{"took":260,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":162,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14683831","_score":20.519024,"_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":["<em>FCRA</em> XXXX Failure to verify the debt FDCPA XXXX Collector did not <em>validate</em> XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$140.00} Violation : <em>FCRA</em> XXXX Unverified <em>derogatory</em> status <em>FCRA</em> XXXX Contract and obligation never produced FDCPA XXXX Collection activity without proof XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$240.00} Violation : <em>FCRA</em> XXXX <em>Missing</em> <em>validation</em> details <em>FCRA</em> XXXX <em>Derogatory</em> <em>entry</em> lacks verification FDCPA XXXX Collector did not <em>validate</em> debt CCI Acct XXXX : XXXX * * Balance : {$230.00"]},"sort":[20.519024,"14683831"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14700837","_score":20.487793,"_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":["} Violation : <em>FCRA</em> 609 <em>Missing</em> <em>validation</em> details <em>FCRA</em> 611 <em>Derogatory</em> <em>entry</em> lacks verification FDCPA 809 Collector did not <em>validate</em> debt XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$230.00} Violation : <em>FCRA</em> 609 No documentation received <em>FCRA</em> 611 Invalid dispute handling FDCPA 809 No debt <em>validation</em> provided XXXX & XXXX Acct XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$240.00} Violation : <em>FCRA</em> 611 Continued collection reporting without verification FDCPA 809 No debt <em>validation</em> presented <em>FCRA</em> 609 Lacks"]},"sort":[20.487793,"14700837"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14686513","_score":20.487793,"_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":["<em>FCRA</em> XXXX Failure to verify the debt FDCPA XXXX Collector did not <em>validate</em> XXXX XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$140.00} Violation : <em>FCRA</em> XXXX Unverified <em>derogatory</em> status <em>FCRA</em> XXXX Contract and obligation never produced FDCPA XXXX Collection activity without proof XXXX XXXX Acct # : XXXX * * * Balance : {$240.00} Violation : <em>FCRA</em> XXXX <em>Missing</em> <em>validation</em> details <em>FCRA</em> XXXX <em>Derogatory</em> <em>entry</em> lacks verification FDCPA XXXX Collector did not <em>validate</em> debt CCI Acct XXXX : XXXX * * Balance : {$230.00"]},"sort":[20.487793,"14686513"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17460994","_score":18.603115,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX is reporting materially inaccurate and incomplete data. The delinquency timeline is impossible. Payment history shows on-time payments through XX/XX/XXXX, yet XXXX is reported as 90 days late and XXXX - XXXX as 120-180 days late. This violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) because the severity of delinquency does not match the actual payment record. \n\nPast-due amounts increase in irregular, non-scheduled increments ( {$200.00}, {$250.00}, {$300.00}, {$350.00}, {$400.00} ) instead of rising in {$50.00} cycles, and no itemization or basis is shown. This makes the balances unverifiable and inaccurate under FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). \n\nTwo months ( XXXX XXXX ) are reported aXXXX XXXX  ( unknown ), leaving gaps in required monthly reporting. Missing months break the continuity of the delinquency timeline and render later derogatory statuses unreliable. \n\nThe account also fails to list the mandated Date of First Delinquency required for federal loan reporting under FCRA obligations, making all delinquency aging unverifiable. \n\nAdditionally, consecutive severe-delinquency statuses ( such as repeated 120-180 day entries ) can not legally occur without matching missed-payment cycles. Reporting back-to-back extreme delinquency months with no supporting payment history is inaccurate and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ). Because the tradeline contains missing data, contradictory payment history, mathematically impossible delinquency aging, inconsistent past-due calculations, absent DOFD, and unverifiable derogatory statuses, it must be corrected or removed unless the furnisher supplies full documentation validating each reported month pursuant to FCRA 1681i. This has been disputed before and returned as \" verified '' without providing the full method of verification to validate this debt. Failure to provide these documents will result in a criminal lawsuit- this is my inten\nt to sue Transunion AND the XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX for sham investigations and will seek monetary damages to the fullest extent.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-24T18:08:10.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"339XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17460994","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-24T18:07:41.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Reporting back-to-back extreme delinquency months with no supporting payment history is inaccurate and violates <em>FCRA</em> 1681e ( b ). Because the tradeline contains <em>missing</em> data, contradictory payment history, mathematically impossible delinquency aging, inconsistent past-due calculations, absent DOFD, and unverifiable <em>derogatory</em> statuses, it must be corrected or removed unless the furnisher supplies full documentation <em>validating</em> each reported month pursuant to <em>FCRA</em> 1681i."]},"sort":[18.603115,"17460994"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17475537","_score":18.57475,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX is reporting materially inaccurate and incomplete data. The delinquency timeline is impossible. Payment history shows on-time payments through XX/XX/XXXX, yet XXXX is reported as 90 days late and XXXX - XXXX as 120-180 days late. This violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) because the severity of delinquency does not match the actual payment record. \n\nPast-due amounts increase in irregular, non-scheduled increments ( {$200.00}, {$250.00}, {$300.00}, {$350.00}, {$400.00} ) instead of rising in {$50.00} cycles, and no itemization or basis is shown. This makes the balances unverifiable and inaccurate under FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). \n\nXXXX months ( XXXX XXXX ) are reported as XXXX XXXX unknown ), leaving gaps in required monthly reporting. Missing months break the continuity of the delinquency timeline and render later derogatory statuses unreliable. \n\nThe account also fails to list the mandated Date of First Delinquency required for federal loan reporting under FCRA obligations, making all delinquency aging unverifiable. \n\nAdditionally, consecutive severe-delinquency statuses ( such as repeated 120-180 day entries ) can not legally occur without matching missed-payment cycles. Reporting back-to-back extreme delinquency months with no supporting payment history is inaccurate and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ). \n\nBecause the tradeline contains missing data, contradictory payment history, mathematically impossible delinquency aging, inconsistent past-due calculations, absent DOFD, and unverifiable derogatory statuses, it must be corrected or removed unless the furnisher supplies full documentation validating each reported month pursuant to FCRA 1681i. This has been disputed before and returned as \" verified '' without providing the full method of verification to validate this debt. Failure to provide these documents will result in a criminal lawsuit- this is my intent to sue TXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  for sham investigations and will seek monetary damages to the fullest extent.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-24T18:08:10.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"339XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17475537","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-11-24T18:07:41.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Reporting back-to-back extreme delinquency months with no supporting payment history is inaccurate and violates <em>FCRA</em> 1681e ( b ). \n\nBecause the tradeline contains <em>missing</em> data, contradictory payment history, mathematically impossible delinquency aging, inconsistent past-due calculations, absent DOFD, and unverifiable <em>derogatory</em> statuses, it must be corrected or removed unless the furnisher supplies full documentation <em>validating</em> each reported month pursuant to <em>FCRA</em> 1681i."]},"sort":[18.57475,"17475537"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17475536","_score":18.57475,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX is reporting materially inaccurate and incomplete data. The delinquency timeline is impossible. Payment history shows on-time payments through XX/XX/XXXX, yet XXXX is reported as 90 days late and XXXX - XXXX as 120-180 days late. This violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) because the severity of delinquency does not match the actual payment record. \n\nPast-due amounts increase in irregular, non-scheduled increments ( {$200.00}, {$250.00}, {$300.00}, {$350.00}, {$400.00} ) instead of rising in {$50.00} cycles, and no itemization or basis is shown. This makes the balances unverifiable and inaccurate under FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). \n\nTwo months ( XXXX XXXX ) are reported as XXXX ( unknown ), leaving gaps in required monthly reporting. Missing months break the continuity of the delinquency timeline and render later derogatory statuses unreliable. \n\nThe account also fails to list the mandated Date of First Delinquency required for federal loan reporting under FCRA obligations, making all delinquency aging unverifiable. \n\nAdditionally, consecutive severe-delinquency statuses ( such as repeated 120-180 day entries ) can not legally occur without matching missed-payment cycles. Reporting back-to-back extreme delinquency months with no supporting payment history is inaccurate and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ). \n\nBecause the tradeline contains missing data, contradictory payment history, mathematically impossible delinquency aging, inconsistent past-due calculations, absent DOFD, and unverifiable derogatory statuses, it must be corrected or removed unless the furnisher supplies full documentation validating each reported month pursuant to FCRA 1681i. This has been disputed before and returned as \" verified '' without providing the full method of verification to validate this debt. Failure to provide these documents will result in a criminal lawsuit- this is my intent to sue XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  for sham investigations and will seek monetary damages to the fullest extent.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-24T18:08:10.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"339XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17475536","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-24T18:07:41.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Reporting back-to-back extreme delinquency months with no supporting payment history is inaccurate and violates <em>FCRA</em> 1681e ( b ). \n\nBecause the tradeline contains <em>missing</em> data, contradictory payment history, mathematically impossible delinquency aging, inconsistent past-due calculations, absent DOFD, and unverifiable <em>derogatory</em> statuses, it must be corrected or removed unless the furnisher supplies full documentation <em>validating</em> each reported month pursuant to <em>FCRA</em> 1681i."]