{"took":330,"timed_out":false,"_shards":{"total":5,"successful":5,"skipped":0,"failed":0},"hits":{"total":{"value":16,"relation":"eq"},"max_score":null,"hits":[{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3352141","_score":21.421991,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX when I have an appointment with my salesperson ( XXXX ) that i know for about 5 yrs bec we've been buying and leasing our car from XXXX XXXX, XXXX. I have an appointment to return my lease car and will try to get a new lease car again. Everything was doing great and with the amount of time spent in the dealer, we decided to buy a certified used car instead and will be under my daughter 's name. \nIn regards to my XXXX XXXX lease car account, as part of the deal, they will end up absorbing the 5 months left on the lease contract. The manager, together with the sale person ( XXXX ) offered to pay the 5 months of my XXXX XXXX lease car totaled about {$1600.00} just to get out of the lease. \nWith the new car deal and as promised, my daughter was approved for 3.4 % if we buy the XXXX   XXXX XXXX for {$29000.00} with {$1000.00} down for 72 months payment, 2 years bumper to bumper, up to XXXX,XXXX miles engine warranty, will make all the windows tinted plus they will pay off the rest of my XXXX XXXX XXXX lease car for {$1600.00}. It so appealing and such a great deal that we end up agreeing to all this. \n\nWhile waiting for all this deals and the financing documents are being reviewed, the XXXX XXXX finance person named XXXX XXXX were giving us different information. 1st, was when I declined the Gap Insurance the personality changed to something defensive, unwelcoming and rude. \n2nd, was the information provided by the manager and sales person about the 2 years bumper to bumper warranty was wrong and I was told that they had a mistake in giving me that information. It should only be 1 year bumper to bumper   warranty. \nTowards the discussion and dealing, We end up signing the given deal. This XXXX XXXX XXXX will be financed with 3.4 %, with 1 year bumper to bumper warranty, XXXX miles warranty, the company will pay off the 5 months left of my XXXX XXXX XXXX Lease car for {$1600.00}. \nWith that being said, all documents were signed and ended. Copied provided to me and my daughter and told us that it will take 2 weeks for the returned XXXX XXXX lease car ( 5 months ) payment to be mailed to us. On that same day ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) they gave us the car. We took it home without any problem. \nXX/XX/XXXX Car tinting job was done. There was no problem. No questions asked. Everyone was nice at the dealer XX/XX/XXXX I noticed that the back chair needs some work done and I called my sales person XXXX if he can have this fix and he scheduled the repair on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nToday, XX/XX/XXXX when my daughter took the car by herself to the dealer. \n2 weeks after we have the car on our possession, the dealer told her that they have to changed her financing rate from 3.4 % to 5.9 %. The monthly payment went up and my daughter were so confused and surprised because everything they promised was changed suddenly. I spoked to the Finance person ( XXXX XXXX ) and asked the reason because I don't think it is right to suddenly change the deal after everything was settled 2 weeks ago. I was told that my daughter can not be approved for 3.4 % bec she will have 3 cars under her name. The XXXX XXXX dealer knows this before they finalized the financing options and the deal. The problem with this was misinforming us and keep promising us of all this good deal until they get us to buy the car. \nFirst of all, we were not notified for 2 weeks about this unapproved rate. Not sure when did they decided to change it. When the car dealer saw my daughter with the car, she was asked to re-signed the vehicle contract and agreement. I am not present when they did this re-signing today. My daughter called me and asked me about this which I am not aware. I don't think this is right. I find this so unfair and unjust. The deal that was made and finalized 2 weeks ago should not be changed without appropriate notification. \nOn the other hand, I still did not received the promised returned lease car 5 months payoff amount. \nThis company runs business wrong. Just to sell cars they will mislead and misinformed the consumer. Promise to give you a great deal but yet not disclosing the right information. \nNot notifying the consumer about the rate and suddenly decided to change without notification. Failing to mail the promised payout amount of the previous lease car is so wrong. \nThe worst thing they made in this deal was to back date the document re-signed today by my daughter to XX/XX/XXXX instead of today 's date XX/XX/XXXX. This is totally wrong. This needs attention to protect consumer about their dealing practice. \nThis never happened to me in the past. It is upsetting, we felt like we were treated unfairly, given a dishonest deal and wrong information. XXXX XXXX, the finance person responsible to process our loan is inefficient and not diligent in notifying properly the consumer about the loan. If he knew after several days that the rate is not possible he could have call or email us about it so we can find a resolution to this deal. We can negotiate again or find what is good and ideal for us.","date_sent_to_company":"2019-08-23T19:05:53.000Z","issue":"Getting a loan or lease","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"89118","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3352141","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"FORD MOTOR CREDIT CO.","date_received":"2019-08-23T03:05:40.000Z","state":"NV","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Changes in terms mid-deal or after closing"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["On the other hand, I still did not received the promised returned <em>lease</em> car 5 months payoff amount. \nThis company runs business wrong. Just to <em>sell</em> cars they will mislead and misinformed the consumer. Promise to <em>give</em> you a great deal but yet not disclosing the right information. \nNot notifying the consumer about the rate and suddenly decided to change without notification. Failing to mail the promised payout amount of the previous <em>lease</em> car is so wrong."],"product":["Vehicle <em>loan</em> or <em>lease</em>"],"issue":["Getting a <em>loan</em> or <em>lease</em>"],"sub_product":["<em>Loan</em>"]},"sort":[21.421991,"3352141"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2660440","_score":16.178352,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"letter send to ocwen after a modification/ bankruptcy/and non reporting to credit bureaus To whom it may concern/ ocwen loan servicing The reason for this letter is to inform you the following about my loan # My name is XXXX XXXX my property address is XXXX XXXX, Ny XXXX. \nXXXX- The property was purchase on XX/XX/XXXX when the real estate market was at its highest {$790.00} after 3 years we were under water with a our home valued dropping to XXXX and with two loans and a 6. % rate that had also a balloon on one the loans. \nXX/XX/XXXX/XX/XX/XXXX- Recession I try to get a modification wasnt approved then I try to short sell which never occur, the broker that stole my money and left me with a delinquency account and almost foreclosed. \nXX/XX/XXXX- The mortgage payments were high and the only way to get my mortgage out of water was through a bankruptcy that will give the be the opportunity to get the home out of water and a fixed rate with a lower mortgage payment that will match the property actual valued. \nXX/XX/XXXX- XXXX was the company that we started the inicial process with in mid XX/XX/XXXX/XX/XX/XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX the actual bankruptcy was established with the sole purpose of fixing the issues on the loan. \nXX/XX/XXXX/XX/XX/XXXX- XXXX made a proposal plan for when the bankruptcy issued had force them to do a modification that in previous years was denied. \nXX/XX/XXXX- XXXX issue a proposal plan that would give me a trial period of payments of XXXX for 3 months after the completion of this trial and with the result of the bankruptcy agreement the valued of the home was now {$540.00} on a 4.0 % fixed and {$230.00} in 36 years payoff. \nIn addition I was going to be able to recovered by credit in accordance to my agreement with XXXX, the credit card agency where going to be reported according to XXXX with the results of my payments. \nXX/XX/XXXX- I never sign any paper work that would made be not liable for the property, The discharge was released on XX/XX/XXXX without no knowledge that their was XX/XX/XXXX/XX/XX/XXXX- Ocwen transition was done in between the bankruptcy issued and the discharge, which in my investigation seems there was a missing piece to the puzzle. Since between that transitions I notice many changes between the payments done while on XXXX and how it was done with ocwen. I also notice my payments were not being reflected into my credit report, it seemed like it was still delinquent and like it was never been paid. I did my diligence by pay on time for over 4 years and my credit reported seem never to change, I was wasnt able to make purchases or even a small loan for a cell phone, this has been both deviating and embarrassing. \nXX/XX/XXXX-XX/XX/XXXX In order to get my credit going I decide to get help from family using them as a primary in order to get a credit line, I was able to see my credit increasing however the mortgage was still not being reported on my credit made things very challenging for me when it comes to recovering my life back in terms to my financial hardship that most American faced because of the market crash. \nFor years I been try to figure out what happen to my credit by hiring agents that are specialized with these types of hardships and, my investigation had lead me to understand that something was not done right between the transition with XXXX and ocwen. Many people with the same and with lease amount of years were able to reestablish their lives without having to wait more than 2 years. In my investigation I also found out that my mortgage was never reaffirmed by XXXX or XXXX and I did n't even know I was discharged from the bankruptcy until I call the court to find out. I understand there has been discrepancy and discretely actions done with XXXX and I understand to be another victim. \nI tried another modification recently this year with XXXX which I had also a trial period which I had sucessfuly completed and have been faithfully payoff my mortgage at a resentful payment of {$3300.00}. I really want to continue payment and continued being responsible for my home, however I am extremely disappointed for the hardship i suffered and how negative my credit reporting has affected my life, while I am being responsible with my end and pay my loan on time. \nI only think is fair for ocwen to revisit this case carefully and fix this problem and reaffirmed my mortgage as per XXXX proposal, so that I could reestablished by credit and life again. \nThank you in advance, and please advice.","date_sent_to_company":"2017-09-09T05:32:04.000Z","issue":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"11420","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2660440","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","date_received":"2017-09-09T05:08:21.000Z","state":"NY","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Investigation took more than 30 days"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["I really want to continue payment and continued being responsible for my home, however I am extremely disappointed for the hardship i suffered and how negative my credit reporting has affected my life, <em>while</em> I am being responsible with my end and pay my <em>loan</em> on time. \nI only think is fair for ocwen to revisit this case carefully and fix this <em>problem</em> and reaffirmed my mortgage as per XXXX proposal, so that I could reestablished by credit and life again. \nThank you in advance, and please advice."],"issue":["<em>Problem</em> with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing <em>problem</em>"]},"sort":[16.178352,"2660440"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3662989","_score":11.966406,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"Quicken Loan offered me the best rate/closing package by far for the purchase of my first home. I am a licensed professional in Florida, had waited many years to be ready, and had many options for lenders. Every time I told Quicken ( XXXX ) that had a better offer, she sweetened my deal, she blew up my phone repeatedly making me offers for mortgage. Finally I applied, I made the worst mistake of my life, and chose Quicken Rocket Mortgage. My experience preparing was a miserable and torturous process, working with XXXX, my mortgage adviser, nobody at Quicken ever answers the phone, lack of communication throughout. In the midst of my purchase COVID hit, I am a XXXX, everyone 's life changed, but as a XXXX, I was still employed, thankfully, even got additional income ... .but my employer wrote in my verification letter that I had been previously paid through company payroll, but at some point in XXXX, during our \" shelter-at-home '' my employer wanted to pay me through their personal account for logistics, the employer submitted that in writing to Quicken. I was approved and received my Clear to Close. Quicken never said it would be problem. Then, literally the night before closing, my seller who had lost his employment, defaulted on the contract and refused to sell! Quicken assured me if I found another property, they could close it quickly, and could \" transfer my whole file right over to a new property '' Although it had been a miserable process and I was unhappy dealing with Quicken, I stayed with them, it sounded like the easiest path to least resistance, as I had my \" clear to close ''. I found another property, submitted everything that was again requested, no \" transfer '' of file ever occurred, I spent another torturous month submitting documents, every day I would wake up to find an email with another 5 things requested! As we finally neared the closing, someone re-verifiied my employment and instead of calling my employers directly which I had supplied, Quicken contacted the company HR dept, spoke to an employee who knew nothing about the fact that the owners of the company had moved me to their home, and I was still there everyday. I was still working, same job, but now I worked from employers home, and she told Quicken that I was no longer employed. Immediately my employer, their attorney, everyone possibly involved contacted Quicken to correct this misinformation. Quicken requested documentation, phone verification, which was AGAIN provided. So, On Monday night, three days before my scheduled closing, I had received a call from my Loan Rep stating that my loan was all set, and instructed me to purchase my Home Owners policy, and told me that if I could get the insurance policy to them by Tuesday morning, we were \" all set to close '' On Tuesday morning they wanted to telephone verify my employment, My employer and the former HR employee both on conference call with Quicken once again confirmed my employment was the same, same pay, my Employer confirmed that NOTHING HAD CHANGED IN MY EMPLOYMENT, but reminded Quicken that I would be paid from my employers personal account during the COVID shelter-at-home period. Now, and only now for the first time, Quicken had a problem with this COVID plan. On Tuesday afternoon at XXXX ; XXXX I received a call from Quicken, Sage my Loan Rep, saying there was a problem. If i was being paid personally by employer, he explained, that would make me a 1099, and I would no longer qualify for my mortgage, since I had no history ( they required 2-years if you are self-employed ) as a 199 XXXX  person. I immediately informed Quicken that I had not received even one private-pay check yet, I reiterated that I was NOT self-employed that this was just my employers idea while we worked from home during COVIDF, and, I explained that if it was a problem, I would request my employer continue to pay me through the payroll system as I had always been. I explained that I was absolutely sure my employer would do whatever was needed, as Quicken would prefer, and that as of yet, nothing had changed, no private check had been given/taken by me. Quicken told me they would look into the matter and get back to me. Wednesday morning which was my scheduled closing day, I called Quicken Client Relations Team first thing in morning and requested to speak to Supervisor. I finally reached someone named XXXX, I told her the whole story, she knew nothing about it, I told supervisor what happened, and once again implored her to speak to underwriting and be sure they understood that my employer was absolutely willing to continue paying me through payroll system during COVID, and any problem they had with our temp plan during COVID would be immediately resolved! Initially she said she would get back to me within 24 hours. I informed her that in 24 hours I would be in default of my real estate purchase contract, I implored her to look at my file as she explained she needed to do, but that I desperately and urgently needed an answer immediately, at the latest I had to notify my Realtor by XXXX that day, if I would be denied, so that I would have time to put my mortgage contingency in place and officially withdraw from my purchase agreement, or request the seller give me an extension to close. I literally begged her to get back to me quickly with some information or I would be in Default of my contract. I spent the next 6 hours calling, emailing everyone I had ever been in contact with at quicken, requested to speak to supervisors, my loan officers supervisor, I even wrote the offie of the CEO of Quicken, begging them for information, and asking that they not allow me to Default from my Purchase Agreement, I needed an answer or explanation of whatever problem there was so I could either fix it, or withdraw. The entire day, I called one person after another, literally, nobody answered or returned my emails, nobody at this company that I had dealt with answered their phones hour after hour of calling, I kept leaving messages as the hours ticked toward XXXX. I received a call from the Manager XXXX XXXX, at approx XXXX and he said he had no information, but that XXXX who I had spoken to that morning was still researching a resolution. at XXXX I finally got someone to answer the phone by calling the main number and going through a client relations representative, who was finally able to trick the gal I had spoken with ( XXXX ) that morning, who although I had begged, never bothered to return my call all day ... .it was, when I finally reached her, XXXX, 40 minutes until Default time ... ... yet, she kept telling me in that phone call, that nobody had returned her call all day, she could not reach anyone, she had had other things to do that day, she had a meeting, she was busy ... ... .I would not allow her to hang up the call, as she insisted that I needed to speak to XXXX, who had answers, I explained that I had just spoken to XXXX, and he said that it was XXXX that was XXXX searching for a resolution to my mortgage status and closing '' he told me he knew nothing ... ... as I had been ignored all day, this felt surreal ... ..and by now, I knew, Quicken, unless they want something from you, they just do not answer their phones! I told her I would lose my deposit, which was my life savings if I did not withdraw from the contract by XXXX, yet she, nor any body at Quicken could tell me the status of my loan, which she told me was now officially in \" suspension ''. I implored them to speak again to my employer, my job had not changed, my position had not changed, my income had not changed and I was NOT self-employed, never had been! We had notified quicken two month prior, in writing on XX/XX/XXXX, of our COVID temporary plan, they had had nearly two months prior to my XX/XX/XXXX closing to let me or my employer know they would not approve such a temporary plan to pay me personally, and instruct me to remain on payroll. They never said a word, having had that information for two months, but waited until the day of my closing, and the last possible day for me to withdraw from my purchase agreement to discover they did not like this plan. We offered to change back to payroll, but Quicken insisted that although I had not taken even one personal check yet, that I was now a 1099, self-employed person, and that was a problem. while speak to her XXXX informed me that she got an answer from underwriting, and they reported that my Employer had written saying I was no longer their nurse, but that I was \" helping them around their home ''. I explained to XXXX that at some point in this process, when Quicken remote accessed my bank account, and saw an additional {$3000.00} deposit and asked what it was, I explained that while we worked from their home, my Employer had offered me an additional role, to deal with their home vendors, maintenance people etc., and they would compensate me OVER AND Above my XXXX salary, as an additional job! I explained that was an entirely different matter, for which Quicken had asked my employer to explain in writing, and I told XXXX I thought underwriting was confused, couldn't I speak with them to explain properly what was in my file, She refused. I begged XXXX, and then finally she said she had finally in touch with that Manger XXXX XXXX and would conference him on the line with us. I begged XXXX, that if they would deny my mortgage, then I must be notified of that in writing so I could legally withdraw from my purchase, or would lose my life savings in the deposit, and potentially be open to a Breech of Contract lawsuit, as I talked and watched the clock tick well past XXXX. He tried to lecture me on how \" mortgage applicants don't understand the changing times that we were in '' and initially they both told me they were not authorized to issue me a denial, I was still in \" suspension '' and not until the phone call got ugly, when I was tired and sick of listening to rhetoric, did XXXX finally inform me that in fact Quicken was denying my loan, and the notification was \" on its way to me as we spoke ''. Well, long story short, I did not receive that Notification until hours after my contractual time deadline, Quicken had a copy of my Contract, and that I had spent nearly 8 hours that day warning them of my deadline, which they failed, or even seemed to care to meet. So, after three horrible, miserable and unprofessional months of processing my mortgage application, countless submission of documents, paying for inspections and appraisals, I have defaulted my contract, lost my \" new home '' and on Friday when my lease expires, I will be homeless! These are the most unprofessional, inept, uncaring and thoughtless people I ever had the misfortune of working with. They purposefully ignore phone calls, they do not provide communication timely, nor communicate information pertinent to the outcome of one of the most important of all life situations, buying a new home! The final decision, which I was told that day was that \" new COVID Guidelines that had been issued of Quicken '' \" had now made my Application unable to be approved! '' I was all of a sudden, on the day of closing, undesirable to fund! Mind you, I had been approved two months prior having the same employer, same income, same everything, when my first contracted seller backed out of my initial home purchase, or I would have closed my mortgage, and now for the second time, although Quicken approved me at pre-approval, \" they would transfer my whole file right over to the new property i found '', they spent another month looking at my paperwork, including two months in advance of my closing date, and in writing, the fact that I would continue working for my employer at home, just through COVID, and yet Quicken said nothing, never informed me that this would render me a \" self-employed person '' and that it would cause them to deny my closing, until the night before my closing. However, then, even after changing their minds, Quicken did not have the courtesy, or humanity nor evidently the legal obligation, to advise me in a timely fashion of their withdrawal of my approval, so that I might properly and legally withdraw from my Contract, thus avoiding me from loosing everything I had, due to these mysterious \" New Guidelines '' that now made me and my application for Mortgage an undesirable! Yet, when I finally received, hours later, my official \" denial '' the reasons given were completely different than I was told by telephone! This should be criminal what they have done to me! This was the most ugly and despicable, miserable experience with this organization, and their \" teams ''! I have never had such a horrible and unprofessional experience quite like this, it was my misfortune to have chosen to apply for mortgage with this company, and I pray they lose their license to be in the position to hurt people in this manner ever again!","date_sent_to_company":"2020-05-21T18:42:05.000Z","issue":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"33433","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3662989","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Rocket Mortgage, LLC","date_received":"2020-05-21T16:45:35.000Z","state":"FL","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Now, and only now for the first time, Quicken had a <em>problem</em> with this COVID plan. On Tuesday afternoon at XXXX ; XXXX I received a call from Quicken, Sage my <em>Loan</em> Rep, saying there was a <em>problem</em>. If i was being paid personally by employer, he explained, that would make me a 1099, and I would no longer qualify for my mortgage, since I had no history ( they required 2-years if you are self-employed ) as a 199 XXXX  person."]