{"took":184,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":53,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14683831","_score":21.636566,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Experian, My name is XXXX XXXX and I'm Begging for your help, I'm NOT A COMPANY! \nTo get things moving, you should have more than enough time to remove these inaccurate accounts from my credit, stop ignoring my disputes I need real help!! I request to remove any/all inaccurate information from my credit report as quickly as possible. The items in question are : XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * * * * * * * * Balance : {$0.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Charged-off account still reporting derogatory despite being closed FCRA XXXX No contract or original obligation provided FDCPA XXXX No debt validation issued before reporting XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$120.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Paid/closed collection still appearing as derogatory FCRA XXXX No original agreement provided FDCPA XXXX No validation documentation provided by collector XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * * * * Balance : {$17000.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Negative account closed but not updated correctly FCRA XXXX Inaccurate balance and charge-off status FCRA XXXX Missing original contract or charge-off proof XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * * * * * XXXX Balance : {$560.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No resolution of previous dispute FDCPA XXXX No debt validation received from collector FCRA XXXX Contract and billing details never furnished XXXXXXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * * * * * * * * Balance : {$750.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No original documentation or proof of assignment FCRA XXXX Reported as collection with no reinvestigation after dispute FDCPA XXXX No notice of debt or validation sent XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$1300.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Reporting after unresolved dispute FCRA XXXX Missing contract and billing breakdown FDCPA XXXX No validation from agency XXXX XXXX  Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$230.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No original agreement FCRA XXXX Failure to verify the debt FDCPA XXXX Collector did not validate XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$140.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Unverified derogatory status FCRA XXXX Contract and obligation never produced FDCPA XXXX Collection activity without proof XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$240.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Missing validation details FCRA XXXX Derogatory entry lacks verification FDCPA XXXX Collector did not validate debt CCI Acct XXXX : XXXX * * Balance : {$230.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No documentation received FCRA XXXX Invalid dispute handling FDCPA XXXX No debt validation provided XXXX & XXXX Acct XXXX : XXXX * * Balance : {$240.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Continued collection reporting without verification FDCPA XXXX No debt validation presented FCRA XXXX Lacks original billing records","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-16T18:04:23.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30297","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14683831","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-07-16T17:57:46.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["* Balance : {$750.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No original documentation or proof of assignment FCRA XXXX Reported as collection with no reinvestigation after dispute <em>FDCPA</em> XXXX No notice of debt or <em>validation</em> sent XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$1300.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Reporting after unresolved dispute FCRA XXXX <em>Missing</em> contract and <em>billing</em> <em>breakdown</em> <em>FDCPA</em> XXXX No <em>validation</em> from agency XXXX XXXX  Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$230.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No original agreement"]},"sort":[21.636566,"14683831"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14700837","_score":21.623241,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear TRANSUNION, My name XXXX XXXX is and I'm Begging for your help, I'm NOT A COMPANY! \nTo get things moving, you should have more than enough time to remove these inaccurate accounts from my credit, stop ignoring my disputes I need real help!! I request to remove any/all inaccurate information from my credit report as quickly as possible. The items in question are : XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Violation : FCRA 611 Charged-off account still reporting derogatory despite being closed FCRA 609 No contract or original obligation provided FDCPA 809 No debt validation issued before reporting XXXX  Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$120.00} Violation : FCRA 611 Paid/closed collection still appearing as derogatory FCRA 609 No original agreement provided FDCPA 809 No validation documentation provided by collector XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$17000.00} Violation : FCRA 611 Negative account closed but not updated correctly FCRA 623 Inaccurate balance and charge-off status FCRA 609 Missing original contract or charge-off proof XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$560.00} Violation : FCRA 611 No resolution of previous dispute FDCPA 809 No debt validation received from collector FCRA 609 Contract and billing details never furnished XXXX XXXX  Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$750.00} Violation : FCRA 609 No original documentation or proof of assignment FCRA 611 Reported as collection with no reinvestigation after dispute FDCPA 809 No notice of debt or validation sent XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$1300.00} Violation : FCRA 611 Reporting after unresolved dispute FCRA 609 Missing contract and billing breakdown FDCPA 809 No validation from agency XXXX XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$230.00} Violation : FCRA 609 No original agreement FCRA 611 Failure to verify the debt FDCPA 809 Collector did not validate XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$140.00} Violation : FCRA 611 Unverified derogatory status FCRA 609 Contract and obligation never produced FDCPA 809 Collection activity without proof XXXX XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$240.00} Violation : FCRA 609 Missing validation details FCRA 611 Derogatory entry lacks verification FDCPA 809 Collector did not validate debt XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$230.00} Violation : FCRA 609 No documentation received FCRA 611 Invalid dispute handling FDCPA 809 No debt validation provided XXXX & XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$240.00} Violation : FCRA 611 Continued collection reporting without verification FDCPA 809 No debt validation presented FCRA 609 Lacks original billing records","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-16T17:57:56.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30297","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14700837","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-16T17:04:11.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["original <em>billing</em> records"]},"sort":[21.623241,"14700837"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14686513","_score":21.623241,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Experian, My name is XXXX XXXX and I'm Begging for your help, I'm NOT A COMPANY! \nTo get things moving, you should have more than enough time to remove these inaccurate accounts from my credit, stop ignoring my disputes I need real help!! I request to remove any/all inaccurate information from my credit report as quickly as possible. The items in question are : XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * * * * * * * * Balance : {$0.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Charged-off account still reporting derogatory despite being closed FCRA XXXX No contract or original obligation provided FDCPA XXXX No debt validation issued before reporting XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$120.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Paid/closed collection still appearing as derogatory FCRA XXXX No original agreement provided FDCPA XXXX No validation documentation provided by collector XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * * * * Balance : {$17000.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Negative account closed but not updated correctly FCRA XXXX Inaccurate balance and charge-off status FCRA XXXX Missing original contract or charge-off proof XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * * * * * XXXX Balance : {$560.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No resolution of previous dispute FDCPA XXXX No debt validation received from collector FCRA XXXX Contract and billing details never furnished XXXXXXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * * * * * * * * Balance : {$750.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No original documentation or proof of assignment FCRA XXXX Reported as collection with no reinvestigation after dispute FDCPA XXXX No notice of debt or validation sent XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$1300.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Reporting after unresolved dispute FCRA XXXX Missing contract and billing breakdown FDCPA XXXX No validation from agency XXXX XXXX  Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$230.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No original agreement FCRA XXXX Failure to verify the debt FDCPA XXXX Collector did not validate XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$140.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Unverified derogatory status FCRA XXXX Contract and obligation never produced FDCPA XXXX Collection activity without proof XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$240.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Missing validation details FCRA XXXX Derogatory entry lacks verification FDCPA XXXX Collector did not validate debt CCI Acct XXXX : XXXX * * Balance : {$230.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No documentation received FCRA XXXX Invalid dispute handling FDCPA XXXX No debt validation provided XXXX & XXXX Acct XXXX : XXXX * * Balance : {$240.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Continued collection reporting without verification FDCPA XXXX No debt validation presented FCRA XXXX Lacks original billing records","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-16T18:04:22.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30297","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14686513","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-16T18:03:59.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["* Balance : {$750.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No original documentation or proof of assignment FCRA XXXX Reported as collection with no reinvestigation after dispute <em>FDCPA</em> XXXX No notice of debt or <em>validation</em> sent XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$1300.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX Reporting after unresolved dispute FCRA XXXX <em>Missing</em> contract and <em>billing</em> <em>breakdown</em> <em>FDCPA</em> XXXX No <em>validation</em> from agency XXXX XXXX  Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$230.00} Violation : FCRA XXXX No original agreement"]},"sort":[21.623241,"14686513"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12851102","_score":19.75251,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing a complaint against Credence Resource Management, who is reporting a collection account for a XXXX  debt on my credit report. This account appears on both XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nOn XX/XX/year>, I sent a debt validation letter to Credence Resource Management via certified mail. They received it on XX/XX/year> ( USPS tracking confirmed ). I formally requested : A signed contract or original agreement A full itemized breakdown of charges Proof Credence had legal authority to collect Proof the debt was still within statute of limitations Credence never responded to me directly. Instead, the original creditor XXXX XXXX XXXX  sent a generic billing statement, which does not meet FDCPA validation standards. \n\nDespite the lack of proper validation, Credence continued to report the debt to XXXX and reinserted it on XXXX after it had previously been marked closed. This reinsertion was made without proper notice, which violates Section 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. \n\nAlso, my XXXX credit report is missing the Scheduled Removal Date, which is required for all negative accounts. \n\nI have included : My validation request letter Proof of USPS delivery The XXXX  statement they used to validate the debt My XXXX dispute letter Screenshots showing the account status changes on my credit reports","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-07T07:05:17.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"98373","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12851102","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Kriya Capital, LLC","date_received":"2025-04-07T06:39:07.000Z","state":"WA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Information belongs to someone else"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Instead, the original creditor XXXX XXXX XXXX  sent a generic <em>billing</em> statement, which does not meet <em>FDCPA</em> <em>validation</em> standards. \n\nDespite the lack of proper <em>validation</em>, Credence continued to report the debt to XXXX and reinserted it on XXXX after it had previously been marked closed. This reinsertion was made without proper notice, which violates Section 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act."]},"sort":[19.75251,"12851102"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17191035","_score":18.939213,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I requested full validation of this account and sent certified letters to LVNV Funding and all three credit bureaus. It has been well over 30 days, and I have not received one single piece of documentation proving this debt belongs to me. All they did was send me a bill that is not verification under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) or the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ).\n\nNow LVNV Funding is calling and threatening to sue, which is harassment under FDCPA 806 and 807. Those threats are illegal and misleading because they still havent validated the debt. Since they clearly dont understand what verification means, let me list it out : Verification of a debt requires : The original signed agreement or application with my name and signature, The full account history showing every charge and payment, The itemized balance breakdown ( principal, interest, fees ), The Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ), Proof of assignment or purchase agreement from the original creditor to LVNV, and The method and date of verification used to confirm ownership with the credit bureaus.\n\nNone of this has been provided. Instead, LVNV and the bureaus continue to report this account with missing or inconsistent Metro 2 fields, no dispute notation, and without verifying ownership clear violations of FCRA 607 ( b ) ( accuracy ), 611 ( a ) ( reinvestigation ), and Metro 2 data standards.\n\nSending me a bill and threatening legal action is not verification its intimidation. You only have 30 days to verify a debt once its disputed. That time has long passed. If this account isnt immediately removed, I will be pursuing additional complaints and legal action for failing to verify, reporting false information, and continued collection activity on an unverified debt.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-12T19:23:49.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"90250","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17191035","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","date_received":"2025-11-12T19:10:38.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I requested full <em>validation</em> of this account and sent certified letters to LVNV Funding and all three credit bureaus. It has been well over 30 days, and I have not received one single piece of documentation proving this debt belongs to me. All they did was send me a <em>bill</em> that is not verification under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( <em>FDCPA</em> ) or the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ).\n\nNow LVNV Funding is calling and threatening to sue, which is harassment under <em>FDCPA</em> 806 and 807."]},"sort":[18.939213,"17191035"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"15328629","_score":18.819134,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"On XX/XX/scrub> 2025, I received a collection letter from Second Round Limited Partnership ( XXXX  ) regarding an account they claim to be collecting on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX  ). This account was originally originated by XXXX XXXX XXXX  and serviced by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nThe XX/XX/XXXX letter from XXXX misrepresents the balance by labeling the entire amount of {$32000.00} as principal balance. In reality, the creditors own charge-off ledger reflects a breakdown of {$27000.00} principal, {$4700.00} interest, and {$220.00} fees. By falsely characterizing the debt as entirely principal, XXXX  misstated the character and legal status of the debt in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 807 ( 2 ) ( A ). \n\nThis letter also came after I disputed the debt in writing with XXXX on XX/XX/year>2025. Under FDCPA 809 ( b ), a debt collector must cease collection until validation is mailed. Instead of mailing proper validation, XXXX continued collection activity, demanded payment, and attempted to shift the burden onto me by asking that I supply documents to prove my own claim. \n\nWhen I requested validation, XXXX mailed me a package of documents purporting to establish XXXX  ownership. Those documents are incomplete and contradictory : The Bill of Sale, dated XX/XX/scrub> 2025 ( effective XX/XX/year>2025 ), is signed by XXXX  XXXX  as Servicer, but does not include Schedule I ( the loan schedule that would identify my account ). No trustee authorization was attached. \nThe Exhibit K certification from XXXX XXXX XXXX  is dated XX/XX/year>2025 nearly XXXX weeks after the Bill of Sale and references a missing Exhibit A. This creates a gap in the chain of title. \nTogether, these documents do not prove that XXXX lawfully owns the account, and therefore XXXX, acting as XXXX  agent, has not validated the debt. \n\nBy misrepresenting the balance, continuing collection without proper validation, and relying on defective ownership documents, XXXX  has engaged in : False and misleading representation of the debts character ( FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ) ) ; Continued collection activity without validation ( FDCPA 809 ( b ) ) ; Unfair collection practices under Florida FCCPA 559.72 ( 9 ) by attempting to collect amounts not permitted by law. \n\nXXXX  actions have caused confusion, XXXX, and the risk of inaccurate credit reporting. I request that the CFPB investigate XXXX  conduct, require them to cease collection until proper validation is provided, and ensure that misrepresentation of balance and unlawful collection practices do not continue.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-08-16T18:34:02.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"33596","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"15328629","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Second Round Limited Partnership, Austin, TX Branch","date_received":"2025-08-16T18:23:14.