},"sort":[18.57475,"17475536"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17248076","_score":18.563652,"_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 breakdown <em>Missing</em> contractual documentation <em>Missing</em> <em>validation</em> history <em>Missing</em> dispute notation ( required under <em>FCRA</em> 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) ) These omissions"]},"sort":[18.563652,"17248076"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13501346","_score":18.048326,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am disputing several inaccurate and damaging entries on my Experian credit report dated XX/XX/scrub>XXXX XXXX The following items are being reported with errors, missing documentation, or in violation of my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  is reporting 4 late payments and a credit usage rate of 165 %, with a balance of {$490.00} and a {$95.00} past due amount. I dispute this information as inaccurate and unverifiable. I never received proper validation or documentation supporting these claims. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX is reporting a charge-off of {$6200.00} with 28 months of derogatory history. I was never notified of this alleged debt, nor was it verified with any signed agreement or proof. Reporting such information without verification is a violation of FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ). \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX shows a charged-off amount of {$8800.00}. I have no knowledge of authorizing or using this account. This account was allegedly sold to a third party, yet no validation was provided before or after the sale. \n\nXXXX appears as a closed account with a consumer statement already on file saying, I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THIS ACCOUNT. I continue to dispute this entry and demand removal unless proof of authorization is presented. \n\nMy report shows extremely high credit utilization ( 165 % ), which is misrepresented and based on inaccurate credit limits. This misreporting has unfairly lowered my FICO score and impaired my ability to obtain credit. \n\nI contacted Experian to dispute these items, but they remain on my report. These negative entries are harming my creditworthiness and were either not validated, not authorized, or reported inaccurately. I am requesting full reinvestigation and permanent removal of the items if they can not be verified with original documentation.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-14T13:14:27.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"303XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13501346","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-05-14T13:14:02.000Z","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":["I am disputing several inaccurate and damaging <em>entries</em> on my Experian credit report dated XX/XX/scrub>XXXX XXXX The following items are being reported with errors, <em>missing</em> documentation, or in violation of my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( <em>FCRA</em> ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  is reporting 4 late payments and a credit usage rate of 165 %, with a balance of {$490.00} and a {$95.00} past due amount."]},"sort":[18.048326,"13501346"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17227293","_score":17.940622,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Equifax Failure to Properly Investigate Dispute, Maintain Accurate Identifiers, and Validate Metro-2 Compliance for Consumer : XXXX XXXX XXXX This complaint is submitted because I mailed a formal dispute to Equifax on XX/XX/year>, challenging inaccurate personal identifiers and multiple unverifiable accounts. \n\nEquifax continues reporting incorrect primary names, past addresses, and employer information that do not belong to the consumer. These identifiers are not supported by verifiable, certified documentation. I explicitly revoked authorization for Equifax to report any personal information not matching my verified identity. \n\nEquifax is also reporting derogatory accounts and inquiries that are inconsistent with XXXX  and XXXX. These include XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, and others. Many entries contain missing mandatory Metro-2 fields, inconsistent dates, and discrepancies in reporting between bureaus, which violates FCRA accuracy requirements. \n\nEquifax continues reporting inquiries that lack compliant supporting data, including XXXX  XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and others. Under FCRA 1681e ( b ), Equifax must assure maximum possible accuracy, which it has failed to do.\n\nI demanded that Equifax either produce certified Metro-2 compliant validation or delete the unverifiable data entirely. Equifax has not properly responded.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-13T17:47:17.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"78130","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17227293","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-11-13T17:41:55.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Equifax is also reporting <em>derogatory</em> accounts and inquiries that are inconsistent with XXXX  and XXXX. These include XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, and others. Many <em>entries</em> contain <em>missing</em> mandatory Metro-2 fields, inconsistent dates, and discrepancies in reporting between bureaus, which violates <em>FCRA</em> accuracy requirements. \n\nEquifax continues reporting inquiries that lack compliant supporting data, including XXXX  XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and others."]},"sort":[17.940622,"17227293"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13962865","_score":17.86531,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am filing a complaint about multiple fraudulent and/or inaccurately reported accounts from Affirm Inc. that are appearing on my credit report. Several of these tradelines reflect late payments, yet I do not recognize or recall authorizing any credit arrangement with Affirm Inc. at all.\n\nThere appear to be at least three separate Affirm entries, each listed under Affirm Inc. with either missing account data or derogatory payment status remarks. These accounts show no balance, no payment history, no updated reporting, and no proof of loan agreement. At least two of the Affirm accounts are marked with late payments, which is highly misleading and damaging to my credit score and profile. I have no desire to purchase items in payment plans. \n\nThis could be the result of : Identity theft Duplicate or fragmented tradelines Accounts opened without full transparency or agreement Errors in how Affirm reports to credit bureaus I was never properly notified, billed, or given a fair opportunity to validate or dispute the original charges associated with these accounts. I have also received no documentation verifying these entries. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), all items listed in a credit file must be accurate, verifiable, and attributable to the consumer with their consent. Affirm has failed on all fronts.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-08T05:01:15.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"98107","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13962865","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Affirm Holdings, Inc","date_received":"2025-06-08T04:57:41.000Z","state":"WA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["There appear to be at least three separate Affirm <em>entries</em>, each listed under Affirm Inc. with either <em>missing</em> account data or <em>derogatory</em> payment status remarks. These accounts show no balance, no payment history, no updated reporting, and no proof of loan agreement. At least two of the Affirm accounts are marked with late payments, which is highly misleading and damaging to my credit score and profile. I have no desire to purchase items in payment plans."]},"sort":[17.86531,"13962865"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"13665963","_score":17.48521,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint regarding multiple inaccurate, unverifiable, and misleading entries on my TransUnion credit report. Despite previous disputes, TransUnion has failed to conduct proper investigations or correct the following issues : Missing hard inquiries : There are no hard inquiries reported, even though I applied for several credit products since XX/XX/year>. This raises concerns of suppression or failure to report. \n\nIncorrect late payments : Accounts such as XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX continue to report derogatory marks or late payments without creditor validation. \n\nXXXX Department XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX TransUnion lists XXXX accounts with identical data, opening dates, and balances. These entries inflate my total debt and lower my credit score unfairly. \n\nUnrealistic credit utilization : TransUnion reports my usage as XXXX XXXX which is mathematically inaccurate based on the reported limits and balances. \n\nXXXX account in forbearance : This account is incorrectly affecting my credit score, despite being under forbearance and therefore protected from negative scoring impact under the CARES Act and FCRA. \n\nI submitted a formal dispute and provided documentation requesting correction of all erroneous items. I received no satisfactory resolution. I now request CFPB assistance to enforce my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ).","date_sent_to_company":"2025-05-22T15:21:56.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"00678","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"13665963","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-05-22T15:10:40.000Z","state":"PR","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":["Incorrect late payments : Accounts such as XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX continue to report <em>derogatory</em> marks or late payments without creditor <em>validation</em>. \n\nXXXX Department XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX TransUnion lists XXXX accounts with identical data, opening dates, and balances. These <em>entries</em> inflate my total debt and lower my credit score unfairly."]},"sort":[17.48521,"13665963"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16609833","_score":17.435263,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXXEmail: XXXX XXXX XXXXTo Whom It May Concern\\XXXXConsumer Financial Protection Bureau\\XXXXSubject: Formal Complaint Regarding Inaccurate Credit Reporting by EquifaxXXXXInformation Services, LLC\\XXXX1. What HappenedXXXXI am a consumer who discovered multiple inaccurate entries on my Equifax credit\\XXXXreport. On XXXX XXXX XXXX I submitted a written dispute to Equifax Information\\nServices, LLC XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, GA XXXX requesting validation and\\ncorrection of the following items:XXXXItem Type Reported\\nDate(s) Specific Deficiencies\\nMissing Inquiry Type\\nCode (Metro2 Field XXXX Inquiry XXXXand Inquiry Result\\nCode (Field 26).\\nMissing Inquiry Type\\nCode (Field 31) andXXXX Inquiry XXXXrecord incorrectly\\nflagged as a\\npublicrecord type 2.\\nMissing ChargeOff\\nDate (Field 22) and\\XXXX  Chargedoff revolving account\\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Not dated\\nnonnumeric status\\ndescriptor\\n(Derogatory).\\nMissing ChargeOff\\XXXX C\\nChargedoff creditcard\\naccount\\n(Acct # XXXX XXXX XXXXDate (Field 24) and\\nNot dated\\nmissing First\\nDelinquency Date.\\nIn each case the required Metro2 data elements are absent, rendering the entries\\nunverifiable under FCRA  623(a)(1) and 607(b) and, for the debtrelated items,\\npotentially violating FDCPA  1692e & 1692g.