating Claim Was Closed Again XX/XX/XXXX Escalation Attempt and Breakdown in Support Process On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Bank of America at XXXX, following prior instructions from a representative identified as XXXX. Upon reaching an agent, I immediately requested to speak with a supervisor due to the ongoing urgency and complexity of my fraud claim. \n\nInstead of being connected to a supervisor, I was transferred multiple times across departments. At each transfer, I was required to restate the full details of my situation. Eventually, I was connected with an individual who I believed to be a supervisor ; however, they appeared unfamiliar with my case and required a full re-explanation. That individual informed me that they had no information on how I could submit supporting evidence for my fraud claim, which directly contradicts prior guidance I had received. \n\nI was then transferred again. After once more explaining the situation, I discovered that I had been routed back to general customer service, rather than a fraud or supervisory team. At this point, after more than an hour on the phone and repeated failed transfers, I became extremely distressed. \nI formally requested that all calls from this date be reviewed and that the conduct of the customer service representatives involved be placed under formal internal review, as the handling of my case was disorganized, inefficient, and wholly inadequate given the seriousness of a fraud claim. The repeated misrouting and lack of procedural knowledge prevented me from submitting critical evidence and materially delayed resolution of my claim. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX Failed Fax Attempts and Paid Third-Party Transmission On XX/XX/XXXX, I attempted to submit my fraud dispute documentation via fax to XXXX, as instructed. Multiple attempts to transmit the documents were unsuccessful and rejected. \nDue to the urgency of ensuring my evidence was received, I paid {$50.00} to send the documents via XXXX  XXXX  ( XXXX ). I received a confirmation indicating that the fax transmission was successful ( see XXXX XXXX ). \n\nTo further ensure delivery, I sent the documents again via an additional fax service ( XXXX  ), and received a second confirmation of successful transmission ( see XXXX  XXXX ). \n\nDespite following all provided instructions and incurring out-of-pocket expenses to do so, I have not received confirmation from Bank of America that my documentation has been properly received or logged into my case file. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX Successful Fax Confirmation XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Successful Fax Confirmation XXXX  XX/XX/XXXX Conflicting Information, Hostile Interaction, and IP Address Dispute On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted Bank of America again and spoke with a representative identified as XXXX ( XXXX  ), who was empathetic and attempted to assist. I was then transferred to an individual named XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, whose conduct was notably unprofessional and dismissive. I am formally requesting that this call be pulled and reviewed, as his behavior materially added to the distress and mishandling of my case. \n\nFollowing this interaction, I was transferred to XXXX, a supervisor, who stated that she would : File internal customer complaints regarding prior interactions Add notes documenting my repeated attempts to submit evidence Keep the fraud claim open until documentation is confirmed received During this call, XXXX stated that the IP address associated with the fraudulent transaction was consistent with my historical usage. \n\nI explicitly dispute this assertion. At the time of the unauthorized transaction, I was physically present at my office in XXXX XXXX in XXXX XXXX, a highly secured facility with verifiable access logs and surveillance records. I am prepared to provide supporting evidence confirming my location. \n\nAdditionally, it is widely recognized that IP addresses can be spoofed or masked, particularly in cases involving coordinated fraud or spam attacks. The presence of a familiar IP address alone does not constitute proof of authorization ( see XXXX  XXXX ). \nXXXX advised that I should also submit my documentation via certified mail, and confirmed that notes would be added to ensure my claim remains open pending receipt and review of my materials. \n\nSupporting Exhibit : XXXX  XXXX FBI.GOV article explaining the prevalence of IP address spoofing and its use in fraudulent activity. \n\nThis article explains that IP addresses can be manipulated, masked, or spoofed by bad actors to make a transaction appear as though it originated from a legitimate user or familiar location. Techniques such as VPN masking, proxy routing, and spoofing tools are commonly used in coordinated fraud and spam attacks. \n\nThe existence of a matching or familiar IP address does not constitute reliable proof of user authorization, particularly in cases involving : Spam or phishing attacks Unauthorized account access Coordinated fraud attempts This exhibit directly challenges Bank of Americas assertion that an IP address consistent with prior usage is sufficient evidence to attribute the transaction to me. It supports the position that additional authentication evidence is required to establish authorization. \n\nXX/XX/XXXX Reversal of Temporary Credit and Ongoing Financial Harm On XX/XX/XXXX, I logged into my Bank of America account and observed that the previously issued temporary credit had been removed without prior notice or explanation. \n\nAs a result, my account balance reverted to approximately {$20000.00}, and I am now incurring interest charges on a balance that I continue to dispute as fraudulent. \n\nThis action has caused immediate and ongoing financial harm, including : Accrual of interest on a disputed and unauthorized transaction Significant negative impact on my account standing Additional emotional distress given the unresolved status of my fraud claim At no point prior to the removal of the temporary credit was I provided : A formal determination letter Supporting evidence for denial of my claim Confirmation that my submitted documentation had been received and reviewed Given that my fraud claim remains disputed and under active submission of supporting evidence, the removal of the temporary credit appears premature and procedurally improper. \n\nI am requesting : Immediate reinstatement of the temporary credit pending full investigation Reversal of all interest and fees associated with the disputed transaction A written explanation detailing the basis for removal of the credit Final Notice of Escalation If this matter is not resolved promptly and appropriately, I will have no choice but to escalate this dispute further. This includes filing formal complaints with the Better Business Bureau, the Federal Trade Commission, and all other relevant regulatory and oversight authorities, as well as pursuing direct legal action against Bank of America. \n\nI am fully prepared to provide the extensive documentation, timeline, and supporting exhibits outlined herein, which clearly demonstrate both the fraudulent nature of this transaction and the banks failure to conduct a reasonable and consistent investigation. I will also seek recovery of all damages incurred, including financial losses, interest charges, and any additional remedies available under applicable law. \n\nI strongly urge Bank of America to take immediate corrective action to resolve this matter before further escalation becomes necessary. \n\nI declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of XXXX and the United States of America that the foregoing statements, timeline, and supporting exhibits are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. \nI further declare that all documents submitted in support of this claim are authentic and have not been altered, and that this statement is made in good faith in connection with a fraud dispute.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-05-04T19:03:56.000Z","issue":"Problem with a purchase shown on your statement","sub_product":"General-purpose credit card or charge card","zip_code":"90046","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21861416","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","date_received":"2026-05-04T18:45:30.