},"sort":[11.966406,"3662989"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6585167","_score":11.38549,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"XXXX : My name is XXXX XXXX and I am writing to file a complaint and request an investigation of my rights being violated that occurred XXXXXXXX.I understand that this is past the normal 180 days but I am asking for an exemption due to the fact that I was unaware of my rights being infringed upon buy CarMart, possibly XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX and the towing company the was working with CarMart until XXXX XXXX, XXXX. I found out that my XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was missing. I have been turned down for every car and line of credit possible trying to build up my credit so that I can get a car which I hadn't had since my car had been repossessed. I haven't received any correspondence from either dealership. CarMart where I had a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX which I owed about {$18000.00} and I had a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. They were both behind on payments COVID was in full swing and I was also just out of the XXXX  fighting my XXXX claim. I was expecting them to come. I called XXXX XXXX XXXX to make arrangements for a voluntary repossession but they would say they would have to call me back but don't. \nOn XXXX XXXXXXXX my daughter was staying the day with me and she came running into the house and said my car was gone. I already knew it was repoed. Somehow I got his phone number and was able to call him. He and his wife brought me my things out the car the next day, which I thought was really nice. I asked him if he just worked for Car Mart or did he work for different companies. He said that he worked for a third party towing company so he could pick up for anyone. Since he was nice enough to bring me my stuff and I knew the receive commission told him about my Harley.I told him were it was and asked him if he would be able to legally return it to the other company and he said yes and he would be able to look up the location to drop it off at so I didn't have to worry about that. I gave him the storage unit place XXXX XXXX XXXX FXXXX XXXX  TX, XXXX. I gave him the XXXX XXXX under the impression that he was legally taking the XXXX back to the company and that was his profession or would have not given him the keys. After that I didn't hear anything else from Car Mart. Not how to get my car back, no notice of intent to sell property, no date/time/location/choice on sale, no judgment date to give the right for my day in court to settle if I wanted, no deficiency notice for me the chance to pay it before it went on my credit report. Not only Did they just throw it on my credit report before giving me the right to rectify it but they also put it incorrectly on one stating I still owed around & XXXX. Which violates Texas Administrative Code Title 7, Part 5, Chapter 84, Subchapter H ; where it states the creditor not only have to give the debtor notice 10 days before the sale of the vehicle, they have to let them have have the opportunity to get their vehicle back, and know when, where, and if the sale was done in a commercially manner. Causing this to be considered a wrongful repossession. \nI wouldn't have known they had done that to me if, because of being denied every time I tried to even get a secured loan I was denied. I called XXXX XXXX XXXX to find out the balance after they told me they would send me a bill when the motorcycle was sold when I called them and told them the bike was on the way. They also haven't sent me any type of correspondence bills, deficiency notice, or nothing. When I called them they said, You are 823 payments behind, are you calling to make a payment today? I told her no because the bike was repossessed almost a year ago. She tells me she will have to call me back but doesn't. \nI called XXXX which is the licensing agency for towing and the only license a repossession operator is required to have in the State of Texas and was informed that per regulation they have to inform the local police they are going to be working in the area. I called XXXX and XXXX Police to see if I could get the Towing company ; s information because I didn't have it anymore due to not knowing there was an issue. Both Police departments said that they were not informed on or around that date of any repossessions in the area. XXXX police officer incident # XXXX stated that I couldnt file a stolen car report because the bike was no longer my property. That as soon as it went into the custody of the towing possession it became their responsibility not mine. I called car Mart and XXXX XXXX and they both told me that it was my problem not theirs. Car Mart also said that the tow guy wasn't even their normal guy and didn't know who he was and it was definitely not her problem. \nAs of right now XX/XX/XXXX The motorcycle is still missing, possibly stolen by the mystery towing company. That may or may not have a license because the manager hates my ex XXXX fiance and had her friend pick it up faking to be tow guy. I actually had no choice in signing the lease because its coerced debt but the manager didn't care. Violated my rights with a wrongful repossession, unfair credit reporting, and unethical business practices. XXXX XXXX XXXX billed me and had me in collections for almost a year if the towing guy was telling the truth. All over a vehicle they had. They also committed a wrongful repossession because they also didn't send me the notices and offer me the chance to rectify the loan. If XXXX XXXX XXXX was actually in the dark then they need to investigate and not tell me that they are not reliable for the bike and continue to bill me and keep me in collections. That is against the unfair credit reporting and unethical business practices. \nThey violated and broke several more laws that I just can't think of but they are getting away with it. Noone is doing anything about it. I finally got away from one XXXX  relationship into being bullied again and feeling helpless. Not only did they take my car but they maliciously made sure that I couldn't get it back and made it where I couldn't get another one. At the time I just left the XXXX  unable to work waiting on my XXXX claim to be approved. I lost everything including my home. I slept in the XXXX for a little while. XXXX XXXX gave me a home and my United States XXXX % XXXX service connected XXXX came through for my 15 years of service to this amazing country. \nI finally got out of an XXXX  relationship but was bullied again and my rights taken away. Made to feel helpless because they have been getting away with it because important people that can help don't. It saddens me though because I had no idea that the very rights that I fought for and put my beautiful kids second for were trampled all over without even an eye blink. I had no idea. If they are doing this so easily to me, how many other people are they doing this too? I am requesting an investigation on the whole incident, a hearing on the tow company, and damages remedies. Thank you, for your time and any support that you may grant me in the future. \n\nXXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2023-02-17T22:05:18.000Z","issue":"Problems at the end of the loan or lease","sub_product":"Loan","zip_code":"76205","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6585167","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Americas Car-Mart, Inc.","date_received":"2023-02-17T21:54:05.000Z","state":"TX","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Problem while selling or giving up the vehicle"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["Not how to get my car back, no notice of intent to <em>sell</em> property, no date/time/location/choice on sale, no judgment date to <em>give</em> the right for my day in court to settle if I wanted, no deficiency notice for me the chance to pay it before it went on my credit report. Not only Did they just throw it on my credit report before <em>giving</em> me the right to rectify it but they also put it incorrectly on one stating I still owed around & XXXX."],"product":["Vehicle <em>loan</em> or <em>lease</em>"],"issue":["<em>Problems</em> at the end of the <em>loan</em> or <em>lease</em>"],"sub_product":["<em>Loan</em>"],"sub_issue":["<em>Problem</em> <em>while</em> <em>selling</em> or <em>giving</em> up the vehicle"]},"sort":[11.38549,"6585167"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3968943","_score":9.433831,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"This is a complaint against LoanCare a subsidiary of XXXX a mortgage company. \n\nI will include here a letter written directly to the aforementioned company that shows a request to assume the loan by another party that I had to place under contract as LoanCare refused to send the appropriate application packet. When finally sent and returned they said it wasn't approved. When I asked why they could not articulate a coherent response. Calling back and getting a different representative i am informed they have no record of this application packet. \n\nI shouldnt be surprised as they had stated that they could not find my proof of insurance, I am willing to provide proof that it was sent 4 times by my agent mailed, faxed and through their computer system. After 2 months I think that has been resolved though I am not placing wagers based upon past performance. \n\nThe previous, though not illegal, is an example of poor business practices. What follows strikes me as fraudulent activity. \nI attempted to have my escrow removed conversations preceded this date but on XXXX XXXX XXXXI was told all is good to have that removed. I have to submit a written request and wait for a review. They denied, it seems they lost the written request. Resubmit denied, Escrow must have zero balance, sent in {$2000.00} than {$700.00} then {$620.00}. Denied because i had to have no late payments for 12 months this is told to me in XXXX. This started in XXXX. I had been sending money to make it happen unfortunately the time to wait for their reviews had taken so long that now the XXXX payment was late. Had I been informed of this in a timely manner I could have addressed it at the correct time. Following is a summary of the amounts tendered at the times of the phone calls in an attempt to get this resolved then and now I am told it can not be changed or addressed for another year as long as I have no more late payments. As I am on a fixed income it is good that there are those out there with a sense of humor. Sadly at my expense. \nXXXX XXXX {$970.00} XXXX XXXX {$2000.00} XXXX XXXX {$690.00} XXXX XXXX {$700.00} XXXX XXXX {$780.00} When I asked now what? I have sent all this extra money that I don't have to meet the 3 months of being jacked around and take my money and give nothing in return. \nManagement representative XXXX employee # XXXX said well you can resubmit I have already submitted 4 times and no matter how much money I send now, I still have a late fee for the first time in 2 decades. Will the response be any different?\n\nWell NO but it may make you feel better. \n\nDid I mention how many times I was hung up on when I told the representative that I felt I was being taken advantage of that he was of no help and was giving me no direction just being insulting and demeaning. Nothing like quality service and this is nothing like quality service. \n\nNow for the part that involves the money for nothing and an attempt to defraud those they are supposed to be representing. I have sent this company proof of insurance with them listed as loss payee from my contracted representative. The contract states that he is responsible for taxes and insurance. \nI thought ok to keep current I will borrow enough to make the escrow cover next year 's insurance and then just have them hold the funds. When I discussed this with them I asked who gets the interest in this case and they said Not you. \nNow I am not a well educated individual but my escrow payment amount is {$1100.00} per month. Insurance annual premium is {$5000.00} a year and the amount these accountants and number wizards are collecting {$1100.00} time 12 months = {$13000.00}. Interest at 4.25 %. So {$13000.00} - {$5000.00} = {$7200.00}. I was told I would never have access to that money because it was needed to pay for last years and next years insurance. As last year is paid off and next year is prepaid I think I am being fed a story.\n\nWhat if I am not the only one subjected to such actions this could amount to several million dollars. This is conjecture but I do get the feeling that they are taking advantage of more than just me. \n\nNow I have to address the XXXX and XXXX  aspects. I call and they mouth pretty words and offer no suggestions and as I have stated before waste time so they can add penalties. I have requested call backs and to date I have received a total of one call back.\n\nI suffer from hearing loss and eye problems. Just writing this document will be followed by XXXX  and XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  and XXXX XXXX issues ). Not to mention the latest issue of XXXX  issues including XXXX and a XXXX XXXX. And another XXXX and XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX scheduled in a few months. Due to the severety of this issue typical spacing for this is 5 to 7 years. This is a direct result of the XXXX and helplessness that I am feeling now and no money to seek professional help. I would love for this company to pay for the XXXX  at least. \n\nMy life in the military and exposure to XXXX XXXX following time in service as well as work at XXXX XXXX that process things like XXXX XXXX work on an island that stored and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as well as XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Needless to say I could have treated myself better. A life growing up in an era of lead paint and asbestos does potentially lead to other XXXX XXXX and I am afraid they are playing on this. \n\nI have now been placed in touch with XXXX employee number XXXX. Of the loss mitigation department obviously preparatory to foreclosure. I believe that despite all of my conversations, sending money and jumping through hoops, They have no interest in helping only stealing what I have spent decades through some very hard economic time trying to keep what I have invested so much in. At this point without any assistance and I stand in fear that they are now doing all they can to steal my property and retirement subsistence. \n\nWhat I would like to see at this time is allow XXXX  XXXX to assume the loan. I had to write a sob story to LoanCare for the reason for the assumption but the reality is it is none of their business but you play along when they are holding you by the XXXX and XXXX \n\nIf that is not acceptable to the high and mighty then eliminate the escrow for the aforementioned reasons. I have been requesting a conversation with management Since late XXXX and finally on XXXX XXXX this request was met. Sadly you have already read XXXX # XXXX response. Spurring this complaint. \n\nHere is the second or third request for this individual to assume the loan. So much discussion that I have lost count with whom and about insurance, escrow or more recently loss mitigation has been discussed LoanCare XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX VA XXXX Lead SD XXXX I XXXX XXXX Request that XXXX XXXX assume my loan XXXX. \nI was told by XXXX employee # XXXX That you want to hear my sob story and events leading up to this situation. Well here goes. \nRecent events regarding the escrow account that I can not get deleted despite the customer service representatives telling me to keep trying. Had this gone through in the promised timely manner I would never have been late for the first time in Decades in XX/XX/2020. \nNow I have been told there is nothing that can be done no matter that I have proof of insurance from another provider not through your escrow service. Of course the first three times I sent this proof directly from the provider the documentation got lost repeatedly. And I frequently felt I was transferred to another department or given some meaningless task to repeat and wait for the next escrow review ( Note XXXX to XXXX XXXX then I finally talked to a member of management XXXX employee # XXXX today XXXX XXXX XXXX Who repeated that there was nothing that could be done and transferred me to XXXX XXXX Who has now sent me to you. \nAs far as the loan goes I will continue to send you {$700.00} per month. I have no more as I am on SS and a fixed income. As well as moderately XXXX. \nCurrently I am now dealing with restricted driving due to XXXX  as a result of XXXX for a XXXX XXXX  ( License suspended ). When the war on energy occurred I had attempted to sell the property but there were no buyers to be had in an area of rapidly declining population followed by tenants with a less than stellar interest in caring for that which belongs to others and my inability to drive down from my primary residence about 4 hours away to make repairs and keep contractors to their promises resulting in freezing conditions from a homeless individual breaking in and turning on the water and with no heat. The date of this can be confirmed in police documents when they did an armed walk through. In addition the contractor had forged his city contractors license and has arrest warrants out and again this old guy is caught in the middle of it all while watching the roof blow off and knowing I will never see this individual again. Hence the ridiculous insurance.\n\nMy current health conditions are not looking to improve to the point of being able to keep up with the tenants and the maintenance. I have entered into a lease option with the aforementioned XXXX XXXX. As this was entered as legally binding agreement his interests must be protected If this is not a suitable arrangement then I again must refer you to the earlier statement of limited income. Both insurance and Taxes are current and paid in full and escrow has a {$0.00} balance if escrow cant be deleted and the loan cant be assumed then I have no choice. Not that I feel I have one now. \nI forgot to mention that a direct result of attempting to stay on good terms with you has resulted in a XXXX XXXX  and XXXX XXXX. Death and living directive were at the forefront of the resultant conversation. Perhaps this will soon rectify itself and how you handle the property of the deceased will no longer be my concern. \nI sincerely hope you can help rectify this situation. \nXXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2020-11-24T16:25:59.000Z","issue":"Trouble during payment process","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"577XX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3968943","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"LoanCare, LLC","date_received":"2020-11-22T10:19:49.000Z","state":"SD","company_public_response":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In addition the contractor had forged his city contractors license and has arrest warrants out and again this old guy is caught in the middle of it all <em>while</em> watching the roof blow off and knowing I will never see this individual again. Hence the ridiculous insurance.