\\n2. Financial Harm\\nBecause these entries are present on my credit report, I am at risk of:\\nCredit score impairment  incomplete or inaccurate inquiries and chargeoffs\\ncan lower my score.\\nDenial or higher cost of credit  lenders may view the unverifiable items as\\nnegative risk factors.\\nLoss of consumer confidence  the uncertainty surrounding my credit file\\ncreates undue stress and limits my ability to make major financial decisions.\\nNo specific dollar amounts are available, but the potential impact on creditworthiness\\nis material.\\n3. Regulatory Violations\\nFair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)   623(a)(1), 607(b), 611(a)(1)(A).\\nFair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)   1692e, 1692g.\\XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  establishes the\\nfurnishers burden of proof, which Equifax has not met.\\nThe missing Metro2 fields constitute violations of the FCRAs accuracy and verification\\nrequirements.\\n4. Timeline (as documented in my dispute to Equifax)\\XXXX XXXX inquiry appears on report (missing required codes).\\XXXX XXXX inquiry appears on report (missing required codes\\nand misclassified).\\nDate unspecified  XXXX and XXXX XXXX  chargedoff accounts appear\\nwithout required datesXXXX XXXX XXXX  I mailed the dispute letter to Equifax requesting validation\\nand deletion of the inaccurate items.\\nNo response has been received within the statutory 30day investigation period.\\n5. Company Failures\\nEquifax failed to provide the mandatory Metro2 data elements, breaching its\\nduty to ensure maximum possible accuracy.\\nThe agency has not supplied any original contracts, account statements, or\\nauthorizations that would establish a permissible purpose for reporting.\\nNo corrective action or written findings have been communicated to me, contrary\\nto FCRA  611(a)(1)(A).\\n6. Attempted Resolutions\\XXXX XXXX XXXX  Sent a formal dispute letter to Equifax (copy attached).\\nRequested full validation of each item and deletion of any unverifiable\\ninformation.\\nRequested acknowledgment of receipt within five business days and a complete\\ninvestigation report within 30 days.\\nTo date, Equifax has not responded.\\n7. Systemic Concerns\\nThe pattern of omitted Metro2 fields across multiple unrelated entries suggests a\\nbroader compliance deficiency within Equifaxs reporting processes. Such systemic\\nfailures can affect many consumers, undermining the integrity of the national credit\\nreporting system.\\n8. Specific Remedy Sought\\nI respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau:\\n1.Require Equifax to complete a thorough investigation of the disputed items,\\nprovide all documentation that substantiates each entry, and delete any\\ninformation that cannot be verified.\\n2. Mandate correction of the Metro2 data fields for the listed inquiries and\\nchargedoff accounts to bring the reporting into full compliance with the FCRA.\\n3. Impose appropriate penalties for the violations and require Equifax to\\nimplement procedural safeguards to prevent recurrence.\\n4.Provide me with a written confirmation of the actions taken and an updated\\ncopy of my credit report reflecting the corrections.\\n9. Supporting Documentation\\nScreenshots of the Equifax credit report showing the four inaccurate entries.\\nImages of my drivers license, SSN verification, and address verification (as\\npreviously submitted).\\nI am prepared to furnish any additional information the Bureau may require.\\nThank you for your prompt attention to this matter. I look forward to a resolution that\\nrestores the accuracy of my credit file and protects my consumer rights.\\nSincerely,\\XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-15T10:31:08.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33418","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16609833","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-15T10:08:43.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["\\n<em>Missing</em> Inquiry Type\\nCode (Field 31) andXXXX Inquiry XXXXrecord incorrectly\\nflagged as a\\npublicrecord type 2.\\n<em>Missing</em> ChargeOff\\nDate (Field 22) and\\XXXX  Chargedoff revolving account\\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Not dated\\nnonnumeric status\\ndescriptor\\n(<em>Derogatory</em>).\\n<em>Missing</em> ChargeOff\\XXXX C\\nChargedoff creditcard\\naccount\\n(Acct # XXXX XXXX XXXXDate (Field 24) and\\nNot dated\\nmissing First\\nDelinquency Date."]},"sort":[17.435263,"16609833"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"16637831","_score":17.098095,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX Email : XXXX XX/XX/XXXX To Whom It May Concern Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Re : Formal Complaint Regarding Systemic Violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act by TransUnion LLC 1. What Happened I have repeatedly disputed XXXX items that appear on my TransUnion credit report. The items consist of XXXX hard inquiries and XXXX tradelines that contain multiple mandatory XXXX reporting deficiencies, missing permissiblepurpose documentation, and internal inconsistencies that render the entries inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. The specific entries are : Inquiries CIG FINANCIA XX/XX/XXXX missing Inquiry Type, Result, Reason, and Furnisher Subscriber Code. \nGLS XX/XX/XXXX missing XXXX XXXX, Result, Source ; incorrectly coded as a XXXX XXXX. \nLIGHTSTREAM XX/XX/XXXX missing XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX ; recordtype mismatch. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX no documented permissible purpose. XXXX XX/XX/XXXX missing XXXX XXXX XXXX ; contains literal N/A placeholders. \nREGIONALAC XX/XX/XXXX missing XXXX Type and Result Codes ; no evidence of a reasonable investigation. \nXXXX XX/XX/XXXX numerous N/A placeholders; missing XXXX XXXX XXXX. \nREGIONALAC XX/XX/XXXX missing XXXX XXXX, Result, Source codes ; no permissiblepurpose documentation. \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX missing Inquiry Type and Result Codes ; no reasonable investigation. \nTD AUTO FINANCE XX/XX/XXXX missing Inquiry Type and Result Codes ; date recorded in XXXX format rather than MM/DD/YYYY. \nTradelines XXXX Account # XXXX missing Date of First Delinquency ; status listed as both Open Account and Collection/Chargeoff. \nXXXX Account # XXXX missing Date of First Delinquency ; status reported as narrative Derogatory without numeric code ; balance exceeds credit limit with no overlimit condition code. \nEach entry violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) for furnishing inaccurate or incomplete information, and the failure to provide a permissible purpose breaches FCRA 605 ( b ). Under FCRA 607 ( b ) and 611, TransUnion is obligated to conduct a reasonable investigation, obtain proper validation from the furnishers, and delete any unverifiable or noncompliant information. \nXXXX. Financial Harm Because these inaccurate inquiries and tradelines remain on my credit file, I have experienced : Potential damage to my credit score due to the presence of unverified hard inquiries and derogatory tradelines. \nReduced access to credit and the likelihood of higher interest rates or denial of credit products, which constitute a tangible financial impact. \nIncreased costs associated with having to monitor my credit report and seek legal counsel to address the ongoing disputes. \nWhile I have not been provided with a precise creditscore change, the pattern of reporting errors is sufficient to cause measurable harm under the standards of the FCRA. \nXXXX. Attempts to Resolve I have submitted a formal dispute to TransUnion on XX/XX/XXXX, detailing each deficiency and demanding correction or deletion. To date, TransUnion has not supplied the required XXXX records, permissiblepurpose documentation, or evidence of a reasonable investigation. \nAlso, In XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX, I sent XXXX separate formal disputes to TransUnion stating the above violations. Instead of fulfilling its duties under the FRCA by correcting the above violations, in all three disputes, TransUnion merely offered the following inadequate boilerplate response : The disputed item ( XXXX ) was verified as accurate. XXXX inadequate response prompted this complaint to the CFPB. \nXXXX. What XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX TransUnion, as a consumer reporting agency, failed its duties under the FCRA because chose not to take the corrective action that the FCRA mandated. TransUnion had no less then XXXX opportunities to take corrective action in my XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX, disputes. \nInstead TransUnion acted as it is above the law, by offering its boilerplate response that The disputed item ( XXXX ) was verified as accurate. '' Clearly, TransUnion does not respect the FCRA. Thus, I respectfully request that the CFPB : XXXX. Order TransUnion to delete all XXXX tradelines because all XXXX are inaccurate, incomplete, or otherwise noncompliant with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ). \nXXXX. XXXX TransUnion to ensure that my credit file is corrected promptly and that it confirms in writing that all XXXX tradelines are deleted. \nXXXX. Impose appropriate civil penalties on TransUnion for violations of the FCRA, FDCPA, and related regulations, and ensure corrective action to prevent recurrence. \nXXXX. Supporting documentation XXXX. XXXX of TransUnion response XX/XX/XXXX formal disputes. \n\" The disputed item ( XXXX ) was verified as accurate '' to my XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX. Copy of my drivers license, social security number, and address verification. \nThank you for your prompt attention to this matter. I trust the CFPB will intervene to enforce compliance and protect my rights under federal consumerfinancialprotection law. \nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-10-16T03:51:14.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"33418","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"16637831","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-10-16T03:46:22.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX Account # XXXX <em>missing</em> Date of First Delinquency ; status reported as narrative <em>Derogatory</em> without numeric code ; balance exceeds credit limit with no overlimit condition code. \nEach <em>entry</em> violates <em>FCRA</em> 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) for furnishing inaccurate or incomplete information, and the failure to provide a permissible purpose breaches <em>FCRA</em> 605 ( b )."]},"sort":[17.098095,"16637831"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12705524","_score":16.872982,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I am filing this formal complaint against Experian for its failure to comply with FCRA 1681i, 1681e ( b ), and FDCPA provisions in relation to disputed and unverifiable accounts that have not been removed despite multiple requests and clear inconsistencies in the data provided. \n\nViolations and Discrepancies Identified : 1. XXXX XXXX XXXX Duplicate Entries ) One account shows : Repaid via refinance never late Another shows : Charge-off 15 negative months Company Sold To : National Credit Adjusters Issue : Two contradictory versions of the same account are being reported simultaneously. This creates confusion and artificially inflates derogatory information.\n\nViolation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) Failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy Additional : This account was removed by XXXX after review, verifying it as inaccurate. \n\n\n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) Debt listed as acquired from XXXX No chain of title, no validation, no contract presented Violation : Continued reporting despite no verifiable ownership violates FCRA 1681i and FDCPA debt buyer requirements Harm : Duplicate derogatory account amplifies credit damage 3. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Reported as charged off with {$1100.00} loss Original loan included insurance to forgive in the event of job loss ( was terminated ) No documentation provided on insurance clause Violation : FCRA 1681i Failure to validate ; also unfairly affecting home loan eligibility 4. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$1100.00} charge-off No original contract or agreement provided Violation : Experian has failed to provide any legal wet-ink contract or signed documentation validating debt This entry was deleted by XXXX, proving it can not be verified. \n\n\n\n5. XXXX XXXX Charge-off of {$680.00} reported Missing key data : No terms, no last activity date, no creditor classification This account has already been deleted by XXXX due to insufficient verification Violation : FCRA 1681i and 1681s-2 failure to remove after dispute and validation requests 6. Possible XXXX XXXX Account marked as paid with {$45.00} written off Reports 25 months of negative payment history No details about original balance or supporting evidence shown Dispute concluded but no data provided Violation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) unverifiable completeness and accuracy 7. Re-aging Pattern Several accounts ( e.g., XXXX XXXX on Equifax ) list a Date of First Delinquency that predates the Date Opened, which is a textbook example of illegal re-aging Violation : FCRA 605 ( c ) artificially extending the time derogatory items remain on file Impact & Harm Due to Experians refusal to correct inaccurate data : I was denied a mortgage loan I was forced to accept a high-APR home loan due to damaged credit I spent months rebuilding my credit, which was undermined by Experians noncompliance These errors have caused both financial harm and emotional distress Dear CFPB, I am filing a formal complaint against Equifax for repeated violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), specifically concerning the reporting of inaccurate, re-aged, and unverifiable accounts. \nViolations and Discrepancies Identified : XXXX. XXXX XXXX - Reported Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX - Reported Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX - Issue : A delinquency can not legally occur before the account is opened. \n- Violation : This constitutes illegal re-aging under FCRA 605 ( c ) and 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) - Harm : This re-aged account artificially extends the negative impact on my credit report. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Debt Buyer ) - Listed as acquiring debt from XXXX XXXX - No proof of legal chain of title, assignment, or ownership provided - Violation : FCRA 1681i - failure to verify the account after dispute ; also violates FDCPA provisions on third-party debt reporting - Note : XXXX has deleted this entry, confirming unverifiability 3. XXXX XXXX - Charge-off with missing original contract, activity data, or documentation - No verification provided despite dispute - Violation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 1681i - Note : XXXX removed this entry based on my dispute 4. Systemic Failure to Investigate Disputes - Despite multiple disputes and legal documentation requests, Equifax has failed to : - Provide wet-ink signatures - Show original agreements or itemized balances - Respond in compliance with required timelines - Violation : FCRA 1681i - failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation Impact & Harm : - I was denied a mortgage loan due to these accounts- I was forced into a high-interest mortgage- I have spent months attempting to rebuild credit that has been unjustly damaged - These errors have caused emotional and financial distress","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-28T14:02:21.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"365XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12705524","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-03-28T13:41:31.000Z","state":"AL","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX XXXX - Charge-off with <em>missing</em> original contract, activity data, or documentation - No verification provided despite dispute - Violation : <em>FCRA</em> 1681e ( b ) and 1681i - Note : XXXX removed this <em>entry</em> based on my dispute 4."]},"sort":[16.872982,"12705524"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12703532","_score":16.872982,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear CFPB, I am filing this formal complaint against Experian for its failure to comply with FCRA 1681i, 1681e ( b ), and FDCPA provisions in relation to disputed and unverifiable accounts that have not been removed despite multiple requests and clear inconsistencies in the data provided. \n\nViolations and Discrepancies Identified : 1. XXXX XXXX XXXX Duplicate Entries ) One account shows : Repaid via refinance never late Another shows : Charge-off 15 negative months Company Sold To : National Credit Adjusters Issue : Two contradictory versions of the same account are being reported simultaneously. This creates confusion and artificially inflates derogatory information.\n\nViolation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) Failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy Additional : This account was removed by XXXX after review, verifying it as inaccurate. \n\n\n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) Debt listed as acquired from XXXX No chain of title, no validation, no contract presented Violation : Continued reporting despite no verifiable ownership violates FCRA 1681i and FDCPA debt buyer requirements Harm : Duplicate derogatory account amplifies credit damage 3. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Reported as charged off with {$1100.00} loss Original loan included insurance to forgive in the event of job loss ( was terminated ) No documentation provided on insurance clause Violation : FCRA 1681i Failure to validate ; also unfairly affecting home loan eligibility 4. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$1100.00} charge-off No original contract or agreement provided Violation : Experian has failed to provide any legal wet-ink contract or signed documentation validating debt This entry was deleted by XXXX, proving it can not be verified. \n\n\n\n5. XXXX XXXX Charge-off of {$680.00} reported Missing key data : No terms, no last activity date, no creditor classification This account has already been deleted by XXXX due to insufficient verification Violation : FCRA 1681i and 1681s-2 failure to remove after dispute and validation requests 6. Possible XXXX XXXX Account marked as paid with {$45.00} written off Reports 25 months of negative payment history No details about original balance or supporting evidence shown Dispute concluded but no data provided Violation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) unverifiable completeness and accuracy 7. Re-aging Pattern Several accounts ( e.g., XXXX XXXX on Equifax ) list a Date of First Delinquency that predates the Date Opened, which is a textbook example of illegal re-aging Violation : FCRA 605 ( c ) artificially extending the time derogatory items remain on file Impact & Harm Due to Experians refusal to correct inaccurate data : I was denied a mortgage loan I was forced to accept a high-APR home loan due to damaged credit I spent months rebuilding my credit, which was undermined by Experians noncompliance These errors have caused both financial harm and emotional distress Dear CFPB, I am filing a formal complaint against Equifax for repeated violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), specifically concerning the reporting of inaccurate, re-aged, and unverifiable accounts. \nViolations and Discrepancies Identified : XXXX. XXXX XXXX - Reported Date Opened : XX/XX/XXXX - Reported Date of First Delinquency : XX/XX/XXXX - Issue : A delinquency can not legally occur before the account is opened. \n- Violation : This constitutes illegal re-aging under FCRA 605 ( c ) and 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) - Harm : This re-aged account artificially extends the negative impact on my credit report. \nXXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX ( Debt Buyer ) - Listed as acquiring debt from XXXX XXXX - No proof of legal chain of title, assignment, or ownership provided - Violation : FCRA 1681i - failure to verify the account after dispute ; also violates FDCPA provisions on third-party debt reporting - Note : XXXX has deleted this entry, confirming unverifiability 3. XXXX XXXX - Charge-off with missing original contract, activity data, or documentation - No verification provided despite dispute - Violation : FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 1681i - Note : XXXX removed this entry based on my dispute 4. Systemic Failure to Investigate Disputes - Despite multiple disputes and legal documentation requests, Equifax has failed to : - Provide wet-ink signatures - Show original agreements or itemized balances - Respond in compliance with required timelines - Violation : FCRA 1681i - failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation Impact & Harm : - I was denied a mortgage loan due to these accounts- I was forced into a high-interest mortgage- I have spent months attempting to rebuild credit that has been unjustly damaged - These errors have caused emotional and financial distress","date_sent_to_company":"2025-03-28T14:02:17.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"365XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12703532","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-03-28T14:01:51.000Z","state":"AL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["XXXX XXXX - Charge-off with <em>missing</em> original contract, activity data, or documentation - No verification provided despite dispute - Violation : <em>FCRA</em> 1681e ( b ) and 1681i - Note : XXXX removed this <em>entry</em> based on my dispute 4."]},"sort":[16.872982,"12703532"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17303811","_score":16.327915,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Re : Illegal Credit Reporting Practices by LVNV Funding LLC To Whom It May Concern : I am filing a formal complaint against LVNV Funding LLC for multiple violations of the FCRA and FDCPA based on their reporting of collection accounts on my credit reports. \n1. LVNV is reporting collection accounts as newly open or active On my XXXX  report, LVNV Funding accounts appear with recent open dates, such as in XX/XX/year>, although I never opened an account with them. \nA debt buyer is prohibited from reporting a collection as if it were a newly established credit line. \nThis misrepresentation violates FCRA 607 ( b ) and FDCPA 807 ( 2 ) ( A ). \n2. False monthly payment history / payment descriptors XXXX is reporting continuous monthly activity, showing false scheduled payments, past due amounts, or monthly entries implying that I am missing payments on an active credit account. \nThis practice artificially re-ages the debt by making it appear current and ongoing. \nCollections do not have monthly payment obligations unless I have a payment agreementwhich I do not. \nThis is a violation of : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) furnishing information known to be inaccurate FDCPA 807 ( 8 ) false credit information 3. Incorrect and manipulated Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) My reports show recent DOFD dates that do not match when the original accounts became delinquent.