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Those documents are incomplete and contradictory : The <em>Bill</em> of Sale, dated XX/XX/scrub> 2025 ( effective XX/XX/year>2025 ), is signed by XXXX  XXXX  as Servicer, but does not include Schedule I ( the loan schedule that would identify my account ). No trustee authorization was attached. \nThe Exhibit K certification from XXXX XXXX XXXX  is dated XX/XX/year>2025 nearly XXXX weeks after the <em>Bill</em> of Sale and references a <em>missing</em> Exhibit A. This creates a gap in the chain of title."]},"sort":[18.819134,"15328629"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16141139","_score":18.774124,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"This is now my third complaint against Portfolio Recovery Associates ( PRA ) concerning their continued furnishing of an alleged XXXX XXXXXXXX debt to XXXX and other bureaus without providing full, legally required debt validation documentation under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \n\nDespite multiple formal disputes and prior CFPB complaints, PRA has failed to produce basic validation, including the bill of sale, purchase agreement, chain of title, or original signed contract. What has been provided so far is a generic response that fails to meet the standard of proper validation under federal law.\n\nViolations : FDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) : PRA has not provided competent evidence to validate the debt. \n\nNo detailed accounting of the debt, original contract, or transfer documentation. \n\nFDCPA 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( 8 ) : Reporting unvalidated, disputed debt to the credit bureaus is deceptive and misleading.\n\nPRA continues to furnish this data despite knowing it is contested and unsubstantiated.\n\nFCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) & ( b ) : As a furnisher, PRA is obligated to report only verified and accurate information.\n\nPRA has failed to respond reasonably to disputes under 1681s-2 ( b ).\n\nFCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) : Credit reporting must be based on maximum possible accuracy, which PRA has not ensured. \n\nWhats Still Missing : No bill of sale or purchase agreement No forward flow agreement No original contract showing I agreed to the debt No chain of title No detailed, itemized breakdown of charges No actual proof of ownership or assignment of the alleged debt Continued Harm : Despite disputing this account directly with PRA and via the CFPB, the collection continues to appear on my XXXX credit report and possibly others. These false entries are damaging my creditworthiness, impeding my ability to obtain housing, auto financing, and other essentials. \n\nThis is especially concerning given that no meaningful dispute investigation appears to have taken place a basic violation of FCRA 1681i.\n\nRelevant Case Law : Clark v. Capital Credit Servs., 460 F.3d 1162 ( 9th Cir. XXXX ) Failure to validate violates 1692g.\n\nTourgeman v. Collins Fin. Servs., 755 F.3d 1109 ( 9th Cir. XXXX ) Unsubstantiated debt harms credit and violates the FDCPA.\n\nDaugherty v. Convergent Outsourcing, 836 F.3d 507 ( 5th Cir. XXXX ) Credit reporting qualifies as collection activity and is governed by FDCPA.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-09-24T23:33:47.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"91324","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16141139","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2025-09-24T23:29:18.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Despite multiple formal disputes and prior CFPB complaints, PRA has failed to produce basic <em>validation</em>, including the <em>bill</em> of sale, purchase agreement, chain of title, or original signed contract. What has been provided so far is a generic response that fails to meet the standard of proper <em>validation</em> under federal law.\n\nViolations : <em>FDCPA</em> 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ) : PRA has not provided competent evidence to <em>validate</em> the debt."]},"sort":[18.774124,"16141139"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17248076","_score":17.371315,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau because I C SYSTEM, a third-party debt collection agency, has reported a derogatory collection/charge-off account under Account # XXXX on my consumer credit file. This account, showing a past-due balance of {$1000.00}, appears on my reports as a derogatory collection item, yet I have never received any legal validation, contractual documentation, billing statements, or proof of ownership from I C SYSTEM despite my disputes.\n\nBecause federal law requires accurate, verifiable, and fully documented reportingand because debt collectors are legally obligated to validate debts under the FDCPA before continuing collection or furnishing derogatory datathis account appears to be unverified, inaccurate, incomplete, and unlawfully reported.\n\nThis narrative explains in full detail what happened, my attempts to resolve the issue, and the multiple violations that appear to have occurred. \n\n1. Discovery of I C SYSTEM Account # XXXX When reviewing my credit reports, I discovered a collection account furnished by I C SYSTEM with the following information : Creditor/Collector : I C SYSTEM Account Number : XXXX Status : Collection/Charge-off Balance Reported : {$1000.00} Reporting : Appears as Derogatory Reporting Pattern : Appears across two credit bureaus No original creditor listed No dates of delinquency or service No documentation attached This was the first time I became aware of this alleged debt. I had : received no letters, received no bills, received no validation notices, received no communication at all from I C SYSTEM. \n\nBecause the law requires debt collectors to send written notice within five days of first contact ( FDCPA 809 ( a ) ), their failure to do so is an immediate red flag and a violation.\n\n2. No Debt Validation Was Ever Provided Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA 809 ( b ) ) : A debt collector must cease collection and furnish no adverse credit information until they provide proper validation of the debt.\n\nTo date : I C SYSTEM has never sent validation.\n\nI C SYSTEM has never provided proof that I owe {$1000.00}.\n\nI C SYSTEM has never provided proof of the original creditor.\n\nI C SYSTEM has never provided a copy of the contract.\n\nI C SYSTEM has never provided any accounting history.\n\nI C SYSTEM has never demonstrated ownership or assignment of this debt. \n\nYet they continue reporting the account as a derogatory collection item. \n\nThis is a direct violation of federal law. \n\n3. No Original Creditor or Contract Identified When a debt is placed in collections, a consumer must be provided : the name of the original creditor, the account number, the date of last payment, the service address, the contractual basis for the debt, and a complete itemization.\n\nI C SYSTEM has furnished none of this information.\n\nTheir reporting contains : no original creditor name, no loan or service details, no dates of delinquency, no agreement terms, no itemized charges.\n\nThis strongly suggests that : The debt may not be mine, The debt may be assigned incorrectly, The balance may be fabricated or inaccurate, I C SYSTEM may not have legal authority to report the account, The data being furnished may be incomplete or unverifiable. \n\nXXXX. Dispute Process Revealed No Documentation After discovering the I C SYSTEM account, I filed formal disputes with the credit bureaus. In these disputes, I specifically requested : validation of the debt, documentation of the original contract, itemized accounting details, proof of ownership or assignment, the method of verification, evidence of a manual reinvestigation, and all documents furnished by I C SYSTEM. \n\nHowever, the credit bureaus responded with a generic statement : The furnisher has verified that the information is accurate. \n\nYet : No documents were provided. \n\nNo contract was provided. \n\nNo proof of the debt was provided.\n\nNo itemization was provided.\n\nNo communication from I C SYSTEM was included.\n\nThis indicates that the dispute was likely processed through e-OSCAR, the automated dispute system that reduces disputes to numeric codes and often bypasses required document review.\n\nThis is not a lawful reinvestigation under FCRA 611 ( a ).\n\n5. Failure to Provide FDCPA-Mandated Validation Because I C SYSTEM is a debt collector, they are required to : send a validation notice within 5 days of first contact, identify the original creditor, provide validation upon request, cease collection while validation is pending, refrain from furnishing unvalidated information to credit bureaus. \n\nI C SYSTEM failed all XXXX requirements. \n\nThey have continued reporting a derogatory debt despite providing XXXX validation documents, which constitutes continued collection activity in violation of federal law. \n\nXXXX. I XXXX XXXX Reporting Is Incomplete and Inaccurate The reporting of Account # XXXX is missing several key data points required by federal law and credit bureau reporting standards : Missing original creditor name Missing account open date Missing date of first delinquency Missing date of last payment Missing service description Missing itemized balance breakdown Missing contractual documentation Missing validation history Missing dispute notation ( required under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) ) These omissions render the account factually incomplete, which by law means it can not be verified as accurate.\n\n7. I C SYSTEM Did Not Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation For an account to remain after a dispute, the furnisher must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation.\n\nA reasonable reinvestigation requires : review of original records, matching data to internal systems, providing documents to credit bureaus, resolving conflicting details, and confirming the debt with documentation.\n\nThere is no evidence I C SYSTEM did any of these.\n\nTheir likely response was a simple : Verified.\n\nThis is not a lawful reinvestigation.\n\nUnder federal law, this failure alone requires deletion.\n\n8. Possible Mistaken Identity or Mixed File Because the I C SYSTEM account : has no original creditor listed, carries a balance not associated with any known account, appears abruptly without prior correspondence, lacks validation, contains incomplete data, and appears only on certain reports, it raises concerns of : mixed credit file, incorrect assignment, data entry error, collection of the wrong consumer, or outdated/unverified debt.\n\nMixed files are a known problem in the credit industry, and the lack of matching identifiers suggests this may be the case.\n\n9. Harm Caused by I C SYSTEMs Reporting Because I C SYSTEM furnished unverified derogatory data, I suffered : damage to credit score, increased interest rates, difficulty securing loans or lines of credit, heightened risk assessments by lenders, emotional stress, financial harm, and reputational damage.\n\nThese damages are the direct result of unlawful reporting and the failure to validate Account # 176633.\n\n10. No Evidence I Owe a Debt to I C SYSTEM At this point, based on : absence of a contract, absence of validation, absence of itemization, absence of notices, absence of ownership proof, absence of reinvestigation documentation, absence of original creditor information, there is no evidence whatsoever that : The debt belongs to me, The debt exists, The balance is correct, I C SYSTEM owns or has rights to collect the debt, I C SYSTEM can legally furnish this information, The reporting is accurate or lawful.\n\n11. Continued Reporting Without Validation Is a Federal Violation I C SYSTEM continues furnishing information despite : no validation no verification no documentation no notices no chain-of-assignment no evidence no reinvestigation no compliance This violates : FDCPA 809 ( b ) FCRA 607 ( b ) FCRA 611 ( a ) FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) This is harmful, unlawful, and must be corrected.\n\n12. Summary of What Happened To summarize : I C SYSTEM Account # 176633 appeared on my credit reports without any prior notice.\n\nI never received validation or documentation.\n\nI C SYSTEM failed to provide the FDCPA-required validation notice.\n\nDisputes to the credit bureaus resulted in generic verified replies.\n\nNo documentation was provided by I C SYSTEM.\n\nThe account lacks original creditor details and required data fields.\n\nI C SYSTEM failed to conduct a lawful reinvestigation.\n\nReporting is incomplete, inaccurate, and unverified.\n\nI C SYSTEM continues to report without validation, in violation of federal law.\n\nThe reporting has caused financial, emotional, and reputational harm.\n\nBecause of these issues, I request the CFPB review this matter and hold I C SYSTEM accountable for furnishing unverified and incomplete information.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-14T23:20:52.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"33161","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17248076","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"I.C. System, Inc.","date_received":"2025-11-14T23:15:29.000Z","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":["I XXXX XXXX Reporting Is Incomplete and Inaccurate The reporting of Account # XXXX is <em>missing</em> several key data points required by federal law and credit bureau reporting standards : <em>Missing</em> original creditor name <em>Missing</em> account open date <em>Missing</em> date of first delinquency <em>Missing</em> date of last payment <em>Missing</em> service description <em>Missing</em> itemized balance <em>breakdown</em> <em>Missing</em> contractual documentation <em>Missing</em> <em>validation</em> history <em>Missing</em> dispute notation ( required under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) ) These omissions"]},"sort":[17.371315,"17248076"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18309356","_score":16.542183,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : FORMAL REQUEST FOR DEBT VALIDATION PORTFOLIO RC ACCOUNT To Whom It May Concern, I am writing regarding the alleged collection account you are reporting under PORTFOLIO RC on my TransUnion credit report. I dispute this debt in its entirety and I am requesting full validation under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g.\n\nACCOUNT INFORMATION YOU ARE REPORTING ( FROM MY TRANSUNION REPORT ) Collection Agency : PORTFOLIO RC Account Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX High Balance : {$1400.00} Balance Owed : {$1400.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date of Last Activity : XX/XX/XXXX Date Reported : XX/XX/XXXX Account Rating : Derogatory Creditor Type : Other Collection Agencies Account Status : Open Payment Status : Collection / Charge-Off Creditor Remarks : Dispute resolved; customer disagrees Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nThis account contains missing information, contradictory data, and incomplete reporting, which raises concerns about its validity and your authority to collect. \n\nREQUESTED DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAW Under FDCPA 1692g, I request that you provide : 1. Proof That I Am Responsible for This Debt A copy of the original contract or agreement containing my signature Any documentation showing I agreed to the charges being reported Proof that I was legally obligated to the amount billed 2. Complete Accounting Breakdown Provide a full itemization of the {$1400.00} balance, including : Original principal Interest Late fees Any added charges A complete ledger showing how the balance was calculated 3. Proof of Ownership / Chain of Custody Provide : Proof of assignment or transfer from XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX to PORTFOLIO RC Evidence that my specific account ( XXXX * XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was included Dates of transfer 4. Proof of Authority to Collect Provide proof that PORTFOLIO RC is authorized to collect this debt, including : The applicable state license number The governing regulatory authority 5. Internal Account Details Original account number from XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nOriginal date of delinquency Date the account became a charge-off Final payment amount and date FCRA REPORTING INACCURACIES Your reporting contains elements that may violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including : Reporting a collection account as OPEN, which is inaccurate Missing payment history Missing last payment date No verification documentation Marking the dispute as resolved without providing the procedures used to verify, in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) Since you have not proven the accuracy or legality of this account, continued reporting may violate : FCRA 1681i Duty to reinvestigate FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) Duty to report accurate information FCRA 1681b Permissible purpose REQUIRED ACTION Until full validation is provided : You must cease all collection activity You may not report this account to any credit bureau You may not sell, transfer, or assign this account If you can not validate the debt : Delete the PORTFOLIO RC account from TransUnion Provide written confirmation of deletion","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-27T00:34:13.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"79707","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18309356","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2025-12-27T00:18:25.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Subject : FORMAL REQUEST FOR DEBT <em>VALIDATION</em> PORTFOLIO RC ACCOUNT To Whom It May Concern, I am writing regarding the alleged collection account you are reporting under PORTFOLIO RC on my TransUnion credit report. I dispute this debt in its entirety and I am requesting full <em>validation</em> under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( <em>FDCPA</em> ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g."]},"sort":[16.542183,"18309356"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"18412693","_score":16.133978,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am writing regarding the alleged collection account you are reporting under PORTFOLIO RC on my credit reports. This account is currently being reported by TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax. I dispute this debt in its entirety and I am requesting full validation pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), 15 U.S.C. 1692g, as well as my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ).\n\nACCOUNT INFORMATION YOU ARE REPORTING ( FROM MY CREDIT REPORTS ) Collection Agency : PORTFOLIO RC Original Creditor : XXXX  XXXX, XXXX. \n\nAccount Number : XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX High Balance : {$1400.00} Balance Owed : {$1400.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date of Last Activity : XX/XX/XXXX Date Reported : XX/XX/XXXX Account Rating : Derogatory Creditor Type : Other Collection Agencies Account Status : Open Payment Status : Collection / Charge-Off Creditor Remarks : Dispute resolved; customer disagrees This account contains missing information, contradictory data, and incomplete reporting, which raises serious concerns about its validity, accuracy, and your authority to report and collect this alleged debt.\n\nREQUESTED DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAW Pursuant to FDCPA 1692g, I request that you provide the following : 1. Proof That I Am Responsible for This Debt A copy of the original contract or agreement containing my signature Documentation showing I agreed to the charges being reported Proof that I was legally obligated to the amount billed 2. Complete Accounting Breakdown Original principal Interest Late fees Any additional charges A complete ledger showing how the {$1400.00} balance was calculated 3. Proof of Ownership / Chain of Custody Proof of assignment or transfer from XXXX  XXXX, XXXX. to PORTFOLIO RC Evidence that my specific account ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) was included Dates of transfer 4. Proof of Authority to Collect Proof that PORTFOLIO RC is authorized to collect this debt Applicable state license number Governing regulatory authority 5. Internal Account Details Original XXXX  XXXX account number Original date of delinquency Date the account became a charge-off Final payment amount and date FCRA REPORTING INACCURACIES Your reporting contains elements that violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), including but not limited to : Reporting a collection account as OPEN, which is inaccurate Missing payment history Missing last payment date No verification documentation Marking the dispute as resolved without providing the procedures used to verify, in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) Since you have not proven the accuracy or legality of this account, continued reporting may violate : FCRA 1681i Duty to reinvestigate FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) Duty to report accurate information FCRA 1681b Permissible purpose REQUIRED ACTION Until full validation is provided : You must cease all collection activity You may not continue reporting this account to any credit bureau You may not sell, transfer, or assign this account If you can not validate this debt : Delete the PORTFOLIO RC account from TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax Provide written confirmation of deletion","date_sent_to_company":"2026-01-02T03:06:17.