\n\nMy current health conditions are not looking to improve to the point of being able to keep up with the tenants and the maintenance. I have entered into a <em>lease</em> option with the aforementioned XXXX XXXX."],"company":["<em>Loan</em>Care, LLC"]},"sort":[9.433831,"3968943"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"6162192","_score":9.238832,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"I applied for a mortgage loan with Movement Mortgage on XX/XX/2021 with XXXX XXXX XXXX in the XXXX, NC XXXX, one of your mortgage originators after talking with him on XX/XX/2021 about purchasing a home and my ability to be approved for a mortgage. \n\n\n\nAfter applying for the loan, I received a preapproval on XX/XX/2021 for {$360000.00}. Subsequently, I received another preapproval on XX/XX/2021 for {$370000.00}. I signed a purchase contract and put up {$15000.00} in due diligence. My expected closing date was XX/XX/2021. \n\n\n\nWe went through with the process of getting the actual approval. The process was very confusing as I was asked for the same documentation several times and asked to explain XXXX XXXX for minimal amounts, such as {$5.00}. Although confused by the requests, I provided what was requested. Per request, I also uploaded pay stubs for the months of XXXX and XXXX. I work XXXX different contract jobs, XXXX as a XXXX employee and XXXX as a XXXX employee. On XX/XX/XXXX, I uploaded pay stubs from both of my jobs. After explaining my contract employment to XXXX XXXX, he advised me to only submit the paystubs for the XXXX position and not the XXXX position, so after that conversation, I only uploaded the pay stubs for the XXXX job. \n\n\n\nXXXX day before the projected closing date, everything started to go downhill. XXXX XXXX informed me that I would not be able to close on XX/XX/XXXX because the title had not been cleared by the attorney because they did not contact the attorney within a reasonable time. He contacted the closing attorney at XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/2021, just XXXX business days before expected closing. I was very upset because I had no clue that we were behind in our timeline, because on XX/XX/XXXX the original closing attorney notified XXXX XXXX and his team that they would not be able to handle the closing. XXXX XXXX and I had a conversation, I communicated to him to then reach out to XXXX XXXX to handle the closing. XXXX XXXX said that he had personally spoken with Attorney XXXX XXXX at XXXX and XXXX and he was told that she would handle the closing. However, on XX/XX/XXXX, the sellers listing agent reached out to confirm closing and he was made aware that the original attorney from XXXX and XXXX would not be able to handle the closing. \n\n\n\nTherefore, I was forced to ask the selling agent for an extension. I received that extension and the new closing date was scheduled for XX/XX/2021. On XX/XX/2021, we were still not able to close, for reasons unknown to me at that time. However, the seller went to the attorneys office and signed closing documents, leaving me with a 7-day window to close before losing the due diligence monies of {$15000.00}. On XX/XX/2021, I reached out to XXXX XXXX many times via phone, text and email but I received no response. \n\n\n\nOn Friday, XX/XX/2021 ( after our second prospective closing date ), XXXX XXXX contacted me via phone and let me know that there was a problem with finalizing loan documents. He stated that because I am a contract employee and my contract states that my end date for employment is XX/XX/2021, I would need to prove that my employment would not end at that time and that it was in fact indefinite. XXXX XXXX also sent an email following up on our conversation that further stated XXXX been instructed that even if they said its an indefinite contract, that would work. ( this email is attached for your review ) On XX/XX/2021, XXXX XXXX contacted my recruiting agencys HR department and asked if the employment is indefinite. Because this was a holiday weekend, XXXX XXXX did not receive a response until XX/XX/2021. The response was there is a situation in which her employment contract could keep getting extended but XXXX hesitant to say indefinitely as were at the mercy of the client in that regard. But is there a possibility of her remaining an employee of ours for a very long time, yes, there is that possibility. \n\n\n\nOn XX/XX/2021, I went to the Movement Mortgages XXXX, NC XXXX and asked to speak with someone in regards to my loan because I was not receiving any communication from my loan XXXX and at this point, we were on a race against the clock. There, I spoke to XXXX XXXX. XXXX informed me that we were looking to close on XX/XX/2021. However, I could not go off of XXXX words. I needed a concrete answer in writing. XXXX let me know that the underwriters were reviewing my file and I needed to wait for a response. At XXXX on XX/XX/2021, XXXX XXXX texted me and stated that he would call me shortly. I waited for his call for an hour and then I texted him and asked when he was going to call. He called me directly after that. He let me know that the response from HR was not sufficient and further clarified to me that the underwriters wanted to see the term indefinite. \n\n\n\nBecause this response was not sufficient, on XX/XX/2021, I reached out to the XXXX XXXX of the recruiting agency to clarify the issue of the stop date for employment of XX/XX/2021. He directly emailed XXXX XXXX and stating the way our system is set up we need to have a start date and end date for our contractors. The end date is an internal control that our systems require us to enter. XXXX XXXX role at XXXX is indefinite and there is a strong possibility they will bring her on their payroll. In the event that does not happen, we would place XXXX XXXX with XXXX of our other clients at the same salary if not more. If you have any questions please feel free to reach out to me. Once receiving this response, I forwarded to XXXX XXXX, she replied thank you for sharing this with me. XXXX and his XXXX are actively working with underwriting to review your employment and I confirmed that they have this information that you just shared. This has been escalated to the highest person in underwriting. XXXX will continue to keep you informed as soon as we have updates, but this is absolutely a high priority. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX also confirmed receipt of the email and confirmed that he sent the response to underwriting. I did not hear from XXXX XXXX throughout the day, I again went to the XXXX office asking to speak with someone in regards to my loan. There, I spoke with XXXX XXXX. XXXX immediately phoned XXXX XXXX. After speaking with XXXX, XXXX XXXX called me, while I was at the office and told me that I was denied the loan, for a number of variances. I asked him to clarify that. He then stated that my XXXX XXXX, my employment verification and my paystubs not showing XXXX hours a week were the reasons why I was denied. The paystubs provided to him showed : XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX hours XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX hours XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX hours XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX hours XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX hours XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX hours XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX hours XX/XX/XXXX - XXXX hours Furthermore, XXXX XXXX and his team had these paystubs throughout the whole process. \n\n\n\nI got off the phone with XXXX XXXX and spoke with his XXXX, XXXX XXXX. I let XXXX XXXX know that I have been a contract employee since the beginning of this process and nothing has changed, why would I be preapproved if this was an issue? She stated that XXXX XXXX did not know that I was a contract employee. I let her know that this was not true. Early on in this process, XXXX XXXX advised me on which job to use and we had extensive conversation about my contract employment. Her response was I dont believe XXXX XXXX did anything nefarious. However I stated, this is not about being nefarious but about XXXX XXXX negligence and inability to pre-approve and process loans successfully. \n\n\n\nOn XX/XX/2021, the last day of having an opportunity to close, I received an email explaining my denial. What was indicated in the letter is temporary or irregular employment, insufficient stability of income. \n\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX I am very familiar with the mortgage approval process and this was the farthest from fair and ethical. I have never seen someone get pre-approve and the loan fall through after signing closing disclosure and seller signing closing documents because of something that was the exact same at the beginning of the process. Evidenced by the reason for being denied, XXXX XXXX was incompetent in preapproving me for the loan. I have learned that per FHA guidelines ( the loan that I was applying for ), if a person is a contract employee, they would need two years history doing this type of work. At the time of pre-approval, I did not have two years of immediate history of contractual employment, however, I do have over 16 continuous years in this field working salaried and contract positions. XXXX XXXX was aware of that and still pre-approved me. I relied on his pre-approval and submitted a contract with {$15000.00} due diligence. \n\n\n\nThere is no excuse to wait until a week and two days after the prospective closing, signing the initial closing disclosure, the seller signing the closing documents, home insurance documents were submitted and paid for, the attorney cleared the title, paying for the appraisal and home inspections, terminating my current lease, hiring movers, and giving away furniture, to then find out that I was denied for the loan. Additionally, the reason for the denial is XXXX that should have been addressed early on, prior to pre-approval. \n\n\nXXXX XXXX and his team lacked integrity, professionalism, knowledge, communication, dignity and morals throughout this process. I have been denied a loan for reasons that were the same when we began the process and all throughout. I have relied on XXXX XXXX negligent pre-approval and have handed over {$15000.00} in due diligence to the seller. \n\n\n\nI am appalled by Movement Mortgages business values and unprofessionalism. There was no concern and there was a clear lackadaisical attitude about my loss of due diligence monies. I had to go to the office to even get a response from anyone about the next steps after submitting employment information. This is the most unbelievable mortgage process that I have ever witnessed. As a consumer, we rely on the education and professional opinions of the loan officers and we suffer greatly when we are led astray by people who are unqualified and negligent in their performance.","date_sent_to_company":"2022-11-03T20:15:33.000Z","issue":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","sub_product":"FHA mortgage","zip_code":"27527","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"6162192","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Movement Mortgage LLC","date_received":"2022-11-03T20:08:50.000Z","state":"NC","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["There is no excuse to wait until a week and two days after the prospective closing, signing the initial closing disclosure, the seller signing the closing documents, home insurance documents were submitted and paid for, the attorney cleared the title, paying for the appraisal and home inspections, terminating my current <em>lease</em>, hiring movers, and <em>giving</em> away furniture, to then find out that I was denied for the <em>loan</em>."]},"sort":[9.238832,"6162192"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3209240","_score":8.251581,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I believe Wells Fargo Mortgage is incorrectly reporting overdue/late payments on a home mortgage listed on all of credit bureaus. I base this belief on the following information. \n\nI owned a home in XXXX XXXX in XXXX of XXXX, when I was diagnosed with a life threatening illness which left me XXXX and unemployable. My wife and our family were required to relocate to XXXX to obtain employment capable of sustaining our family. \n\nWe looked into selling our XXXX house in XX/XX/XXXX, but would have been severely under water. We were able to find renters from XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX ; when the renters received military PCS orders. We revaluated the option of selling ; but the market had not improved. We were able to sign new renters to a short-term 6 month lease in XX/XX/XXXX. In the XXXX of XXXX, those renters became unreliable and we decided to move to a month-to-month rental with them ; while listing the house for sale at the same time. There was not one single offer at all on the home for 6+ months. The 2nd set of renters gave their 30 day notice to move out at the beginning XX/XX/XXXX. \nAt the beginning of XX/XX/XXXX, [ After consultation with our realtor, the Veterans Administration ( VA ), and Wells Fargo Mortgage ( WFM ) ], we initiated the process of a Deed-In-Lieu ( DIL ) with both the VA and WFM. I have attached the following : 1 ) The formal request letter to WFM dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, 2 ) an email dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX documenting WFM representative XXXX XXXX confirmation that my wife and I had submitted all required paperwork necessary to begin processing our DIL request, 3 ) An email dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX from VA representative XXXX XXXX confirming WFM had completed an appraisal of the XXXX XXXX house on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX with an appraised value of XXXX, The renters moved out of the house at the end of XX/XX/XXXX and the home was vacant since that time. We continued to pay the monthly mortgage due ( on-time ) for both months of XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. Money was getting tight while paying two mortgages on my wifes income and my retirement/disability pay. \n\nIn early XX/XX/XXXX ; we received a Notice of Approval for a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure Letter from WFM dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX with a lot of information. The main points of concern were, Conditions that must be met You and all other occupants must vacate your property and the title must be clear and marketable by XX/XX/XXXX, the vacate date. Understand that any personal belongings left after XX/XX/XXXX, the vacate date become the property of Wells Fargo Bank N.A.,  Transfer/closing To complete the transfer of ownership of your home back to the owner of your mortgage, you must sign and complete all required documents provided to you by a third-party attorney, or title company acting on behalf of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. \n\nOn XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ; we signed, dated, and faxed back our agreement to the terms of the approval for the Deed-in-Lieu to WFM. Furthermore ; I phoned XXXX XXXX XXXX, Home Preservation Specialist, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., phone : XXXX Ext XXXX. To inform him that the house was already vacant with all personal property removed and in marketable condition on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ; there was no need to wait until XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nWe did not have sufficient funds in reserve to pay for our XXXX  home 's XX/XX/XXXX mortgage and our XXXX home 's XX/XX/XXXX mortgage payment. It was my understanding ( after my phone conversations with Mr XXXX ) that once we vacated the XXXX  home ( for purposes we are discussing here ) on the WFM mandated Vacate Date of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ... The House and ALL personal property with the house ; became the property of Wells Fargo Bank, N/A ; as per their letter dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. At which point, we were not responsible for further mortgage payments. ( This is due in part to the fact it was a VA backed mortgage, and Lenders can not report mortgage payments as being late until the 16th of the month on VA backed mortgages ). \n\nIn this case, I would only have missed the XX/XX/XXXX mortgage payment on the XXXX  house. I should not be showing as late on any following months as I was no longer in possession of the house. It doesn't make sense to be held financially responsible for thousands of dollars for three additional months ; for a home you were required to vacate for those months. \n\nIt appears from an internet search on the property sales of the home, WFM eventually sold the house on XX/XX/XXXX for {$200000.00} ( see attached XX/XX/XXXX search from XX/XX/XXXXXX/XX/XXXX ). In addition, the Veterans Administration paid out approximately {$39000.00} and change to Wells Fargo Bank NA, to cover the deficiency balance between what was owed after the Deed in Lieu and the sale price on XX/XX/XXXX. So it appears that Wells Fargo ended up recouping a total of {$240000.00} for the XXXX  house. Which is pretty much a break even for them ; if not more than what I actually owed at the time of the Deed in Lieu. \n\nWhich brings up the question ; was Wells Fargo Bank N.A., dragging this process out so that I could not afford to keep up with dual mortgage payments. In order for them to be able to collect the deficiency balance from the VA? In the WFM letter dated XX/XX/XXXX it states that if I was able to meet all of the conditions stated in the letter ... '' and the mortgage is released, the investor ( and other interested parties ) waives its right to seek a deficiency balance under the mortgage note and/or related documents. '' My main concern, at this point, is the fact that I know have to pursue a purchase of a new build home which is more XXXX compliant for myself, and an aging parent. In order to restore my full VA home loan entitlement, I had to repay the Veterans Administration the full amount it had to payout to Wells Fargo Bank, NA.. A total repayment on my part of the full {$39000.00} and change in the last 30 days. I can provide documentation of payment to the VA if requested. So, I have absolutely no outstanding federal debts, or obligations tied to this mortgage. \n\nI understand that the Deed in Lieu will be reflected on my credit report. The issue I am debating is how WFM is reporting the late payment status with the XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX credit bureaus. I have attached copies from the first three bureaus which were pulled on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. I am waiting on a mailed report from XXXX. \n\nThe XXXX payment status is reflecting, \" At least 120 days, or more than four payments past due. ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ), but the payment history is reflecting all current from XXXX XXXX. \n\nThe XXXX payment status is reflecting, \" Credit grantor received deed for collatoral in lieu of foreclosure on a defaulted mortgage '' ( updatedXX/XX/XXXX ), and the payment history is reflecting XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX late, XX/XX/XXXX Late, XX/XX/XXXX Late, XX/XX/XXXX Negative. \n\nThe XXXX  Payment status is relecting, \" 120 days past due '' ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ), and the payment history is reflecting XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX late, XX/XX/XXXX late. \n\nI am still waiting to see how the XXXX reporting is affecting my credit scores. \n\nI received a letter dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, from WF Home mortgage which states, '' We discovered a processing issue that affected our credit reporting. We apologize for this issue and we want to share the steps we have taken to address it. '' \" When the deed in lieu was finalized, the closed date wasn't furnished to the consumer reporting agencies. \n\nWe've notified the consumer reporting agencies to include the correct date on your credit report. \n\nYou may reach out to the consumer credit reporting agencies. They can confirm that they completed the updates ... '' The problem with this XXXX XX/XX/XXXX letter is that is does not identify the CORRECTED DATE the Deed in Lieu was supposed to be finalized and updated with at the consumer reporting agencies. It is totally vague! I waited a few weeks from the time I received the XXXX XX/XX/XXXX letter ; to give the consumer reporting agencies to update their systems. \nThen I did follow up with the credit reporting agencies on of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX was the only one with a XXXX update ( and I submit an incorrect update ). XXXX XXXX   last update was XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX last update was XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nIt was at this point in XXXX that I began disputes with the three main credit bureaus and also contacted WFM directly to try and resolve this issue. \n\nI was put in contact with a Mr. XXXX XXXX, Executive Resolution Specialist, Customer Care and XXXX XXXX ( Phone :XX/XX/XXXX ) to act as my liaison through my dispute process with WFM. \n\nI sent WFM a fax request an update to reflect no missing payments to all of the consumer credit reporting agencies on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. ( See attached Fax dated XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nI ended up receiving a letter dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX from XXXX XXXX, Senior Vice President, Wells Fargo Home Lending. It stated they had received my inquiry and their goal would be to try and and provide a response by XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. ( See attached letter datedXX/XX/XXXX ) During the interval of time between XXXX XXXX and XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ; I had several conversations with Mr. XXXX ( some heated ones ) in regards to the status of my credit reporting dispute. We were unable to see eye-to-eye. I received WFM response to my dispute the evening of XX/XX/XXXX, from Mr. XXXX via email. It was less than satisfactory, in my opinion. ( see attached letter dated XX/XX/XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-04-11T06:20:56.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3209240","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","date_received":"2019-04-11T06:07:13.000Z","state":"UT","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":["We looked into <em>selling</em> our XXXX house in XX/XX/XXXX, but would have been severely under water. We were able to find renters from XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX ; when the renters received military PCS orders. We revaluated the option of <em>selling</em> ; but the market had not improved. We were able to sign new renters to a short-term 6 month <em>lease</em> in XX/XX/XXXX."]},"sort":[8.251581,"3209240"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3208554","_score":8.251581,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I believe XXXX XXXX XXXX is incorrectly reporting overdue/late payments on a home mortgage listed on all of credit bureaus. I base this belief on the following information. \n\nI owned a home in XXXX XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX, when I was diagnosed with a life threatening illness which left me XXXX and unemployable. My wife and our family were required to relocate to XXXX to obtain employment capable of sustaining our family. \n\nWe looked into selling our XXXX house in XX/XX/XXXX, but would have been severely under water. We were able to find renters from XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX ; when the renters received military PCS orders. We revaluated the option of selling ; but the market had not improved. We were able to sign new renters to a short-term 6 month lease in XX/XX/XXXX. In the XX/XX/XXXX, those renters became unreliable and we decided to move to a month-to-month rental with them ; while listing the house for sale at the same time. There was not one single offer at all on the home for 6+ months. The 2nd set of renters gave their 30 day notice to move out at the beginning XX/XX/XXXX. \nAt the beginning of XX/XX/XXXX, [ After consultation with our realtor, the Veterans Administration ( VA ), and XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) ], we initiated the process of a Deed-In-Lieu ( DIL ) with both the VA and XXXX. I have attached the following : 1 ) The formal request letter to XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX, 2 ) an email dated XX/XX/XXXX documenting XXXX representative XXXX XXXX confirmation that my wife and I had submitted all required paperwork necessary to begin processing our DIL request, 3 ) An email dated XX/XX/XXXX from VA representative XXXX XXXX confirming XXXX had completed an appraisal of the XXXX XXXX house on XX/XX/XXXX with an appraised value of XXXX, The renters moved out of the house at the end of XX/XX/XXXX and the home was vacant since that time. We continued to pay the monthly mortgage due ( on-time ) for both months of XX/XX/XXXXand XX/XX/XXXX. Money was getting tight while paying two mortgages on my wifes income and my retirement/disability pay. \n\nIn early XX/XX/XXXX ; we received a Notice of Approval for a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure Letter from XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX with a lot of information. The main points of concern were, Conditions that must be met You and all other occupants must vacate your property and the title must be clear and marketable by XX/XX/XXXX, the vacate date. Understand that any personal belongings left after XX/XX/XXXX, the vacate date become the property of XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, Transfer/closing To complete the transfer of ownership of your home back to the owner of your mortgage, you must sign and complete all required documents provided to you by a third-party attorney, or title company acting on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX ; we signed, dated, and faxed back our agreement to the terms of the approval for the Deed-in-Lieu to  XXXX. Furthermore ; I phoned Mr. XXXX XXXX, Home Preservation Specialist, XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX, phone : XXXX Ext XXXX. To inform him that the house was already vacant with all personal property removed and in marketable condition on XX/XX/XXXX ; there was no need to wait until XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nWe did not have sufficient funds in reserve to pay for our XXXX   home 's XX/XX/XXXX mortgage and our Utah home 's XX/XX/XXXX mortgage payment. It was my understanding ( after my phone conversations with Mr XXXX ) that once we vacated the XXXX home ( for purposes we are discussing here ) on the XXXX mandated Vacate Date of XX/XX/XXXX ... The House and ALL personal property with the house ; became the property of XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; as per their letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. At which point, we were not responsible for further mortgage payments. ( This is due in part to the fact it was a VA backed mortgage, and Lenders can not report mortgage payments as being late until the XXXX of the month on VA backed mortgages ). \n\nIn this case, I would only have missed the XX/XX/XXXX mortgage payment on the XXXX house. I should not be showing as late on any following months as I was no longer in possession of the house. It doesn't make sense to be held financially responsible for thousands of dollars for three additional months ; for a home you were required to vacate for those months. \n\nIt appears from an internet search on the property sales of the home, XXXX eventually sold the house on XX/XX/XXXX for {$200000.00} ( see attached XXXX search from XX/XX/XXXX ). In addition, the Veterans Administration paid out approximately {$39000.00} and change to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, to cover the deficiency balance between what was owed after the Deed in Lieu and the sale price on XX/XX/XXXX. So it appears that XXXX XXXX ended up recouping a total of {$240000.00} for the XXXX   house. Which is pretty much a break even for them ; if not more than what I actually owed at the time of the Deed in Lieu. \n\nWhich brings up the question ; was XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, dragging this process out so that I could not afford to keep up with dual mortgage payments. In order for them to be able to collect the deficiency balance from the VA? In the XXXX letter dated XX/XX/XXXX it states that if I was able to meet all of the conditions stated in the letter ... '' and the mortgage is released, the investor ( and other interested parties ) waives its right to seek a deficiency balance under the mortgage note and/or related documents. '' My main concern, at this point, is the fact that I know have to pursue a purchase of a new build home which is more XXXX compliant for myself, and an aging parent. In order to restore my full VA home loan entitlement, I had to repay the Veterans Administration the full amount it had to payout to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX A total repayment on my part of the full {$39000.00} and change in the last 30 days. I can provide documentation of payment to the VA if requested. So, I have absolutely no outstanding federal debts, or obligations tied to this mortgage. \n\nI understand that the Deed in Lieu will be reflected on my credit report. The issue I am debating is how XXXX is reporting the late payment status with the XXXX, XXXX, Experian, and XXXX credit bureaus. I have attached copies from the first three bureaus which were pulled on XX/XX/XXXX. I am waiting on a mailed report from XXXX. \n\nThe XXXX payment status is reflecting, \" At least 120 days, or more than four payments past due. ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ),  but the payment history is reflecting all current from XX/XX/XXXX-XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nThe Experian payment status is reflecting, \" Credit grantor received deed for collatoral in lieu of foreclosure on a defaulted mortgage '' ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ), and the payment history is reflecting XX/XX/XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX late, XX/XX/XXXX Late, XX/XX/XXXX Late, XX/XX/XXXX Negative. \n\nThe XXXX Payment status is relecting, \" 120 days past due '' ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ), and the payment history is reflecting XX/XX/XXXX: XX/XX/XXXX late, XX/XX/XXXX late. \n\nI am still waiting to see how the XXXX reporting is affecting my credit scores. \n\nI received a letter dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, from XXXX XXXX XXXX   which states, '' We discovered a processing issue that affected our credit reporting. We apologize for this issue and we want to share the steps we have taken to address it. '' \" When the deed in lieu was finalized, the closed date wasn't furnished to the consumer reporting agencies. \n\nWe've notified the consumer reporting agencies to include the correct date on your credit report. \n\nYou may reach out to the consumer credit reporting agencies. They can confirm that they completed the updates ... '' The problem with this XXXX XX/XX/XXXX letter is that is does not identify the CORRECTED DATE the Deed in Lieu was supposed to be finalized and updated with at the consumer reporting agencies. It is totally vague! I waited a few weeks from the time I received the XX/XX/XXXX letter ; to give the consumer reporting agencies to update their systems. \nThen I did follow up with the credit reporting agencies on of XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX was the only one with a XX/XX/XXXX update ( and I submit an incorrect update ). Experian 's last update was XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX 's last update was XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nIt was at this point in XX/XX/XXXX that I began disputes with the three main credit bureaus and also contacted XXXX directly to try and resolve this issue. \n\nI was put in contact with a Mr. XXXX XXXX, Executive Resolution Specialist, Customer Care and Recovery Group ( Phone : XXXX ext XXXX ) to act as my liaison through my dispute process with XXXX. \n\nI sent XXXX a fax request an update to reflect no missing payments to all of the consumer credit reporting agencies on XX/XX/XXXX. ( See attached Fax dated XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nI ended up receiving a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX from XXXX XXXX, Senior Vice President, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. It stated they had received my inquiry and their goal would be to try and and provide a response by XX/XX/XXXX. ( See attached letter dated XX/XX/XXXX ) During the interval of time between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ; I had several conversations with Mr. XXXX ( some heated ones ) in regards to the status of my credit reporting dispute. We were unable to see eye-to-eye. I received XXXX response to my dispute the evening of XX/XX/XXXX, from Mr. XXXX via email. It was less than satisfactory, in my opinion. ( see attached letter dated XX/XX/XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-04-11T06:21:06.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3208554","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2019-04-11T06:21:02.000Z","state":"UT","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":["We looked into <em>selling</em> our XXXX house in XX/XX/XXXX, but would have been severely under water. We were able to find renters from XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX ; when the renters received military PCS orders. We revaluated the option of <em>selling</em> ; but the market had not improved. We were able to sign new renters to a short-term 6 month <em>lease</em> in XX/XX/XXXX."]},"sort":[8.251581,"3208554"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3208553","_score":8.251581,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I believe XXXX XXXX XXXX is incorrectly reporting overdue/late payments on a home mortgage listed on all of credit bureaus. I base this belief on the following information. \n\nI owned a home in XXXX XXXX in XXXX of XXXX, when I was diagnosed with a life threatening illness which left me XXXX and unemployable. My wife and our family were required to relocate to XXXX to obtain employment capable of sustaining our family. \n\nWe looked into selling our XXXX house in XX/XX/XXXX, but would have been severely under water. We were able to find renters from XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX ; when the renters received military XXXX XXXX. We revaluated the option of selling ; but the market had not improved. We were able to sign new renters to a short-term 6 month lease in XX/XX/XXXX. In the XXXX of XXXX, those renters became unreliable and we decided to move to a month-to-month rental with them ; while listing the house for sale at the same time. There was not one single offer at all on the home for 6+ months. The 2nd set of renters gave their 30 day notice to move out at the beginning XX/XX/XXXX. \nAt the beginning of XX/XX/XXXX, [ After consultation with our realtor, the Veterans Administration ( VA ), and XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX ) ], we initiated the process of a Deed-In-Lieu ( DIL ) with both the VA and XXXX. I have attached the following : 1 ) The formal request letter to XXXX dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, 2 ) an email dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX documenting XXXX representative XXXX XXXX confirmation that my wife and I had submitted all required paperwork necessary to begin processing our DIL request, 3 ) An email dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX from VA representative XXXX XXXX confirming XXXX had completed an appraisal of the XXXX XXXX house on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX with an appraised value of XXXX, The renters moved out of the house at the end of XX/XX/XXXX and the home was vacant since that time. We continued to pay the monthly mortgage due ( on-time ) for both months of XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. Money was getting tight while paying two mortgages on my wifes income and my retirement/XXXX pay. \n\nIn early XX/XX/XXXX ; we received a Notice of Approval for a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure Letter from XXXX dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX with a lot of information. The main points of concern were, Conditions that must be met You and all other occupants must vacate your property and the title must be clear and marketable by XX/XX/XXXX, the vacate date. Understand that any personal belongings left after XX/XX/XXXX, the vacate date become the property of XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, Transfer/closing To complete the transfer of ownership of your home back to the owner of your mortgage, you must sign and complete all required documents provided to you by a third-party attorney, or title company acting on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. \n\nOn XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ; we signed, dated, and faxed back our agreement to the terms of the approval for the Deed-in-Lieu to XXXX. Furthermore ; I phoned Mr. XXXX XXXX, Home Preservation Specialist, XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, phone : XXXX Ext XXXX. To inform him that the house was already vacant with all personal property removed and in marketable condition on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ; there was no need to wait until XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nWe did not have sufficient funds in reserve to pay for our XXXX  home 's XX/XX/XXXX mortgage and our XXXX home 's XX/XX/XXXX mortgage payment. It was my understanding ( after my phone conversations with Mr XXXX ) that once we vacated the XXXX home ( for purposes we are discussing here ) on the XXXX mandated Vacate Date of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ... The House and ALL personal property with the house ; became the property of XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; as per their letter dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. At which point, we were not responsible for further mortgage payments. ( This is due in part to the fact it was a VA backed mortgage, and Lenders can not report mortgage payments as being late until the XXXX of the month on VA backed mortgages ). \n\nIn this case, I would only have missed the XX/XX/XXXX mortgage payment on the XXXX   house. I should not be showing as late on any following months as I was no longer in possession of the house. It doesn't make sense to be held financially responsible for thousands of dollars for three additional months ; for a home you were required to vacate for those months. \n\nIt appears from an internet search on the property sales of the home, XXXX eventually sold the house on XX/XX/XXXX for {$200000.00} ( see attached XXXX search from XX/XX/XXXX ). In addition, the Veterans Administration paid out approximately {$39000.00} and change to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, to cover the deficiency balance between what was owed after the Deed in Lieu and the sale price on XX/XX/XXXX. So it appears that XXXX XXXX ended up recouping a total of {$240000.00} for the XXXX   house. Which is pretty much a break even for them ; if not more than what I actually owed at the time of the Deed in Lieu. \n\nWhich brings up the question ; was XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, dragging this process out so that I could not afford to keep up with dual mortgage payments. In order for them to be able to collect the deficiency balance from the VA? In the XXXX letter dated XX/XX/XXXX it states that if I was able to meet all of the conditions stated in the letter ... '' and the mortgage is released, the investor ( and other interested parties ) waives its right to seek a deficiency balance under the mortgage note and/or related documents. '' My main concern, at this point, is the fact that I know have to pursue a purchase of a new build home which is more ADA compliant for myself, and an aging parent. In order to restore my full VA home loan entitlement, I had to repay the Veterans Administration the full amount it had to payout to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX.. A total repayment on my part of the full {$39000.00} and change in the last 30 days. I can provide documentation of payment to the VA if requested. So, I have absolutely no outstanding federal debts, or obligations tied to this mortgage. \n\nI understand that the Deed in Lieu will be reflected on my credit report. The issue I am debating is how XXXX is reporting the late payment status with the Equifax, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX credit bureaus. I have attached copies from the first three bureaus which were pulled on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. I am waiting on a mailed report from XXXX. \n\nThe Equifax payment status is reflecting, \" At least 120 days, or more than four payments past due. ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ), but the payment history is reflecting all current from XXXX XXXX. \n\nThe XXXX payment status is reflecting, \" Credit grantor received deed for collatoral in lieu of foreclosure on a defaulted mortgage '' ( updated XXXX XXXX ), and the payment history is reflecting XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX late, XX/XX/XXXX60 Late, XXXX 90 Late, XX/XX/XXXX Negative. \n\nThe XXXX  Payment status is relecting, \" 120 days past due '' ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ), and the payment history is reflecting XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX30 late, XX/XX/XXXX 60 late. \n\nI am still waiting to see how the XXXX reporting is affecting my credit scores. \n\nI received a letter dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, from XXXX XXXX XXXX which states, '' We discovered a processing issue that affected our credit reporting. We apologize for this issue and we want to share the steps we have taken to address it. '' \" When the deed in lieu was finalized, the closed date wasn't furnished to the consumer reporting agencies. \n\nWe've notified the consumer reporting agencies to include the correct date on your credit report. \n\nYou may reach out to the consumer credit reporting agencies. They can confirm that they completed the updates ... '' The problem with this XXXX XX/XX/XXXX letter is that is does not identify the CORRECTED DATE the Deed in Lieu was supposed to be finalized and updated with at the consumer reporting agencies. It is totally vague! I waited a few weeks from the time I received the XXXX XX/XX/XXXX letter ; to give the consumer reporting agencies to update their systems. \nThen I did follow up with the credit reporting agencies on of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. Equifax was the only one with a XXXX update ( and I submit an incorrect update ). XXXX  's last update was XXXX XXXX. XXXX 's last update was XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nIt was at this point in XXXX that I began disputes with the three main credit bureaus and also contacted XXXX directly to try and resolve this issue. \n\nI was put in contact with a Mr. XXXX XXXX, Executive Resolution Specialist,  Customer Care and XXXX XXXX ( Phone : XXXX ext XXXX ) to act as my liaison through my dispute process with XXXX. \n\nI sent XXXX a fax request an update to reflect no missing payments to all of the consumer credit reporting agencies on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. ( See attached Fax dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nI ended up receiving a letter dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX from XXXX XXXX, Senior Vice President, XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. It stated they had received my inquiry and their goal would be to try and and provide a response by XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. ( See attached letter dated XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ) During the interval of time between XXXX XXXX and XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ; I had several conversations with Mr. XXXX ( some heated ones ) in regards to the status of my credit reporting dispute. We were unable to see eye-to-eye. I received XXXX response to my dispute the evening of XX/XX/XXXX, from Mr. XXXX via email. It was less than satisfactory, in my opinion. ( see attached letter datedXX/XX/XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-04-11T06:21:06.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3208553","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2019-04-11T06:21:02.000Z","state":"UT","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Account status incorrect"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["We looked into <em>selling</em> our XXXX house in XX/XX/XXXX, but would have been severely under water. We were able to find renters from XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX ; when the renters received military XXXX XXXX. We revaluated the option of <em>selling</em> ; but the market had not improved. We were able to sign new renters to a short-term 6 month <em>lease</em> in XX/XX/XXXX."]},"sort":[8.251581,"3208553"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3209120","_score":8.213791,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"I believe XXXX XXXX XXXX  is incorrectly reporting overdue/late payments on a home mortgage listed on all of credit bureaus. I base this belief on the following information.\n\nI owned a home in XXXX XXXX   in XX/XX/XXXX, when I was diagnosed with a XXXX XXXX illness which left me XXXX and unemployable. My wife and our family were required to relocate to XXXX to obtain employment capable of sustaining our family. \n\nWe looked into selling our XXXX house in XX/XX/XXXX, but would have been severely under water. We were able to find renters from XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX ; when the renters received military PCS orders. We revaluated the option of selling ; but the market had not improved. We were able to sign new renters to a short-term 6 month lease in XX/XX/XXXX. In the XX/XX/XXXX, those renters became unreliable and we decided to move to a month-to-month rental with them ; while listing the house for sale at the same time. There was not one single offer at all on the home for 6+ months. The 2nd set of renters gave their 30 day notice to move out at the beginning XX/XX/XXXX. \nAt the beginning of XX/XX/XXXX, [ After consultation with our realtor, the Veterans Administration ( VA ), and XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX ) ], we initiated the process of a Deed-In-Lieu ( DIL ) with both the VA and XXXX. I have attached the following : 1 ) The formal request letter to XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX, 2 ) an email dated XX/XX/XXXX documenting XXXX representative XXXX XXXX confirmation that my wife and I had submitted all required paperwork necessary to begin processing our DIL request, 3 ) An email dated XX/XX/XXXX from VA representative XXXX XXXX confirming XXXX had completed an appraisal of the XXXX XXXX house on XX/XX/XXXX with an appraised value of XXXX, The renters moved out of the house at the end of XX/XX/XXXX and the home was vacant since that time. We continued to pay the monthly mortgage due ( on-time ) for both months of XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. Money was getting tight while paying two mortgages on my wifes income and my retirement/disability pay. \n\nIn early XX/XX/XXXX ; we received a Notice of Approval for a Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure Letter from XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX with a lot of information. The main points of concern were, Conditions that must be met You and all other occupants must vacate your property and the title must be clear and marketable by XX/XX/XXXX, the vacate date. Understand that any personal belongings left after XX/XX/XXXX, the vacate date become the property of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, Transfer/closing To complete the transfer of ownership of your home back to the owner of your mortgage, you must sign and complete all required documents provided to you by a third-party attorney, or title company acting on behalf of XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. \n\nOn XX/XX/XXXX ; we signed, dated, and faxed back our agreement to the terms of the approval for the Deed-in-Lieu to XXXX. Furthermore ; I phoned Mr. XXXX XXXX, Home Preservation Specialist, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, phone : XXXX Ext XXXX. To inform him that the house was already vacant with all personal property removed and in marketable condition on XX/XX/XXXX ; there was no need to wait until XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nWe did not have sufficient funds in reserve to pay for our XXXX   home 's XX/XX/XXXX mortgage and our XXXX  home 's XX/XX/XXXX mortgage payment. It was my understanding ( after my phone conversations with Mr XXXX ) that once we vacated the XXXX home ( for purposes we are discussing here ) on the XXXX mandated Vacate Date of XX/XX/XXXX ... The House and ALL personal property with the house ; became the property of XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX ; as per their letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. At which point, we were not responsible for further mortgage payments. ( This is due in part to the fact it was a VA backed mortgage, and Lenders can not report mortgage payments as being late until the XXXX of the month on VA backed mortgages ). \n\nIn this case, I would only have missed the XX/XX/XXXX mortgage payment on the XXXX house. I should not be showing as late on any following months as I was no longer in possession of the house. It doesn't make sense to be held financially responsible for thousands of dollars for three additional months ; for a home you were required to vacate for those months. \n\nIt appears from an internet search on the property sales of the home, XXXX eventually sold the house on XX/XX/XXXX for {$200000.00} ( see attached XXXX search from XX/XX/XXXX ). In addition, the Veterans Administration paid out approximately {$39000.00} and change to XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, to cover the deficiency balance between what was owed after the Deed in Lieu and the sale price on XX/XX/XXXX. So it appears that XXXX XXXX ended up recouping a total of {$240000.00} for the XXXX   house. Which is pretty much a break even for them ; if not more than what I actually owed at the time of the Deed in Lieu. \n\nWhich brings up the question ; was XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, dragging this process out so that I could not afford to keep up with dual mortgage payments. In order for them to be able to collect the deficiency balance from the VA? In the XXXX letter dated XX/XX/XXXX it states that if I was able to meet all of the conditions stated in the letter ... '' and the mortgage is released, the investor ( and other interested parties ) waives its right to seek a deficiency balance under the mortgage note and/or related documents. '' My main concern, at this point, is the fact that I know have to pursue a purchase of a new build home which is more ADA compliant for myself, and an aging parent. In order to restore my full VA home loan entitlement, I had to repay the Veterans Administration the full amount it had to payout to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX.. A total repayment on my part of the full {$39000.00} and change in the last 30 days. I can provide documentation of payment to the VA if requested. So, I have absolutely no outstanding federal debts, or obligations tied to this mortgage. \n\nI understand that the Deed in Lieu will be reflected on my credit report. The issue I am debating is how XXXX is reporting the late payment status with the XXXX, Transunion, XXXX, and XXXX credit bureaus. I have attached copies from the first three bureaus which were pulled on XX/XX/XXXX. I am waiting on a mailed report from XXXX. \n\nThe XXXX payment status is reflecting, \" At least 120 days, or more than four payments past due. ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ), but the payment history is reflecting all current from XX/XX/XXXX-XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nThe XXXX  payment status is reflecting, \" Credit grantor received deed for collatoral in lieu of foreclosure on a defaulted mortgage '' ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ), and the payment history is reflecting XX/XX/XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX 30 late, XX/XX/XXXX 60 Late, XX/XX/XXXX 90 Late, XX/XX/XXXX Negative. \n\nThe Transunion Payment status is relecting, \" 120 days past due '' ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ), and the payment history is reflecting XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX 30 late, XX/XX/XXXX 60 late. \n\nI am still waiting to see how the XXXX reporting is affecting my credit scores. \n\nI received a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, from XXXX XXXX XXXX   which states, '' We discovered a processing issue that affected our credit reporting. We apologize for this issue and we want to share the steps we have taken to address it. '' \" When the deed in lieu was finalized, the closed date wasn't furnished to the consumer reporting agencies. \n\nWe've notified the consumer reporting agencies to include the correct date on your credit report. \n\nYou may reach out to the consumer credit reporting agencies. They can confirm that they completed the updates ... '' The problem with this XX/XX/XXXX letter is that is does not identify the CORRECTED DATE the Deed in Lieu was supposed to be finalized and updated with at the consumer reporting agencies. It is totally vague! I waited a few weeks from the time I received the XX/XX/XXXX letter ; to give the consumer reporting agencies to update their systems. \nThen I did follow up with the credit reporting agencies on of XX/XX/XXXX. XXXX was the only one with a XX/XX/XXXX update ( and I submit an incorrect update ). XXXX 's last update was XX/XX/XXXX. Trans-Union 's last update was XX/XX/XXXX. \n\nIt was at this point in XX/XX/XXXX that I began disputes with the three main credit bureaus and also contacted XXXX directly to try and resolve this issue. \n\nI was put in contact with a Mr. XXXX XXXX, Executive Resolution Specialist, Customer Care and Recovery Group ( Phone : XXXX ext XXXX ) to act as my liaison through my dispute process with XXXX. \n\nI sent XXXX a fax request an update to reflect no missing payments to all of the consumer credit reporting agencies on XX/XX/XXXX. ( See attached Fax dated XX/XX/XXXX ). \n\nI ended up receiving a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX from XXXX XXXX, Senior Vice President, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. It stated they had received my inquiry and their goal would be to try and and provide a response by XX/XX/XXXX. ( See attached letter dated XX/XX/XXXX ) During the interval of time between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ; I had several conversations with Mr. XXXX ( some heated ones ) in regards to the status of my credit reporting dispute. We were unable to see eye-to-eye. I received XXXX response to my dispute the evening of XX/XX/XXXX, from Mr. XXXX via email. It was less than satisfactory, in my opinion. ( see attached letter dated XX/XX/XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2019-04-11T06:21:06.000Z","issue":"Incorrect information on your report","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"XXXXX","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3209120","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2019-04-11T06:21:02.000Z","state":"UT","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":["We looked into <em>selling</em> our XXXX house in XX/XX/XXXX, but would have been severely under water. We were able to find renters from XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX ; when the renters received military PCS orders. We revaluated the option of <em>selling</em> ; but the market had not improved. We were able to sign new renters to a short-term 6 month <em>lease</em> in XX/XX/XXXX."]},"sort":[8.213791,"3209120"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"3599318","_score":7.5355406,"_source":{"product":"Mortgage","complaint_what_happened":"In XXXX, I purchased a house in XXXX XXXX, NY, which I believed would be my home for the rest of my life. The trouble began in XXXX when the economy crashed, I lost three jobs within a few months and I had to finance all medical payments for my brother in XXXX after a 'plane crash. The following is a timeline of the events occurring during my 12-YEAR ATTEMPT AND FAILURE TO GET A LOAN MODIFICATION. \n\nMY COMPLAINT IS AGAINST FAY SERVICING, which took over the loan after XXXX, then XXXX XXXX. \n\nMY COMPLAINT : On XX/XX/XXXX, the judge in XXXX County ordered the foreclosure and sale of the property. It had taken Fay Servicing an entire year to set the auction date, mainly because they had neglected to meet deadlines for properly advertising the property in local newspapers in XXXX. Meanwhile, they charged me all the extra interest and fees for an entire year, when the delay was due to their own incompetence, not mine. \n\n1. I have resided at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, NY XXXX since XXXX. My efforts to come to some sort of resolution with XXXX/XXXX XXXX began in XXXX, XXXX and have continued since then with little or no progress whatsoever. For the purposes of this document, since XXXX was taken over by XXXX XXXX, I refer only to the Bank, which is understood to be XXXX at the start of this procedure, and XXXX XXXX as of XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n2. I have been asked to submit the same documents ( proof of income, profit and loss statements, proof of employment, hardship letters, utilities bills, rental leases, bank statements, tax returns, and more ) over and over and over again, and during the last court session with a referee in XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX, realized that the banks attorney and the banks representative, both of whom were present, had still been unable to correctly calculate my income, despite the fact that I had sent every document they requested time and time again. \n\n3. In XX/XX/XXXX I took a XXXX jumbo mortgage for {$940000.00} on XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. It was a 4-arm balloon mortgage and I was paying interest only for 4 years. I was told by the broker that the value of my house would always shoot up and I could always refinance when the 4-year period was up. \n\n4. In XXXX I lost two jobs and I had to pay for my brothers medical expenses after a plane crash ; I had to support my daughter who had XXXX problems ; and I had tenants who disappeared without paying rent. At this time I was paying the mortgage. \n\n5. On XX/XX/XXXX, I attempted to refinance my loan with a special deal offered by the Bank and sent all the documents they requested, including a hardship letter outlining the events of my life in XXXX. \n\n6. Instead of refinancing my loan, I was told I could apply for a modification and was asked to send documents to XXXX XXXX, applying for the modification with a reduction in principal to {$720000.00} and the remainder interest-free for 3 years. I was denied the modification. \n\n7. In XX/XX/XXXX I put my house at XXXX XXXX XXXX up for sale for {$950000.00} which was the amount of the loan at that time. Its value had plummeted from {$1.00} XXXX. \n\n8. I was in arrears on the mortgage for XXXX and XXXX. I wrote to the Bank with a hardship letter and asked for a loan deferment for those months only. I was denied the deferment, but I CONTINUED TO PAY THE MORTGAGE. \n\n9. On XX/XX/XXXX, I was told by the Bank to send in another application. I requested a 3-month deferral of the 2 months arrears and sent documents again. Yet again, even after being told to send in the application, I was DENIED. \n\n10. On XX/XX/XXXX, I was again asked to send in another application. I sent a new hardship letter and a request for deferral, along with all the documents. Once again I was DENIED. \n11. In XX/XX/XXXX I hired XXXX XXXX  XXXX, CA, for help, and paid them {$3500.00}. They assured me that they could get the modification. \n\n12. By XX/XX/XXXX I was still paying regular mortgage payments on my XXXX XXXX property. I applied again for a deferral of the outstanding 2 months mortgage payments. I also applied again for the loan modification program. I sent another hardship letter and sent the same documents again. I was again DENIED the deferral. \n\n13. On XX/XX/XXXX, after trying in vain to reach XXXX XXXX   XXXX, I learned that it was a scam, and the company was being sued by the State Attorney General in CA. Of course, they had done nothing at all about my modification. \n\n14. In XX/XX/XXXX one of the loan counselors at the Bank told me to make a payment of {$4000.00} which I did. I then received a phone call from that counselor stating that it was not enough and I needed to pay another {$320.00}. I paid immediately. \n\n15. On XX/XX/XXXX, in a lengthy phone conversation with a Bank counselor, I was told that since I was three months in arrears, I was now eligible for the LOAN MITIGATION MORTGAGE ASSISTANCE PLAN. The loan counselor TOLD ME NOT TO MAKE ANY FURTHER PAYMENTS because I was already in pre-foreclosure and making payments would make me ineligible for the modification. I stopped all further payments just as I was told to do by the Banks counselor.\n\n16. XX/XX/XXXX I sent a letter to the Bank and another complete set of documents, as requested by the loan counselor. \n\n17. At the end of XXXX the Bank returned the checks for {$4000.00} and {$320.00} to me with no explanation. \n\n18. In XX/XX/XXXX I took XXXX XXXX XXXX off the market. Although the property was listed with a major realtor in the area, in 9 months, there had been not a single offer. \n\n19. On XX/XX/XXXX, unable to deal with the Bank on my own, I hired attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX. Who has been the Attorney of Record since then.\n\n20. On XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter from the Bank stating that they had never received documents from me and I appeared to be uninterested in a loan modification. They asked for more documents, which I sent. \n\n21. In XXXX, I had a conversation with XXXX XXXX, HAMP, at XXXX XXXX, who requested more documents. He explained to me that the bank has a new deadline every month, and that if no one at the bank has looked at my documents within that month, they become obsolete, and I must resend them with up-to-date bank account statements. \n22. On XX/XX/XXXX, I forwarded all my documents to my attorney who then forwarded all of these documents to XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX. \n\n23. On XX/XX/XXXX, despite sending all of the documents requested by the Bank several times over, I received a letter from them stating that my file had been closed due to non-receipt of documents. \n\n24. On XX/XX/XXXX I received a letter from the Bank denying my HAMP modification with the statement that my loan was too large for the HAMP program. \n\n25. On XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, although I had been denied the HAMP program, I received a letter from the Bank asking for the same documents again, which again were sent to the Bank for review. \n\n26. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from Loan Counseling at XXXX XXXX stating that their records indicated that I was not interested in any payment assistance a remarkable statement considering the number of phone calls I made and the number of times I sent large packets of documentation. At no point have I ever stated or indicated in any way whatsoever that I was and am not interested in mortgage relief and assistance. \n\n27. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent all of my documents again to the Bank to show that I was interested in assistance and a modification. \n\n28. On XX/XX/XXXX, right after sending them a whole package, I was sent a letter claiming that XXXX XXXX had not received all the documents I had sent, so I once again sent them everything they requested. \n\n29. In XXXX, XXXX, in addition to the false statements made by the bank, they served foreclosure papers to my residence ay XXXX XXXX XXXX. A s I was not present, the papers were delivered to my tenants despite the fact that they had already been instructed to send all correspondence to my attorney and not to my residence. My personal financial information was thus revealed to a third unrelated party, who then used this information to break their existing lease, causing me a huge loss of income. \n\n30. In XXXX, XXXX, I was out of the country on a working trip and had arranged to have all mail forwarded to a friend who would look out for anything from the Bank. She did not receive any mail at all from the Bank. On my return on XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from the Bank stating that they had been unable to reach me and were proceeding with the foreclosure. They took this measure although they had been instructed to send all correspondence to the Attorney of Record and not to me. I also learned that the Post office will not forward official mail from any bank, so the letter had been returned to the Bank. They interpreted this as being a lack of interest on my part. \n31. Even though I once again sent documents to the Bank as requested, I received yet another letter at the end of XXXX that the file had been closed because no documents had been received. \n\n32. On XX/XX/XXXX the Bank sent me another letter requesting more documents. I was asked to send the Profit and Loss statement for XXXX XXXX, which I did, although I had already sent it to the Bank numerous times. \n\n33. On XX/XX/XXXX, the Bank claimed that they had not received any documents, although they had been sent through counsel, as requested. \n\n34. On XX/XX/XXXX, although I had already been denied HAMP several months before, I received another letter from the Bank denying a HAMP modification for which I was no longer applying! \n\n35. On XX/XX/XXXX, I wrote again to the Bank requesting them to stop sending any correspondence to me and to direct everything to my counsel XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX. I confirmed that she was and still is - my attorney of record. \n\n36. Through counsel, I provided the Bank with the profit and loss statement for all my properties. \n\n37. At the end of XXXX/early XX/XX/XXXX, my counsel spoke to the loan counselor who confirmed that they had received all of my documents and everything was in order and the modification was ready to go to forward. \n\n38. In XXXX, XXXX I received a call from the Bank stating that I had been approved for a three ( 3 ) -month trial period, but had been not approved for the modification. They stated that I had to complete an interview over the phone to show eligibility for a new program that had just come into place. \n\n39. My Counsel conducted the interview for me as I was suffering from acute stress and didnt feel able to handle it properly. \n\n40. On XX/XX/XXXX, I was admitted to the emergency room at XXXX Hospital for XXXX  XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX XXXX due to the XXXX  Ive been experiencing for years as a result of this foreclosure issue. \n\n41. In XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from the Town of  XXXX informing me that, although required to pay the property taxes during this process, the bank had failed to pay the second half of the property taxes for the year. I was forced to spend long hours on the phone with the bank to get them to pay the taxes. \n\n42. On XX/XX/XXXX the Bank sent me a letter requesting documents ; I sent everything that was requested, including rental leases as proof of income. \n43. Despite the fact that the Bank had known for months that XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX had been retained as my attorney since XX/XX/XXXX, and they have been directed to correspond only with her, they continued to send correspondence to me. Yet again, I had to send the bank a letter explaining that all correspondence must go through my counsel, and that they can not send any mail to my address. \n\n44. In XX/XX/XXXX, I received a Class Action document against XXXX stating that as a Member of Class C, I am eligible for a permanent loan modification and a financial settlement, which must be granted by law. Nothing ever happened about this action and I received no further information. \n\n45. In XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from XXXX XXXX at the Bank requesting more updated documents. \n\n46. On XX/XX/XXXX I sent a new hardship letter along with every document requested. \n\n47. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent a letter to XXXX XXXX explaining my sources of income and why, as a XXXX XXXX  and XXXX XXXXXXXX, those sources often change as jobs and tenants change, but that my net income remains fairly stable. \n\n48. On XX/XX/XXXX, through counsel I sent more letters to the Bank as requested : Confirming that I pay tenants utilities bills at XXXX XXXX myself ; explaining that XXXX XXXX XXXX is based at my home office, XXXX XXXX XXXX ; Explaining continued hardship but improved finances. \n\n49. On XX/XX/XXXX, I received a letter from XXXX XXXX XXXX, representing XXXX XXXX, attempting to collect the full debt of {>= $1,000,000}. \n\n50. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent the Bank my documents again including but not limited to my profit and loss statement for XXXX XXXX and all the requested documents from my tenants, confirming their leases, as requested. \n\n51. On XX/XX/XXXX, I followed up with the Bank, confirming that my tenants reimburse me their share of my utilities bills. \n\n52. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent letters to the Bank confirming my employment at XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX XXXX, XXXX, as requested. \n\n53. Throughout this whole process, I continued to send copies of all deposits made to my bank account with a full explanation for each deposit, as requested. \n\n54. In XX/XX/XXXX, the Bank requested yet again that I send another Profit and Loss statement for XXXX XXXX, which I complied with and sent. \n\n55. In XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX sent me a letter asking for {$250000.00} to cure the default. \n\n56. In XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX yet again requested documents, which I sent through my counsel, including but not limited to : Social Security Award letter, XXXX XXXX  Award Letter ; Proof of Income for XXXX XXXX ; Profit and Loss for XXXX XXXX ; Proof of Income for XXXX XXXX XXXX ; 2 Months Bank Statements showing Social Security and Rental received ; Proof of Occupancy for Tenants and all leases. \n\n57. In XX/XX/XXXX, while I was out of the country, XXXX XXXX once again served my tenants with foreclosure papers, which included all my personal private financial information. For the second time, my tenants then used this to cease paying rent and I was forced to move forward with an eviction, suffering a loss of {$8000.00} in rent and {$2500.00} in legal costs. XXXX XXXX had been instructed multiple times not to serve me or my tenants at my residence, but to serve my Attorney on file. XXXX XXXX continued to ignore my requests to have all correspondence sent to my attorney. \n\n58. On XX/XX/XXXX, my attorney XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX. XXXX   received a stipulation for discontinuing the first foreclosure action. \n\n59. For this foreclosure action I complied and sent all the documents yet again to XXXX XXXX immediately. \n\n60. On XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX, following another request from the Bank, I sent all the requested documents including but not limited to : XXXX pension award with letter of explanation TWICE in the same month ; 2 most recent bank statements, all pages ; XXXX tax return with certified profit and loss from the accountant for the rental income ; real estate owned ; schedule E for all properties ; profit and loss for film company 61. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent an explanation of expected total income in XXXX, as requested. \n\n62. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent a corrected interpretation of my bank statement and an updated hardship letter, as requested. \n\n63. In late XX/XX/XXXX, I was requested to send the same documents that I had already provided in XXXX. Once again, I sent, as requested : leases, bank statements, XXXX tax return, etc. \n\n64. In XXXX, XXXX, the tax assessment of XXXX XXXX XXXX showed the assessed value had been reduced from {>= $1,000,000} to {$850000.00}. \n\n65. On XX/XX/XXXX, as requested, I again sent all details of expenses for my properties, such as insurance and taxes for each property ; latest bank statements with XXXX XXXX  and Social Security deposits ; Profit & Loss for XXXX XXXX XXXX from XXXX XXXX - XX/XX/XXXX ; Schedule of Real Estate Owned ; Principal, Interest, Taxes and Insurance along with Gross Monthly Rental received and mortgage loan balances. \n66. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent the schedule for XXXX XXXX, XXXX as requested by the Bank. ( One property is owned by this LLC,  which is in turned owned by the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). \n\n67. On XX/XX/XXXX, the first foreclosure settlement conference took place, which I attended with my counsel. \n\n68. During that conference my counsel and I were again asked to submit a whole package of documents. \n\n69. On XX/XX/XXXX, my Counsel submitted all the documents requested. \n\n70. On XX/XX/XXXX I was informed by Plaintiffs counsel they had all the documents. \n\n71. After submission of all the documents, on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX once again requested the exact same documents that had just been submitted with explanations. \n\n72. XX/XX/XXXX, my counsel sent an email explaining everything, pointing out those documents that had already been sent, and re-sending some documents as well. \n\n73. The Bank blatantly ignored the documents which had been sent along with full explanations by my counsel ; they continued to request the same documents yet again, including documents for a property that I did not own and were informed accordingly by my counsel. \n\n74. On XX/XX/XXXX, the second conference in this matter took place. The referee stated that the bank could not request any further documents and set a date for a third conference, ordering a bank representative to be present. The referee was disturbed by the banks failure to review the documents sent, and their failure to even review the letter sent by my counsel. \n\n75. On XX/XX/XXXX, at a third conference, the banks attorney was present, but the banks representative did not attend, although he had been ordered to appear. The bank requested more documents and in an act of good faith, I consented to provide a few more documents so that my case could finally reach a decision on the modification. \n\n76. The referee ordered a fourth and last conference at which the banks representative was ordered to be present. \n\n77. On XX/XX/XXXX, we held the fourth and final conference. The attorney and banks representative were both present. \n\n78. Before we even entered the conference room, the banks representative informed me that they could not give me a modification because my income is too low. \n\n79. During the conference, I learned that the Bank had based their calculations on the income from only one property, instead of using the total income from three properties ( and other sundry income ), which I had provided to the bank multiple times. They had not calculated the income correctly, despite the hundreds of documents that they had requested and received over a period of more than FIVE YEARS.