\n\nRe-aging a debt to extend its reporting period is strictly prohibited under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ). \nXXXX repeatedly updates dates in a manner inconsistent with the actual timeline of the underlying debt. \n4. Failure to validate debt I have repeatedly requested validation, but XXXX has not provided : Original creditor information The true Date of First Delinquency Proof they own the debt Proof that I opened any account connected to the alleged obligation Instead, they continue to report derogatory information without verification, violating FDCPA 809 ( b ) and FCRA 611.\n\nRequested Action I request the CFPB investigate LVNV Funding LLC for : Re-aging debts Reporting collections as newly opened accounts Misrepresenting payment history Failing to validate debts Furnishing inaccurate credit information Please require removal LVNV entries.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-17T17:14:08.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"441XX","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17303811","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","date_received":"2025-11-17T16:53:33.000Z","state":"OH","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Was not notified of investigation status or results"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Failure to <em>validate</em> debt I have repeatedly requested <em>validation</em>, but XXXX has not provided : Original creditor information The true Date of First Delinquency Proof they own the debt Proof that I opened any account connected to the alleged obligation Instead, they continue to report <em>derogatory</em> information without verification, violating FDCPA 809 ( b ) and <em>FCRA</em> 611."]},"sort":[16.327915,"17303811"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17358175","_score":16.309984,"_source":{"product":"Debt collection","complaint_what_happened":"I am submitting this complaint to report a serious issue regarding the reporting and handling of a derogatory account appearing on my consumer credit file under the name TARGET/TD, with the identifying digits XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This account is currently listed as a Collection/Charge-Off, and although it appears on my credit report as a derogatory entry, none of the legally required documentation has been provided to verify its accuracy, ownership, completeness, or legitimacy. As a result, I am disputing the account in its entirety based on lack of validation, lack of verification, procedural deficiencies, and potential violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). \n\nThe purpose of this What Happened? statement is to provide a clear, factual, and detailed explanation of the sequence of events, the actions I have taken, the failures of the credit reporting agencies and the furnisher to comply with federal law, and why this complaint requires CFPB involvement for a fair resolution. \n\nI am not requesting special treatment or removal of legitimate information ; I am requesting enforcement of the law. If the furnisher can not validate the account using original documentation, the derogatory reporting should not be allowed to remain. \n\n1. How the TARGET/TD Account Appears on My Credit Report The TARGET/TD account ending in XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX appears with the following characteristics : Status : Collection/Charge-Off Past Due Amount : {$0.00} Closed Date : XX/XX/year> Reporting Category : Derogatory Furnisher : TD Bank USA, N.A. ( TARGET/TD ) Negative Payment History : Multiple late-payment markers Notation : Account shows derogatory status despite being reported as Paid Although the account shows a paid status, it still carries negative and damaging derogatory codes, including : Charge-off notation XXXX late payments Closed with derogatory history Negative reporting across all three credit bureaus Because this account is coded with a derogatory history, it significantly impacts creditworthiness whether or not the past-due balance is {$0.00}. \n\n2. I Never Received Any of the Legally Required Documentation Proving This Account Is Valid The foundation of my dispute is simple : No one has produced any original documentation showing that this account belongs to me or that the information is being reported accurately. \n\nDespite disputing this tradeline, I have not received : A signed contract A credit application Any form of account origination document A cardholder agreement Copies of statements Any documentation showing purchases A breakdown of transactions Copies of billing cycles Payment history records Proof of any delinquency A valid date of first delinquency ( DOFD ) Charge-off explanation or supporting documentation Without any of these documents, the furnisher can not validate or verify the account. \n\n3. The Credit Bureaus Verified the Account Without Supplying Any Evidence I filed disputes with all applicable credit bureaus explaining that this account lacked validation, contained inaccurate information, and appeared to be unverifiable.\n\nHowever, each bureau returned the dispute with : A one-line statement : Verified as accurate No documents No supporting evidence No explanation of what was reviewed No identification of the person or department that verified the account No method of verification No copy of the investigation results No proof that the furnisher provided the required documents No indication of a manual or document-based review Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ), a reinvestigation requires reviewing documentationnot clicking automated confirmation codes through e-OSCAR. \n\nThe speed of the verification strongly implies that the process was purely automated. \nAutomation is not a lawful substitute for a real investigation. \n\n4. I Requested the Method of Verification and Received No Response That Met Legal Standards Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ), when a consumer disputes information and then requests the method of verification ( MOV ), the credit bureau is required to provide : The procedure used The documents reviewed The name and contact of the person who verified it The date of verification Whether verification was manual or automated Details of the furnishers response Proof that the bureau actually obtained evidence I received none of these required elements.\n\nWithout a compliant MOV, the reinvestigation can not be considered lawful.\n\n5. TARGET/TD Has Not Validated the Account Under FCRA or FDCPA Standards In addition to contacting the bureaus, I attempted to obtain information directly from the furnisherTARGET/TD. \nAt no point has TARGET/TD provided : A copy of the original credit application Statements A contract A record of payments A purchase summary A breakdown of how the final balance was calculated Proper notification of delinquent status Any documents linking me personally to the account If the furnisher can not produce these, the account is legally unverifiable.\n\n6. The Reporting Contains Errors, Omissions, and Inconsistencies There are numerous reporting inconsistencies that make the tradeline incomplete or inaccurate under the FCRA : A. Missing Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) This is a legally required data point.\n\nIf the DOFD is wrong, unclear, or missing, the reporting period can not be validated and may be illegally re-aged.\n\nB. Conflicting Account Status The account is reported as : Paid But also coded as Derogatory And associated with negative late-payment history And coded as Charge-Off This is unclear, contradictory, and misleading.\n\nC. Past Due Amount Shows 0, Yet Derogatory Codes Remain A XXXX  past-due balance paired with charge-off coding is inconsistent, especially without documentation.\n\nD. No Supporting Payment History The credit report shows late payments but no supporting records. \n\nE. Questionable Charge-Off Date The date appears inconsistent with typical creditor charge-off timelines. \n\nErrors like these violate : FCRA 602 Maximum Possible Accuracy FCRA 607 ( b ) Reasonable Procedures 7. I Suffered Harm Due to This Inaccurate and Unverified Reporting The TARGET/TD derogatory tradeline continues to negatively impact my credit profile by : Lowering credit scores Causing denials of credit applications Resulting in higher interest rates Increasing insurance premiums Damaging my creditworthiness Affecting access to financial products Causing emotional and financial stress Because the account has not been validated, this harm is unjustified. \n\n8. Why This Complaint Requires CFPB Involvement I have exhausted all other channels : Disputed with the bureaus Requested method of verification Attempted validation from the furnisher Asked for correction of errors Sought documentation None of these attempts produced substantial information.\n\nThe bureaus : Did not obtain documentation Did not validate the account Did not conduct a meaningful reinvestigation Did not comply with FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) MOV requirements The furnisher : Did not supply documents Did not validate anything Did not correct errors Continues reporting the account The situation meets the threshold for a CFPB dispute.\n\n9. What I Am Requesting for a Fair Resolution I am requesting a fair resolution that fully complies with FCRA and FDCPA requirements. \n\nA. Provide Complete Validation and Documentation TARGET/TD must provide : The signed application Original contractual agreement Billing statements Transaction history Payment ledger DOFD documentation Charge-off explanation Proof I authorized the account If they can not, the bureaus must delete the account. \n\nB. Require a Proper, Manual Reinvestigation The credit bureaus must : Obtain actual documents Review those documents Ensure accuracy Verify completeness Provide written results C. Require a Fully Compliant Method of Verification Including : Who verified the account What document\n\ns were reviewed How verification occurred Whether it was manual or automated D. Delete the Account if It Can not Be Verified Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) furnisher/bureau must delete : unverifiable information unverifiable late-payment history unverifiable charge-off designation E. Add the Legally Required Disputed by Consumer Notation If this notation is missing at any point, the reporting is incomplete and unlawful.\n\nF. Notify All Users of My Credit File If corrections or deletions occur, the bureaus must notify : lenders insurers creditors any entity that recently accessed the report G. Prevent Illegal Reinsertion If removed, the bureaus must not reinsert the account unless : TARGET/TD certifies its accuracy I receive adva\nnce written notification This is required under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ).\n\n10. Summary and Closing In summary, a fair resolution to this issue requires : Transparency Proper validation Proper reinvestigation Proper documentation Compliance with the law Correction or removal of inaccurate or incomplete information If the furnisher can not validate the TARGET/TD account ending in XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX with original documentation, the derogatory reporting must be deleted entirely. \n\nI am simply requesting what federal law grants every consumer : accuracy, fairness, validation, and proper investigation.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-11-19T23:03:11.000Z","issue":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","sub_product":"I do not know","zip_code":"10801","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17358175","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY","date_received":"2025-11-19T23:00:01.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Debt is not yours"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["The Reporting Contains Errors, Omissions, and Inconsistencies There are numerous reporting inconsistencies that make the tradeline incomplete or inaccurate under the <em>FCRA</em> : A. <em>Missing</em> Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) This is a legally required data point.