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Card was charged for something you did not purchase with the card"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In response, I immediately took protective action and froze my accounts with all three <em>major</em> credit <em>bureaus</em>. \n\nSupporting XXXX  : XXXX  XXXX Credit <em>Bureau</em> Freeze Confirmations XX/XX/XXXX IT Security Review/ Password and Account Protection On XX/XX/XXXX, I contacted my IT department and explained that I was being targeted by a spam bombing attack. My IT department advised me on immediate steps to secure my accounts and helped me implement spam filters until the attack stopped."]},"sort":[7.438789,"21861416"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7600426","_score":7.2855268,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to inform you that I have received a copy of my credit report and it has come up with some errors. You reported several wrong personal identifiers in the file, which may jeopardize my identity if they are not changed immediately! \nI want this resolved as soon as possible so please remove all inaccuracies from your records before any bad consequences happen because these things can really harm someone's life. \nMy only name is XXXX XXXX XXXX, I do not have another name or alias. I insist that you remove all names from your system that do not match XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nAlso, my current address is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX, XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX! I am requesting that the information in my file be updated to reflect only my current correct address. Any address that you have on file for me that deviates from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX, XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX is not accurate and should be removed immediately. \nI also ask that you remove any employers and phone numbers associated with my credit report. I do not AUTHORIZE you to retain or report any information, which consists of unverified claims about myself being potentially outdated or inaccurate. \nPlease do not use old or incorrect information about me. I understand that you must complete this update within 30 days of receipt of my letter, which means it's imperative we get everything accurate! \nI look forward to your written response confirming your compliance on this matter as well as an updated credit report. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX Please send your written response to my address of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX, XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX I am reporting that there are some negative items in my credit profile, but I have not confirmed or accepted that these are accurate. I dispute these claims and demand that any negative information be removed from the reports immediately.The claims that this information in my report is negative, untrue, incorrect, incomplete, untimely, and not verifiable are unsubstantiated. I have yet to be provided physical verifiable proof that the claims of negativity within my report are true.After reviewing my report I noticed several deviations from mandatory reporting standards therefore the data in my report can not be accurate and complete! With that said, I refute your allegations and challenge you to provide proof that you have the right to report this incomplete negative information about me. Document that you have complied with the reporting requirements, and report without any deviations. If you have not complied with the requirements or there are any negative aspects below that have been challenged, you must remove them from my report. Per 15 U.S.C 1681e 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 \" Also per 12 CFR Part 1022 ( Regulation V ) requires furnishers to : A - Furnish information about accounts or other relationships with a consumer that has integrity. B - Furnish information about accounts or other relationships with a consumer that is accurate. C - Conduct reasonable investigations of consumer disputes According to CRRG, in order to make a lawful report, you must follow the Metro 2 compliance standards. Also as stated in the CRRG Any Deviation From These Standards Jeopardizes The Integrity of The Data. This means that any mistakes in reporting claims can make the information less accurate. This is important to remember because it affects the accuracy of any federally regulated reports. With that said! I found some mistakes and inaccuracies in your report and I would like to invoke my rights to dispute/challenge these inaccurate and non-compliant items. If you continue to report claims that are not perfect, it shows that you do not care about my rights as a consumer. I don't think it's fair for you to report on me in a way that isn't confirmed to be ethical and meets the standards of certified reporting. The following claims about me were not reported correctly and do not meet federal requirements. I am challenging these claims and asking for proof that the proper reporting standards were followed. \nchallenged account : XXXX  ( XXXX ) - ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) XXXX ( Original Creditor : ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX is reporting on my consumer credit file without providing me any communication regarding the account and debt alleged owed XXXX under FDCPA they are suppose to provide me a notice within 5 days before furnishing on my reporting, providing me notice of the debt pursuant to 15 U.S. Code 1692g - Validation of debts- a ) Notice of debt ; contents Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing ( 1 ) the amount of the debt ; ( 2 ) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed ; ( 3 ) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector ; ( 4 ) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector ; and ( 5 ) a statement that, upon the consumers written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor. they did not lawfully provide proper communication that i have a right under 15 U.S. Code 1692g - Validation of debts- ( b ) Disputed debts If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection ( a ) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. Collection activities and communications that do not otherwise violate this subchapter may continue during the 30-day period referred to in subsection ( a ) unless the consumer has notified the debt collector in writing that the debt, or any portion of the debt, is disputed or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor. Any collection activities and communication during the 30-day period may not overshadow or be inconsistent with the disclosure of the consumers right to dispute the debt or request the name and address of the original creditor. 15 U.S. Code 1666b - Timing of payments- ( a ) Time to make payments A creditor may not treat a payment on a credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan as late for any purpose, unless the creditor has adopted reasonable procedures designed to ensure that each periodic statement including the information required by section 1637 ( b ) of this title is mailed or delivered to the consumer not later than 21 days before the payment due date. These companies are reporting late payments, collections, and 30 day, 60 days,120 days payment on dates that are PPNL PAID AND NEVER LATE there fore prompting me to not be able to properly responded during the dunning period for the alleged debt which does not constitute for me to be liable by law under 15 U.S. Code 1692g - Validation of debts ( c ) Admission of liability The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer.15 U.S. Code 1681b - Permissible purposes of consumer reports- ( a ) In general Subject to subsection ( c ), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other : ( 1 ) In response to the order of a court having jurisdiction to issue such an order, a subpoena issued in connection with proceedings before a Federal grand jury, or a subpoena issued in accordance with section 5318 of title 31 or section 3486 of title 18. ( 2 ) In accordance with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates. ( 3 ) To a person which it has reason to believe ( A ) intends to use the information in connection with a credit transaction involving the consumer on whom the information is to be furnished and involving the extension of credit to, or review or collection of an account of, the consumer ; they are communicating with Third