\n\n80. I informed the Bank representative that they had calculated my income incorrectly. He confirmed this by showing me the income statement for only THREE MONTHS for ONLY ONE PROPERTY, which I had previously sent among all the other documents, on which he had based his calculations. He was not even aware that I have three income-producing properties, or he was deliberately ignoring this fact. It is absolutely evident from every document they have requested, and from all tax returns of the past 5 years. \n\nWe appealed the case. It was denied again because the judge stated that we had brought no new information to the proceedings. Our argument was that the original information had not been properly assessed. \nThe Judge did observe that the bank had not issued me with the correct 90-day warning re foreclosure, and a hearing about this is scheduled for XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n81. A trial was set for XX/XX/XXXX, to address the issue of an INCORRECT 90-DAY NOTICE OF FORECLOSURE LETTER from XXXX XXXX, which came directly from the bank instead of from their attorney and which was not delivered to me correctly. At the court, however, two ladies appeared as representatives of XXXX XXXX one a direct link to the bank, the other a representative of the banks attorneys, XXXX XXXX. Both ladies seemed eager to cooperate and promised to ensure that the bank would react in good faith. The Judge set a series of deadlines for compliance, as follows : XX/XX/XXXX I was to send in all requested documents for a full modification package, as listed by the banks representatives. Plaintiff was to review and request missing documents by XXXX. Defendant to provide missing documents by XX/XX/XXXX. Plaintiff to make decision re modification by XX/XX/XXXX. Defendant will contribute escrow advance amount XXXX to cover property taxes paid by the bank ). Loss mitigation package to be submitted by Defense counsel to Plaintiffs counsel, XXXX XXXX. Hearing and compliance conference set for XXXX. \n\n82. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent all documents requested by the bank to XXXX XXXX via a XXXX  link. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent the remaining documents via XXXX. XXXX forward these docs to XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX XXXX at XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, and was directed to send them to a XXXX XXXX. XXXX received confirmation of receipt. \n\n83. On XX/XX/XXXX, one day after the courts deadline, XXXX received an email from XXXX XXXX at XXXX stating : I just wanted to give you an heads up that I know our MDL was due yesterday but there was an oversight by my previous clerk and we are working feverishly today to get an update. Ill have a MDL as soon as possible, and since we do not have to be back until XXXX, would be fine with extending our stipulation if need be. \n84. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX sent a MISSING DOCUMENTS letter indicating that they had not received ANY of the documents I had submitted to XXXX and that she had submitted to XXXX in a timely manner. \n\n85. On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX responded : XXXX, i have a huge problem with the attached missing documents letter. It indicates no package was submitted and all of the documents marked not yet received were in fact included in the original submission, sent on time. Not only has your client not complied with the deadline to review the documents and issue a missing documents letter, when they finally do send a missing documents letter, it clearly indicates they did not review the package submitted as it shows every single document is missing and not yet received. I will need to bring all of this to the courts attention and I must say I am extremely disappointed as it was my understanding your office and the bank representative assured us you would actually stay on top of this review. \n85. On XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX I sent emails to XXXX XXXX asking her to find out when docs were sent from XXXX to XXXX XXXX. I also sent XXXX my response to the Missing Documents letter asking her to forward it to XXXX. Despite several phone calls to her office to ensure that she had received my response, I finally learned that XXXX was absent due to the death of her father. I tried to reach an assistant to no avail. Twice, I also tried to reach both XXXX XXXX at XXXX ( as XXXX XXXX was absent and he had forwarded the Missing Docs letter ) and XXXX XXXX, my case worker at XXXX XXXX Home Preservation Division who had signed the Missing Docs letter. I never received any response from either person. \nA few days later, I received a reprimand from XXXX XXXX for having tried to reach him directly. \n86. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent my response to the Missing Docs letter with an explanation and details of the XXXX folder containing the requested updated documents to the following : XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX all at XXXX. \n\nUpdated docs included : Updated tenant leases ; updated tax award letter ; updated XXXX XXXX  award letter ; Deed and Title for XXXX XXXX ; invoices addressed to XXXX XXXX as proof of residence ; my letter of response to the Missing Docs document, with signature page. \n\n87. On XX/XX/XXXX, I attended court with XXXX XXXX. The banks representative and attorney were present, but the judge was absent. We had a conference in which I was able to state my case. I gave both representatives this timeline as proof of the number of years and incidents that have been recorded to date. The banks representatives admitted that THEY ARE UNABLE TO DEAL WITH XXXX  AS THEY DO NOT KNOW HOW TO USE IT but they neglected to inform XXXX XXXX, choosing instead to make ME guilty of not sending the requested documents. We again agreed to a series of deadlines as follows : The bank requested further documents which I was to provide by XX/XX/XXXX. They were to review and I was to send further documents if requested by XX/XX/XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, the bank was to reach a decision. We are to appear in Court on XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n88. On XX/XX/XXXX ( a few days late as I was not aware of the deadline on the XXXX ) I sent documents to XXXX XXXX as requested, via XXXX : 4506-T More bank statements Letter explaining that XXXX XXXX XXXX was purchased with cash no mortgage 89. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent the same documents to XXXX XXXX as email attachments. \n\n90. On XX/XX/XXXX, I sent documents requested by the bank after review as follows : P and L for XXXX XXXX, XXXX Revised 4506 T Letter explaining why there is no 44506-T for XXXX XXXX, only for XXXX XXXX XXXX. On XX/XX/XXXX, the deadline for a decision, no communication was received from the bank, nor on any day afterwards. \n\n91. On XX/XX/XXXX, we received a HAMP application from XXXX XXXX at XXXX XXXX the exact same application that I had submitted in XXXX, for which I was deemed ineligible. More documents were requested. XXXX responded to the banks attorney re the HAMP application, asking if this was a joke 92. At XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX was in her car preparing to drive to Court in XXXX  when she received a phone call from the banks representative, who was ALREADY AT COURT, even though our date was for XXXX. He had already requested a further postponement of the case. \n\n93. On XX/XX/XXXX, I asked XXXX if we could press the bank for a decision since they had received all the documentation, and would have had to provide a decision by XX/XX/XXXX in any case. However, the courts were closed for two weeks for XXXX and the date of XX/XX/XXXX was the earliest that could be obtained. \n\n94. A few days before the Court date, we again received notice that it had been postponed to XX/XX/XXXX. \n\n95. On XX/XX/XXXX I received a statement from XXXX XXXX outlining the outstanding debts. \n\n96. Since XX/XX/XXXX, the saga has continued. The mortgage was taken over by FAY SERVICING in XXXX. I continued to try to receive a loan modification to no avail. \n\n97. My partner, Mr. XXXX XXXX, offered to be a co-borrower on a refinance and was refused because he was not actually resident on the premises. \n\n98. In a further court hearing, it was determined that I was just {$400.00} a month short of the required amount for a loan modification. \n\n99. In XX/XX/XXXX, I put the property up for sale with two top realtors. After 18 months there were no offers at all, although the property is in the XXXX  and in an excellent location and in great condition. I did not want to lower the sales price below the debt owed so that I could pay off the debt. \n\n100. On XX/XX/XXXX the judge ordered foreclosure and sale, but Fay servicing neglected to follow proper procedure for the sale. \n\n101.Since the property did not sell, I offered Fay Servicing a very reasonable short sale of {>= $1,000,000} when the debt was {>= $1,000,000}. They refused the offer. \n\n101. The property was set for auction on XX/XX/XXXX. I attended and was perplexed as there seemed to be no officials and no buyers. The auction had been postponed but no one had thought it necessary to let me know. \n\n102. On XX/XX/XXXX, my home of 33 years was auctioned off and sold for {>= $1,000,000}, ie LESS THAN THE SHORTSALE AMOUNT I HAD OFFERED. Not one single person was present at the auction, and I am convinced that the buyer had INSIDE INFORMATION as he is just another investor. So in fact, the bank DID take a short sale. That investor now has the property back on the market for the exact same price that I had in XXXX. It was not bought as a home for a family but ONLY as an investment with a quick turnover.","date_sent_to_company":"2020-04-09T08:19:07.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay mortgage","sub_product":"Conventional home mortgage","zip_code":"875XX","tags":"Older American","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"3599318","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Fay Servicing, LLC","date_received":"2020-04-09T06:52:53.000Z","state":"NM","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":null},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["In XXXX I lost two jobs and I had to pay for my brothers medical expenses after a plane crash ; I had to support my daughter who had XXXX <em>problems</em> ; and I had tenants who disappeared without paying rent. At this time I was paying the mortgage. \n\n5. On XX/XX/XXXX, I attempted to refinance my <em>loan</em> with a special deal offered by the Bank and sent all the documents they requested, including a hardship letter outlining the events of my life in XXXX. \n\n6."]},"sort":[7.5355406,"3599318"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2680977","_score":6.962375,"_source":{"product":"Vehicle loan or lease","complaint_what_happened":"Okay just to be clear I have filed complaints since about 7 months ago with every federal, state, local,  house, goveneor, sheriff, chief, representatives and more I had sent out over 5000 emails,  an according t my XXXX bill I had made over 20,000 in the last two months alone. Denial letters from free legal services from missiouri and arkansas, denial from help from victiums of crimes special programs and denial from attorney generals and on and on and on. \n\nOk it kind of a long story it actually starts almost five months ago, lets just say since five months ago we have suffered hacking and scammers, and idenity theft and it was bad for a while we were  and are almosr 7000 in debt just from that alone not including everything on my credit record with is almost 70,000 which I thnk some is my student loans. Well after afew weeks the calmed down a bit.\nWell about a week  a month after that, I had to stop working because of my health being so XXXX so I havent worked in almost 4 months now and still waiting on XXXX to kick it.  \nWell we ended up having to get  another vehicle,  cause of my appointsments and hospital visits it wasnt working out with husbands shedule. And he was goning to lose his job if we kept at it\nSo on XX/XX/XXXX we finally got someone to give us a chance with a truck which my husband used for work sometimes.\nWell that was the first time XXXX XXXX lied to me, when they called me about being approved for sure I was told all we had to do was come and sign the papers and it was going to be XXXX  Dollars Down.  No more than that, I thought thank god,\nWell of course I still had not be released to go back to work yet not sure when I am going back honestly,  my health is XXXX XXXX, andy ways  about  a week of having the truck it started acting up they were very slow to respond abut the issue and it took  almost two weeks for them to actually do something about it.\n\nWell XX/XX/XXXX I told my husband since we were so far in debt with everything with the scamming and hacking that we was not going to have to file for bankcruptcy and I had researched online that we can file for a petition of affirmation of  automatitc stay of assets which would help keep the only assets we had\nWell I went online which since we had got hacked, and scammed and the idenity theft I had set up proxy, vpns, IP addresses,  and emails and everything it was that bad. \n\nWell I was online again looking for free legal help to fill the  paperwork out and were to get the forms from online frokm the district courst of missouri and I filled it all out the waviers for the courts cost and fees and everything else then was told that it  would be filed on XX/XX/XXXX and that afternoon was told go aheaed and send out to the dealerships and in a few days we finish the rest of the procedure and it was gonna cost like XXXX dollars well with me not working I had just got my last check and all  ihad left ws XXXX so I gave him that through online transfer. \n\nSo the next day XX/XX/XXXX at around XXXX we heard a tow truck outside and my husband went to look and their they were taking his truck, we had not received one call, one , text, or email or any notice that this was happening at all.   My husband jumped in my car and drove two hours away to talk to them to see what was going on and when he got there they \n\nTHE FINACE SIDE OF THE COMPANY TOLD HIM HE COULD HAVE THE TRUCK BACK IF HE PAID THEM XXXX FOR TOWING IT.   \nWELL WHY HE WAS OUT THERE I HAD GONE ONLINE AND FILIED OUT COMPLAINTS I KNOW THEY ARE IN THE WRONG FOR DOING THAT. \n\nWELL THAT SAME DAY I TALKED TO THE GM XXXX WHICH TOOK ME 8 TIMES TO GET HIM BECAUSE XXXX I THINK HER NAME WAS OR XXXX KEPT LYING TO ME WHEN I ASKE TO SPEAK TO THE GM SHE SAID SHE WAS AND THAT IS NOT HOW SHE INTRADUCED HERESLF ON THE PHONE WHEN ANSERING PLUS I HAD TALKE D TO HER MANY TIMES BEFORE.\n\nHAD TO GO THROUGH CUSTOMER SERVICE LINE AND ASK FOR GM FINALLY GOT  HIM XXXX\n\nAND HE SAID THAT BECAUSE FO THE COMPLAINTS I HAD SUBMITTED THATS WHY THEY TOOK THE TRUCK AND IT WAS BEING REVIEWED BY THEIR SUPPOSEDLY TEAM OF LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES. \n\nYET THEY TOLD MY HUSBAND THAT THEY RECEIVED THE PAPERS ABOUT THE BANK RUPTCY AND THAT IS THE REASON WHY THEY TOOKT THE TRUCK BACK.\n\nCONFLICTING STORIES THERE,  WELL SINCE THEN I HAVE BEEN ONLINE TRYING TO LEARN HOW TO UPGRADE TO EFILE WELL THAT WAS A WEEK WASTED TO COME AND FIND OUT I CANT WHEN I HAVE DOCUMENTS FROM ONLINE SHOWING AND STATING ON HOW YOU CAN IF YOU REPRESENTING YOURSELF PRO SE\n\nWELL IN THAT TIME THEY BARLY SPOKE TO ME THEY TALKED TO MY HUSBAND THOUGH.  WELL THRUSDAY HE TALKED TO THEM LATE EVENING  AND THEY TOLD HIM THAT IF I DROPPED THE LAWSUIT THAT THEY WOULD RETURN THE TRUCK BACK TO US AND WOULD BE CHARGED FOR THE TOWING\n\nFUNNY THING IS ABOUT THE WHOLE THING I NEVER FILED YET I GOT SOME HELP AND WE WERE HAVING SOMEONE SERVED A DEMAND LETTER WITH ONE OF THE BARGGININGS WAST TO RETURN THE TRUCK.\n\nSO APPARENTLY HE HAS BEEN TALKING TO XXXX, AND XXXX, AND XXXX AT XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX AR. XXXX XXXX\n\nWELL THE NEXT DAY I SENT VIA EMAIL AND ONLINE FAX TO HEADQUARTERS WELL WHAT THEY SHOW ONLINE AS HEADQUARTERS AND SENT TO THE XXXX NUMBER EMAIL EVEN THOUGH IST XXXX AR. XX/XX/XXXX EMAIL AS WELL. \n\n I  WLL ATTACH COPY OF THAT AS WELL, WELL DIDNT HEAR NOTHING AND MY HUSBAND ASKED ME TO CALL THEM SO  I DID STARTING AT XXXX XXXX TILL  ABOUT XXXX AT NIGHT WHEN I CALLED THEY HUNG UP, PUT ME ON HOLD FOREVER AND THEN HANG UP TAKE MESSAGE FOR XXXX AND SAID HE WAS BUSY AND DIDNT EVER CALL BACK AT ALL I CALLED EVERY NAME ON LIST TO CORP. OFFICE IN XXXX, IN AND LEFT MESSAGE STATING I SENT EMAIL EXKPLAING THE REASON WE WAS FILING AND THERE WAS NO LAWSUIT AND THAT ALL WE WANTED WAS WHAT WE ASKED FOR.   THEN  ABOUT XXXX XXXX XXXX FINALLY ANSERED THE DOOR HE \n\nSTATED TO ME HE TEXTED MY HUSBAD THAT MORING AND TOLD HIM THAT HE WOUDLNT KNOW TILL XXXX\nAND THAT HE MIGHT HAVE TO BE PUT INTO ANOTHER VEHICAL NOT THE TRUCK.\n\nNOW, I WAS VERY MAD SINCE FRIDAY I HAVE DONE NOTHING BUT RESEARCH AND RESEARCH AND I FOUND OUT A LOT OF THINGS \n\nWHICH ALL GO AGAINST OUR CIVIL RIGHTS, AND POOR WORK ETHICS ON THEIR POINT OF VEIW, \nNOW THEY TOLD MY HUSBAND THAT THE ONLY HE COULD HAVE HIS THINGS OUT OF THE CAR WAS TO GIVE BACK THE OTHER KEY .\n\nWELL LIKE I SAID I HVE RESEARCHED XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX AND I HAVE FOUND OUT A LOT ABOUT THIS COMPANY AND I ALSO HAVE AT LEAST OVER 25000 DOWNLOADS OF MISSIOURI,  ARKANSAS, AND XXXX  LAWS ON CIVIL RIGHS, CIVIL RIGHTS AND AUTOMOBILES AND CIVIL RIGHT AND REPOSSIONS AS WELL.\n\nI HAVE OVER 100 TABS SAVED ON PHONE AND LAPTOP AND DOCUMENTS ABOUIT THIS COMPANY, MANY LAWSUITS AND LOTS OF UNFAIR PRACTICES AND AND REPOSSESIONS AND MORE, \n\nI WILL ONLY SEND CERTAIN THINGS PRETAING TO THIS MOSTLY .\n\nEverything here I have got off their websites, contracts  as employees, share holders,  and more mainly going to focus on the problem at hand and I have read and downloaded all the law archives from Missouri, Arkansas, Indianan. I have read and downloaded the laws pertaining to civil rights, repossession and arbritaration laws as well and I  have downloaded the Byrider Franchising hand book 0n how they are to run the the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX stores the chains of commands policy they are to follow and more and I also have clips of the contract as well\nWHICH THE CONTRACT AND THEIR POLICYS CONTRADICT THEMSELVES AND THEY DID NOT FOLLOW ANY OF THE PROCEDURES ON CONTRACT OR HANDBOOK. Portioning to this mess.\n\nLike I mentioned before we were victims of crime again which was reported but of course due to lack of man power which was lied. XXXX  police officer said and time and no leads  cant do much about that problem at all, but the company XXXX XXXX would not even hear our story or didnt take any compassion to our situations.\n\n\nLISTED BELOW IS EVERYONE I HAD CALLED AND LEFT MESSAGES AND EMAILED AND FAXED LETTERS TO SEE ABOUT GETTING THIS CLEARED UP WITH OF COURSE NO RESPONSE FROM ANY OF THE MEMBERS WAS TOLD BY THE  EMPLOYEES OUT OF XXXX AR. XXXX XXXX THEY WERE NOT ALLOWED TO SPEAK TO US YET THEY CONTINUED COMMUICATION WITH MY HUSBAND NOT MUCH BUT MORE SO HIM THEN ME AND I AM THE BUYER\n\nSO ONLINE WHEN YOU LOOK UP MAIN HEADQUARTERS FOR XXXX XXXX THIS IS WHAT COMES UP //.\n\nXXXX XXXX\t\t\t\t\tAKA----XXXX \n\nXXXX AR XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX HEADQUARTERS              AFTER YOU REWORD THINGS COMES UP\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX IN XXXX\nPhone--XXXX XXXX XXXX\nFax--XXXX XXXX XXXX\nEmail--XXXX\n\nSO THE WEBSITE IT GIVES A LIST OF NAMES OF SUPPOSEDLY THE PEOPLE RUNNING THIS LOCATION::\nXXXX XXXX PRESIDENT-- LEFT 6 MESSAGES ON VOICEMAIL, XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXXXX/XX/XXXX\n\nXXXX XXXX--CONSUMER AFFAIRS SPECIALIST ( WHICH THAT IS WHAT I WAS TOLD WHO I NEEDED TO SPEAK WITH)---XX/XX/XXXX    LEFT 15 VOICE MAILS\n\nXXXX XXXX--DIRCTOR OF SALES--XX/XX/XXXX  LEFT 8 MESSAGES\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX-- XX/XX/XXXX  LEFT 4 VOICEMAILS\n\nXXXX XXXX-- LEFT 4 VOICEMAILS XX/XX/XXXX \nXXXX XXXX--XX/XX/XXXX LEFT 3 VOICEMAILS XXXX XXXX XXXX--XX/XX/XXXX LEFT 3 VOICEMAILS\n\nXXXX  XXXX--XX/XX/XXXX LEFT 5 VOICEMAILS XXXX XXXX--XX/XX/XXXX  LEFT 2 VOICEMAILS\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX--XX/XX/XXXX  LEFT 6 VOICEMAILS\n\nSUPPOSEDLY EMAIL FOR OFFICE IS ----XXXX  WHICH GOES TO XXXX AR.   AND CUSTOMER SERVICE EMAIL IS XXXX\nWHICH IM SURE GOES TO XXXX AR. LOCATION AS WELL\n\nTHAT WAS ALL DAY SATURDAY I TRIED CALLING CORP OFFICE AND ONLY SENT OUT ONCE THE EMAIL TO THE EMAILS ON WEBSITES AND FAXED TO THE FAX NUMBERS AS WELL\n\nXXXX \nXXXX AR XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nXXXX I THINK HE A GM XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX AND I THINK XXXX\n\nHAVE ALL SAID DIFFERENT STORIES TO ME WHEN AND IF THEY ANSWERED OR TOOK MY CALLS \n\nAND HAD TOLD MY HUSBAND MANY DIFFERENT STORIES AS WELL VERY CONFLICTING STORIES\n\n\n\nWELL I FOUND OUT\nXXXX CUSTOMER SERVICE IS LINKED TO BOTH PLACES AND TRANSFERS CALLS ONLY TO XXXX AR   I CALLED THEM 25 TIMES  XXXX\n\nSO I WAS MAD, MY HUSBAND WAS MAD CAUSE THEY KEEP LYING TO US AND TELLING US DIFFERENT STORIES.. SO I DID DIGGING AROUND ON EACH PERSON AND THE COMPANY ITSELF AND I DOWNLOAD ALL PUBLIC ARCHIEVES  OF THE LAWS FOR CONSUMERS AND BUSINESS AND ARBRITRATION LAWS AS WELL AND I WIL COPY AND PASTE WHAT I HAD SEND LINKS DOCUMENTS AND PICTURES TO BACK UP MY FINDINGS \n\nAND I ALSO CAME ACROSS THEIR FRANCISHING HAND BOOK ON HOW THEY ARE TO RUN THEIR BUSINESS AND HOW THEY TARGET PEOPLE WHO ARE FINIANCALLLY UNSTABLE AND LIE TO THEM AND CHARGING HOW MUCH INTERSET THEY WANT NO MORE THOUGH THAN  35% AND MORE I HAVE DOWNLOAD COMPLAINTS OF THINGS THEY HAVE DONE SIMILAR TO THIS AND NO BODY REALLY DONE MUCH\n\nI AM REQUESTING TWO THINGS AT THIS TIME\n\nFRIST IS THE TRUCK BACK WITH TITLE NO MORE LEASE AT ALL OR NEW TRUCK \n\nSECOND AND I WONT THIS IS A SUIT BROUGHT ON THEM AS WELL OR BEING DECEITFUL AND MISLEADING AND BREAKING LAWS AND MORE BAD BUSINESS JUDGEMENTS AS WELL.\n\nSO WHEN YOU XXXX XXXX  HEADDQUARTERS IT COMES UP XXXX IN AND THAT I FOUND LIKE I SAID GOES ROUTED TO XXXX  AR,\n\nI HAVE A PICTURE OF THAT, WHEN YOU ENTER THE WEBSITE AND PICK A LOCATON AND CHOOSE INDIANA  WELLL XXXX  IN LOCATION DONT COME UP HAVE PICTURE AS WELL.\n\n\nLIKE I SAID I DID A LOT OF DIGGING AROUND ON THESE PEOPLE I ACTUALLY HAVE HOME ADDRESSESS AND PHONE NMBERS HOME ONES AND CELLS AND SOCIAL MEDIA WEBSITES THEY CONNECTED TO AS WELL AND MUCH  MORE FAKE WEBSITES, NUMBERS GENERATED TO FULL CONSUMERS INTO BELIVING THEY CALLING CUSTOMER SERVICE BUT NOT THEY JUST CALLING THE STORE THEY HAVING A PROBLEM WITH AND GET TRANSFERRED AROUND FOUND ALSO THAT IF YOU GO TO \n\nXXXX---DIRECT WEBSITE AND MAKE A PAYMENT AND THEY DONT TELL YOU THIS AND I DONT TRUST IT AT ALL SO I DIDNT MAKE A PAYMENT IT TAKES YOU TO A THIRD PARTY WEBSITE NOT EVEN CALLED XXXX OR ANYTHING TO DO WITH XXXX WEBSITES.