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"79707","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"18412693","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","date_received":"2026-01-02T02:58:49.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["REQUESTED DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAW Pursuant to <em>FDCPA</em> 1692g, I request that you provide the following : 1. Proof That I Am Responsible for This Debt A copy of the original contract or agreement containing my signature Documentation showing I agreed to the charges being reported Proof that I was legally obligated to the amount <em>billed</em> 2."]},"sort":[16.133978,"18412693"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12248579","_score":15.965788,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing a complaint against Credit Corp Solutions for attempting to collect an invalid and unverified debt, sending conflicting documentation regarding the ownership of the debt, and engaging in deceptive, unfair, and abusive debt collection practices in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 15 U.S.C. 1692g and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2. \n\n1. Misleading and Conflicting Documentation - On XX/XX/year>, I contacted Credit Corp Solutions after receiving a pre-legal notice that listed The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX original creditor and XXXX XXXX as the current creditor. \n- When I asked for debt validation, the representative was rude, dismissive, and repeatedly insinuated that I was lying instead of providing the legally required documentation. \n- The only validation I received was a duplicate of the same pre-legal notice, except this time the \" current creditor '' was changed to Credit Corp Solutions instead of XXXX XXXX. This raised serious concerns about the legitimacy and accuracy of their records, creating further inconsistencies regarding the true ownership of this debt. \n- When I called them out on this discrepancy, the representative refused to provide any further proof, continued to imply that I was being dishonest, and hung up on me. \n- On XX/XX/year>, I received another pre-legal notice from Credit Corp Solutions, but this time, the letter did not include the name of the current creditor at all. This omission raises further concerns about the legitimacy of this debt collection attempt. A debt collector is required to provide clear and accurate information, including the name of the entity that currently owns the debt. \n- The fact that I have now received three different communications with conflicting or missing information regarding the creditor suggests potential violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and misrepresentation of the debt. \n\n2. Failure to Provide Proper Debt Validation Despite my written request for debt validation, Credit Corp Solutions has failed to provide any of the following legally required documentation : Proof of Legal Ownership of the Debt - A copy of the assignment or sale agreement proving that Credit Corp Solutions legally owns or has the right to collect on this debt.\n\n- If another entity still owns the debt, written proof of Credit Corp Solutions ' authority to collect. \n\nComplete Account and Billing History - A detailed breakdown of the alleged balance, including all charges, adjustments, and payments made. \n- A line-by-line itemized statement showing the services or products billed and the corresponding amounts. \n\nOriginal Signed Agreement or Contract - A copy of any contract, financial agreement, or consent form that I allegedly signed, demonstrating that I agreed to the specific charges now in dispute. \n\nProof That the Services Billed Were Actually Rendered - Official treatment records and clinical notes verifying that each billed service was completed. \n- Before and after photos ( if applicable ) confirming that all procedures were performed. \n- Signed patient acknowledgment forms confirming I accepted and received all services billed. \n- Any evidence that the amount being collected is correct and not subject to errors, miscalculations, or disputes. \n\nInstead of providing any of this, they sent me another pre-legal notice on XX/XX/year>, despite failing to validate the debt. \n\nWhy This Is a Violation of Consumer Protection Laws : - Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 15 U.S.C. 1692g, a debt collector must provide proper validation of a debt upon request. Credit Corp Solutions failed to do so and instead sent conflicting information. \n- Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), a debt can not be reported unless it is accurate and verifiableyet they have sent conflicting information on who even owns the debt. \n- Under the Consumer Financial Protection Act, debt collectors must not use deceptive, misleading, or unfair practicesbut they have sent two different letters with conflicting ownership claims. \n- The representatives rude and unprofessional behavior, as well as their refusal to provide validation, suggests an intentional attempt to intimidate and mislead me instead of following legal procedures. \n\nThis account was also reported for fraud back in XX/XX/year>. Fraud report attached.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-28T02:07:36.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"Medical debt","zip_code":"32828","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12248579","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Credit Corp Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-02-28T01:39:57.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["- The fact that I have now received three different communications with conflicting or <em>missing</em> information regarding the creditor suggests potential violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( <em>FDCPA</em> ) and misrepresentation of the debt. \n\n2."]},"sort":[15.965788,"12248579"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12158078","_score":15.873375,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint against Aldridge Pite Haan , LLP, the attorneys representing XXXX XXXX I, XXXX, for misrepresenting debt details, failing to validate the alleged debt, and engaging in unfair collection practices in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and Georgia consumer protection laws. \n\nFailure to Validate Debt as Required by Law ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) : I have repeatedly requested a full validation of the debt beginning XX/XX/XXXX, but the agency provided an incomplete response missing critical documentation. \nInitially, on XX/XX/XXXX, they emailed a balance due letter instead of an itemized breakdown of the amount due or a debt validation letter as I had requested. \nOn XX/XX/XXXX, after multiple calls requesting more information, I finally received what they would call a debt validation packet. But it did provide any of the specifically requested information such as : A complete Bill of Sale proving my account was included in the debt purchase and bought from the original creditor ( they sent a redacted bulk sale statement ). \nA full itemized breakdown of how the balance increased from {$4900.00} in XX/XX/XXXX to {$7400.00} post-judgment despite no additional charges being made. \nProof that Aldridge Pite Haan , LLP is legally authorized to collect on behalf of XXXX XXXX I, XXXX. \n\nIncorrect & Inflated Balance Reporting : The agency has provided multiple conflicting balance statements each time I have talked to them, and when I requested a breakdown, I refused a clear explanation of how interest and fees were applied, other than their illegal claims that I'm accruing 11.5 % daily interest. \n\nFalse Claim of an Active Garnishment ( Violation of 15 U.S.C. 1692e ( 4 ) ) : Aldridge Pite Haan , LLP has repeatedly claimed that my wages are currently being garnished, even though I obtained a court record confirming the garnishment was dismissed in XX/XX/XXXX, just days after it was put in place. When I provided proof of the dismissal, they refused to acknowledge it and continued to claim garnishment was active, even going on to state that it was in another county than I was originally told, which proved to also be untrue. \n\nFailure to Update Court Records ( XXXX. XXXX ) : Since the garnishment was dismissed, they are legally required to update the court records to reflect this. Instead, they continue to falsely represent that the garnishment exists in communications with me. \n\nFraudulent Interest Rate Application ( Violation of O.C.G.A. 7-4-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ) : Aldridge Pite Haan falsely claimed, on multiple occasions, that my debt is accruing 11.5 % interest per day even though Georgia law states that post-judgment interest must be calculated annually at the prime rate + 3 % not daily. This incorrect calculation has artificially inflated the amount they claim I owe, and they refuse to correct it or explain it further.\n\nDeceptive Collection Tactics & Violation of Georgia Fair Business Practices Act ( O.C.G.A. 10-1-393 ) : They have repeatedly pressured me to provide personal banking information under the pretense that I must do so to make payments. They attached a lien XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX ) to my home based on an improperly calculated judgment balance. They refuse to provide a legally required itemized breakdown of fees, charges, and post-charge-off interest calculations. They've now started to keep making me wait to speak with a supervisor as they have apparently notated my account to the point that no agent will discuss my account with me, but the supervisor never calls. I was trying to quickly resolve this matter nearly a month ago, and they refuse to provide me with correct information, refuse to offer a settlement amount or allow me to reasonable negotiate the debt, and will not discuss resolution options without obtaining my bank information.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-02-26T22:07:20.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"30114","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12158078","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Aldridge PIte Haan, LLP","date_received":"2025-02-20T11:02:21.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Failure to <em>Validate</em> Debt as Required by Law ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) : I have repeatedly requested a full <em>validation</em> of the debt beginning XX/XX/XXXX, but the agency provided an incomplete response <em>missing</em> critical documentation. \nInitially, on XX/XX/XXXX, they emailed a balance due letter instead of an itemized <em>breakdown</em> of the amount due or a debt <em>validation</em> letter as I had requested."]},"sort":[15.873375,"12158078"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17268878","_score":15.542439,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint because Experian has failed for over 60 days to properly reinvestigate and verify the accounts listed below. Instead of providing the documents I requested, Experian repeatedly sends me stall letters, copies of my credit report, and false statements claiming Im using a third-party company. None of this is verification under FCRA 1681i ( a ) or 1681e ( b ).\n\nBelow are the issues with each account : A. XXXX XXXX XXXX  Late Payment Acct # XXXX {$0.00} Balance Experian is reporting a late payment with a {$0.00} balance, which makes the tradeline hearsay without any payment-supporting documents.\n\nTo legally verify a late payment, Experian must obtain : The due date The date the payment was received The date the payment was posted Full payment ledger DOFD documentation Metro-2 compliant payment coding Experian has provided none of this. \nB. XXXX XXXX 3 VERSIONS OF THE SAME DEBT Experian is reporting a single XXXX XXXX XXXX  debt three different ways, which is illegal, misleading, and a major violation of FCRA.\n\n1. XXXX XXXX Acct # XXXX {$1600.00} 2. XXXX XXXX Acct # XXXX {$1600.00} 3. XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # XXXX {$1600.00} This is the same debt, but Experian is allowing : 2 different account numbers 2 different balances ( {$1600.00} and {$1600.00} ) 3 different company names Duplicate collection reporting Mixed data across multiple furnishers Inconsistent Metro-2 fields This violates : FCRA 1681e ( b ) accuracy FCRA 1681i ( a ) failure to reinvestigate FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) furnisher verification FDCPA 1692e false representation of amount/creditor FDCPA 1692g ( b ) continued collection without validation Metro-2 one account = one tradeline What is required to verify a collection : The original XXXX XXXX XXXX agreement A full payment/billing ledger Itemized balance calculation Proof of ownership/assignment DOFD Pre-reporting notice Metro-2 compliance Experian has none of these documents.\n\nThis duplicate listing is illegal.\n\nC. XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Acct # XXXX {$830.00} Medical Collection This is a medical collection, and Experian must obtain HIPAA-compliant validation.\n\nTo verify a medical debt, Experian must obtain : Original USAP billing records XXXX codes Dates of service Full itemized charges Proof of assignment to XXXX DOFD Metro-2 reporting fields None were provided.\n\nThis account has been in dispute, and the clock already started, but Experian did not obtain verification.\n\nD. XXXX XXXX TWO SEPARATE CHARGE-OFFS Acct # XXXX {$950.00} Charge-off Acct # XXXX {$780.00} Charge-off Both charge-offs require : Original signed contract Full payment history Charge-off ledger Itemized breakdown of past due balances, interest, fees DOFD Metro-2 verification Experian has provided zero documents.\n\nE. XXXX XXXX  Acct # XXXX {$1000.00} Charge-off To verify a charge-off, Experian must obtain : Contract Billing/payment ledger DOFD Charge-off worksheet Metro-2 fields Proof the balance is accurate None of this was provided.\n\nLEGAL VIOLATIONS BY EXPERIAN FCRA Violations 1681i ( a ) failure to reinvestigate disputes 1681e ( b ) failure to maintain maximum accuracy 1681s-2 ( b ) accepting unverified data from furnishers FDCPA Violations ( collection accounts ) 1692g ( b ) continued collection/reporting without validation 1692e false representation of amount, character, or creditor Metro-2 Violations Duplicate reporting Mixed account numbers Mixed creditor names Missing DOFD Missing required fields Inaccurate status codes Experian has never provided one page of supporting documentation.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-16T00:35:12.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77042","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17268878","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-11-16T00:32:42.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["LEGAL VIOLATIONS BY EXPERIAN FCRA Violations 1681i ( a ) failure to reinvestigate disputes 1681e ( b ) failure to maintain maximum accuracy 1681s-2 ( b ) accepting unverified data from furnishers <em>FDCPA</em> Violations ( collection accounts ) 1692g ( b ) continued collection/reporting without <em>validation</em> 1692e false representation of amount, character, or creditor Metro-2 Violations Duplicate reporting Mixed account numbers Mixed creditor names <em>Missing</em> DOFD <em>Missing</em> required fields Inaccurate status codes"]},"sort":[15.542439,"17268878"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14919079","_score":15.284156,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint to report multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) related to three collection accounts appearing on my credit reports from TransUnion, Equifax, and Experian. The details and violations are as follows : 1. I.C. System {$810.00} ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX Mobility ) The account is reported as Open by TransUnion but Closed by Experian, violating FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) for inaccurate and inconsistent reporting.\n\nThe Date Opened and Date of Last Activity appear to have been re-aged to XXXX despite the debt originating much earlier, violating FCRA 605 ( c ). \nNo full debt itemization or proof of debt has been provided. I formally request debt validation under FDCPA 809.\n\nThe original creditor is vaguely listed as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mobility '' without adequate account detail, which does not satisfy FDCPA 809 ( a ).\n\nViolation : No original date of delinquency ( DOFD ) disclosed DOFD is required to calculate the 7-year limit for negative reporting ( FCRA 605 ( c ) ).\n\nThis date is missing from all three bureaus for this account.\n\nViolation : Creditor listed as Other Collection Agencies Vague creditor labeling violates the transparency and specificity required under FDCPA 809 ( a ) and FCRA 609 ( a ).\n\n2. Smith Rouchn / Lakeland Radiologists {$580.00} ( Medical Debt ) The account is Open on TransUnion but Closed on Equifax again violating FCRA 623 ( a ).\n\nBoth bureaus show the account as \" Derogatory '' despite it being marked as disputed, and no updated resolution or reinvestigation has occurred ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ).\n\nDispute status is not properly communicated to all CRAs, violating FDCPA 807 ( 8 ).\n\nIf validation was requested, continued collection without verifying is a violation of FDCPA 809 ( b ).\n\nIf no payments have been made since 2021, this account may be nearing or past the 7-year reporting window, triggering FCRA 605 ( a ) concerns.\n\nTransUnion includes language : Account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements.\n\nEquifax says Consumer disputes this account information.\n\nYet both still report it as Derogatory, which is misleading under FDCPA 807 and FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ).\n\nFCRA requires a full reinvestigation or a clear frivolous notice if not investigated none is noted.\n\nViolation : No medical debt itemizationNo reference to service date, insurance payments, or amount breakdown violating transparency standards for medical debt after CFPB medical reporting guidance ( XXXX ).\n\n3. Med Data Systems / Copiah County Medical Center {$990.00} ( Medical Debt ) TransUnion lists the account as Open, while Experian and Equifax list it as Closed, violating FCRA 623 ( a ).\n\nNo itemization of debt, original service date, or clear \" Date of First Delinquency '' is provided ( FCRA 609 ).\n\nUnder the 2022 CFPB Medical Debt Reporting Rule, medical debt should not appear on credit reports unless unpaid for at least one year. This debt may have been reported prematurely.\n\nNo proof of debt has been provided despite ongoing reporting I request full debt validation ( FDCPA 809 ).\n\nThe account remains marked Derogatory even though it's disputed, without evidence of proper resolution or reinvestigation ( FCRA 611 ).\n\nViolation : Multiple inconsistent Date Opened entries across bureaus Experian and Equifax : XX/XX/XXXX TransUnion : XX/XX/XXXX Suggests re-aging or data mismatch FCRA 623 ( a ) violation. \nViolation : Collecting and reporting without clear medical provider authorization If XXXX XXXX XXXX is a third-party collection agency, they must have clear authorization and itemization to report medical debts ( CFPB guidance, FDCPA 807 ).