parties TRANSUNION, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX with out proper permissible purpose under 15 U.S. Code 1692c - Communication in connection with debt collection- ( a ) Communication with the consumer generally Without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, a debt collector may not communicate with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt ( b ) Communication with third parties Except as provided in section 1692b of this title, without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector, or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as reasonably necessary to effectuate a postjudgment judicial remedy, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than the consumer, his attorney, a consumer reporting agency if otherwise permitted by law, the creditor, the attorney of the creditor, or the attorney of the debt collector. this company is also furnishing incorrect incomplete in accurate information they are claiming to have charged off and collecting which they can not do, i asked them for validation of debt This letter is being sent to you in response to notices sent to me from your company and more importantly, due to your erroneous reporting to the Credit Bureaus, the highly negative impact on my personal credit report. Please be advised that this is not a refusal to pay, but a notice sent pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 ( b ) that your claim is disputed and validation is requested. This is NOT a request for verification or proof of my mailing address, but a request for VALIDATION made pursuant to the above-named Title and Section. I respectfully request that your offices provide me with competent evidence that I have any legal obligation to pay you regarding the following account numbers : 15 U.S. Code 1681e - Compliance procedures-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. ( 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. ( 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. ( 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. ( 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. 15 U.S. Code 1681i - Procedure in case of disputed accuracy- ( a ) Reinvestigations of disputed information ( 1 ) Reinvestigation required ( A ) In general Subject to subsection ( f ) and except as provided in subsection ( g ), if the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumers file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly, or indirectly through a reseller, of such dispute, the agency shall, free of charge, conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate and record the current status of the disputed information, or delete the item from the file in accordance with paragraph ( 5 ), before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the agency receives the notice of the dispute from the consumer or reseller. Please provide me with : Your legal staff will agree that compliance with this request is required under the state laws and the Federal Statutes. In addition to the questionnaire below, please attach copies of : - Agreement with your client that grants you the authority to collect on this alleged debt, or proof of acquisition by purchase or assignment. - Agreement that bears the signature of the alleged debtor wherein he or she agreed to pay the creditor. - Proof that you are licensed to collect in my state. - Your license numbers and Registered Agent or Agent of Service. - The identity, name, and address of the original creditor. Please also be advised that this letter is not only a formal dispute, but a request that you cease and desist any and all collection activities. At this time, I will also inform you that if your offices have reported invalidated information to any of the 3 major Credit Bureaus ( XXXX, XXXX or TransUnion ) this action might constitute fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Due to this fact, if any negative mark is found on any of my credit reports by your company or the company that you represent, I will not hesitate to bring legal action against you for the following : 1. Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, ,2. Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and 3. Defamation of Character If your offices can provide proper documentation as requested in the following Declaration, I will require at least 30 days to investigate this information and during such time all collection activity must cease and desist. Also, during this validation period, if any action is taken which could be considered detrimental to any of my credit reports, I will consult with my legal counsel for suit. This includes listing any information with a credit reporting repository that could be inaccurate or invalidated or verifying an account as accurate, when in fact there is no provided proof that it is accurate. I would also like to request, in writing, that no telephone contact be made by your company to my home or my place of employment. If your offices attempt telephone communication with me, including but not limited to computer generated calls and calls or correspondence sent to or with any third parties, it will be considered harassment and I will have no choice but to file suit. All future communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted in this letter by USPS. If your company fails to respond to this validation request within 30 days from the date of your receipt, all references to this account must be deleted and completely removed from my credit report and a copy of such deletion ( to any/all of the XXXX major credit reporting bureaus : XXXX, XXXX and TransUnion ) request shall be sent to me immediately. It would be advisable that you assure your records are in order before I am forced to take legal action against your company and your client. This is an attempt to correct your records, any information obtained shall be used for that purpose. they failed to do so. they also did not provide me with my 1099C tax form for the charge off i have to turn all charged off debts in on for income on 1099c in which they are claiming to have done while unlawfully still trying to collect.\n\nFurthermore, as you can see from the information above, your agency is not reporting accurate information. According to [ 15 USC 1681e ] ( b ), 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 to whom the report relates.\n\nYou are in violation of the FCRA, [ 15 USC 1681b ] ( a ) ( 2 ) : ( a ) In general. Subject to subsection ( c ), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other : ( 2 ) In accordance with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates. I offer my testimony herein that I have not authorized or given anyone access to my private and confidential records and certainly not the information you're reporting.\n\nMy rights were violated, especially my right to privacy, according to [ 15 USC 1681 ] ( a ) ( 4 ) There is a need to ensure that consumer reporting agencies exercise their grave responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and respect for the consumers right to privacy To Whom It May Concern : This letter is being sent to you in response to notices sent to me from your company and more importantly, due to your erroneous reporting to the Credit Bureaus, the highly negative impact on my personal credit report. Please be advised that this is not a refusal to pay, but a notice sent pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 ( b ) that your claim is disputed and validation is requested.\n\nThis is NOT a request for verification or proof of my mailing address, but a request for VALIDATION made pursuant to the above-named Title and Section. I respectfully request that your offices provide me with competent evidence that I have any legal obligation to pay you regarding the following account numbers : XXXX ( XXXX ) - ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX ( Original Creditor : ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Please provide me with : Your legal staff will agree that compliance with this request is required under the state laws and the Federal Statutes.\n\nIn addition to the questionnaire below, please attach copies of : - Agreement with your client that grants you the authority to collect on this alleged debt, or proof of acquisition by purchase or assignment.\n\n- Agreement that bears the signature of the alleged debtor wherein he or she agreed to pay the creditor.\n\n- Proof that you are licensed to collect in my state.