\n\nALSO FOUND OUT THAT XXXX XXXX IS NOT REGISTERED WITH THE FEDERAL BANK RESERVERS I CHECKED NOT ON THERE NOR IS BYRIDER OR XXXX OR SOME OF THE OTHER NAMES I TRIED TO ENTER AS WELL\n\nI WILL SUBMIT THAT ALL AS WELL. THEY ARE APPARENTLY REGISTERED AND IN.GOV WITH 4 DIFFERENT NUMBERS AS WELL AND DIFFERENT ADDRESSES AND NAMES AND CONTACTS WHICH I DID TRY TO REACH OUT TO AND NOTHING I WILL ATTACH ALL THAT AS WELL.  \n\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, FL, XXXX----XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)   XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, Florida XXXX (Address of Principal Executive Offices, Including Zip Code) (XXXX) XXXX (Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)    XXXX XXXX \n\n\nTHIS RIGHT HERE HIS JUST ONE OF THE REGISTRATION NUMBERS THEY HAVE NOT TO THE ADDRESS THAT THEY SAY IS CORP OFFICE HEADQUARTES DONT EVEN MATCH UP\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. is an entity registered at Indiana with company number XXXX. Company is incorporated onXX/XX/XXXX. Current status of the company is Merged. The company's agentis XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, IN, XXXX - XXXX, USA The company's secretaryis XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, IN, XXXX, USA The company's presidentis XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, IN, XXXX, USA\nCompany information\n\nFrom  \n\n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX IS THE SERVING AGENT WHOM I WOULD LIKE SERVED AND EVERYONE ELSE SERVED AS WELL THEY ALL LIE \n\nAgent\nName\tXXXX XXXX XXXX\nAddress\tXXXX XXXX XXXX., XXXX, IN, XXXX - XXXX, USA\nSecretary\nName\tXXXX XXXX XXXX\nAddress\tXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, IN, XXXX, USA\nP\n\nFrom  \n\n\nTHIS IS FROM PAGE 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS REVIEW \n\nThe Company utilizes its Loss Prevention and Recovery Department (the LPR) to perform on-site audits of branch compliance with \nCompany underwriting guidelines. XXXX audits Company branches on a schedule that is variable depending on the size of the branch, length of \ntime a branch has been open, current tenure of the Branch Manager, previous branch audit score and current and historical branch profitability. \nXXXX reports directly to the Accounting and Administrative Management of the Company. The Company believes that an independent review \nand audit of its branches that is not tied to the sales function of the Company is imperative in order to assure the information obtained is \nimpartial.  \n\nTHIS IS FROM PAGE 9 AS WELL CALLED MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT OF CONTRACTS\n\nThe Companys Management Information Services personnel maintain a number of reports to monitor compliance by customers with their \nobligations under Contracts and direct loans made by the Company. These reports may be accessed on a real-time basis throughout the \nCompany by management personnel, including Branch Managers and staff, at computer terminals located in the main office and each branch \noffice. These reports include delinquency aging reports, customer promises reports, vehicle information reports, purchase reports, dealer \nanalysis reports, static pool reports, and repossession reports.  \nA delinquency report is an aging report that provides basic information regarding each account and indicates accounts that are past due. The \nreport includes information such as the account number, address of the customer, home and work phone numbers of the customer, original term \nof the Contract, number of remaining payments, outstanding balance, due dates, date of last payment, number of days past due, scheduled \npayment amount, amount of last payment, total past due, and special payment arrangements or agreements.  \nAny account that is less than 120 days old is included on the delinquency report on the first day that the Contract is contractually past due. \nOnce an account becomes 30 days past due, repossession proceedings are implemented unless the customer provides the Company with an \nacceptable explanation for the delinquency and displays a willingness and the ability to make the payment, and commits to a plan to return the \naccount to current status. When an account is 60 days past due, the Company ceases recognition of income on the Contract and repossession \nproceedings are initiated. At 120 days delinquent, if the vehicle has not yet been repossessed, the account is written off. Once a vehicle has \nbeen repossessed, the related loan balance no longer appears on the delinquency report. Instead, the vehicle appears on the Companys \nrepossession report and is sold, either at auction or to an automobile dealer.  \n\nWhen an account becomes delinquent, the Company immediately contacts the customer to determine the reason for the delinquency and to \ndetermine if appropriate arrangements for payment can be made. If payment arrangements acceptable to the Company can be made, the \ninformation is entered in its database and is used to generate a Promises Report, which is utilized by the Companys collection staff for \naccount follow up.  \n\nThe Company prepares a repossession report that provides information regarding repossessed vehicles and aids the Company in disposing of \nrepossessed vehicles. In addition to information regarding the customer, this report provides information regarding the date of repossession, \ndate the vehicle was sold, number of days it was held in inventory prior to sale, year, make and model of the vehicle, mileage, payoff amount \non the Contract, XXXX book value, XXXX XXXX value, suggested sale price, location of the vehicle, original dealer and condition of the \nvehicle, as well as notes other information that may be helpful to the Company.  \nThe Company also prepares a dealer analysis report that provides information regarding each dealer from which it purchases Contracts. This \nreport allows the Company to analyze the volume of business done with each dealer and the terms on which it has purchased Contracts from \nsuch dealer.  \n\nThe Companys policy is to aggressively pursue legal remedies to collect deficiencies from customers. Oral requests for payment are made \nbeginning when an account becomes 11 days delinquent. When an account becomes 30 days delinquent and the customer has not made \npayment arrangements acceptable to the Company or has failed to respond to the requests for payment, a repossession request form is prepared \nby the responsible branch office employee for approval by the Branch Manager for the vicinity in which the borrower lives. Once the \nrepossession request has been approved, first by the Branch Manager and second by the applicable District  \n   \n\n\nTHIS STATES HOW ANYONE IN THE COMPANY CAN ACCESS ALL INFORMATION ALTER INFORMATION BASICALLY DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, NOT PRIVACY \n\nComputerized Information System  \nThe Company utilizes integrated computer systems developed by XXXX to assist in responding to customer inquiries and to monitor the \nperformance of its Contract and direct loan portfolio and the performance of individual customers under Contracts. All Company personnel are \nprovided with real-time access to information from a single shared database. The Company has created specialized programs to automate the \ntracking of Contracts and direct loans from inception. The Companys computer network encompasses both its corporate headquarters and its \nbranch office locations. See Monitoring and Enforcement of Contracts above for a summary of the different reports prepared by the \n\n\n\n\nTHIS THEY VIOLADATED AS WELL  FALSE IMPLICATIONS  PAGE 11\n\n Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and applicable state law counterparts \nprohibit the Company from contacting customers during certain times and at certain places, from using certain threatening practices \nand from making false implications when attempting to collect a debt.  \n  \n\nNO PRIVACY WITH INTERGRATED DATABASE BUT IT SAYS THEY HAVE TO KEEP OUR STUFF PRIVATE THEY DONT PAGE 11 AS WELL\n\n Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and applicable state law counterparts \nprohibit the Company from contacting customers during certain times and at certain places, from using certain threatening practices \nand from making false implications when attempting to collect a debt.  \n  \n\nSTATES THEY MAY NOT INTERFER  PAGE 12\n\nBankruptcy. Federal bankruptcy and related state laws may interfere with or affect the Companys ability to recover collateral or \nenforce a deficiency judgment.  \n\n\nNEXT IS ABOUT HOW EMPLOYESS ARE TO HANDLE THINGS AND WHO HANDLES THEM AND THE PROCDURES AND THE DO AND DONTS  ASLO PAGE 12, 13, 14, 15 ,16.17:::IPAGE 14 STATES THAT AS SOON AS THEY REPOSSES A VEHICLE ITS TOOK TO AUTION RIGHT AWAY\n\n\nThe auction proceeds we receive from the sale of repossessed vehicles and other recoveries are subject to fluctuation due to economic \nand other factors beyond our control.  \nIf we repossess a vehicle securing a Contract, we typically have it transported to an automobile auction for sale. Auction proceeds from the sale \nof repossessed vehicles and other recoveries are usually not sufficient to cover the outstanding balance of the Contract, and the resulting \ndeficiency is charged off. In addition, there is, on average, approximately a 30-day lapse between the time we repossess a vehicle and the time \nit is sold by a dealer or at auction. The proceeds we receive from such sales depend upon various factors, including the supply of, and demand \nfor, used vehicles at the time of sale. Such supply and demand are dependent on many  \n   \nHERE IT STATES WRONGFUL REPOSSETIONS, BANRUPTCY VIOLATOINS AND MORE\n\nWe are subject to risks associated with litigation.  \nAs a consumer finance company, we are subject to various consumer claims and litigation seeking damages and statutory penalties, based \nupon, among other things:  \n   \n   \n   \n   \n   \n   \n   \n   \n   \n12  \n   \n  usury laws;  \n   \n  disclosure inaccuracies;  \n   \n  wrongful repossession;  \n   \n  violations of bankruptcy stay provisions;  \n   \n  certificate of title disputes;  \n   \n  fraud;  \n   \n  breach of contract; and  \n   \n  discriminatory treatment of credit applicants.  \n\n\nSome litigation against us could take the form of class action complaints by consumers. As the assignee of Contracts originated by dealers, we \nmay also be named as a co-defendant in lawsuits filed by consumers principally against dealers. The damages and penalties claimed by \nconsumers in these types of actions can be substantial. The relief requested by the plaintiffs varies but may include requests for compensatory, \nstatutory and punitive damages. We also are periodically subject to other kinds of litigation typically experienced by businesses such as ours, \nincluding employment disputes and breach of contract claims. No assurances can be given that we will not experience material financial losses \nin the future as a result of litigation or other legal proceedings.  \n\nPAGES 17-21 SAYS THE HAVE TO PRACTICE PROPER COLLECTION POLICES WHICH THEY DID NOT::\n  licensing requirements;  \n  requirements for maintenance of proper records;  \n  payment of required fees to certain states;  \n  maximum interest rates that may be charged on loans to finance new and used vehicles;  \n  debt collection practices;  \n  proper disclosure to customers regarding financing terms;  \n  privacy regarding certain customer data;  \n  interest rates on loans to customers;  \n  telephone solicitation of direct loan customers; and  \n  collection of debts from loan customers who have filed bankruptcy.  \n\n\nAGAIN ON PAGE 18  INTERGRATED DATABASE\n\nWe may experience problems with our integrated computer systems or be unable to keep pace with developments in technology.  \nWe use various technologies in our business, including telecommunication, data processing, and integrated computer systems. Technology \nchanges rapidly. Our ability to compete successfully with other financing companies may depend on our ability to efficiently and cost-\neffectively implement technological changes. Moreover, to keep pace with our competitors, we may be required to invest in technological \nchanges that do not necessarily improve our profitability.  \nWe utilize integrated computer systems to respond to customer inquiries and to monitor the performance of our Contract and direct loan \nportfolios and the performance of individual customers under our Contracts and direct loans. Problems with our systems operations could \nadversely impact our ability to monitor our portfolios or collect amounts due under our Contracts and direct loans, which could have a material \nadverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. \n\n\nOKAY THIS ON PAGE 97 OF THEIR POLICY HANDBOOK CALLED GOVERNING LAW.\n\n16. GOVERNING LAW.  \n(a) The validity, interpretation, construction and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by the internal laws of the State \nof Florida, except that Section 16(b) shall be construed in accordance with the Federal Arbitration Act if arbitration is chosen by the Employee \nas the method of dispute resolution.  \n(b) Any dispute arising out of this Agreement shall, at the Employees election, be determined by either (i) arbitration under the \nrules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect (but subject to any evidentiary standards set forth in this Agreement), in which \nboth parties shall be bound by the arbitration award, or (ii) by litigation. Whether the dispute is to be settled by arbitration or litigation, the \nvenue for the arbitration or litigation shall be Tampa, Florida. The parties consent to personal jurisdiction in each trial court in the selected \nvenue having subject matter jurisdiction notwithstanding their residence or situs, and each party irrevocably consents to service of process in \nthe manner provided hereunder for the giving of notices.  \n\n\n  \n(b) Any dispute arising out of this Agreement shall, at the Employees election, be determined by either (i) arbitration under the \nrules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect (but subject to any evidentiary standards set forth in this Agreement), in which \nboth parties shall be bound by the arbitration award, or (ii) by litigation. Whether the dispute is to be settled by arbitration or litigation, the \nvenue for the arbitration or litigation shall be Tampa, Florida. The parties consent to personal jurisdiction in each trial court in the selected \nvenue having subject matter jurisdiction notwithstanding their residence or situs, and each party irrevocably consents to service of process in \nthe manner provided hereunder for the giving of notices.\n\nTHESE NEXT FEW PAGES 115 10 125 ARE THE AUTOMOBILE DEALER RETAIL AGREEMENT PLANS:::\n\nThe undersigned Dealer proposes to sell to the undersigned XXXX XXXX XXXX. (XXXX), from time to time, Promissory Notes, Security \nAgreements, Retail Installment contracts, Conditional Sales Contracts, or other instruments hereinafter referred to as Contracts, evidencing \ninstallment payment obligations owing Dealer arising from the time sale of motor vehicle(s) and secured by such Contracts. It is understood \nthat XXXX shall have the sole discretion to determine which Contracts it will purchase from Dealer.  \n   \nIndemnity : As a separate and cumulative obligation, Dealer shall defend and hold XXXX harmless from any and all claims, defenses, \noffsets, damages, suits, administrative or other proceedings, cost (including reasonable attorneys fees), expenses, losses, and liabilities. \n(Collectively Claims) arising out of connected with or relating to the Contract or the goods or services sold there under. Timing of \nindemnification is within 7 days of demand by XXXX. \n\nXXXX XXXX XXXX. (hereinafter referred to as XXXX XXXX XXXX. or the Company) requires ethical conduct in the practice of \nfinancial management in all aspects of business activities.  \nThe XXXX XXXX XXXX. Code of Ethical Conduct for Financial Managers applies to all senior officers serving in a financial role. The Chief \nExecutive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Controller, as well as certain other senior financial officers, hold an elevated role in corporate \ngovernance and are expected to act in accordance with the highest standards of personal and professional integrity, to comply with all \napplicable laws, rules, and regulations, to preserve and protect shareholders interests, and to abide by the XXXX XXXX XXXX. Code of \nBusiness Conduct and Ethics and other policies and procedures adopted by XXXX XXXX XXXX. that govern the conduct of its employees. \nThis Code of Ethical Conduct is intended to supplement the XXXX XXXX XXXX. Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.  \nAs the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Controller, or other senior financial officer, I certify to you that I adhere to and \nadvocate the following principles governing my professional and ethical conduct in the fulfillment of my responsibilities. I agree to:  \n   \n  a. Comply with the Companys internal policies and procedures; \nb. Act at all times in accordance with the Companys Code of Business Conduct and Ethics which has been provided to me and with \nwhich I will comply; \nc. Engage in and promote honesty, integrity and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of \ninterest between personal and professional relationships; \nd. Provide accurate, complete, objective, timely and understandable financial disclosures in regards to internal reports as well as \nd\ndocuments filed or submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission, any governmental, private or public regulatory agency, \nor used in public communications; \ne. Comply with applicable federal, state, provincial, and/or local governmental laws, rules and regulations, as well as appropriate \nprivate and public regulatory agencies; \nf. Respect the confidentiality of information acquired in the course of performing my work responsibilities except when authorized or \notherwise legally obligated to disclose such information; \ng. Act in good faith, responsibly, with due care, competence and diligence, without misrepresenting or omitting material facts or \nallowing my independent judgment to be compromised; \n  h. Avoid using confidential information acquired in the course of performing my job responsibilities for personal advantage; \n\n\nTHEY HAVE FIVE PAGES OF DEALERSHIPS THEY GET THERE CARS FROM PAGES ON PAGES ON HOW THEY KEEP FROM PAYING TAXES AND GET EXTRA MONEY THEY ARE CROOKS AND THEY ARE ALL THROUGH ONE MAIN GUY XXXX XXXX XXXX.  \n\nXXXX IS NOT EVEN A REAL BANK THEY GET THEIR MONEY FROM OTHER PLACES\nTHEY STOLE FROM US\n\n\nTHE MAIN STORES COMPANYS WE HAVING ISSUES WITH WILL BE LISTED FIRST ALL THE REST ARE POSSIBLE PLACES WHERE SUPPOSEDLY THEY ARE WHICH ONLINE AND ON SOME OF THEIR WEBSITES THEY ARE LISTED ON ONE OF THE TWO ADDRESSES LISTED FIRST.    ALSO NAMES OF SOME OF THE ASSOCIATES THAT WERE THE MAIN ISSUE ARE LOCATED AT THE XXXX AR LOCATION,  THE ONES TO INDIANA ARE NOT EVEN AT THAT LOCATION I FOUND OUT\n\nXXXX XXXX\nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX AR XXXX\nXXXX\n\nTHE FOLLOWING PEOPLE WHO DID THIS AND HAVE NOT CONTACTED US LIED TO US AND REFUSED TO TALK TO US AND TOLD US","date_sent_to_company":"2017-09-21T19:11:20.000Z","issue":"Struggling to pay your loan","sub_product":"Lease","zip_code":"65616","tags":"Servicemember","has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2680977","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Byrider Franchising, LLC","date_received":"2017-09-21T16:54:45.000Z","state":"MO","company_public_response":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","sub_issue":"Lender trying to repossess or disable the vehicle"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["of direct <em>loan</em> customers; and  \n  collection of debts from <em>loan</em> customers who have filed bankruptcy."],"product":["Vehicle <em>loan</em> or <em>lease</em>"],"issue":["Struggling to pay your <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["<em>Lease</em>"]},"sort":[6.962375,"2680977"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"2891107","_score":5.8995543,"_source":{"product":"Student loan","complaint_what_happened":"XX/XX/XXXX To : Consumer Protection Credit Bureau, XXXX XXXX XXXX  and XXXX  Re : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : Acct # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  - Inaccurate information provided to client ( XXXX ) - Poor and non-existing communications to client - Inaccurate and not-at-fault reporting ( not at fault = XXXX XXXX XXXX  ) ( amount and cause ) - AES at Fault for current situation - Request for DELETION of unfair and unnecessary report to Credit Bureaus o Unethical, unfair, and erroneous information, poor and lack of follow up communications ( by AES ) o Lack of response from XXXX since XX/XX/XXXX SEE ATTACHED WORD DOC OF FORMATTED DESCRIPTION Current Timeframe in Dispute : XX/XX/XXXX Note : PRIOR scenario that applies leading up to XX/XX/XXXX - started ~XX/XX/XXXX documented in Section II Dear Consumer Protection Beurea and relevant parties, This communication is primarily to escalate through the Consumer Protection Bureau and is being copied to all credit bureaus and AES . As this unfair sequence of events has unfolded, and has become out of control, and has impacted me negatively in an unfair manner, despite all my effort to work with AES and XXXX, since ~XX/XX/XXXX.\n\nFor clarity, I have outlined the most recent series of events in the following SECTION I ( in which many errors and untrue information was provided to me ), and included a SECTION II, outlining the beginning of communications and erroneous events ( respectively : since ~XX/XX/XXXX ).