\n\nViolation : Account reported as Derogatory despite dispute and possible insurance coverage If insurance was pending or paid later, reporting without waiting 1 year ( per CFPBs XXXX rule ) is unlawful. \nTheres a note : Subject has not satisfied debt, which may be misleading if insurance coverage exists or existed.\n\nGlobal Violations Across All Accounts FCRA 605 ( c ) Failure to provide or use correct DOFD None of the accounts include a clear Date of First Delinquency, which is required to trigger the 7-year clock.\n\nFDCPA 809 ( b ) No debt validation response prior to reporting If any collector reported to the bureaus before validating the debt upon request, that is a clear violation.\n\nFDCPA 807 Misleading credit reporting Labeling disputed or unvalidated debts as Derogatory or Charged Off without full substantiation misleads other creditors and lenders.\n\nFCRA 602 & 605B No consumer statement or investigation follow-up in conclusions Missing or inconsistent Date of First Delinquency ( all accounts ) Ongoing reporting of disputed accounts without flagging or resolution No itemization or proof of medical billing, despite CFPB medical debt guidance Mislabeling or lack of clarity about original creditor Unlawful third-party collection reporting without prior validation Failure to provide required information under FCRA 609 and FDCPA 809","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-28T23:33:43.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"390XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14919079","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-28T23:33:18.000Z","state":"MS","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["FCRA 602 & 605B No consumer statement or investigation follow-up in conclusions <em>Missing</em> or inconsistent Date of First Delinquency ( all accounts ) Ongoing reporting of disputed accounts without flagging or resolution No itemization or proof of medical <em>billing</em>, despite CFPB medical debt guidance Mislabeling or lack of clarity about original creditor Unlawful third-party collection reporting without prior <em>validation</em> Failure to provide required information under FCRA 609 and <em>FDCPA</em> 809"]},"sort":[15.284156,"14919079"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"21704375","_score":15.2825985,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I requested full validation of an alleged debt from Midland Credit Management. On XX/XX/XXXX, they responded with incomplete information. They provided only XXXX random statements and did not provide the required documentation to validate the debt under the FDCPA. \n\nMissing Required Documentation : No detailed calculation or itemized breakdown of the alleged balance No original contract or agreement with my handwritten signature No chain of assignments or proof of ownership of the account No proof of authorization to collect in Tennessee, including license number and Registered Agent Because Midland did not provide proper validation, they are not legally permitted to continue collection activity under 15 U.S.C. 1692g ( b ). The debt remains disputed, and they have not met federal requirements to verify the debt. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX, I sent a certified letter asking for the following : What is the money you say I owe for? \nExplain and show in detail how you calculated what you say I owe. \nProvide me with copies of any papers that show I agreed to pay you, including original handwritten signatures. \nProvide a chain of assignment and receipts proving that you own the account and the monies you claim I owe are your entitlement. \nIdentify the original creditor. \nProof that the Statute of Limitations has not expired on this account. \nShow me that you are licensed to collect in my state. \nProvide me with your license numbers and Registered Agents. \n\n\n\nI received on XX/XX/XXXX a packet of incomplete information. It included a letter stating they had reviewed their records and did not understand what I was disputing. Actual Quote from letter : \" We are uncertain of what you are specifically disputing. '' The proof of ownership that was sent was not sufficient to prove ownership. No receipts or contract copies were showing they had purchased and owned the account. I only got a printed form stating the account had been sold, which does not satisfy the requirements as proof of ownership. I also received XXXX random account statements from the original creditor with the dates XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. These were the first pages of the billing statement, only, and did not show any type of calculations that showed how the amount was reached. It is claimed that i owe them {$2600.00}. I am requesting proof of ownership and the above information as I do not believe they own the account, and I do not agree with the balance.","date_sent_to_company":"2026-04-29T13:10:52.000Z","issue":"Written notification about debt","sub_product":"Credit card debt","zip_code":"378XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"21704375","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","date_received":"2026-04-29T12:43:01.000Z","state":"TN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I requested full <em>validation</em> of an alleged debt from Midland Credit Management. On XX/XX/XXXX, they responded with incomplete information. They provided only XXXX random statements and did not provide the required documentation to <em>validate</em> the debt under the <em>FDCPA</em>."]},"sort":[15.2825985,"21704375"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14919080","_score":15.262337,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint to report multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) related to three collection accounts appearing on my credit reports from TransUnion, Equifax, and Experian. The details and violations are as follows : 1. I.C. System {$810.00} ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX Mobility ) The account is reported as Open by TransUnion but Closed by Experian, violating FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) for inaccurate and inconsistent reporting.\n\nThe Date Opened and Date of Last Activity appear to have been re-aged to XXXX despite the debt originating much earlier, violating FCRA 605 ( c ). \nNo full debt itemization or proof of debt has been provided. I formally request debt validation under FDCPA 809.\n\nThe original creditor is vaguely listed as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mobility '' without adequate account detail, which does not satisfy FDCPA 809 ( a ).\n\nViolation : No original date of delinquency ( DOFD ) disclosed DOFD is required to calculate the 7-year limit for negative reporting ( FCRA 605 ( c ) ).\n\nThis date is missing from all three bureaus for this account.\n\nViolation : Creditor listed as Other Collection Agencies Vague creditor labeling violates the transparency and specificity required under FDCPA 809 ( a ) and FCRA 609 ( a ).\n\n2. Smith Rouchn / Lakeland Radiologists {$580.00} ( Medical Debt ) The account is Open on TransUnion but Closed on Equifax again violating FCRA 623 ( a ).\n\nBoth bureaus show the account as \" Derogatory '' despite it being marked as disputed, and no updated resolution or reinvestigation has occurred ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ).\n\nDispute status is not properly communicated to all CRAs, violating FDCPA 807 ( 8 ).\n\nIf validation was requested, continued collection without verifying is a violation of FDCPA 809 ( b ).\n\nIf no payments have been made since 2021, this account may be nearing or past the 7-year reporting window, triggering FCRA 605 ( a ) concerns.\n\nTransUnion includes language : Account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements.\n\nEquifax says Consumer disputes this account information.\n\nYet both still report it as Derogatory, which is misleading under FDCPA 807 and FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ).\n\nFCRA requires a full reinvestigation or a clear frivolous notice if not investigated none is noted.\n\nViolation : No medical debt itemizationNo reference to service date, insurance payments, or amount breakdown violating transparency standards for medical debt after CFPB medical reporting guidance ( XXXX ).\n\n3. Med Data Systems / Copiah County Medical Center {$990.00} ( Medical Debt ) TransUnion lists the account as Open, while Experian and Equifax list it as Closed, violating FCRA 623 ( a ).\n\nNo itemization of debt, original service date, or clear \" Date of First Delinquency '' is provided ( FCRA 609 ).\n\nUnder the 2022 CFPB Medical Debt Reporting Rule, medical debt should not appear on credit reports unless unpaid for at least one year. This debt may have been reported prematurely.\n\nNo proof of debt has been provided despite ongoing reporting I request full debt validation ( FDCPA 809 ).\n\nThe account remains marked Derogatory even though it's disputed, without evidence of proper resolution or reinvestigation ( FCRA 611 ).\n\nViolation : Multiple inconsistent Date Opened entries across bureaus Experian and Equifax : XX/XX/XXXX TransUnion : XX/XX/XXXX Suggests re-aging or data mismatch FCRA 623 ( a ) violation. \nViolation : Collecting and reporting without clear medical provider authorization If XXXX XXXX XXXX is a third-party collection agency, they must have clear authorization and itemization to report medical debts ( CFPB guidance, FDCPA 807 ).\n\nViolation : Account reported as Derogatory despite dispute and possible insurance coverage If insurance was pending or paid later, reporting without waiting 1 year ( per CFPBs XXXX rule ) is unlawful. \nTheres a note : Subject has not satisfied debt, which may be misleading if insurance coverage exists or existed.\n\nGlobal Violations Across All Accounts FCRA 605 ( c ) Failure to provide or use correct DOFD None of the accounts include a clear Date of First Delinquency, which is required to trigger the 7-year clock.\n\nFDCPA 809 ( b ) No debt validation response prior to reporting If any collector reported to the bureaus before validating the debt upon request, that is a clear violation.\n\nFDCPA 807 Misleading credit reporting Labeling disputed or unvalidated debts as Derogatory or Charged Off without full substantiation misleads other creditors and lenders.\n\nFCRA 602 & 605B No consumer statement or investigation follow-up in conclusions Missing or inconsistent Date of First Delinquency ( all accounts ) Ongoing reporting of disputed accounts without flagging or resolution No itemization or proof of medical billing, despite CFPB medical debt guidance Mislabeling or lack of clarity about original creditor Unlawful third-party collection reporting without prior validation Failure to provide required information under FCRA 609 and FDCPA 809","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-28T23:33:46.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"390XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14919080","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-07-28T23:33:18.000Z","state":"MS","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["FCRA 602 & 605B No consumer statement or investigation follow-up in conclusions <em>Missing</em> or inconsistent Date of First Delinquency ( all accounts ) Ongoing reporting of disputed accounts without flagging or resolution No itemization or proof of medical <em>billing</em>, despite CFPB medical debt guidance Mislabeling or lack of clarity about original creditor Unlawful third-party collection reporting without prior <em>validation</em> Failure to provide required information under FCRA 609 and <em>FDCPA</em> 809"]},"sort":[15.262337,"14919080"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14918763","_score":15.262337,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint to report multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) related to three collection accounts appearing on my credit reports from TransUnion, Equifax, and Experian. The details and violations are as follows : 1. I.C. System {$810.00} ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX Mobility ) The account is reported as Open by TransUnion but Closed by Experian, violating FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) for inaccurate and inconsistent reporting.\n\nThe Date Opened and Date of Last Activity appear to have been re-aged to XXXX despite the debt originating much earlier, violating FCRA 605 ( c ). \nNo full debt itemization or proof of debt has been provided. I formally request debt validation under FDCPA 809.\n\nThe original creditor is vaguely listed as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Mobility '' without adequate account detail, which does not satisfy FDCPA 809 ( a ).\n\nViolation : No original date of delinquency ( DOFD ) disclosed DOFD is required to calculate the 7-year limit for negative reporting ( FCRA 605 ( c ) ).\n\nThis date is missing from all three bureaus for this account.\n\nViolation : Creditor listed as Other Collection Agencies Vague creditor labeling violates the transparency and specificity required under FDCPA 809 ( a ) and FCRA 609 ( a ).\n\n2. Smith Rouchn / Lakeland Radiologists {$580.00} ( Medical Debt ) The account is Open on TransUnion but Closed on Equifax again violating FCRA 623 ( a ).\n\nBoth bureaus show the account as \" Derogatory '' despite it being marked as disputed, and no updated resolution or reinvestigation has occurred ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ).\n\nDispute status is not properly communicated to all CRAs, violating FDCPA 807 ( 8 ).\n\nIf validation was requested, continued collection without verifying is a violation of FDCPA 809 ( b ).\n\nIf no payments have been made since 2021, this account may be nearing or past the 7-year reporting window, triggering FCRA 605 ( a ) concerns.\n\nTransUnion includes language : Account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements.\n\nEquifax says Consumer disputes this account information.\n\nYet both still report it as Derogatory, which is misleading under FDCPA 807 and FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ).\n\nFCRA requires a full reinvestigation or a clear frivolous notice if not investigated none is noted.\n\nViolation : No medical debt itemizationNo reference to service date, insurance payments, or amount breakdown violating transparency standards for medical debt after CFPB medical reporting guidance ( XXXX ).\n\n3. Med Data Systems / Copiah County Medical Center {$990.00} ( Medical Debt ) TransUnion lists the account as Open, while Experian and Equifax list it as Closed, violating FCRA 623 ( a ).\n\nNo itemization of debt, original service date, or clear \" Date of First Delinquency '' is provided ( FCRA 609 ).\n\nUnder the 2022 CFPB Medical Debt Reporting Rule, medical debt should not appear on credit reports unless unpaid for at least one year. This debt may have been reported prematurely.\n\nNo proof of debt has been provided despite ongoing reporting I request full debt validation ( FDCPA 809 ).\n\nThe account remains marked Derogatory even though it's disputed, without evidence of proper resolution or reinvestigation ( FCRA 611 ).\n\nViolation : Multiple inconsistent Date Opened entries across bureaus Experian and Equifax : XX/XX/XXXX TransUnion : XX/XX/XXXX Suggests re-aging or data mismatch FCRA 623 ( a ) violation. \nViolation : Collecting and reporting without clear medical provider authorization If XXXX XXXX XXXX is a third-party collection agency, they must have clear authorization and itemization to report medical debts ( CFPB guidance, FDCPA 807 ).\n\nViolation : Account reported as Derogatory despite dispute and possible insurance coverage If insurance was pending or paid later, reporting without waiting 1 year ( per CFPBs XXXX rule ) is unlawful. \nTheres a note : Subject has not satisfied debt, which may be misleading if insurance coverage exists or existed.\n\nGlobal Violations Across All Accounts FCRA 605 ( c ) Failure to provide or use correct DOFD None of the accounts include a clear Date of First Delinquency, which is required to trigger the 7-year clock.\n\nFDCPA 809 ( b ) No debt validation response prior to reporting If any collector reported to the bureaus before validating the debt upon request, that is a clear violation.\n\nFDCPA 807 Misleading credit reporting Labeling disputed or unvalidated debts as Derogatory or Charged Off without full substantiation misleads other creditors and lenders.\n\nFCRA 602 & 605B No consumer statement or investigation follow-up in conclusions Missing or inconsistent Date of First Delinquency ( all accounts ) Ongoing reporting of disputed accounts without flagging or resolution No itemization or proof of medical billing, despite CFPB medical debt guidance Mislabeling or lack of clarity about original creditor Unlawful third-party collection reporting without prior validation Failure to provide required information under FCRA 609 and FDCPA 809","date_sent_to_company":"2025-07-28T23:33:42.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"390XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14918763","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-07-28T23:17:17.000Z","state":"MS","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["FCRA 602 & 605B No consumer statement or investigation follow-up in conclusions <em>Missing</em> or inconsistent Date of First Delinquency ( all accounts ) Ongoing reporting of disputed accounts without flagging or resolution No itemization or proof of medical <em>billing</em>, despite CFPB medical debt guidance Mislabeling or lack of clarity about original creditor Unlawful third-party collection reporting without prior <em>validation</em> Failure to provide required information under FCRA 609 and <em>FDCPA</em> 809"]},"sort":[15.262337,"14918763"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17217145","_score":15.213188,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint because the account being reported by Jefferson Capital Systems is inaccurate, unverifiable, and has not been properly validated despite multiple written disputes submitted to the credit reporting agencies and directly to the furnisher. The account appears on my credit report as a collection/charge-off with an alleged past-due balance of approximately {$2500.00}. The reporting appears to show that the account was acquired or placed with Jefferson Capital Systems sometime after the original creditor charged it off. However, the information presented on my credit reports does not match any documentation I have ever received, and Jefferson Capital has not provided any proof that the debt is valid, that they have the legal right to report it, or that any of the information they are furnishing is accurate. \n\nBecause of the substantial negative impact this reporting has had on my credit profile, and because none of the required documents have been produced after multiple dispute attempts, I believe that Jefferson Capital Systems has failed to comply with its obligations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). This narrative outlines in detail what happened, the actions I took, the actions ( or lack of actions ) taken by Jefferson Capital and the credit bureaus, the inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the reporting, and the harm that has resulted from the failure to properly validate and verify this account. \n\n1. How the issue was discovered In early XXXX, I obtained my credit reports from the three major credit reporting agenciesXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXto review my financial history for accuracy. When reviewing these reports, I noticed a collection account reported by Jefferson Capital Systems. The tradeline was listed as a collection/charge-off with a derogatory status and an alleged past-due balance of approximately {$2500.00}. The account did not include clear information regarding : The original creditor When Jefferson Capital acquired the debt Whether the debt was purchased, assigned, or transferred The date of first delinquency Any original contract associated with the alleged account Any billing history from the original creditor The absence of this information raised immediate concerns, especially because I had not received documentation from Jefferson Capital showing proof of ownership, proof of assignment, or validation of the debt. \n\n2. First rounds of disputes submitted to the credit bureaus Between XXXX and XX/XX/year>, I submitted formal written disputes to TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax. In these disputes, I included the following concerns : I did not receive original creditor documentation proving that I owed the alleged amount. \n\nI never received a notice of assignment or transfer showing Jefferson Capital owned the account. \n\nI never received a debt validation letter from Jefferson Capital Systems as required under FDCPA 809 ( b ). \n\nThe reporting contained inaccurate or missing fields, including unclear dates and inconsistent ownership information. \n\nIn each dispute, I requested a full reinvestigation under FCRA 611 ( a ) and demanded that the bureaus supply the method of verification required under 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). I also explained that Jefferson Capital must provide : A copy of the original signed contract or application A complete breakdown of the accounts balance A full accounting history Proof that the company owns or has legal authority over the debt Copies of billing statements and payment records A copy of the charge-off documentation from the original creditor The credit bureaus responded with generic template statements saying the furnisher had verified the account as accurate, but no documentation whatsoever was provided. This indicated that the verification was likely an automated e-Oscar response from Jefferson Capital Systems, not a meaningful reinvestigation. \n\n3. Follow-up disputes to Jefferson Capital Systems After receiving generic responses from the credit bureaus, I sent direct written requests to Jefferson Capital Systems asking for validation of the debt under FDCPA 809 ( b ). I asked for : The original signed contract or application A copy of the original creditors statements A detailed ledger or accounting history The date the debt allegedly went delinquent Proof that Jefferson Capital purchased or was assigned the debt Copies of all notices sent to me Any documents they used to verify the debt to the credit bureaus Jefferson Capital Systems did not provide any of the requested documents. Instead, the account continued to appear on my credit reports as verified, even though no proof was ever supplied to me showing that the account was valid or that Jefferson Capital had the right to report it. \n\n4. Issues with the reporting itself As I examined the tradeline more closely, I identified numerous inconsistencies and missing elements, including : a. No proof of original creditor The credit report did not clearly identify : Who the original creditor was When the account was opened When the account allegedly went delinquent Why the account was charged off This information is required for any collection account to be reported accurately. \n\nb. No date of first delinquency ( DOFD ) The DOFD is required under FCRA for aging and retention purposes. Jefferson Capital did not provide this date, making the account impossible to age correctly and raising concerns about re-aging ( an unlawful practice ). \n\nc. Inconsistent or incomplete balance information The account shows a balance of approximately {$2500.00}, but Jefferson Capital did not provide : A breakdown of how this amount was calculated Whether interest or fees were added Whether the balance includes original creditor charges d. No substantiation for any late payments Some reports show late payment indicators, but Jefferson Capital has not produced any statements or transaction histories to support these claims. \n\ne. No evidence of assignment or legal ownership Jefferson Capital Systems did not provide : A contract of assignment A bill of sale A portfolio transfer document Any record showing they legally purchased or are otherwise authorized to report the alleged debt Without this proof, the reporting appears to violate both the FCRA and FDCPA. \n\n5. Failure to provide validation under FDCPA Under FDCPA 809 ( b ) : A debt collector must cease collection activity until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt. \n\nBecause Jefferson Capital did not provide validation materialsincluding the original contract or itemized statementJefferson Capital was required to : Stop reporting the debt Stop collection attempts Remove the entry Instead, the account continued to be reported. \n\nReporting a debt to a credit bureau is considered collection activity under federal law. Therefore : Jefferson Capital should not have reported the account Jefferson Capital should not have verified the account The credit bureaus should not have continued publishing it The continued reporting may constitute unlawful collection activity 6. Inadequate reinvestigation under FCRA 611 ( a ) The credit bureaus ' reinvestigation processes do not appear to meet FCRA standards for the following reasons : They relied exclusively on automated e-Oscar responses. \n\nNo documentation was reviewed or provided. \n\nNone of the disputes addressed missing DOFD information. \n\nNone of the disputes resulted in a corrected or clarified report. \n\nNo bureau provided the legally required method of verification. \n\nThis indicates the bureaus : Did not perform a meaningful reinvestigation Did not evaluate the evidence Accepted unverified data from Jefferson Capital without question This constitutes a failure under FCRA requirements. \n\n7. Violations of FCRA 607 ( b ) Maximum possible accuracy Jefferson Capital Systems has a legal responsibility to ensure maximum possible accuracy of all reported information. This includes : Correct dates Valid balances Accurate creditor information Proper account status Clear ownership history No missing DOFD Because Jefferson Capital provided none of this information, the reporting does not meet the accuracy standard. \n\n8. Violations of FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) Duty to report disputes Some credit reports did not reflect the mandatory dispute notation : Consumer disputes this account. \n\nThis omission misrepresents the account to lenders and violates federal law. \n\n9. Violations of FCRA 623 ( b ) Duty to investigate Jefferson Capital Systems is required to : Conduct a reasonable investigation Review all information provided by the consumer Provide corrected data to the bureaus Delete information that can not be verified Jefferson Capital ignored all of these obligations. \n\n10. Harm caused by inaccurate and unverifiable reporting The continued appearance of this unverifiable collection account has caused significant and measurable harm, including : Reduced credit score Denial of credit applications Increased interest rates Higher insurance premiums Emotional distress and frustration Time lost trying to resolve the discrepancies Difficulty refinancing loans Loss of access to favorable financial opportunities This harm continues every month the account remains on my reports. \n\n11. Summary of my actions To resolve this matter, I : Obtained my credit reports Identified inaccuracies in the Jefferson Capital tradeline Filed disputes with all bureaus Requested method of verification Sent validation requests to Jefferson Capital Requested documentation proving ownership Provided clear written explanations Filed multiple follow-up disputes Gave both the bureaus and Jefferson Capital time to respond Filed this CFPB complaint as a last resort Despite all steps taken, Jefferson Capital Systems has not provided evidence proving the account is valid. \n\n12. Why CFPB intervention is required CFPB involvement is necessary because : Jefferson Capital did not validate the debt The credit bureaus did not perform a real reinvestigation The method of verification was not disclosed The account contains multiple inconsistencies Jefferson Capital may have violated the FDCPA The credit bureaus may have violated the FCRA The continued reporting is causing ongoing harm I have exhausted all options available to me outside of regulatory action. \n\nConclusion The account being reported by Jefferson Capital Systems is inaccurate, incomplete, unverifiable, and harmful. Jefferson Capital has not validated the debt, has not provided any original documentation, has not proven ownership, and has not complied with federal laws governing credit reporting and debt collection. The credit bureaus have not conducted a meaningful reinvestigation, relying instead on automated responses. \n\nBecause of the failure to validate, the account should not be on my credit report at all. I am requesting the CFPBs assistance to require Jefferson Capital Systems and the credit bureaus to either : Provide full documentation and validation, or Delete the account entirely, as required under federal law. \n\nI respectfully request that the CFPB intervene to ensure compliance with the FCRA and FDCPA and to restore accuracy to my credit reports.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-14T00:51:56.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"63379","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17217145","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CL Holdings LLC","date_received":"2025-11-14T00:45:42.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I never received a debt <em>validation</em> letter from Jefferson Capital Systems as required under <em>FDCPA</em> 809 ( b ). \n\nThe reporting contained inaccurate or <em>missing</em> fields, including unclear dates and inconsistent ownership information. \n\nIn each dispute, I requested a full reinvestigation under FCRA 611 ( a ) and demanded that the bureaus supply the method of verification required under 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii )."]},"sort":[15.213188,"17217145"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17358118","_score":15.063348,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint because the account being reported by SYNCB/VENM ( Synchrony Bank / Venmo ) , referenced as account number ending in XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, is appearing on my consumer credit reports as a derogatory Collection/Charge-Off account, yet this reporting status is inaccurate, unverifiable, incomplete, and not being supported with any legally sufficient documentation. Despite multiple disputes, requests for validation, and repeated attempts to obtain the required documentation from both the credit reporting agencies and the furnisher, the account continues to be reported inaccurately. The company has not provided any evidence proving that I am legally responsible for this account, nor has any bureau provided the required method of verification as mandated by federal law. \n\nThis complaint describes in detail what happened, what steps I took, the inaccurate and misleading information being reported, the failure of SYNCB/VENM to validate the alleged debt, and the failure of the credit bureaus to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). The purpose of this complaint is to ensure compliance, transparency, and lawful resolution. \n\n1. Background of the Issue The SYNCB/VENM account appears on my consumer report as : Status : Collection/Charge-Off Reported As : Derogatory Past Due Amount : {$0.00} Closed On : XX/XX/year> Furnisher : Synchrony Bank Reporting Bureau Example : XXXX ( though it may appear on others ) The central issue is that this tradeline is being reported as a derogatory collection/charge-off without any supporting legal documentation, without any proof that the account belongs to me, and without compliance with mandatory validation or reinvestigation standards. \n\nI did not authorize this account, and I have no record, contract, agreement, application, or billing statement that establishes this alleged obligation. I contacted the credit reporting agencies disputing the accuracy and requesting validation, yet the bureaus verified the account without providing any supporting documentation, which strongly suggests that the so-called verification was conducted through an automated e-OSCAR exchange rather than a meaningful investigation. \n\n2. Inaccuracies and Deficiencies in the SYNCB/VENM Reporting The reporting of the SYNCB/VENM account shows multiple issues that constitute legal violations or at least procedural deficiencies under the FCRA and FDCPA.\n\nA. No Original Documentation Was Provided No party has ever produced : A signed contract or agreement A credit application A promissory note An itemized statement of charges Any proof of account origination Any proof of my authorization A transaction history A complete payment history Any documentation showing I created, opened, or used this account Without these documents, the account is unverified and unverifiable.\n\nB. Verification Appears to Be Automated, Not Investigative The bureaus returned results marked as verified, but did not : Provide documents Explain what was reviewed Identify the individual who verified the account Identify the verification method Explain whether the review was manual or electronic This suggests non-compliance with FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 2 ).\n\nC. Missing, Conflicting, or Incomplete Data The SYNCB/VENM reporting lacks critical accuracy elements, including : Missing date of last payment Missing date of first delinquency No itemized past-due amount No breakdown of the charge-off No documented charge-off reason No final billing statement Incomplete information that affects interpretation of the account is considered inaccurate under FCRA 607 ( b ).\n\n3. Steps I Took to Resolve the Issue A. Initial Dispute I disputed the account with the credit bureaus, stating that I did not recognize the account and requested that they : Verify the information Provide original documentation Contact SYNCB/VENM for source records Provide a detailed method of verification under 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) B. Bureau Response The bureaus responded extremely quickly, marking the account as verified, with no explanation, no documents, and no supporting evidence.\n\nThe lack of documentation clearly demonstrates that a reasonable reinvestigation did not occur, violating : FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) duty to reinvestigate FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) duty to provide method of verification FCRA 607 ( b ) duty to ensure maximum possible accuracy The bureaus can not simply accept automated furnisher responses.\n\nC. Request for Validation from Furnisher I contacted the furnisher or attempted to do so. SYNCB/VENM did not provide : Any contract Any billing history Any validation Any explanation Any documentation supporting their right to report A furnisher can not legally verify what it can not validate.\n\n4. How SYNCB/VENMs Reporting Violates Federal Law A. Failure to Maintain Maximum Possible Accuracy ( FCRA 607 ( b ) ) Reporting an account as a collection/charge-off without possessing original documentation is a violation of the accuracy requirement.\n\nB. Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ) The bureaus did not conduct a proper reinvestigation. They relied on automated verified responses rather than reviewing actual documents.\n\nC. Failure to Provide Method of Verification ( FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ) I requested the method of verification, but the bureaus and SYNCB provided no details.\n\nD. SYNCB Failed to Provide Validation Under FDCPA To report an account to a bureau, a collector or furnisher must be able to validate the debt. SYNCB has not done so.\n\nE. Reporting Without a Permissible Purpose If SYNCB can not validate the account, then the original permissible purpose is not established.\n\nF. Incomplete or Missing Data The reporting lacks : Contract dates Payment history Original balance structure Date of first delinquency This violates the duty of completeness.\n\nG. Potential Re-aging Issues If the date of first delinquency is missing or incorrect, this may constitute illegal re-aging under FCRA 605.\n\n5. The Harm This Inaccurate Reporting Has Caused The reporting of SYNCB/VENM as a derogatory collection/charge-off has caused significant harm to my : Credit scores Ability to qualify for loans Creditworthiness Interest rates offered by lenders Housing opportunities Insurance costs These are real and ongoing injuries caused by inaccurate and unverified reporting.\n\n6. The Bureaus Failure to Provide Documentation Every dispute response I received failed to provide : Evidence that SYNCB validated the debt A signed contract A billing history A date of account opening Date of first delinquency Documentation supporting the accuracy of the reporting Any explanation of the reinvestigation process The lack of documentation raises serious concerns about : Reliability of the reporting Whether the furnisher had legal right to report Whether the bureaus used automated verification Whether FCRA procedures were followed 7. How This Account Appears to Be Unverifiable Based on the responses from both SYNCB/VENM and the bureaus, it is clear that : No original documentation exists or was supplied The bureaus relied on automated systems Furnisher did not validate the debt No substantiated data was provided An account can not be reported if the furnisher can not validate it.\n\n8. Why This Complaint Is Necessary This CFPB complaint is necessary because : My disputes have been ignored or handled improperly I have been provided with no documentation My rights under FCRA have been violated SYNCB appears to lack required validation The bureaus continue reporting harmful information A proper reinvestigation has not occurred I am requesting oversight so that SYNCB and the credit bureaus comply with the law.\n\n9. What I Am Requesting Through This Complaint I am requesting that the CFPB require SYNCB/VENM and the credit bureaus to take the following actions : A. Provide Full Validation Documents This includes : Signed contract Account application Original terms and disclosures Complete account history Transaction-level billing statements Proof of ownership or assignment Date of first delinquency Charge-off details If SYNCB can not provide these, the account must be deleted.\n\nB. Provide a True Method of Verification The bureaus must explain : What documents were reviewed Who verified the account Whether the verification was manual or automated What system was used What were the results of the reinvestigation When the verification occurred Why the information was determined to be accurate C. Correct or Delete the SYNCB/VENM Account If validation can not be produced, the tradeline must be removed immediately as required by : FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) FCRA 607 ( b ) FDCPA validation requirements D. Cease Publishing Unverified Information Until validation is provided, the information should be suppressed.\n\nE. Prevent Reinsertion If the account is deleted, it can not be reinserted unless all legal requirements are met. \n\n10. Conclusion The SYNCB/VENM XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account is inaccurate, unverifiable, and being reported without proper documentation. The credit bureaus and the furnisher have not complied with the investigation, accuracy, or validation rules required under federal law. \n\nThis complaint seeks transparency, lawful verification, correction of inaccurate information, and deletion of unverifiable information. I respectfully request that the CFPB intervene to ensure that the credit reporting agencies and SYNCB/VENM follow the law, provide the required documents, and conduct a lawful reinvestigation.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-19T22:43:49.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"10801","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17358118","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","date_received":"2025-11-19T22:28:38.000Z","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":["<em>Missing</em>, Conflicting, or Incomplete Data The SYNCB/VENM reporting lacks critical accuracy elements, including : <em>Missing</em> date of last payment <em>Missing</em> date of first delinquency No itemized past-due amount No <em>breakdown</em> of the charge-off No documented charge-off reason No final <em>billing</em> statement Incomplete information that affects interpretation of the account is considered inaccurate under FCRA 607 ( b ).\n\n3. Steps I Took to Resolve the Issue A."]