\n\n- Your license numbers and Registered Agent or Agent of Service. \n- The identity, name, and address of the original creditor. \n-copy of the debt purchase aggrement with creditor with terms and conditions attached Please also be advised that this letter is not only a formal dispute, but a request that you cease and desist any and all collection activities. \nAt this time, I will also inform you that if your offices have reported invalidated information to any of the XXXX major Credit Bureaus ( XXXX, XXXX or TransUnion ) this action might constitute fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Due to this fact, if any negative mark is found on any of my credit reports by your company or the company that you represent, I will not hesitate to bring legal action against you for the following : 1. Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, ,2. Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and 3. Defamation of Character If your offices can provide proper documentation as requested in the following Declaration, I will require at least 30 days to investigate this information and during such time all collection activity must cease and desist.\n\nAlso, during this validation period, if any action is taken which could be considered detrimental to any of my credit reports, I will consult with my legal counsel for suit. This includes listing any information with a credit reporting repository that could be inaccurate or invalidated or verifying and account as accurate, when in fact there is no provided proof that it is accurate.\n\nI would also like to request, in writing, that no telephone contact be made by your company to my home or my place of employment. If your offices attempt telephone communication with me, including but not limited to computer generated calls and calls or correspondence sent to or with any third parties, it will be considered harassment and I will have no choice but to file suit. All future communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted in this letter by USPS.\n\nIf your company fails to respond to this validation request within 30 days from the date of your 1 of 2 receipt, all references to this account must be deleted and completely removed from my credit report and a copy of such deletion ( to any/all of the XXXX major credit reporting bureaus : XXXX, XXXX and TransUnion ) request shall be sent to me immediately.\n\nIt would be advisable that you assure your records are in order before I am forced to take legal action against your company and your client. This is an attempt to correct your records, any information obtained shall be used for that purpose.\n\nTo Whom It May Concern : I am concerned about the validity and accuracy of your recent investigation of the accounts that are reporting on my credit report. About 30 days ago I requested an investigation because I felt the item ( s ) below were not being reported legally.\n\nA couple of days ago I received a letter stating that your investigation was complete and the items listed above were Verified. \nThis letter is my formation request for you to explain to me how you conducted your investigation and for you to provide me your method of verification. \nYour response should to me should include the following at a minimum. \nPlease explain to me what your representatives uncovered to lead them to believe that you are reporting this item as it legally should be reported? \nWhat certified documents were reviewed to conclude your investigation? \nPlease provide a complete copy of all of the information that was transmitted to the data furnisher as part of the investigation. \nWhat did it cost your company to obtain the documents needed to complete your investigation? \nPlease provide proof of your timely procurement of certified documents. \nDid you speak directly to any agent of the company that was reporting the information to confirm the accuracy of what you are reporting? \nIf yes to above : Who did you speak to? \nOn what date? \nHow long was the conversation? \nWhat was their position? \nWhat telephone number did you call? \nWhat is the name of the employee of your company that spoke directly to the above party? \nWhat is the position of the employee of your company that spoke directly to the above party? \nHow long has that employee been employed by your company? \nWhat formal training was provided to this employee to investigate items of this kind? \nWas there any e-mail or written communication between members of your company and the above party? \nProvide copies of all correspondence ; supply copies of any and all conclusive documentation to prove that you have in fact conducted a reasonable investigation of the account in question. \nProvide the date of the commencement of delinquency. \nProvide the SPECIFIC date reporting that these items will cease. \nEnclosed with your response to the above questions I respectfully request a notarized affidavit confirming the information that is provided is true and correct as per my civil rights granted under several federal laws. This information should not come as a form letter response. \nMy initial dispute was detailed and directly related to the account in question. A template response will not be an acceptable response. If you can not supply ALL of the above information in a timely manner as detailed in several laws, including but not limited to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, I must immediately demand the permanent removal of this item from my credit report. \nThis erroneous entry is detrimental to my overall credit rating and has caused me severe financial and emotional distress. If you choose not to provide the above-requested deletion or requested/required documentation of your investigation, I will pursue the enforcement of my constitutional rights via federal court proceedings. As you are well aware this information will come out through my formal discovery process and necessary depositions. I have recently studied constitutional consumer protection laws along with civil/federal court procedures. I will represent myself pro-se and will formally request a jury trial. \nHere is a list of accounts that you claimed were verified FALSE LATE PAYMENT REPORTING THESE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS WHERE NEVER LATE [ PPNL ] [ PAID NEVER LATE ] AND SHOULD BE UPDATED AS PAID AS AGRRED. \n\nXXXX [ LATE PAYMENT DATE XX/XX/XXXX ] XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX [ LATE PAYMENT DATE XX/XX/XXXX ] XXXX XXXX [ LATE PAYMENT XX/XX/XXXX DAY XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ] XXXX XXXX XXXX [ LATE PAYMENT DATES XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ] XXXX [ LATE PAYMENT DATE XX/XX/XXXX ] XXXX XXXXXXXX [ LATE PAYMENT DATES XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ] Inaccurate late payments like this are preventing me from obtaining credit that I'm trying to apply for because it's lowering my credit score big time. I've already been in talks with some experts who have informed me that there are laws to ensure that inaccurate credit information can't be reported.\n\nI have fully investigated my rights and found that the Fair Credit Reporting Act does not allow you to victimize innocent, credit worthy individuals by reporting erroneous and inaccurate information. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the following applies to me : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 8 ) Ability of Consumer to Dispute Information Directly with Furnisher ( A ) In general. The Federal banking agencies, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Commission shall jointly prescribe regulations that shall identify the circumstances under which a furnisher shall be required to re-investigate a dispute concerning the accuracy of information contained in a consumer report on the consumer, based on a direct request of a consumer.\n\n( B ) Considerations. In prescribing regulations under subparagraph ( A ), the agencies shall weigh : ( i ) the benefits to consumers with the costs on furnishers and the credit reporting system ; ( ii ) the impact on the overall accuracy and integrity of consumer reports of any such requirements ; ( iii ) whether direct contact by the consumer with the furnisher would likely result in the most expeditious resolution of any such dispute ; and ( iv ) the potential impact on the credit reporting process if credit repair organizations, as defined in section 403 ( 3 ), including entities that would be a credit repair organization, but for section 403 ( 3 ) ( B ) ( i ), are able to circumvent the prohibition in subparagraph ( G ).