\n\nIf the DOFD is wrong, unclear, or <em>missing</em>, the reporting period can not be <em>validated</em> and may be illegally re-aged.\n\nB."]},"sort":[16.309984,"17358175"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14183533","_score":16.154434,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Email : XXXX Phone : ( XXXX ) XXXX SSN ( Last 4 ) : XXXX DOB : XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX To Whom It May Concern, I am disputing multiple accounts listed on my credit report. These accounts are not only inaccurate or outdated but also violate key sections of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ), and the Metro 2 Compliance Reporting Standards. Please review the details of each account below and remove them from my credit report immediately as required by federal law. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This account is marked as 'Potentially Negative ' despite reporting a {$0.00} balance and no current delinquency or charge-off. \nWhy this violates the law : Marking an account as potentially negative without evidence of delinquency is misleading and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), which requires the most accurate and complete reporting. Additionally, the Metro 2 fields such as Portfolio Type and Compliance Condition Code ( Field 17A ) are not appropriately set, leading to a misclassification of the accounts current status. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This account reports a late payment on a closed loan with a XXXX balance. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 611 allows me to dispute information that is no longer verifiable or complete. Reporting derogatory payment history on a closed account without ongoing obligations or balance suggests incomplete investigation. The missing or improperly coded Segment K status and Date of First Delinquency ( Field 25 ) violates Metro 2 formatting, making this entry noncompliant. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Issue : Account is closed with a derogatory status, but no active debt or accurate last activity date is shown. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) requires deletion of unverifiable information. Without proof of balance, updated activity, or proper coding of Fields 17A and 25, the negative status may be inaccurate. This account violates Metro 2 rules by omitting the mandatory compliance condition fields required for derogatory trade lines. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank Trust Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$4900.00} Issue : This collection account lacks validation and fails to identify the original creditor 's documentation. \nWhy this violates the law : Under FDCPA 809, collectors must provide full validation of the debt upon request. If the original creditors documentation can not be produced, FCRA 609 and 611 entitle me to dispute the accuracy and demand deletion. Continuing to report this entry without full verification violates both federal laws and Metro 2 requirements for accurate and validated data furnishing. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This mortgage account appears to be a duplicate or aged tradeline with no verifiable details. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 611 requires credit bureaus to delete unverifiable or duplicate information. The Metro 2 compliance segment fields appear incomplete, particularly the absence of a valid Portfolio Type or First Delinquency Date. Without complete data, the tradeline is misleading and harmful. \n\n\nAccount XXXX XXXX  Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Issue : A closed mortgage loan with no delinquency history is still being reported with outdated and unverified information. \nWhy this violates the law : According to FCRA 609 and 1681e ( b ), all data must be up to date and traceable to a source. This tradeline lacks supporting documentation, and its age makes it potentially obsolete under 1681c. The missing Metro 2 fields prevent the bureaus from proving its accuracy. \n\n\nAccount : XXXXXXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This entry appears outdated and lacks current activity or proper coding. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) places the burden on furnishers to correct or delete inaccurate information after a dispute. This tradeline fails to meet Metro 2 's structural requirements, such as Compliance Condition Codes and Segment updates. Without that structure, the account violates both federal and data reporting standards. \n\n\nGiven the violations above, I am demanding permanent deletion of all accounts listed. If the data furnishers or credit bureaus can not validate each account with original documentation and full Metro 2 compliance, they must be deleted under federal law. I am exercising my rights to dispute inaccurate and unverifiable information under FCRA, FDCPA, and related statutes. I expect your investigation to be completed within the 30-day period as required. \n\nThank you for your prompt attention. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-19T21:06:28.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"20748","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14183533","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-06-19T20:56:10.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Why this violates the law : <em>FCRA</em> 611 allows me to dispute information that is no longer verifiable or complete. Reporting <em>derogatory</em> payment history on a closed account without ongoing obligations or balance suggests incomplete investigation. The <em>missing</em> or improperly coded Segment K status and Date of First Delinquency ( Field 25 ) violates Metro 2 formatting, making this <em>entry</em> noncompliant."]},"sort":[16.154434,"14183533"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14172079","_score":16.14647,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Email : XXXX Phone : ( XXXX ) XXXX SSN ( Last 4 ) : XXXX DOB : XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX To Whom It May Concern, I am disputing multiple accounts listed on my credit report. These accounts are not only inaccurate or outdated but also violate key sections of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ), and the Metro 2 Compliance Reporting Standards. Please review the details of each account below and remove them from my credit report immediately as required by federal law. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This account is marked as 'Potentially Negative ' despite reporting a {$0.00} balance and no current delinquency or charge-off. \nWhy this violates the law : Marking an account as potentially negative without evidence of delinquency is misleading and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), which requires the most accurate and complete reporting. Additionally, the Metro 2 fields such as Portfolio Type and Compliance Condition Code ( Field 17A ) are not appropriately set, leading to a misclassification of the accounts current status. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This account reports a late payment on a closed loan with a XXXX balance. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 611 allows me to dispute information that is no longer verifiable or complete. Reporting derogatory payment history on a closed account without ongoing obligations or balance suggests incomplete investigation. The missing or improperly coded Segment K status and Date of First Delinquency ( Field 25 ) violates Metro 2 formatting, making this entry noncompliant. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Issue : Account is closed with a derogatory status, but no active debt or accurate last activity date is shown. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) requires deletion of unverifiable information. Without proof of balance, updated activity, or proper coding of Fields 17A and 25, the negative status may be inaccurate. This account violates Metro 2 rules by omitting the mandatory compliance condition fields required for derogatory trade lines. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank Trust Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$4900.00} Issue : This collection account lacks validation and fails to identify the original creditor 's documentation. \nWhy this violates the law : Under FDCPA 809, collectors must provide full validation of the debt upon request. If the original creditors documentation can not be produced, FCRA 609 and 611 entitle me to dispute the accuracy and demand deletion. Continuing to report this entry without full verification violates both federal laws and Metro 2 requirements for accurate and validated data furnishing. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This mortgage account appears to be a duplicate or aged tradeline with no verifiable details. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 611 requires credit bureaus to delete unverifiable or duplicate information. The Metro 2 compliance segment fields appear incomplete, particularly the absence of a valid Portfolio Type or First Delinquency Date. Without complete data, the tradeline is misleading and harmful. \n\n\nAccount XXXX XXXX  Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Issue : A closed mortgage loan with no delinquency history is still being reported with outdated and unverified information. \nWhy this violates the law : According to FCRA 609 and 1681e ( b ), all data must be up to date and traceable to a source. This tradeline lacks supporting documentation, and its age makes it potentially obsolete under 1681c. The missing Metro 2 fields prevent the bureaus from proving its accuracy. \n\n\nAccount : XXXXXXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This entry appears outdated and lacks current activity or proper coding. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) places the burden on furnishers to correct or delete inaccurate information after a dispute. This tradeline fails to meet Metro 2 's structural requirements, such as Compliance Condition Codes and Segment updates. Without that structure, the account violates both federal and data reporting standards. \n\n\nGiven the violations above, I am demanding permanent deletion of all accounts listed. If the data furnishers or credit bureaus can not validate each account with original documentation and full Metro 2 compliance, they must be deleted under federal law. I am exercising my rights to dispute inaccurate and unverifiable information under FCRA, FDCPA, and related statutes. I expect your investigation to be completed within the 30-day period as required. \n\nThank you for your prompt attention. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-19T21:06:26.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"20748","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14172079","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-19T21:06:03.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Why this violates the law : <em>FCRA</em> 611 allows me to dispute information that is no longer verifiable or complete. Reporting <em>derogatory</em> payment history on a closed account without ongoing obligations or balance suggests incomplete investigation. The <em>missing</em> or improperly coded Segment K status and Date of First Delinquency ( Field 25 ) violates Metro 2 formatting, making this <em>entry</em> noncompliant."]