},"sort":[15.063348,"17358118"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14373621","_score":14.49082,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"To : Equifax Information Services XXXX. XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX Subject : Formal Rebuttal to Incomplete and Inaccurate Investigation Results- Verified Accounts Without Documentation To Whom It May Concern, This correspondence is in response to the results received from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) complaint submission and the response Equifax issued regarding several disputed accounts. Although Equifax marked several tradelines as \" verified, '' this was done without any documented evidence or proof of verification, violating both my rights as a consumer and multiple federal regulations.\n\nUnder FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681i and 1681s-2 ( b ), a reinvestigation must be reasonable and include evidence from the furnisher supporting the continued reporting. Simply checking with the furnisher and receiving a reply is not sufficient under the law. I am hereby challenging the so-called \" verified '' accounts due to lack of documentary proof, inaccuracy, and unverifiability.\n\nThe following accounts were improperly verified without providing proper validation, supporting documentation, or contract agreements : XXXX. XXXX XXXX NO contract, application, or billing statements provided NO original creditor evidence submitted Violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 1681i ( a ) XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account was verified without furnishing evidence of legal liability Lacks billing history, application, or wet signature agreement Violates FCRA 1681s-2 and FDCPA 1692g 3. XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX entries ) False or unverifiable delinquency data remains Failure to report a full accounting or payoff No itemized breakdown of debt and charges FCRA 1681i violations and unreasonable reinvestigation XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX of false payment reporting Missing documents to confirm original balance or late fees Misleading furnishing and no updated consumer statement XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX entries ) NO chain of title or assignment provided Reported amounts and dates of delinquency modified without proof Data entry manipulated to maintain derogatory status Violates FDCPA 1692e ( false representation ), FCRA 1681i 6. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX No agreement, contract, or original itemized proof submitted Account origin and balance unverifiable Must be deleted immediately per FCRA and FTC guidance These tradelines remain in factual dispute due to : Absence of legally sufficient evidence Refusal to provide full and complete validation Multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and UCC 9-210 This is NOT a frivolous dispute. It is a formal rebuttal and continuation of a previously submitted dispute with supplementary facts and demands.\n\nI am demanding that Equifax : Immediately delete the inaccurate and unverifiable tradelines listed above.\n\nProvide a full reinvestigation including supporting documents and contracts.\n\nCease reporting unverifiable negative data and submit a rapid rescoring to all bureaus.\n\nFailure to comply may result in formal complaints to the FTC, CFPB escalation, and legal action under : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) XXXX XXXX Equifax, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX. XXXX )","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-30T17:36:49.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33169","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14373621","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-30T17:10:18.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The following accounts were improperly verified without providing proper <em>validation</em>, supporting documentation, or contract agreements : XXXX. XXXX XXXX NO contract, application, or <em>billing</em> statements provided NO original creditor evidence submitted Violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 1681i ( a ) XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Account was verified without furnishing evidence of legal liability Lacks <em>billing</em> history, application, or wet signature agreement Violates FCRA 1681s-2 and <em>FDCPA</em> 1692g 3."]},"sort":[14.49082,"14373621"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17245894","_score":14.475058,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"This statement details precisely what occurred regarding the AMERICOLLECT account reported under identifier XXXX, currently appearing on my credit report as a collection/chargeoff with a past-due balance of {$570.00} and listed as derogatory on all bureaus. \n\nThis narrative is being provided to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) to document the complete history of this account, explain the violations committed by Americollect and the credit bureaus, and to describe the financial, emotional, and legal harm I have suffered as a result of inaccurate, incomplete, unverifiable, and noncompliant reporting. \n\nThis is a precise, chronological, legally structured account of what happened. \n\n1. Initial Discovery of the AMERICOLLECT XXXX Account on XXXX XXXX XXXX I first became aware of this Americollect account while reviewing my credit reports. The entry appeared as : Name : AMERICOLLECT Status : Collection / Derogatory Balance : {$570.00} Account Type : Third-party collection Reporting : All three credit bureaus Payment History : None provided Public records or supporting data : None Original creditor : Not disclosed Details : Minimal information, incomplete data fields This account appeared without any prior communication from Americollect and without any explanation of what the debt was supposed to be for. The account seemed to appear out of nowhere, without : A notice A letter A bill A phone call A statement A verification request A validation notice Identity confirmation Seeing an unfamiliar derogatory collection for {$570.00} immediately concerned me, especially because Americollect provided no contextual information identifying what the debt pertained to. \n\n2. Americollect Never Provided the Legally Required FDCPA Validation Notice Under FDCPA 809 ( a ), a debt collector must send a written notice of the debt within 5 days of their first communication with a consumer.\n\nI never received : A validation letter A debt verification notice An initial communication Any written correspondence Any identification of the alleged creditor Any 30-day dispute rights notification Any disclosure or explanation of the debt Instead, Americollect immediately reported the debt to the credit bureaus, which is considered a collection action.\n\nThis is a clear violation of FDCPA 809 ( a ), which requires : Written notice Amount of debt Name of original creditor Consumer rights disclosure Option to dispute within 30 days Americollect provided none of this.\n\n3. I Never Received Any Validation Documentation Even After Disputing the Debt After discovering the account on my credit reports, I disputed the debt with Americollect directly and with all three credit bureaus.\n\nIn these disputes, I specifically requested : Validation of the debt Name of original creditor Signed contract Itemized billing history Date of service Account ledger Proof of assignment Proof Americollect legally owns the debt Explanation of how the {$570.00} was calculated Americollect failed to provide any of these.\n\nThey never sent : A copy of a signed agreement Service records Billing statements An itemized breakdown Proof of ownership A copy of a bill of sale Assignment documentation Business records linking me to the debt Their failure to provide these documents violates : FDCPA 809 ( b ) ( collector must stop collection until validation is provided ) FCRA 623 ( b ) ( furnishers must conduct a reasonable investigation ) FCRA accuracy obligations Yet Americollect continued to report the debt, even without providing validation. \n\n4. Americollect Failed to Identify the Original Creditor Americollect did not disclose : Who originally claimed I owed the debt When the debt originated What type of debt it was Whether it was medical, utility, service-based, etc. \n\nAny details about the charge This is extremely problematic because : I have no idea what the debt is supposed to be Without the original creditors name, I can not confirm validity I can not verify if I ever received a service or product I can not check whether insurance, payment, or settlement applied I can not determine if the debt is even mine Reporting a debt without identifying the original creditor is a clear violation of both FDCPA and FCRA. \n\n5. Americollect Provided the Bureaus With Insufficient, Incomplete, or Inaccurate Data The tradeline is missing essential information such as : Original creditor name Date of first delinquency ( DOFD ) Original account number ( masked or missing ) Date the debt was incurred Service codes Payment details Medical service provider ( if applicable ) Any supporting documentation FCRA 607 ( b ) requires maximum possible accuracy, which Americollect failed to provide.\n\nThe account appears to be furnished with : Minimal data Incorrect or incomplete fields No original documentation Unclear account history Possible re-aging, which is illegal This raises serious concerns about the accuracy of Americollect 's reporting. \n\n6. I Disputed the Account With XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX I submitted formal disputes with all three bureaus : XXXX XXXX XXXX In my disputes, I included specific requests for : Verification Documentation Method of Verification ( MOV ) Reasonable reinvestigation Identification of original creditor Proof of ownership Any contracts or statements Each bureau responded with the generic laundry-list responses : Verified Account information confirmed We have reviewed your dispute None of these responses addressed the core issues, nor did they comply with the FCRA. \n\n7. The Bureaus Did Not Provide the Required Method of Verification ( MOV ) Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), I requested MOV from all three bureaus.\n\nMOV requires : Description of procedure used to verify the account Identification of documents reviewed Name of furnisher representative Whether verification was electronic or manual Dates of the investigation Any documentation used in verification The bureaus did not provide : What method was used What proof Americollect supplied Whether any documentation was reviewed Any meaningful explanation whatsoever This violates the FCRA.\n\n8. The Bureaus Likely Used XXXX  Instead of a Real Investigation The brevity of their responses and lack of documentation strongly suggest that : The bureaus used XXXX Americollect responded with automated codes No documentation was exchanged No human investigation took place The CFPB has stated clearly that : XXXX does not fulfill FCRA reinvestigation requirements Automated verification is inadequate Furnishers must provide actual evidence Given this, the verification appears to be unlawful, inadequate, and invalid. \n\n9. Americollect Failed to Mark the Account as Disputed Once I disputed the debt, Americollect was required under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) to report the account as disputed by consumer.\n\nAmericollect failed to : Add the dispute notation Notify the credit bureaus Update the reporting Indicate that the debts legitimacy is contested This omission misleads lenders and violates federal law.\n\n10. The Debt May Be Incorrect, Expired, Misapplied, or Not Even Mine Because Americollect has provided no documentation whatsoever, the debt may be : A billing error A balance already paid A balance owed by another person A case of identity confusion A duplicate balance A debt already settled or handled by insurance A debt outside the statute of limitations A debt belonging to a different consumer Without documentation, none of these possibilities can be ruled out. \n\n11. Americollect May Have Violated HIPAA ( If the Debt Was Medical ) Americollect frequently collects medical debts.\n\nIf this debt is medical in nature, Americollect is required to : Provide proof of HIPAA-compliant assignment Provide itemized medical service documentation Demonstrate lawful access to medical billing data Show patient identity confirmation procedures Protect PHI under federal privacy law They provided none of this.\n\nThis raises concerns of potential HIPAA violations.\n\n12. Americollect Failed to Demonstrate Permissible Purpose to Report My Information Under FCRA 604, furnishers must demonstrate : Permissible purpose Legal authority Valid assignment Identity match Americollect has provided no basis for reporting this account to the credit bureaus.\n\nTherefore, Americollect may have accessed, used, and reported my data without lawful authorization.\n\n13. Damages and Harm Caused by Americollects Reporting The Americollect tradeline has caused substantial harm, including : A. Credit Score Damage Collections severely impact credit scores, reducing points and harming creditworthiness.\n\nB. Denials of Credit This derogatory account has directly contributed to : Loan denials Higher scrutiny by lenders Declined applications C. Higher Interest Rates When credit was extended, the interest rates were significantly elevated. \n\nD. Financial Loss I incurred out-of-pocket expenses for : Certified mail Credit monitoring Document preparation E. Emotional Distress I suffered : Anxiety Stress Frustration Uncertainty Due to Americollects refusal to validate or correct the account.\n\n14. Summary of What Happened To summarize : The Americollect XXXX account appeared on my credit report unexpectedly. \n\nAmericollect never sent a validation notice required by FDCPA 809 ( a ).\n\nAmericollect never provided validation after it was requested.\n\nAmericollect did not identify the original creditor.\n\nAmericollect has not proven ownership or legal right to collect.\n\nThe credit bureaus failed to conduct a lawful reinvestigation.\n\nThe bureaus refused to provide a Method of Verification. \n\nThe bureaus likely used XXXX instead of reviewing documents. \n\nAmericollect failed to mark the account as disputed. \n\nThe reporting contains errors, missing fields, and inaccuracies. \n\nThe accounts legitimacy can not be established. \n\nThe reporting has caused financial and emotional harm. \n\nThe account is unverified, inaccurate, and unlawfully furnished. \n\nThis concludes the XXXXword WHAT HAPPENED narrative.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-15T00:31:35.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"633XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17245894","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AmeriCollect","date_received":"2025-11-15T00:29:05.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["They never sent : A copy of a signed agreement Service records <em>Billing</em> statements An itemized <em>breakdown</em> Proof of ownership A copy of a <em>bill</em> of sale Assignment documentation Business records linking me to the debt Their failure to provide these documents violates : <em>FDCPA</em> 809 ( b ) ( collector must stop collection until <em>validation</em> is provided ) FCRA 623 ( b ) ( furnishers must conduct a reasonable investigation ) FCRA accuracy obligations Yet Americollect continued to report the debt, even without"]},"sort":[14.475058,"17245894"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17269464","_score":14.13813,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing this complaint because TransUnion has failed for over XXXX months to verify ANY of the accounts I have been disputing, despite me disputing every XXXX  days. This gives TransUnion XXXX  days to investigate and XXXX days for mail and processing. \nNot one page of verification has ever been provided.\n\nAll I receive is a copy of my credit report and stall letters falsely claiming I am working with a third party, which is NOT verification under the FCRA 1681i ( a ) or 1681e ( b ). \nBelow are the individual problems with each account : A. XXXX Late Payment Acct # XXXX {$0.00} Balance A late payment can not be reported unless the furnisher provides : The actual due date The date payment was received The date payment was posted Full payment ledger DOFD This account shows a past-due/late status with a {$0.00} balance, which is hearsay without supporting payment records. TransUnion provided no payment history and no verification. \nB. XXXX XXXX XXXX VERSIONS OF THE SAME DEBT XXXX {$1600.00} Collection XXXX {$1600.00} Collection XXXX {$1600.00} XXXX XXXX  is reporting XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  account XXXX different ways, under XXXX different names and XXXX different account numbers. This violates : FCRA 1681e ( b ) accuracy FCRA 1681i ( a ) reinvestigation FDCPA 1692e ( 2 ) false representation FDCPA 1692g ( b ) continued collection without validation Metro-2 one account = one tradeline To verify a collection, XXXX  and TransUnion must provide : The original XXXX  XXXX contract Full payment ledger Itemized balance calculation Chain of title ( ownership proof ) DOFD Metro-2 codes None of this was provided. \nXXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Acct # XXXX {$830.00} Medical Collection This is a medical debt, and TransUnion must obtain HIPAA-compliant validation, including : Original billing statement XXXX  codes Dates of service Proof of assignment to XXXX  DOFD XXXX XXXX XXXX of this was provided. No documentation at all. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Different Names, Same Acct # XXXX {$290.00} Charge-Off TransUnion is reporting this twice, under XXXX different names. \nTo verify a charge-off, TransUnion must obtain : Original contract Full payment history Charge-off date and ledger Balance calculation DOFD Ownership documents if transferred None of this has been provided in XXXX months. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX DIFFERENT CHARGE-OFFS Acct # XXXX {$950.00} Charge-off Acct # XXXX {$780.00} Charge-off Both charge-offs require : Contract Payment ledger Charge-off calculation DOFD Metro-2 fields TransUnion and First Premier have provided no documentation at all. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # XXXX {$1000.00} Charge-Off Same issue : no contract, no ledger, no DOFD, no Metro-2 verification .\n\nA charge-off can not be verified without these documents. \nXXXX XXXX Acct # XXXX {$260.00} Charge-Off Again : no contract, no payment history, no charge-off breakdown, no DOFD, no verification. \nXXXX XXXX  Acct # XXXX {$0.00} Charge-Off A {$0.00} balance charge-off can not legally report without : Contract Ledger Charge-off documentation XXXX TransUnion has none of this. \nLEGAL VIOLATIONS BY TRANSUNION TransUnion has violated : FCRA 1681i ( a ) failure to reinvestigate 1681e ( b ) failure to maintain maximum accuracy 1681s-2 ( b ) failure of furnishers to verify disputed info FDCPA ( for collection accounts ) 1692g ( b ) continued collection without validation 1692e false/misleading representations Metro-2 Duplicate reporting Missing DOFD Missing status codes Inconsistent balances Mixed data across furnishers TransUnion has not obtained one legally required document in over six months.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-16T00:17:41.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"77042","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17269464","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-16T00:11:40.