\n\n( C ) Applicability. Subparagraphs ( D ) through ( G ) shall apply in any circumstance identified under the regulations promulgated under subparagraph ( A ).\n\n( D ) Submitting a notice of dispute- A consumer who seeks to dispute the accuracy of information shall provide a dispute notice directly to such person at the address specified by the person for such notices that : ( i ) identifies the specific information that is being disputed ; ( ii ) explains the basis for the dispute; and ( iii ) includes all supporting documentation required by the furnisher to substantiate the basis of the dispute.\n\n( E ) Duty of person after receiving notice of dispute. After receiving a notice of dispute from a consumer pursuant to subparagraph ( D ), the person that provided the information in dispute to a consumer reporting agency shall : ( i ) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information ; ( ii ) review all relevant information provided by the consumer with the notice ; ( iii ) complete such person 's investigation of the dispute and report the results of the investigation to the consumer before the expiration of the period under section 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) within which a consumer reporting agency would be required to complete its action if the consumer had elected to dispute the information under that section; and ( iv ) if the investigation finds that the information reported was inaccurate, promptly notify each consumer reporting agency to which the person furnished the inaccurate information of that determination and provide to the agency any correction to that information that is necessary to make the information provided by the person accurate.\n\n( F ) Frivolous or Irrelevant Dispute ( i ) In general. This paragraph shall not apply if the person receiving a notice of a dispute from a consumer reasonably determines that the dispute is frivolous or irrelevant, including -- ( I ) by reason of the failure of a consumer to provide sufficient information to investigate the disputed information; or ( II ) the submission by a consumer of a dispute that is substantially the same as a dispute previously submitted by or for the consumer, either directly to the person or through a consumer reporting agency under subsection ( b ), with respect to which the person has already performed the person 's duties under this paragraph or subsection ( b ), as applicable.\n\n( ii ) Notice of determination. Upon making any determination under clause ( i ) that a dispute is frivolous or irrelevant, the person shall noti","date_sent_to_company":"2023-09-25T04:35:08.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"28306","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7600426","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2023-09-25T04:35:02.000Z","state":"NC","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":["At this time, I will also inform you that if your offices have reported invalidated information to any of the 3 <em>major</em> Credit <em>Bureaus</em> ( XXXX, XXXX or TransUnion ) this action might constitute fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Due to this fact, if any negative mark is found on any of my credit reports by your company or the company that you represent, I will not hesitate to bring <em>legal</em> action against you for the following : 1. Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, ,2."]},"sort":[7.2855268,"7600426"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"7599504","_score":7.28019,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing to inform you that I have received a copy of my credit report and it has come up with some errors. You reported several wrong personal identifiers in the file, which may jeopardize my identity if they are not changed immediately! \nI want this resolved as soon as possible so please remove all inaccuracies from your records before any bad consequences happen because these things can really harm someone's life. \nMy only name is XXXX XXXX XXXX, I do not have another name or alias. I insist that you remove all names from your system that do not match XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nAlso, my current address is XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXm requesting that the information in my file be updated to reflect only my current correct address. Any address that you have on file for me that deviates from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX is not accurate and should be removed immediately. \nI also ask that you remove any employers and phone numbers associated with my credit report. I do not AUTHORIZE you to retain or report any information, which consists of unverified claims about myself being potentially outdated or inaccurate. \nPlease do not use old or incorrect information about me. I understand that you must complete this update within 30 days of receipt of my letter, which means it's imperative we get everything accurate! \nI look forward to your written response confirming your compliance on this matter as well as an updated credit report. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX Please send your written response to my address of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX I am reporting that there are some negative items in my credit profile, but I have not confirmed or accepted that these are accurate. I dispute these claims and demand that any negative information be removed from the reports immediately.The claims that this information in my report is negative, untrue, incorrect, incomplete, untimely, and not verifiable are unsubstantiated. I have yet to be provided physical verifiable proof that the claims of negativity within my report are true.After reviewing my report I noticed several deviations from mandatory reporting standards therefore the data in my report can not be accurate and complete! With that said, I refute your allegations and challenge you to provide proof that you have the right to report this incomplete negative information about me. Document that you have complied with the reporting requirements, and report without any deviations. If you have not complied with the requirements or there are any negative aspects below that have been challenged, you must remove them from my report. Per 15 U.S.C 1681e 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 \" Also per 12 CFR Part 1022 ( Regulation V ) requires furnishers to : A - Furnish information about accounts or other relationships with a consumer that has integrity. B - Furnish information about accounts or other relationships with a consumer that is accurate. C - Conduct reasonable investigations of consumer disputes According to CRRG, in order to make a lawful report, you must follow the Metro 2 compliance standards. Also as stated in the CRRG Any Deviation From These Standards Jeopardizes The Integrity of The Data. This means that any mistakes in reporting claims can make the information less accurate. This is important to remember because it affects the accuracy of any federally regulated reports. With that said! I found some mistakes and inaccuracies in your report and I would like to invoke my rights to dispute/challenge these inaccurate and non-compliant items. If you continue to report claims that are not perfect, it shows that you do not care about my rights as a consumer. I don't think it's fair for you to report on me in a way that isn't confirmed to be ethical and meets the standards of certified reporting. The following claims about me were not reported correctly and do not meet federal requirements. I am challenging these claims and asking for proof that the proper reporting standards were followed. \nchallenged account : XXXX  ( XXXX ) - ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX  ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX ( Original Creditor : ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX is reporting on my consumer credit file without providing me any communication regarding the account and debt alleged owed XXXX under FDCPA they are suppose to provide me a notice within 5 days before furnishing on my reporting, providing me notice of the debt pursuant to 15 U.S. Code 1692g - Validation of debts- a ) Notice of debt ; contents Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing ( 1 ) the amount of the debt ; ( 2 ) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed ; ( 3 ) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector ; ( 4 ) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector ; and ( 5 ) a statement that, upon the consumers written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor. they did not lawfully provide proper communication that i have a right under 15 U.S. Code 1692g - Validation of debts- ( b ) Disputed debts If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection ( a ) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. Collection activities and communications that do not otherwise violate this subchapter may continue during the 30-day period referred to in subsection ( a ) unless the consumer has notified the debt collector in writing that the debt, or any portion of the debt, is disputed or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor. Any collection activities and communication during the 30-day period may not overshadow or be inconsistent with the disclosure of the consumers right to dispute the debt or request the name and address of the original creditor. 