},"sort":[16.14647,"14172079"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14164932","_score":16.14647,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Email : XXXX Phone : ( XXXX ) XXXX SSN ( Last 4 ) : XXXX DOB : XX/XX/XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX To Whom It May Concern, I am disputing multiple accounts listed on my credit report. These accounts are not only inaccurate or outdated but also violate key sections of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ), Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA ), and the Metro 2 Compliance Reporting Standards. Please review the details of each account below and remove them from my credit report immediately as required by federal law. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This account is marked as 'Potentially Negative ' despite reporting a {$0.00} balance and no current delinquency or charge-off. \nWhy this violates the law : Marking an account as potentially negative without evidence of delinquency is misleading and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), which requires the most accurate and complete reporting. Additionally, the Metro 2 fields such as Portfolio Type and Compliance Condition Code ( Field 17A ) are not appropriately set, leading to a misclassification of the accounts current status. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This account reports a late payment on a closed loan with a XXXX balance. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 611 allows me to dispute information that is no longer verifiable or complete. Reporting derogatory payment history on a closed account without ongoing obligations or balance suggests incomplete investigation. The missing or improperly coded Segment K status and Date of First Delinquency ( Field 25 ) violates Metro 2 formatting, making this entry noncompliant. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Issue : Account is closed with a derogatory status, but no active debt or accurate last activity date is shown. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) requires deletion of unverifiable information. Without proof of balance, updated activity, or proper coding of Fields 17A and 25, the negative status may be inaccurate. This account violates Metro 2 rules by omitting the mandatory compliance condition fields required for derogatory trade lines. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank Trust Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$4900.00} Issue : This collection account lacks validation and fails to identify the original creditor 's documentation. \nWhy this violates the law : Under FDCPA 809, collectors must provide full validation of the debt upon request. If the original creditors documentation can not be produced, FCRA 609 and 611 entitle me to dispute the accuracy and demand deletion. Continuing to report this entry without full verification violates both federal laws and Metro 2 requirements for accurate and validated data furnishing. \n\n\nAccount : XXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This mortgage account appears to be a duplicate or aged tradeline with no verifiable details. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 611 requires credit bureaus to delete unverifiable or duplicate information. The Metro 2 compliance segment fields appear incomplete, particularly the absence of a valid Portfolio Type or First Delinquency Date. Without complete data, the tradeline is misleading and harmful. \n\n\nAccount XXXX XXXX  Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Issue : A closed mortgage loan with no delinquency history is still being reported with outdated and unverified information. \nWhy this violates the law : According to FCRA 609 and 1681e ( b ), all data must be up to date and traceable to a source. This tradeline lacks supporting documentation, and its age makes it potentially obsolete under 1681c. The missing Metro 2 fields prevent the bureaus from proving its accuracy. \n\n\nAccount : XXXXXXXX XXXX Date Reported : XXXX XXXX XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Issue : This entry appears outdated and lacks current activity or proper coding. \nWhy this violates the law : FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) places the burden on furnishers to correct or delete inaccurate information after a dispute. This tradeline fails to meet Metro 2 's structural requirements, such as Compliance Condition Codes and Segment updates. Without that structure, the account violates both federal and data reporting standards. \n\n\nGiven the violations above, I am demanding permanent deletion of all accounts listed. If the data furnishers or credit bureaus can not validate each account with original documentation and full Metro 2 compliance, they must be deleted under federal law. I am exercising my rights to dispute inaccurate and unverifiable information under FCRA, FDCPA, and related statutes. I expect your investigation to be completed within the 30-day period as required. \n\nThank you for your prompt attention. \n\nSincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-06-19T21:06:26.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"20748","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"14164932","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-06-19T21:06:03.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Why this violates the law : <em>FCRA</em> 611 allows me to dispute information that is no longer verifiable or complete. Reporting <em>derogatory</em> payment history on a closed account without ongoing obligations or balance suggests incomplete investigation. The <em>missing</em> or improperly coded Segment K status and Date of First Delinquency ( Field 25 ) violates Metro 2 formatting, making this <em>entry</em> noncompliant."]},"sort":[16.14647,"14164932"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"17840420","_score":16.08003,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"SECTION 1 : HIGH-IMPACT ERRORS & DISPUTES ( Most Important ) 1. Cap One Auto ( Closed ) Reported as Repossession ( Account # XXXX ) Potential Errors : Reported simply as Repossession even though you stated it was a voluntary repossession, communicated by phone. \n\nNo payment history displayed ( shows blank ), even though payments occurred. \n\nPast due amount of {$460.00} is not clearly supported. \n\nUnknown payment history incomplete reporting.\n\nReporting may violate accuracy requirements if lender can not verify dates, past dues, and the involuntary vs voluntary status.\n\nWhy this is dispute-eligible : FCRA 1681e ( b ) : Information must be reported with maximum possible accuracy.\n\nMaryland MCDCA 14-202 ( 3 ) : Can not disclose credit information known to be false or misleading.\n\nMaryland MCPA 13-301 : Misrepresenting the nature of a debt is a deceptive practice.\n\nMissing payment history = incomplete = inaccurate.\n\nThis is your largest negative item and should be the first dispute. \n\nSECTION 2 : REVOLVING ACCOUNTS WITH ERRORS 2. XXXX Credit Card Reported as 60 Days Past Due ( Account # XXXX ) Potential Errors : Account opened XX/XX/XXXX Reports 30-day late entries in XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX, yet the last payment date is XX/XX/XXXX timeline is questionable. \n\n60 days past due status may not match reported late pattern. \n\nCredit usage reported at 149 %, yet balance is {$440.00} on a {$300.00} limit should be 149 %, but accuracy depends on dates. \n\nWhy dispute-eligible : Late payments must be verifiable, not estimated. \n\nIf the creditor can not show the exact due date + posting date the lates must be removed.\n\nFCRA 1681i : unverifiable = must be deleted.\n\nSECTION 3 : CHARGEOFFS WITH POTENTIAL REPORTING ISSUES 3. Capital One ( Closed Charged Off ) Account # XXXX Potential Errors : No payment history displayed missing data. \n\nCanceled by credit grantor + Charged off as bad debt is double reporting of a derogatory status. \n\nLast payment date : XX/XX/XXXX unusually recent relative to charge-off date. \n\nWhy dispute-eligible : Incomplete payment history = inaccurate. \n\nDuplicate derogatory descriptors violate FCRA accuracy requirements. \n\nXXXX. XXXX ( Closed Charged Off ) Account # CLXXXX Potential Errors : No payment history displayed.\n\nCreditor reports Profit & loss writeoff but balance is only {$65.00}. \n\nLast payment XX/XX/XXXX, charge-off XX/XX/XXXX timeline often inaccurate. \n\nDispute grounds : Missing payment history = incomplete = inaccurate. \n\nSmall-dollar charge-offs must be verified ; often they can not be validated.\n\nSECTION 4 : COLLECTION ACCOUNTS TO CHALLENGE 5. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$480.00} Potential Errors : XXXX routinely fails to validate debts. \n\nNo proof provided that account belongs to you. \n\nNo service dates, contract dates, or proof of responsibility.\n\nCollection balance not showing itemized fees.\n\nWhy dispute-eligible : FCRA & FDCPA require validation upon request. \n\nMissing contract = must be deleted if disputed. \n\nXXXX. XXXX XXXX # XXXX {$450.00} ( XXXX XXXX ) XXXX. XXXX XXXX  # XXXX {$650.00} ( XXXX  XXXX ) Potential Errors for Both : XXXX rarely provides supporting documentation. \n\nNo payment history. \n\nNo proof you agreed to assignment of debt. \n\nNo itemization of interest or fees.\n\nBalance may be inflated.\n\nDispute grounds : Incomplete and unverifiable information.\n\nFCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) prohibits reporting unverifiable data.\n\nMaryland MCDCA prohibits collection on a debt that is invalid or unverified.\n\nSECTION 5 : OLD NEGATIVE ITEMS 8. XXXX  120 Days Late Opened XXXX Potential Errors : Reports as 120 days past due, but balance is {$0.00} and no payment history is present. \n\nStatus updated XX/XX/XXXX more than XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nXXXX be outside the XXXX reporting window for late payments ( depends on exact DOFD ). \n\nWhy dispute-eligible : Incomplete inaccurate. \n\nIf DOFD ( Date of First Delinquency ) is before XX/XX/XXXX, it must be removed under FCRA 7-year rule.\n\nSECTION 6 : OPEN AUTO LOAN WITH POSSIBLE INCONSISTENCY 9. Cap One Auto ( Open ) Account # XXXX This account looks positive, but there is a potential inconsistency : Potential Error : Payment history displays partial or missing months. \n\nExceptional payment history but missing first 23 months ( data unavailable ).\n\nWhy this matters : Missing data reduces your score and may be counted as \" insufficient history. '' Dispute grounds : Incomplete reporting violates FCRA accuracy rules. \n\nLender must report complete history or update it.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-12-08T19:20:38.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"21060","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"17840420","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","date_received":"2025-12-08T19:20:13.000Z","state":"MD","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Personal information incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Duplicate <em>derogatory</em> descriptors violate <em>FCRA</em> accuracy requirements. \n\nXXXX. XXXX ( Closed Charged Off ) Account # CLXXXX Potential Errors : No payment history displayed.\n\nCreditor reports Profit & loss writeoff but balance is only {$65.00}. \n\nLast payment XX/XX/XXXX, charge-off XX/XX/XXXX timeline often inaccurate. \n\nDispute grounds : <em>Missing</em> payment history = incomplete = inaccurate. \n\nSmall-dollar charge-offs must be verified ; often they can not be <em>validated</em>."]},"sort":[16.08003,"17840420"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14919079","_score":15.980458,"_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":["No proof of debt has been provided despite ongoing reporting I request full debt <em>validation</em> ( FDCPA 809 ).\n\nThe account remains marked <em>Derogatory</em> even though it's disputed, without evidence of proper resolution or reinvestigation ( <em>FCRA</em> 611 ).