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["LEGAL VIOLATIONS BY TRANSUNION TransUnion has violated : FCRA 1681i ( a ) failure to reinvestigate 1681e ( b ) failure to maintain maximum accuracy 1681s-2 ( b ) failure of furnishers to verify disputed info <em>FDCPA</em> ( for collection accounts ) 1692g ( b ) continued collection without <em>validation</em> 1692e false/misleading representations Metro-2 Duplicate reporting <em>Missing</em> DOFD <em>Missing</em> status codes Inconsistent balances Mixed data across furnishers TransUnion has not obtained one legally required document"]},"sort":[14.13813,"17269464"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17288052","_score":13.750689,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this statement to explain in full detail what happened regarding the account currently being reported by Vance & Huffman LLC, referenced as account number XXXX, which appears on my XXXX and XXXX credit reports as a collection/charge-off with a balance of {$1400.00}. This explanation outlines the discrepancies, inaccuracies, missing documentation, unexplained dates, and procedural issues that make this account unverifiable and in need of full reinvestigation. It also describes why I believe the reporting is incomplete, unfairly damaging, and not compliant with the requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \n\nTo begin, the information being reported across the credit bureaus is inconsistent and incomplete. According to the screenshot, Vance & Huffman LLC is only reporting to XXXX and XXXX, while Equifax shows nothing at all. The fact that a collection agency reports an account to XXXX or XXXX bureaus but not all three is often an indicator of incomplete data or internal inconsistencies in their records. Inconsistent reporting is XXXX of the signs that the information furnished may not be complete, verified, or accurate. \n\nThe information reported shows the account is marked as a collection/charge-off, with a current balance and high balance both listed as {$1400.00}. The account was opened on XX/XX/year>, according to XXXX, and is listed with a start date of XX/XX/year> on XXXX. This is already a significant discrepancy. An account can not have XXXX different opening/start dates across different bureaus and still meet the maximum possible accuracy requirement of FCRA XXXX ( b ). \n\nWhen XXXX bureau reports an opened date of XX/XX/XXXX and another reports a start date of XX/XX/XXXX, it raises concerns about whether the collector actually has accurate records. This inconsistency alone is enough to trigger a reinvestigation. \n\nAdditionally, both the Original Creditor and Creditor Type fields list the creditor as Unknown, which is a major red flag. A consumer can not be expected to validate or understand an account when the collection agency can not clearly identify the original creditor. If the original creditor is truly unknown, then Vance & Huffman should never have reported this information because credit-reporting requirements mandate that accounts must identify the original creditor and accurately reflect the full account history. \n\nUnder the FDCPA and FCRA, a collector must haveand be willing to providedocumentation showing what the debt is, where it came from, and how it was calculated. Reporting a debt from an unknown original creditor fails the basic validation requirement. \n\nFurthermore, the payment history for this account is not provided at all. Collections accounts often have minimal payment data, but even then, the reporting should include : Date of original delinquency Date of charge-off Date of last payment Itemized ledger Account history prior to collection However, the account shows no monthly payment history, no delinquency timeline, and no explanation of how the alleged debt progressed from an original creditor ( unknown ) to Vance & Huffman LLC XXXX Without this information, it is impossible for me to validate or confirm the legitimacy of this account. \n\nThe consumer dispute fields also state Account not disputed. This is not correct, as I am formally disputing the account now. Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ), any time a consumer disputes an account with a credit bureau, the furnisher must report that the account is disputed. Failure to do so renders the reporting inaccurate. Failure to update the dispute status is not merely a clerical oversight ; it is a violation of the law and indicates the furnisher is not following proper procedures. \n\nNext, the status reported is Negative on XXXX and Closed / Collection/Charge-Off on XXXX. The closure date on TransUnion is listed as XXXX same date as the supposed date opened. This is nonsensical and raises the question of whether the account was ever legitimately opened or whether the collection agency simply inserted dates without having any verified data. \n\nThere is also a Last Activity date of XX/XX/year> on XXXX. Yet I have no record, knowledge, email, phone call, mailed notice, billing statement, or communication of any sort from Vance & Huffman LLC on that date or around that time. A date of last activity should be tied to a consumer action ( such as payment, communication, or account modification ). If the collection agency generated this date internally rather than based on any actual consumer action, then the recording of that date is misleading and inaccurate. \n\nAnother discrepancy exists in the status updates. The TransUnion entry shows : Start Date : XX/XX/year> Last Reported : XX/XX/year> The account can not be last reported before the start date. This inconsistency demonstrates that the account record being furnished is flawed and likely incomplete. \n\nAdditionally, the Date of Last Payment is blank. If the account has never had a payment, then the collection agency must provide the original delinquency date from the original creditor. Instead, that data is missing entirely. The Original Creditor is listed as Unknown, and the Account Type Detail is blank. This is incomplete and prevents the consumer from being able to validate the account. \n\nThe comments field in the consumer reporting system states Added in XXXX XX/XX/year>. This suggests the account was simply inserted into the credit reporting system without proper verification or validation. Many collection agencies use automated software that uploads accounts in bulk, sometimes without checking for accuracy. If that is the case here, the collection agency may have inserted data that is unverified.\n\nThere is also no evidence that Vance & Huffman provided any legally required validation notice. Under FDCPA 809 ( a ), collectors must send a written notice within five days of first contact. I did not receive : A validation letter A notification of right to dispute A billing statement An explanation of charges An itemization of the debt Any written communication at all Because I did not receive this notice, I was never informed of my 30-day right to dispute the debt before it was reported to the credit bureaus. Without providing the required validation, the collection agency can not legally continue collection efforts, which include credit reporting. \n\nAnother issue is the absence of an itemized breakdown showing how the balance reached {$1400.00}. Since the collection agency has not identified the original creditor, I can not verify whether that amount is correct, inflated, or the result of fees or interest added by the collection agency. Under Regulation F ( CFPB ), collectors must include : Itemization date Itemized amount at that date Added interest Added fees Payments received Adjustments None of these required items are present in the credit report.\n\nThe account is also marked with the Account Rating : Derog, which severely damages my credit score. Derogatory accounts, especially collections, carry heavy negative scoring weight. The impact of this entry is significant, and because of the inconsistencies, missing information, and lack of validation, the reporting is unfair and harmful. \n\nAdditionally, I have never received any notice from the original creditor indicating that the debt was sold or assigned to Vance & Huffman LLC. Under standard credit and lending practices, if a debt is placed with a collection agency, the original creditor sends a notice indicating the transfer. I did not receive any such notice. \n\nThe bureau data also states that the creditor type is Other Collection Agencies, and the accounts Original Creditor is Unknown. A collection agency can not legally report a debt without identifying the original creditor. This is a foundational requirement of the FCRA, as consumers must be able to determine where a debt originated.\n\nThe absence of documentationcombined with conflicting dates, missing information, unknown original creditor, and the lack of validationmakes the account unverifiable.\n\nIn reviewing the timeline, the credit report lists : Date Opened : XX/XX/year> Start Date : XX/XX/year> Account Status : Closed Last Activity : XX/XX/year> Last Reported : XX/XX/year> Date of Last Payment : High Balance : {$1400.00} Balance : {$1400.00} This timeline reveals internal contradictions. For example, the account can not be closed and then start XXXX months later. It can not have a last reported date before its start date. It can not have a last activity date that corresponds to no interaction or transaction that I made. \n\nEqually problematic is that the Account Type Detail is blank, meaning the bureau does not have enough information to categorize the debt. When key fields such as this are missing, it shows that the collection agency did not provide the required data fields. \n\nA proper entry must include : Original creditor Account type Payment history Itemization Dates Balance breakdown Terms Because none of this information is present, the account can not be considered complete or accurate. \n\nI also did not receive any pre-reporting notice. Under some state laws and best practices, collectors must notify consumers prior to reporting a debt to the credit bureaus. Without that notice, I had no chance to address or dispute the account before negative reporting occurred. \n\nFurthermore, Vance & Huffman LLC has reported the account as Individual Responsibility. I do not recognize or recall entering into any agreement with this company or any lender that would have transferred the debt to them. If Vance & Huffman purchased or acquired the debt, they must provide proof of assignment or transfer, which I have never been shown. \n\nAdditionally, if this were a legitimate debt, the collection agency would have legal access to : Account origination documents Billing statements A complete transaction history Charge-off details Evidence of attempts to contact the consumer Transfer and assignment records Because the collection agency did not provide any of this, I have no way to confirm whether the account is valid or whether the amount is accurate. \n\nFor these reasons, I am disputing the legitimacy, accuracy, completeness, and verifiability of the account. The inconsistencies, lack of documentation, missing notices, conflicting dates, incomplete information, vague creditor identification, and absence of validation all raise reasonable doubts about the integrity of the account. \n\nThis is the full and complete explanation of what happened regarding the VANCE & HUFFMAN LLC account.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-17T23:34:46.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"75126","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17288052","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"V and H Portfolio","date_received":"2025-11-17T23:28:12.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["There is also no evidence that Vance & Huffman provided any legally required <em>validation</em> notice. Under <em>FDCPA</em> 809 ( a ), collectors must send a written notice within five days of first contact."]},"sort":[13.750689,"17288052"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13287442","_score":13.399835,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Subject : Formal Complaint Inaccurate and Unverified Reporting by LVNV Funding LLC / Resurgent XXXX XXXX XXXX  Account To Whom It XXXX Concern, This letter is to file a formal complaint against LVNV Funding LLC and Resurgent Capital Services for their continued reporting of an account originally associated with XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. This account # XXXX is currently being reported to all three major credit reporting agencies ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as a collection account with a balance of {$1000.00}, and reflects a misleading past due status dated XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n\n\n1. Misleading and Potentially Re-Aged Reporting According to Resurgents own documentation, this account was charged off on XX/XX/XXXX, with no payments made since XX/XX/XXXX. Despite this, the tradelines across the three bureaus show the account as past due as of XX/XX/XXXX, and XXXX lists it as last updated on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nThis misrepresentation of the accounts age and status creates the false appearance of recent delinquency, which is both inaccurate and harmful. It may constitute re-aging, which is prohibited under FCRA 605 ( c ). The original delinquency datenot recent reporting or collection activitymust determine how long an account remains on a consumers credit file.\n\n2. Failure to Provide Legal Debt Validation In response to my dispute, Resurgent provided : A billing statement from XX/XX/XXXX A Resurgent-prepared summary page An ownership history sheet referencing multiple internal transfers However, they failed to include : A signed credit agreement or application with my name A complete, itemized breakdown showing how the balance increased to {$1000.00} Legal documentation proving the assignment or sale of this specific account to LVNV Funding LLC Under FDCPA 809, a debt collector must provide full and verifiable proof of the debt. The documents sent do not meet this threshold.\n\n3. Incomplete and Inaccurate Credit Bureau Reporting In addition to the re-aged dates, the reporting is also missing : Payment terms Monthly payment amount A complete payment history Proper identification of charge-off details This violates FCRA 607 ( b ), which requires that information furnished to cred\nit reporting agencies be both accurate and complete.\n\n4. Pattern of Misconduct Across Multiple Accounts This is now the third account Ive had to dispute involving LVNV Funding LLC and Resurgent Capital Services, all showing the same troubling behaviors : Re-aging of debts Missing documentation Misleading payment history Generic summaries not issued by the original creditor These repeated violations indicate a potential pattern of noncompliance with federal reporting and debt collection laws.\n\n5. Consumer Harm Because this account is being reported to all three bureaus with false freshness and delinquency, it is directly harming my credit profile. This is impacting my ability to qualify for fair credit terms, rent property, or access basic financial opportunities. It also misleads creditors who review my profile.\n\nRequested Resolution In light of the violations above, I respectfully request that the CFPB : Require the removal of this account from all credit reporting agencies if it can not be fully validated Investigate the accuracy and legality of LVNV Funding LLC and Resurgent Capital Services reporting and documentation practices Provide written confirmation of the outcome as required under FCRA 1681i I have attached : The documents sent by Resurgent Capital Services Screenshots of the XXXX credit report A copy of my government-issued ID and proof of address Given that this account is being reported across all three bureaus, I respectfully urge the CFPB to act promptly to ensure the account is either fully validated with proper legal documentation or deleted from all consumer credit reports in accordance with federal law.\n\nThank you for your time and attention to this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-01T05:53:10.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"90028","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13287442","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","date_received":"2025-05-01T05:47:37.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Failure to Provide Legal Debt <em>Validation</em> In response to my dispute, Resurgent provided : A <em>billing</em> statement from XX/XX/XXXX A Resurgent-prepared summary page An ownership history sheet referencing multiple internal transfers However, they failed to include : A signed credit agreement or application with my name A complete, itemized <em>breakdown</em> showing how the balance increased to {$1000.00} Legal documentation proving the assignment or sale of this specific account to LVNV Funding LLC Under <em>FDCPA</em>"]},"sort":[13.399835,"13287442"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14088047","_score":13.395793,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"To : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Subject : Formal Complaint and Dispute Debt Buyer Reporting Violations of FCRA and FDCPA ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Dear CFPB Representative, I am submitting a formal complaint regarding a debt buyer tradeline reported on my consumer credit report. This account is listed as a collection account with the original creditor being XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  and currently managed by a debt buyer whose full identity and ownership details are not provided in the tradeline. This violates several provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) and is part of a known pattern of legal abuse and misreporting by debt buyers that has resulted in federal lawsuits. \n\nAccount Information : Account Number : XXXX Creditor/Originator : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Current Owner : Not Disclosed ( Debt Buyer Account ) Date Opened ( Reported ) : XX/XX/XXXX Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX Status : Collection Balance : {$170.00} High Balance : {$170.00} Date Reported : XX/XX/XXXX Activity Designator / Terms / Payment History : Not provided Legal Issues and Violations : Re-Aging of Debt ( FCRA 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ) ) : The date of first delinquency is shown as XX/XX/XXXX, but the account is listed as \" opened '' on XX/XX/XXXX more than two years after delinquency, suggesting illegal re-aging of the debt. This deceptive practice is prohibited under federal law and was challenged in the case FTC XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, where a debt buyer was found guilty of similar FCRA violations. \n\nIncomplete and Unverifiable Reporting ( FCRA 1681e ( b ), 1681s-2 ( b ) ) : The tradeline fails to include : The name of the debt buyer who owns the account Payment history Chain of title Any indication of validation Without this, the account is incomplete, inaccurate, and unverifiable, making it unfit for continued reporting. \n\nFailure to Provide Debt Validation ( FDCPA 809, 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) : If the current furnisher is a third-party debt collector ( which the \" debt buyer '' classification implies ), they are legally obligated to provide full validation upon request and before reporting to CRAs. Failing to identify themselves or provide any such documentation violates the FDCPA.\n\nMisleading Status Designation ( FCRA 1681i and FDCPA 1692e ) : The account is labeled \" collection '' and open, while there is no disclosed payment schedule, agreement, or activity. This creates a false impression of a valid, actively due debt, which is misleading and potentially damaging to my financial reputation. \n\nPattern of Legal Abuse : Accounts of this type specifically XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  debts sold to unknown debt buyers have been the subject of multiple class action lawsuits and regulatory fines due to improper credit reporting practices, inaccurate balances, and lack of documentation. The CFPB has previously taken enforcement action in such cases, and I request that this account be reviewed under similar scrutiny. \n\nRequested Actions : I respectfully request the following : Immediate investigation into the debt buyers identity, ownership rights, and the legal accuracy of the tradeline.\n\nEnforcement of FCRA compliance by requiring the deletion or correction of this tradeline due to improper re-aging, unverifiable ownership, and missing account details.