15 U.S. Code 1666b - Timing of payments- ( a ) Time to make payments A creditor may not treat a payment on a credit card account under an open end consumer credit plan as late for any purpose, unless the creditor has adopted reasonable procedures designed to ensure that each periodic statement including the information required by section 1637 ( b ) of this title is mailed or delivered to the consumer not later than 21 days before the payment due date. These companies are reporting late payments, collections, and 30 day, 60 days,120 days payment on dates that are PPNL PAID AND NEVER LATE there fore prompting me to not be able to properly responded during the dunning period for the alleged debt which does not constitute for me to be liable by law under 15 U.S. Code 1692g - Validation of debts ( c ) Admission of liability The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer.15 U.S. Code 1681b - Permissible purposes of consumer reports- ( a ) In general Subject to subsection ( c ), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other : ( 1 ) In response to the order of a court having jurisdiction to issue such an order, a subpoena issued in connection with proceedings before a Federal grand jury, or a subpoena issued in accordance with section 5318 of title 31 or section 3486 of title 18. ( 2 ) In accordance with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates. ( 3 ) To a person which it has reason to believe ( A ) intends to use the information in connection with a credit transaction involving the consumer on whom the information is to be furnished and involving the extension of credit to, or review or collection of an account of, the consumer ; they are communicating with Third parties XXXX, EQUIFAX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX with out proper permissible purpose under 15 U.S. Code 1692c - Communication in connection with debt collection- ( a ) Communication with the consumer generally Without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, a debt collector may not communicate with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt ( b ) Communication with third parties Except as provided in section 1692b of this title, without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector, or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as reasonably necessary to effectuate a postjudgment judicial remedy, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than the consumer, his attorney, a consumer reporting agency if otherwise permitted by law, the creditor, the attorney of the creditor, or the attorney of the debt collector. this company is also furnishing incorrect incomplete in accurate information they are claiming to have charged off and collecting which they can not do, i asked them for validation of debt This letter is being sent to you in response to notices sent to me from your company and more importantly, due to your erroneous reporting to the Credit Bureaus, the highly negative impact on my personal credit report. Please be advised that this is not a refusal to pay, but a notice sent pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 ( b ) that your claim is disputed and validation is requested. This is NOT a request for verification or proof of my mailing address, but a request for VALIDATION made pursuant to the above-named Title and Section. I respectfully request that your offices provide me with competent evidence that I have any legal obligation to pay you regarding the following account numbers : 15 U.S. Code 1681e - Compliance procedures-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. ( 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. ( 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. ( 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. ( 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. 15 U.S. Code 1681i - Procedure in case of disputed accuracy- ( a ) Reinvestigations of disputed information ( 1 ) Reinvestigation required ( A ) In general Subject to subsection ( f ) and except as provided in subsection ( g ), if the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumers file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly, or indirectly through a reseller, of such dispute, the agency shall, free of charge, conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate and record the current status of the disputed information, or delete the item from the file in accordance with paragraph ( 5 ), before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the agency receives the notice of the dispute from the consumer or reseller. Please provide me with : Your legal staff will agree that compliance with this request is required under the state laws and the Federal Statutes. In addition to the questionnaire below, please attach copies of : - Agreement with your client that grants you the authority to collect on this alleged debt, or proof of acquisition by purchase or assignment. - Agreement that bears the signature of the alleged debtor wherein he or she agreed to pay the creditor. - Proof that you are licensed to collect in my state. - Your license numbers and Registered Agent or Agent of Service. - The identity, name, and address of the original creditor. Please also be advised that this letter is not only a formal dispute, but a request that you cease and desist any and all collection activities. At this time, I will also inform you that if your offices have reported invalidated information to any of the 3 major Credit Bureaus ( Experian, Equifax or TransUnion ) this action might constitute fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Due to this fact, if any negative mark is found on any of my credit reports by your company or the company that you represent, I will not hesitate to bring legal action against you for the following : 1. Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, ,2. Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and 3. Defamation of Character If your offices can provide proper documentation as requested in the following Declaration, I will require at least 30 days to investigate this information and during such time all collection activity must cease and desist. Also, during this validation period, if any action is taken which could be considered detrimental to any of my credit reports, I will consult with my legal counsel for suit. This includes listing any information with a credit reporting repository that could be inaccurate or invalidated or verifying an account as accurate, when in fact there is no provided proof that it is accurate. I would also like to request, in writing, that no telephone contact be made by your company to my home or my place of employment. If your offices attempt telephone communication with me, including but not limited to computer generated calls and calls or correspondence sent to or with any third parties, it will be considered harassment and I will have no choice but to file suit. All future communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted in this letter by USPS. If your company fails to respond to this validation request within 30 days from the date of your receipt, all references to this account must be deleted and completely removed from my credit report and a copy of such deletion ( to any/all of the 3 major credit reporting bureaus : Equifax, Experian and TransUnion ) request shall be sent to me immediately. It would be advisable that you assure your records are in order before I am forced to take legal action against your company and your client. This is an attempt to correct your records, any information obtained shall be used for that purpose. they failed to do so. they also did not provide me with my 1099C tax form for the charge off i have to turn all charged off debts in on for income on 1099c in which they are claiming to have done while unlawfully still trying to collect.