\n\nViolation : Multiple inconsistent Date Opened <em>entries</em> across bureaus Experian and Equifax : XX/XX/XXXX TransUnion : XX/XX/XXXX Suggests re-aging or data mismatch <em>FCRA</em> 623 ( a ) violation."]},"sort":[15.980458,"14919079"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14919080","_score":15.931522,"_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":["No proof of debt has been provided despite ongoing reporting I request full debt <em>validation</em> ( FDCPA 809 ).\n\nThe account remains marked <em>Derogatory</em> even though it's disputed, without evidence of proper resolution or reinvestigation ( <em>FCRA</em> 611 ).\n\nViolation : Multiple inconsistent Date Opened <em>entries</em> across bureaus Experian and Equifax : XX/XX/XXXX TransUnion : XX/XX/XXXX Suggests re-aging or data mismatch <em>FCRA</em> 623 ( a ) violation."]},"sort":[15.931522,"14919080"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"14918763","_score":15.931522,"_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":["No proof of debt has been provided despite ongoing reporting I request full debt <em>validation</em> ( FDCPA 809 ).\n\nThe account remains marked <em>Derogatory</em> even though it's disputed, without evidence of proper resolution or reinvestigation ( <em>FCRA</em> 611 ).\n\nViolation : Multiple inconsistent Date Opened <em>entries</em> across bureaus Experian and Equifax : XX/XX/XXXX TransUnion : XX/XX/XXXX Suggests re-aging or data mismatch <em>FCRA</em> 623 ( a ) violation."]},"sort":[15.931522,"14918763"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"11410822","_score":15.726504,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Dear Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, I am writing to dispute the accuracy and validity of a charge-off account that has been reported on my consumer report. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq., I have the right to accurate and complete information in my credit reports. I believe the information regarding this charge-off account is inaccurate and/or incomplete, and I request an immediate investigation into this matter. \n\nInaccuracies : XXXX. Future Reporting Dates o TransUnion Last Reported : XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX Last Reported : XX/XX/XXXX o XXXX Last Reported : XX/XX/XXXX o Issue : Reporting future dates violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) rules on accuracy and timeliness. This indicates a possible system error or premature data submission. \nXXXX. Balance Inconsistency o Balance Reported : {$5500.00} o Credit Limit Reported : {$4700.00} o Issue : The reported balance exceeds the credit limit without explanation. If fees or penalties caused the overage, they should be documented. This inconsistency suggests a reporting error. \nXXXX. Comments Conflict o TransUnion : \" Charged off as bad debt. Dispute resolved ; reported by grantor. '' o XXXX : No comments visible. \no XXXX : No comments visible. \no XXXX : TransUnion comments include dispute resolution details, while the other bureaus lack similar comments, indicating inconsistent reporting of dispute outcomes. \no XXXX. Date Discrepancies o Date of Last Payment : TransUnion : XX/XX/XXXX XXXX : Not listed. \nXXXX : Not listed. \no Date of Last Activity : TransUnion : XX/XX/XXXX XXXX : Not listed. \nXXXX : Not listed. \no Issue : The dates of last payment and activity should align across all bureaus. Missing dates in XXXX and XXXX raise concerns about incomplete reporting. \nXXXX. Two-Year Payment History o TransUnion : Shows consistent \" XXXX '' or blank entries, but no clear derogatory ( CO ) reporting. \no XXXX : Payment history not visible. \no XXXX : Payment history not visible. \no Issue : Missing payment history in XXXX and XXXX suggests incomplete data reporting. XXXX history lacks details on derogatory status ( \" CO '' entries ). \nXXXX. Account Type/Status Conflict o Account Type : Revolving Credit Card o Account Status : Derogatory and Collection/Chargeoff o Issue : Accounts can not simultaneously be listed as \" Revolving '' and \" Charged Off '' without clarification. This conflicting status indicates improper classification. \n\n\n\n\n\n\nApplicable Legal Basis for Dispute XXXX. Verification Requirement ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) : - The FCRA mandates that all disputed information be verified within 30 days of a consumers dispute. If the information can not be verified, it must be corrected or deleted. \nXXXX. Obligation of Accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) : - Consumer reporting agencies must ensure maximum possible accuracy of the information in consumer reports. The inaccurate or unverifiable information regarding the charge-off account violates this requirement. \nXXXX. Re-Aging of Debt ( 15 U.S.C. 1681c ) : - The FCRA prohibits re-aging of old debt. If the date of first delinquency is inaccurately reported, the charge-off may appear on my credit report longer than the allowed 7 years. \nXXXX. Validation of Debt ( Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692g ) : - Under the FDCPA, if the debt is being collected by a third party, I have the right to request validation of the debt, including proof of ownership and the amount owed. If the creditor or collection agency can not validate the debt, it must be removed.","date_sent_to_company":"2025-01-07T20:32:02.000Z","issue":"Improper use of your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"11706","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"11410822","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-01-07T20:22:54.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":"Reporting company used your report improperly"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["<em>Missing</em> dates in XXXX and XXXX raise concerns about incomplete reporting. \nXXXX. Two-Year Payment History o TransUnion : Shows consistent \" XXXX '' or blank <em>entries</em>, but no clear <em>derogatory</em> ( CO ) reporting. \no XXXX : Payment history not visible. \no XXXX : Payment history not visible. \no Issue : <em>Missing</em> payment history in XXXX and XXXX suggests incomplete data reporting. XXXX history lacks details on <em>derogatory</em> status ( \" CO '' <em>entries</em> ). \nXXXX."]},"sort":[15.726504,"11410822"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":162,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":162}]}},"product":{"doc_count":162,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":135,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":135}]}},{"key":"Debt collection","doc_count":27,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"I do not know","doc_count":26},{"key":"Credit card debt","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":162,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":56,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account information incorrect","doc_count":25},{"key":"Information belongs to someone else","doc_count":16},{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":10},{"key":"Personal information incorrect","doc_count":3},{"key":"Information is missing that should be on the report","doc_count":1},{"key":"Public record information inaccurate","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Improper use of your report","doc_count":48,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Reporting company used your report improperly","doc_count":48}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":31,"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":24},{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":6},{"key":"Was not notified of investigation status or results","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Attempts to collect debt not owed","doc_count":18,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Debt is not yours","doc_count":18}]}},{"key":"False statements or representation","doc_count":7,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Attempted to collect wrong amount","doc_count":7}]}},{"key":"Written notification about debt","doc_count":2,"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":2}]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":162,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":162}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":162,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":84},{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":78}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":162,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":162}]}},"company":{"doc_count":162,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":48},{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":45},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":41},{"key":"Affirm Holdings, Inc","doc_count":2},{"key":"ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Resurgent Capital Services L.P.","doc_count":2},{"key":"SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL","doc_count":2},{"key":"AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP","doc_count":1},{"key":"Aargon Agency, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"AmeriCollect","doc_count":1},{"key":"Amsher Collection Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"CAPITAL ONE FINANCIAL CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"CBC Companies, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"CCS Financial Services, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"CL Holdings LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"HW Holding, Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"I.C. System, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Medical-Commercial Audit Inc","doc_count":1},{"key":"NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION","doc_count":1},{"key":"National Credit Adjusters, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"National Credit Systems,Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Regional Management Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"SLM CORPORATION","doc_count":1},{"key":"TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY","doc_count":1},{"key":"Tower Loan of Mississippi, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"V and H Portfolio","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":162,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"TX","doc_count":25},{"key":"NY","doc_count":22},{"key":"FL","doc_count":21},{"key":"CA","doc_count":16},{"key":"MO","doc_count":16},{"key":"MS","doc_count":6},{"key":"AZ","doc_count":5},{"key":"MD","doc_count":5},{"key":"MI","doc_count":5},{"key":"NV","doc_count":5},{"key":"VA","doc_count":5},{"key":"GA","doc_count":4},{"key":"AL","doc_count":3},{"key":"IN","doc_count":3},{"key":"LA","doc_count":3},{"key":"NH","doc_count":3},{"key":"TN","doc_count":3},{"key":"NJ","doc_count":2},{"key":"OH","doc_count":2},{"key":"SC","doc_count":2},{"key":"WA","doc_count":2},{"key":"MA","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"PA","doc_count":1},{"key":"PR","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":162,"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":93},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":4},{"key":"Company disputes the facts presented in the complaint","doc_count":1}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":162,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":11}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-15T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-15T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16469162,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{"2":[15.726504,"11410822"],"3":[14.401788,"14200389"],"4":[12.972549,"14115705"],"5":[12.068871,"17357057"],"6":[10.815337,"17931788"],"7":[8.7758,"15318249"]}}}