\n\nConfirmation that no further reporting will occur without proper documentation, including the original agreement, proof of assignment, and a payment history. \n\nThat CFPB considers potential action against the furnisher and any related entity if this is found to be part of a pattern of consumer harm. \n\nThis inaccurate, incomplete, and possibly unlawful reporting is having a negative impact on my credit file. I am asserting my rights under FCRA and FDCPA, and I request CFPB intervention to ensure compliance and prevent further damage. \n\n_____________________________________________________________________ To : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Subject : Dispute of Collection Account Reported by XXXX XXXX Legal Violations Under FCRA and FDCPA Dear CFPB Representative, I am submitting this formal complaint regarding a collection account reported by XXXX XXXX on my consumer credit report. After reviewing the tradeline, I have identified multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and potentially the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), which affect the accuracy, completeness, and legality of this entry. \n\nAccount Details : Account Number : XXXX Creditor : XXXX XXXX Reported Balance : {$1700.00} Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX Date Reported : XX/XX/XXXX Status : Collection Type : Telecommunications/Cellular Payment History : Not Provided Contact : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, TX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX Legal Issues with This Reporting : 1. Violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Inaccuracy & Incompleteness This tradeline provides no payment history, no activity record, no validation documentation, and no details of account ownership, despite being labeled a collection account. Per FCRA, credit furnishers and reporting agencies must ensure all reported information is accurate, complete, and up to date. The absence of these critical elements renders the tradeline incomplete and unverifiable. \n\nXXXX. Failure to Identify Ownership or Collection Authority This account is listed as a collection, but XXXX XXXX is a service provider, not a third-party debt collector. If XXXX sold or assigned the debt to a collection agency, that information must be disclosed. If a third party is reporting this account on XXXX behalf, they are subject to FDCPA 809 ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) and are required to provide debt validation.\n\n3. Reporting Without Full Validation ( FDCPA 809 ) If this account is being collected or reported by any party other than the original creditor, I am entitled to receive : Verification of the debt The name of the original creditor The full breakdown of charges leading to the {$1700.00} balance Confirmation that the entity reporting this debt has legal standing to collect it None of this information has been provided or made accessible. Reporting this debt without validation violates FDCPA requirements. \n\nXXXX. Potential Re-Aging or Misclassification of Telecommunications Debt The \" Date Opened '' is XX/XX/XXXX, with a \" Date of First Delinquency '' in XX/XX/XXXX. If this debt is older or was incurred earlier than this, it may have been re-aged a tactic that unfairly extends the time it remains on my report, which violates FCRA 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ) and 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ).\n\nMy Request to the CFPB : I respectfully request the following : Initiate an investigation into this account and its reporting accuracy, validation, and legal compliance. \n\nConfirm whether XXXX XXXX still owns this debt or if it has been sold or assigned to a third-party collector. If so, require disclosure of the current debt owner. \n\nRequire that this account be verified with supporting documentation, including : Original contract or service agreement Billing statements Proof of ownership/assignment Chain of title, if sold If the furnisher or CRA can not verify the completeness and accuracy of this tradeline, request its permanent deletion under FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ). \n\nThis account is causing harm to my creditworthiness. Under both FCRA and FDCPA, I am asserting my rights to full, accurate, and verifiable reporting and request your assistance in resolving this matter appropriately. \n________________________________________________________________ To : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Subject : Dispute of Medical Collection Account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \n\nDear CFPB Representative, I am submitting this formal complaint and dispute regarding a medical debt collection tradeline being reported on my credit file by XXXX XXXX for services allegedly provided by XXXX XXXX  XXXX. \n\nThis entry is inaccurate, incomplete, and being reported in a manner that violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), and recent changes in federal medical debt reporting policy as directed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and implemented through the National Consumer Assistance Plan ( NCAP ). \n\nAccount Information : Original Creditor XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX. \n\nBalance Owed : {$680.00} Date Assigned : XX/XX/XXXX Date Reported : XX/XX/XXXX Date of First Delinquency : [ Not Provided ] Date of Last Payment : [ Not Provided ] Current Status : Unpaid Account Type : XXXX XXXX Comments : Consumer Disputes This Account Information Legal Concerns and Violations : 1. Violation of Medical Debt Reporting Rules ( Effective XX/XX/XXXX ) Under the updated Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion policies, paid medical collections must be deleted from credit reports, and unpaid medical debt under {$500.00} is no longer allowed to be reported. If this account qualifies under either, it should be removed immediately. I am requesting full verification that : The account is still legally reportable It meets the dollar threshold for continued reporting Insurance payment status has been verified 2. Violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Accuracy and Completeness The tradeline does not include essential details required by law, such as : A full billing breakdown or explanation of services The date of first delinquency Whether insurance was billed or pending Without this information, the tradeline is incomplete and unverifiable, and thus a violation of the FCRA. \n\nXXXX. Potential FDCPA Violations Medical Debt Not Properly Validated If XXXX XXXX is acting as a debt collector, they must provide full validation of the debt under 15 U.S.C. 1692g. I have not received any documentation validating this account including proof of treatment, billing statement, or insurance adjudication results and yet it continues to be reported, harming my credit profile. \n\n4. No Notice Prior to Reporting FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 7 ) There is no evidence that proper notice was sent 30 days before reporting this debt to the credit bureaus, as required by the FCRA for medical debt. This failure makes the reporting action unlawful. \n\nXXXX. Unfair Reporting of Time-Barred Debt If this debt is from early XXXX or earlier, depending on Georgias statute of limitations for medical debt ( typically 46 years ), this may now be time-barred from collection or credit reporting, unless re-aged which is also a violation of FCRA 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ). \n\nRequest for Relief : I am requesting the CFPB investigate this account and require XXXX XXXX and the credit bureaus to : Verify the debts accuracy and legal eligibility for reporting under current medical debt regulations. \n\nProvide full validation of the debt, including : Insurance billing details Service date and type Billing and patient statements Delete the account if it can not be validated or is improperly reported under new guidelines. \n\nConfirm whether the account was ever paid or settled, and if so, ensure deletion in compliance with current CFPB and credit bureau policies. \n\nThis collection entry is negatively affecting my credit standing and was reported without adequate verification or legal compliance. I am asserting my rights under the FCRA and FDCPA and request the XXXX assistance in resolving this matter fairly. \n______________________________________________________________________ Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Subject : Dispute of Medical Collection Account Reported by XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Dear CFPB Representative, I am filing a formal dispute regarding a medical collection tradeline being reported on my credit profile by XXXX, on behalf oXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, in the amount of {$720.00}. This debt is reflected as : Original Creditor : XXXX Georgia XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX : {$720.00} Date Assigned : XX/XX/XXXX Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX Status Date : XX/XX/XXXX Creditor Classification : Medical/Health Care Account Type : Individual Account Comments : Medical Dispute Basis & Legal Violations This medical debt is being reported in a manner that violates current federal guidelines regarding the reporting of medical collections on consumer credit reports. I am invoking my rights under : 1. FCRA 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ) Obsolete Debt Reporting The date of first delinquency is XX/XX/XXXX, which means this account is over XXXX years old. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), adverse information including collections can not be reported more than 7 years from the date of first delinquency. This item is at or beyond the legal reporting limit and must be removed if it exceeds the XXXX window. \n\nXXXX. Medical Debt Reporting Reform Effective XX/XX/XXXX The three major credit bureaus ( Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion ) implemented policy changes per CFPB pressure, stating : Medical debt under {$500.00} is no longer reportable.\n\nPaid medical collections must be removed.\n\nMedical collections can not be reported until 365 days after being sent to collections to allow insurance payment and resolution. \n\nIt is unclear from the reporting if this account was ever billed to insurance, paid in part, or resolved. If any of the following apply, the account is in violation of CFPB policy and should be deleted : The account was paid or settled The balance is under {$500.00} The debt was reported before 365 days from assignment 3. FCRA 1681e ( b ) Inaccurate/Incomplete Reporting This account lacks key information required to ensure accuracy : No date of last payment No evidence of itemized charges No documentation showing patient responsibility vs insurance denial Without this information, the debt can not be fully verified and should not be included in my consumer file. \n\n4. FDCPA 809 ( 15 USC 1692g ) Failure to Validate Debt I have not received any validation or itemized statement regarding this debt. If XXXX is acting as a third-party collector, they are required to send validation of the debt upon request, which includes : Itemized charges Insurance billing outcomes Signed consent to treatment Action Requested I request the CFPB investigate this collection tradeline and take corrective action against improper reporting. Specifically, I ask : Immediate removal of the tradeline if the account is beyond the legal reporting period.\n\nVerification and validation of the medical debt in compliance with FCRA and FDCPA.\n\nConfirmation that the debt meets CFPB and credit bureau policy for reporting, especially concerning the dollar amount and age of the debt.\n\nDocumentation of whether this debt was ever billed to and denied by insurance. \n\nThis item is damaging my credit and is not being reported in compliance with current consumer protection laws and reporting standards. \n______________________________________________________________________ Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) Subject : Dispute of Medical Collection Account Reported by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Dear CFPB Representative, I am submitting a formal dispute regarding a medical collection account being reported by XXXX XXXX XXXX, assigned from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, in the amount of {$640.00}. The account details are as follows : Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX XXXX XXXX Account Number : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Amount Owed : {$640.00} Date Assigned : XX/XX/XXXX Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX Status : Unpaid Creditor Classification : Medical/Health Care Status Date : XX/XX/XXXX Legal Basis for Dispute I am disputing this account based on the following legal grounds and federal protections applicable to the reporting of medical debt on consumer credit reports : 1. CFPB Medical Debt Reporting Rules ( Effective XX/XX/XXXX ) Under updated guidelines announced by the CFPB and implemented by the credit reporting agencies ( Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion ), the following rules apply : Medical debts under {$500.00} must not be reported on credit reports. \n\nPaid medical debts must be removed from credit reports. \n\nMedical debt can not be reported until XXXX full year ( 365 days ) after it was sent to collections to allow time for insurance claims and billing resolution. \n\nDispute Justification : It is unclear whether this {$640.00} debt was submitted to insurance, paid in part, or subject to billing errors. If it was ever paid, disputed with the provider, or not aged 365 days from the date of assignment, its reporting violates the current CFPB and credit bureau policy and must be deleted. \n\nXXXX. Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) XXXX ( b ) : Accuracy and Completeness The FCRA mandates that information furnished to consumer reporting agencies must be accurate and complete. This debt lacks essential information such as : Date of last payment Itemization of charges Whether the balance reflects insurance adjustments or billing errors Dispute Justification : Without clear documentation or validation of this debt, its accuracy is in question and it must be removed until proven with complete and accurate records. \n\n3. Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 809 ( 15 U.S. Code 1692g ) : Debt Validation I have not received any validation or documentation from XXXX XXXX XXXX verifying the origin, legitimacy, or details of this debt. The FDCPA requires that any debt collector must provide proper validation upon request. \n\nDispute Justification : No validation has been provided. Until full debt verification ( including itemized billing, insurance status, and treatment consent ) is received, this debt must not be reported. \n\nRequested Resolution I am respectfully requesting that the CFPB investigate this medical collection tradeline and take appropriate action to ensure compliance with consumer protection laws. I specifically request : Removal of this account from all credit reports if it is unverified, inaccurate, or reported in violation of federal guidelines. \n\nDocumentation from XXXX XXXX XXXX proving the legitimacy and reporting accuracy of this account. \n\nConfirmation that this debt meets all CFPB and credit bureau requirements, including the {$500.00} threshold and the one-year delay rule. \n\nThis account is negatively affecting my credit profile, and I am exercising my rights under the FCRA and FDCPA to ensure fair, accurate, and lawful reporting of consumer information. \n\nThank you for your time and attention to this matter.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-15T13:08:37.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"30076","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14088047","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-06-15T13:08:11.000Z","state":"GA","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Potential <em>FDCPA</em> Violations Medical Debt Not Properly <em>Validated</em> If XXXX XXXX is acting as a debt collector, they must provide full <em>validation</em> of the debt under 15 U.S.C. 1692g. I have not received any documentation <em>validating</em> this account including proof of treatment, <em>billing</em> statement, or insurance adjudication results and yet it continues to be reported, harming my credit profile. \n\n4."]},"sort":[13.395793,"14088047"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":53,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":53}]}},"product":{"doc_count":53,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":28,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":19},{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":6},{"key":"Federal student loan debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Medical debt","doc_count":1},{"key":"Telecommunications debt","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":22,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":22}]}},{"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}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"USDA mortgage","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":53,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":21,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":19},{"key":"Debt was paid","doc_count":1},{"key":"Debt was result of identity theft","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":9,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":8},{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":7}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":6,"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":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":5,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Didn't receive enough information to verify debt","doc_count":4},{"key":"Didn't receive notice of right to dispute","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"False statements or representation","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempted to collect wrong amount","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Other features, terms, or problems","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Other problem","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Repossession","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan balance remaining after the vehicle is repossessed and sold","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Took or threatened to take negative or legal action","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Threatened or suggested your credit would be damaged","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Trying to communicate with the company to fix an issue while managing or servicing your loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":53,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":53}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":53,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":32},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":21}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":53,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":53}]}},"company":{"doc_count":53,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":8},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":6},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":6},{"key":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","doc_count":5},{"key":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","doc_count":3},{"key":"Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC","doc_count":3},{"key":"CL Holdings LLC","doc_count":2},{"key":"AES/PHEAA","doc_count":1},{"key":"AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Affirm Holdings, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"Aldridge PIte Haan, LLP","doc_count":1},{"key":"AmeriCollect","doc_count":1},{"key":"Consumer Adjustment Company Incorporated","doc_count":1},{"key":"Credit Corp Solutions Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"FC HoldCo LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"HW Holding, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"I.C. System, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Javitch, Block & Rathbone LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Kriya Capital, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Mr. Cooper Group Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"National Credit Adjusters, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":1},{"key":"Second Round Limited Partnership, Austin, TX Branch","doc_count":1},{"key":"TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"V and H Portfolio","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":53,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TX","doc_count":10},{"key":"FL","doc_count":8},{"key":"CA","doc_count":7},{"key":"GA","doc_count":7},{"key":"NY","doc_count":5},{"key":"MO","doc_count":4},{"key":"MS","doc_count":3},{"key":"LA","doc_count":2},{"key":"NC","doc_count":2},{"key":"TN","doc_count":2},{"key":"MI","doc_count":1},{"key":"VA","doc_count":1},{"key":"WA","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":53,"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":18},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":53,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":2},{"key":"Older American","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[13.395793,"14088047"],"3":[7.791699,"4300801"]}}}