\n\nFurthermore, as you can see from the information above, your agency is not reporting accurate information. According to [ 15 USC 1681e ] ( b ), 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 to whom the report relates.\n\nYou are in violation of the FCRA, [ 15 USC 1681b ] ( a ) ( 2 ) : ( a ) In general. Subject to subsection ( c ), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other : ( 2 ) In accordance with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates. I offer my testimony herein that I have not authorized or given anyone access to my private and confidential records and certainly not the information you're reporting.\n\nMy rights were violated, especially my right to privacy, according to [ 15 USC 1681 ] ( a ) ( 4 ) There is a need to ensure that consumer reporting agencies exercise their grave responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and respect for the consumers right to privacy To Whom It May Concern : This letter is being sent to you in response to notices sent to me from your company and more importantly, due to your erroneous reporting to the Credit Bureaus, the highly negative impact on my personal credit report. Please be advised that this is not a refusal to pay, but a notice sent pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 ( b ) that your claim is disputed and validation is requested.\n\nThis is NOT a request for verification or proof of my mailing address, but a request for VALIDATION made pursuant to the above-named Title and Section. I respectfully request that your offices provide me with competent evidence that I have any legal obligation to pay you regarding the following account numbers : XXXX ( XXXX ) - ( XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( Original Creditor : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  ) XXXX XXXX  ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) XXXX ( Original XXXX : ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Please provide me with : Your legal staff will agree that compliance with this request is required under the state laws and the Federal Statutes.\n\nIn addition to the questionnaire below, please attach copies of : - Agreement with your client that grants you the authority to collect on this alleged debt, or proof of acquisition by purchase or assignment.\n\n- Agreement that bears the signature of the alleged debtor wherein he or she agreed to pay the creditor.\n\n- Proof that you are licensed to collect in my state.\n\n- Your license numbers and Registered Agent or Agent of Service.\n\n- The identity, name, and address of the original creditor.\n\n-copy of the debt purchase aggrement with creditor with terms and conditions attached Please also be advised that this letter is not only a formal dispute, but a request that you cease and desist any and all collection activities.\n\nAt this time, I will also inform you that if your offices have reported invalidated information to any of the 3 major Credit Bureaus ( XXXX, Equifax or XXXX ) this action might constitute fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Due to this fact, if any negative mark is found on any of my credit reports by your company or the company that you represent, I will not hesitate to bring legal action against you for the following : 1. Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, ,2. Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and 3. Defamation of Character If your offices can provide proper documentation as requested in the following Declaration, I will require at least 30 days to investigate this information and during such time all collection activity must cease and desist.\n\nAlso, during this validation period, if any action is taken which could be considered detrimental to any of my credit reports, I will consult with my legal counsel for suit. This includes listing any information with a credit reporting repository that could be inaccurate or invalidated or verifying and account as accurate, when in fact there is no provided proof that it is accurate.\n\nI would also like to request, in writing, that no telephone contact be made by your company to my home or my place of employment. If your offices attempt telephone communication with me, including but not limited to computer generated calls and calls or correspondence sent to or with any third parties, it will be considered harassment and I will have no choice but to file suit. All future communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted in this letter by USPS.\n\nIf your company fails to respond to this validation request within 30 days from the date of your 1 of 2 receipt, all references to this account must be deleted and completely removed from my credit report and a copy of such deletion ( to any/all of the 3 major credit reporting bureaus : Equifax, XXXX and XXXX  ) request shall be sent to me immediately.\n\nIt would be advisable that you assure your records are in order before I am forced to take legal action against your company and your client. This is an attempt to correct your records, any information obtained shall be used for that purpose.\n\nTo Whom It May Concern : I am concerned about the validity and accuracy of your recent investigation of the accounts that are reporting on my credit report. About 30 days ago I requested an investigation because I felt the item ( s ) below were not being reported legally.\n\nA couple of days ago I received a letter stating that your investigation was complete and the items listed above were Verified.\n\nThis letter is my formation request for you to explain to me how you conducted your investigation and for you to provide me your method of verification.\n\nYour response should to me should include the following at a minimum.\n\nPlease explain to me what your representatives uncovered to lead them to believe that you are reporting this item as it legally should be reported?\n\nWhat certified documents were reviewed to conclude your investigation?\n\nPlease provide a complete copy of all of the information that was transmitted to the data furnisher as part of the investigation.\n\nWhat did it cost your company to obtain the documents needed to complete your investigation?\n\nPlease provide proof of your timely procurement of certified documents.\n\nDid you speak directly to any agent of the company that was reporting the information to confirm the accuracy of what you are reporting?\n\nIf yes to above : Who did you speak to?\n\nOn what date?\n\nHow long was the conversation?\n\nWhat was their position?\n\nWhat telephone number did you call?\n\nWhat is the name of the employee of your company that spoke directly to the above party?\n\nWhat is the position of the employee of your company that spoke directly to the above party?\n\nHow long has that employee been employed by your company?\n\nWhat formal training was provided to this employee to investigate items of this kind?\n\nWas there any e-mail or written communication between members of your company and the above party?\n\nProvide copies of all correspondence ; supply copies of any and all conclusive documentation to prove that you have in fact conducted a reasonable investigation of the account in question.\n\nProvide the date of the commencement of delinquency.\n\nProvide the SPECIFIC date reporting that these items will cease.\n\nEnclosed with your response to the above questions I respectfully request a notarized affidavit confirming the information that is provided is true and correct as per my civil rights granted under several federal laws. This information should not come as a form letter response.\n\nMy initial dispute was detailed and directly related to the account in question. A template response will not be an acceptable response. If you can not supply ALL of the above information in a timely manner as detailed in several laws, including but not limited to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, I must immediately demand the permanent removal of this item from my credit report.\n\nThis erroneous entry is detrimental to my overall credit rating and has caused me severe financial and emotional distress. If you choose not to provide the above-requested deletion or requested/required documentation of your investigation, I will pursue the enforcement of my constitutional rights via federal court proceedings. As you are well aware this information will come out through my formal discovery process and necessary depositions. I have recently studied constitutional consumer protection laws along with civil/federal court procedures. I will represent myself pro-se and will formally request a jury trial.\n\nHere is a list of accounts that you claimed were verified FALSE LATE PAYMENT REPORTING THESE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS WHERE NEVER LATE [ PPNL ] [ PAID NEVER LATE ] AND SHOULD BE UPDATED AS PAID AS AGRRED. \n\nXXXX [ LATE PAYMENT DATE XX/XX/XXXX ] XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX [ LATE PAYMENT DATE XX/XX/XXXX ] XXXX XXXX [ LATE PAYMENT XX/XX/XXXX DAY XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ] XXXX XXXX XXXX [ LATE PAYMENT DATES FED XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX ] XXXX [ LATE PAYMENT DATE XX/XX/XXXX ] XXXX  XXXX [ LATE PAYMENT DATES XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX ] Inaccurate late payments like this are preventing me from obtaining credit that I'm trying to apply for because it's lowering my credit score big time. I've already been in talks with some experts who have informed me that there are laws to ensure that inaccurate credit information can't be reported. \n\nI have fully investigated my rights and found that the Fair Credit Reporting Act does not allow you to victimize innocent, credit worthy individuals by reporting erroneous and inaccurate information. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the following applies to me : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 8 ) Ability of Consumer to Dispute Information Directly with Furnisher ( A ) In general. The Federal banking agencies, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Commission shall jointly prescribe regulations that shall identify the circumstances under which a furnisher shall be required to re-investigate a dispute concerning the accuracy of information contained in a consumer report on the consumer, based on a direct request of a consumer.\n\n( B ) Considerations. In prescribing regulations under subparagraph ( A ), the agencies shall weigh : ( i ) the benefits to consumers with the costs on furnishers and the credit reporting system ; ( ii ) the impact on the overall accuracy and integrity of consumer reports of any such requirements ; ( iii ) whether direct contact by the consumer with the furnisher would likely result in the most expeditious resolution of any such dispute ; and ( iv ) the potential impact on the credit reporting process if credit repair organizations, as defined in section 403 ( 3 ), including entities that would be a credit repair organization, but for section 403 ( 3 ) ( B ) ( i ), are able to circumvent the prohibition in subparagraph ( G ).\n\n( C ) Applicability. Subparagraphs ( D ) through ( G ) shall apply in any circumstance identified under the regulations promulgated under subparagraph ( A ).\n\n( D ) Submitting a notice of dispute- A consumer who seeks to dispute the accuracy of information shall provide a dispute notice directly to such person at the address specified by the person for such notices that : ( i ) identifies the specific information that is being disputed ; ( ii ) explains the basis for the dispute; and ( iii ) includes all supporting documentation required by the furnisher to substantiate the basis of the dispute.\n\n( E ) Duty of person after receiving notice of dispute. After receiving a notice of dispute from a consumer pursuant to subparagraph ( D ), the person that provided the information in dispute to a consumer reporting agency shall : ( i ) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information ; ( ii ) review all relevant information provided by the consumer with the notice ; ( iii ) complete such person 's investigation of the dispute and report the results of the investigation to the consumer before the expiration of the period under section 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) within which a consumer reporting agency would be required to complete its action if the consumer had elected to dispute the information under that section; and ( iv ) if the investigation finds that the information reported was inaccurate, promptly notify each consumer reporting agency to which the person furnished the inaccurate information of that determination and provide to the agency any correction to that information that is necessary to make the information provided by the person accurate.\n\n( F ) Frivolous or Irrelevant Dispute ( i ) In general. This paragraph shall not apply if the person receiving a notice of a dispute from a consumer reasonably determines that the dispute is frivolous or irrelevant, including -- ( I ) by reason of the failure of a consumer to provide sufficient information to investigate the disputed information; or ( II ) the submission by a consumer of a dispute that is substantially the same as a dispute previously submitted by or for the consumer, either directly to the person or through a consumer reporting agency under subsection ( b ), with respect to which the person has already performed the person 's duties under this paragraph or subsection ( b ), as applicable.\n\n( ii ) Notice of determination. Upon making any determination under clause ( i ) that a dispute is frivolous or irrelevant, the person shall noti","date_sent_to_company":"2023-09-25T04:35:08.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"28306","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"7599504","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2023-09-25T04:35:02.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["At this time, I will also inform you that if your offices have reported invalidated information to any of the 3 <em>major</em> Credit <em>Bureaus</em> ( XXXX, Equifax or XXXX ) this action might constitute fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Due to this fact, if any negative mark is found on any of my credit reports by your company or the company that you represent, I will not hesitate to bring <em>legal</em> action against you for the following : 1. Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, ,2."]},"sort":[7.28019,"7599504"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":8,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":8}]}},"product":{"doc_count":8,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":1},{"key":"Other debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rental debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit card","doc_count":1,"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":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":8,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":4,"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":4}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"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":"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}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":8,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":8}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":8,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":4},{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":3},{"key":"Closed with monetary relief","doc_count":1}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":8,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":8}]}},"company":{"doc_count":8,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":3},{"key":"BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"National Credit Systems,Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":8,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"NC","doc_count":4},{"key":"CA","doc_count":1},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"MI","doc_count":1},{"key":"NY","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":8,"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":6}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":8,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}},"_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":{}}}