\n\nPART I : CURRENT Scenario/Sequence of Events These events led to inaccurate and unfair reporting, that has negatively impacted my credit, of which I strive to retain good standing, and have maintained positive marks for many years ( my credit is of the utmost importance, and I am very careful, aside from having too much debt ; which I am working on ) : XX/XX/XXXX : ( Events leading up to XX/XX/XXXX Erroneous and Undeserved Reporting ) I engaged AES : 1 ) to understand why theXX/XX/XXXX letter to XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) had not been responded to ( more on that in following summary from earlier inXX/XX/XXXX) and 2 ) to get solid assistance and clear information ( which I have been fighting for, for many months ) It was stated they did not know why XXXX  had not responded { again } ( XXXX  took over loan portfolio from XXXX years back ) I asked to please help w/a solution as Ive made continuos effort to assist in a lower payment to enable getting ahead ( my financial situation had changed, for the time being ) I was transferred to a helpful lady, that expressed she did not understand why Id never been offered the reduced 6-month option initially, during the preceding months of various contact ( since ~XX/XX/XXXX ) She explained Id make a good faith payment of XXXX ( XXXX per loan ) o It would bring the account current, and Id have this option for 6-months o *This would allow more time to find out status of the XX/XX/XXXX letter/request to XXXX o Relevant background ; *Please note : prior to 2nd sub bullet above : AES STATED ( months back prior to XX/XX/XXXX ) Id have to be behind more than 30 days for them to be able to assist me in any manner ( a bit unethical, unfair, and inappropriate ) And stated likely could get anything that would be reported, removed I did let a small amount go, to follow direction provided ( Im beyond regretful )XX/XX/XXXX: Good faith {$100.00} payment was made / and account was brought current as stated by AES ( Also of note : I was under the impression this {$100.00} payment would cover the 1st payment for the XX/XX/XXXX reduced payment schedule : was it deducted from the balance? These # s are still unclear, and clarity of what is truly owed/ after all this is still in question ) oXX/XX/XXXX., XX/XX/XXXX andXX/XX/XXXX : {$100.00} payments were made per the plan o I went to make the XX/XX/XXXX payment and noted that a high amount was showing to be paid I was confused, and made a {$200.00} payment to coverXX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ( late for XX/XX/XXXX. as I had been confused, regarding what was going on ) I had received a call at one point and argued that the system was in error, still confused, and was working more than 15 hours a day and need to talk to someone that could properly explain what was going on. Nothing was resolved, no call back, no help.XX/XX/XXXX: I called at XXXX for another lengthy call ( 47-minutes ) ( Two reps : XXXX and XXXX and one good faith payment woman ) : o Spoke with representive 1 : He said just put the extension for the 2nd 3-months, and the balance will come current, and not to worry, and that clearly there was a misunderstanding about needing to re-input the next 3-months ( why AES does the process this way, Ive no idea, not logical ) o I continued to express concerns over the other issues : 1 ) the communication not being accurate, or followed up in a timely manner, and that it there was no WRITTEN detail that this 2nd part of the 6-months had to be redone ( there was no written detail of this from AES ) 2 ) That the XXXX letter still had no response ( from XX/XX/XXXX) 3 ) And that no one ever addressed the small reported amount from months back ( THIS IS SEPARATE from RECENT ERRONEOUS REPORTING IN XX/XX/XXXX ) This person did not care to address these issues or escalate, and transferred me to a rep to pay a good faith pymt of XXXX  ( ignored my concerns ) while they re-input the additional 3-months of the 6, and stated all would be brought current ( which turned out to be WRONG ) When on the line w/the good faith pymt woman, I continued to express my concerns : and she thought it important to speak w/another Sr. Agent : ( I thought she was still putting the payment through, as I had shared all was authorized and same account information as in my account ) o Transferred again to new agent/Rep # 2 : ( XXXX or XXXX/notes are not clear which was first ) o This agent/Rep # 2 listened very kindly, and with detail : He looked at history and options He commented that XXXX may not have responded and perhaps it is their way of declining I responded that is unethical/unacceptable/illegal : they have a legal responsibility to respond ( that is like me saying I do not have to be responsible and respond to AES/or pay my bill and expect no consequences ).\n\nHe offered kindly, to again re-forward the letter, and to the in-office liaison ( which, I was told before there was one, then was told there was not one : B/c I now presume the LIASION LIKLEY DID NOT WANT TO ASSIST, nor did AES for the most part ) This Rep found a 24-month deferral of which he stated I should have 12 months remaining for use I questioned this as in earlier months AES ERRONEUOSLY gave me that option ( then FAILED to communicate it was not available to me this is documented in SECTION 2 ) He said he thought it was worth a try : - Hed input for the 12-months - And we have the remaining 3-month on the 6-pay as our backup, so not to worry ( this sounded reasonable to me, and he was very kind and seemed knowledgeable ) - I stated I was concerned this would go into 30 days and be reported - He responded and said not to worry as we had time, as reporting was not done until month end - He stated Id hear if 12-month deferral is approved very quickly and reiterated we have the 3-month back up in place so itll be covered no matter what ( again, sounds safe/reasonable ) AND remember I was told earlier : the continued 3-month would bring acct current ( by 1st rep ) so no worries I NEVER RECEIVED any update on the 12-month option nothing : no written communication, no phone call, NOTHING.\n\nI did ~14 days later see you did not make your good faith pymt on the 3-month option and it has been cancelled { paraphrased } ) My initial thought ; where is the 12-month response?? Perhaps it is moving forward And why did no one ask me for the good faith payment in writing or via phone? If that needed to be taken care of : why no follow up? I thought is was taken care of!\n\nIn the meantime the amount past due was increased : I looked Friday evening on XX/XX/XXXX : and it was in danger of going to the 30 days It WOULD NOT allow payment to be marked for theXX/XX/XXXX, or theXX/XX/XXXX : as the weekend was in play ( and AES lives on an EST cutoff I WORK 15 hours a day I cant time on these hurtful consumer practices and relied on AES to communicate properly! ) VERY DISTURBING I went ahead and paid {$100.00} to test and hope it would show in best timing of course not it saysXX/XX/XXXX paid ( despite being told explicitly to NOT pay as it would come current ) XX/XX/XXXX Called ( 1st thing Mon ) : expressed all errors from AES, was greatly upset/panicked : o They apologized, and said the reporting occurred over the weekend and too bad that is how it works ( So, they can report over the weekend but not credit for a XX/XX/XXXXpayment in the system at XXXX??? Unfair consumer practices/leaving a consumer in a bad spot especially after being given inaccurate info and NO COMMUNICATION ON STATUS of the 12-month OPTION AND I WAS WORKING WITH AES very diligently. I was infuriated ) o While on the phone, I panicked, and PAID {$720.00} ( so now a total of {$820.00} has been paid, plus the XXXX paid earlier in XX/XX/XXXX = XXXX ) I expressed that was not right ( AES told me NOT TO PAY before b/c it would come current with either scenario above composed on XX/XX/XXXX) So here I am. I do the right thing because I value my credit, AND had made all efforts to work w/AES ( and XXXX ) I get completely damaged credit, by believing all the erroneous information, and experiencing no follow-up from AES. ( My score dropped >80 points!!!! NEVER do I not pay my bills ) o Next step : after apologies from AES and statement that their hands were tied : I verbally shared again all their errors and statements the rep responded that now that I laid it all out as I had it may be that there is a case to get deleted ( but, it should never have gotten to this point at all, I dont have the time for all of this ). They said they rarely delete anything ( opposite of statements earlier in XX/XX/XXXX).\n\no This should be deleted : this was due to all AES direction, inaccurate information ( depending on whom you speak with ), and lack of follow up on status of options being input on my behalf.\n\no These are all AES errors. I did nothing wrong aside from believing I was speaking with folks that knew the system, areas to be approved, processes, and their assurance Id be okay, and all would be current.\n\nCaveat : even if the 12-month option were communicated as not going through, or that the 3-month good faith needed to be looked at/and the payment needed to be secured : I would have had TIME to remedy and PAY THAT 700+ before XX/XX/XXXX, and the XX/XX/XXXX payment, and theXX/XX/XXXX phone call : Another series of erroneous statements, and lack of communication updates ( w/regard to the 12-month option to reiterate NEVER informed of anything leaving me to believe it was in process ) Now I am transferred to get the good faith pymt complete ( which should have already been done before the 2nd transfer onXX/XX/XXXX ) o I paid {$100.00} to the good faith agent.\n\no Now : {$1100.00} paid total betweenXX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX And again the question never was answered : the XXXX  GF payment does not count toward the next due payment?\n\nAnd then I learn that the 2nd phase of a 6-month lowered payment does NOT bring it current It only does that during the first 3-month portion ( which there should never have been a gap in the first place! ) AES records the calls : I was told it would bring it current before representive # 2.\n\nTo add : whatever was reported with respect to amounts, Im not sure is accurate.\n\nThough, again : it should never have been reported.\n\nPART II The Beginning/Summary of events leading up to XX/XX/XXXXand XX/XX/XXXXAroundXX/XX/XXXX : o I contacted AES after many attempts to get the two loans refinanced, to lower my payments o No Service providers will refi a Private k-12 loan as their criteria is for it to be with a 4-year university or the like o It was stated over 13 years back if anything ever were to happen, I could always refi the loans again more erroneous information These types of loans are very difficult to get refinanced through Educational service lenders AES stated there were no options to help me, and they really could not investigate any further unless I go beyond 30-days late ( this was actually said even earlier on and I had delayed on paying, but never had the heart to let it go over 30 days, as my credit is of value, it scared me. This is not very ethical, IMHO, its as though they want to harm the consumer/paying customer ) After numerous conversations, someone ( that was kind and wanted to help ) suggested I write a letter directly to XXXX and kindly state my position, and ask if there was any way or options to refinance through them Once the letter was complete, I was to fax and email it to AES, to forward to XXXX o XXXX was the original lender, and had since exited from any student loan programs, selling their portfolio to XXXX  On XX/XX/XXXX, I faxed and emailed the letter.\n\nI followed up to ensure receipt AES stated to give at least 30 days for XXXX to respond They never have responded, and I followed up w/AES multiple times to find out status. I kept getting the theyll respond when they respond Additionally, I was told there was an in-house XXXX liaison, and that they likely could assist.\n\nNot once was I ever enabled to engage with this person, and then later was told there was no liaison in house Then recently was told there was Which is it? Just like all the erroneous communications, no follow through, and poor handling, this was becoming par for the course in my engagement with AES : can not trust anything that is said Dont get me wrong : there have been a few very professional and kind people that have tried to assist But, a high % of individuals do not know processes, rules to specific loans, and then the zero follow up on has become beyond taxing, and is unacceptable, and has caused my decent credit to be destroyed.\n\nDuring this timeframe : I was offered a 24-month deferral : they put the request through o But here we go : NO UPDATE, NO RESPONSE, NO explanation via mail, email, or the like that it was not approved as I learned by my calling in later that my loan did not qualify for that program, as it was in the private category Why did I have to call and find out? My payment was late due to this as I again, am under an impression something is in process.\n\nBut to no avail : and no communication from AES.\n\nThere have been times Id email through the AES system asking for updates, or asking for something to be remedied : NO RESPONSE Only a canned we are in receipt of your email auto generated response.\n\nBut NO status to any requests And the most important one was when the 24-month deferral was not eligible : why cant it be common practice to follow up with your client?\n\nWhy is it as a client I dont matter?\n\nI have paid on this loan since XXXX XXXX o That is over 13.5 years and a lot of money w/interest IN SUMMARY o Now, today, I must pay the payment of XXXX plus the XXXX late fee o When this should have already been caught up but the poor communication and the errors cost me an additional 700+ and this XXXX. Which is fine, I am okay paying my loans : but I hope you can see the awful position I have been put in, and stress I have endured.\n\no Never, once, did I say I'd not pay.\n\no I only listened to AES, and got pushed under the dirt with credit due to all I shared in Part I and Part II.\n\no And I have spent hours writing this up and have endured far too much stress.\n\no Most important : My credit is ruined, due to no fault of my own o I have someone willing to help get this refinanced, but now with the credit problem I am really in a bad place.\n\no And, I cant refi for a car lease up to revise in XX/XX/XXXX, I cant rent, I cant buy, 2 creditors lowered my credit this is completely a mess, all due to the irresponsible actions of AES ( and in part : XXXX ).\n\no There as well are legalities related to this, it has been clarified that some of these actions and lack of actions are a potential litigation issue.\n\no I have done everything I can, and kindly appreciate assistance in this matter Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this mess of a matter. Please know I am mentally drained in all the follow up Ive endured, and I am at my wits end.\n\nAs a suggestion, AES staff should be better trained to accurately communicate applicable policies to each available option, and not say to NOT pay, and as well not taking payment over a weekend should be on AES, not the consumer, ( at least in this situation ).\n\nI have for over 13 years kept this paid, and only late paid as I considered earlier on the statement I had to go 30 days to get help from AES I have worked hard to maintain my credit and good payment history. This is not appropriate. Please consider these extreme errors, and consider deletion of the late reporting, as I was not late and would not have been had it not been for the direction stated from AES.\n\nKind regards, XXXX XXXX XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2018-04-30T04:07:08.000Z","issue":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","sub_product":"Private student loan","zip_code":"95124","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"2891107","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"AES/PHEAA","date_received":"2018-04-30T03:35:29.000Z","state":"CA","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Received bad information about your loan"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["o Most important : My credit is ruined, due to no fault of my own o I have someone willing to help get this refinanced, but now with the credit <em>problem</em> I am really in a bad place.\n\no And, I cant refi for a car <em>lease</em> up to revise in XX/XX/XXXX, I cant rent, I cant buy, 2 creditors lowered my credit this is completely a mess, all due to the irresponsible actions of AES ( and in part : XXXX )."],"product":["Student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_product":["Private student <em>loan</em>"],"sub_issue":["Received bad information about your <em>loan</em>"]},"sort":[5.8995543,"2891107"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12858508","_score":5.039192,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Summary of Demand Please take notice that I hereby demand the immediate deletion of multiple charged-off and late-payment accounts from my credit files. These accounts ( identified in detail below ) are inaccurately reported and unlawfully retained on my credit reports despite : Debt Cancellation : The debts were canceled/discharged, triggering IRS reporting of canceled debt as income ( 26 U.S.C. 61 ( a ) ( 12 ) ) and implicating IRS Publication 4681 on canceled debts. A canceled debt is no longer an enforceable obligation, and continuing to report it as owed is false. ( Indeed, IRS Pub. 4681 notes that a taxpayer may not have to include canceled debt in income under certain conditions underscoring that the debt is treated as extinguished. ) UCC Public Filings : I have filed and perfected UCC-1 Financing Statements ( Delaware Filing XXXX XXXX ; Minnesota Filing XXXX XXXX ) accompanied by executed security agreements. These filings are public records that put all parties on notice that the referenced debts have been secured and settled. Under the Uniform Commercial Code, an account is defined as a right to payment of a monetary obligation ( including credit card or loan receivables ). The above filings establish my secured interest and rights in these accounts, meaning any remaining debt obligations have been resolved via security interest or set-off. Continuing to report these accounts as delinquent ignores the UCC Article 9 rights and the fact that the obligations have been addressed.\n\nApostilled Documents : The relevant security agreements and affidavits have been apostilled pursuant to the 1961 Hague Convention, confirming their authenticity as public documents internationally. This means the discharge of debt and transfer of rights in those accounts are not only recorded domestically but also recognized internationally. The Credit Bureaus have constructive and actual notice of these apostilled public filings, yet have failed to adjust my reports accordingly. \nPrior Disputes FCRA Non-Compliance : I have disputed these accounts, yet you have failed to investigate and correct the information as required. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), you are obligated to maintain maximum possible accuracy and to promptly delete or correct information that can not be verified or is inaccurate. However, the accounts remain, showing months of false derogatory information. This is a blatant violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), 1681i, and 1681s-2 ( b ). The FCRA and its implementing regulations also require furnishers and bureaus to ensure information reflects the true status of the debt. For example, CFPB regulations define accuracy to mean that furnished information correctly reflects liability and performance on the account Reporting a canceled or otherwise settled debt as a charge-off with a balance due is inaccurate by definition under these standards.\n\nDemand : I demand that each Credit Bureau delete the accounts listed below in full from my credit reports. Written confirmation of deletion and updated credit reports should be provided within 5 calendar days of your receipt of this letter ( note : FCRA also requires that upon deletion after a dispute, the consumer be notified and provided a copy of the updated report within 5 business daysFailure to comply will result in immediate legal action, regulatory complaints, and pursuit of all available remedies against you.\n\n________________________________________ 2. Legal Basis for Removal of These Accounts 2.1 Debt Cancellation IRS Treatment and Federal Law Under federal law, a debt that is canceled or forgiven is treated as income to the debtor, because it is no longer an obligation to repay ( 26 U.S.C. 61 ( a ) ( 12 ) ). I have received IRS Form 1099-C for the relevant accounts ( or the creditors were obligated to issue them ), meaning the creditors formally canceled the debts. Once a debt is canceled, the creditor writes off the debt, and the IRS considers it discharged. In fact, IRS Publication 4681 explicitly notes that a taxpayer may exclude canceled debt from income in cases of insolvency or other exceptions reinforcing that the debt itself has been extinguished.\n\nImplication : If a debt no longer exists for purposes of collection ( and is only an IRS reportable event ), it is patently inaccurate for the Credit Bureau to continue reporting the account as an outstanding balance, past-due, or charge-off. Doing so misrepresents the consumers obligations and creditworthiness. By reporting a canceled debt as a live delinquency, you are furnishing false credit information. This runs afoul of the FCRAs accuracy mandate and also potentially constitutes deceptive conduct, since the true status ( discharged debt ) is not reflected. It also may violate 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), which prohibits furnishers from reporting information they know or have reason to know is inaccurate.\n\nFurthermore, federal regulations and banking guidelines require that creditors charge off delinquent accounts ( e.g. credit cards after 180 days of non-payment ) and cease treating them as assets. Once charged off, the debt is no longer carried on the creditors books, and if its also canceled ( with a 1099-C issued ), it is effectively resolved from a legal standpoint. Continuing to report such an account as if its an enforceable debt is not only inaccurate but also undermines the purpose of those regulations ( which is to accurately reflect when a debt is uncollectible ).\n\nIn summary, the presence of a 1099-C or charge-off on an account means the debt should not be reported as owed. I have included in prior disputes copies of relevant 1099-C forms and affidavits of debt cancellation. Your failure to remove these accounts despite evidence of cancellation is a willful violation of FCRAs requirement to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy XXXX. \nXXXX UCC Financing Statements and Security Agreements I have taken the additional step of securing my rights through the Uniform Commercial Code ( UCC ) filings mentioned above. These UCC-1 Financing Statements, filed with the Delaware Secretary of State and the Minnesota Secretary of State, give public notice of a security interest in the accounts/debts at issue. In the underlying security agreements ( duly executed and notarized ), the original creditors agreed ( by acquiescence or contract ) to transfer rights and title in the accounts to me, the secured party, as part of a settlement and discharge of the debt. These documents have been apostilled for authenticity under the Hague Convention of 1961, making them valid for recognition internationally.\n\nUnder UCC Article 9, an account is broadly defined as a right to payment of a monetary obligation, including those arising from loans or credit card transactions The debts being reported by your agency fall squarely within this definition. As the secured party of record on these accounts, I hold the senior rights to those obligations. In effect, the obligations have been assigned to me and discharged they are no longer owed by me to the original creditors. Therefore, from the perspective of any third-party ( including a CRA ), there is a XXXX balance and no delinquency the original creditor has been made whole or has relinquished its claim, and I, as the secured party, am not reporting any claim of delinquency on myself ( obviously ). \nYour reporting of these accounts as charge-offs or past-due ignores the UCC record and the reality that the debts have been settled via a security interest exchange. This not only violates FCRA ( by reporting fundamentally inaccurate account status ) but also interferes with my rights under UCC law. Minnesotas adoption of the UCC ( Minn. Stat. 336.9-101 et seq. ) and Delawares UCC provisions both dictate that a perfected security interest puts the world on notice of the secured partys rights. By continuing to report the debt as owed to the original creditor ( and in default ), you are publishing information that is inconsistent with public records and derogatory to the secured partys interest.\n\nI remind you that federal law ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ) requires furnishers to update and correct information that is no longer accurate. Here, the furnishers ( original creditors ) have documentation of these UCC filings and should have instructed deletion ; if they failed to do so, both they and you are liable for willful FCRA violations.\n\nThe existence of a publicly filed UCC-1 Financing Statement is easily verifiable evidence that the debt status is disputed and transferred failing to consider or investigate that is a violation of your duty under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ).\n\n2.3 FCRA Violations by the Credit Bureaus and Furnishers The FCRA imposes strict duties on credit reporting agencies ( CRAs ) like Experian, XXXX, and XXXX, as well as on the furnishers of information ( the creditors ). Your handling of these accounts breaches multiple FCRA provisions : Failure to Assure Accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) : Every time you prepare a consumer report, you must have reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information. Reporting a debt as outstanding when it was canceled ( or continuing to report a charge-off with a balance that was forgiven ) is not accurate, let alone maximally accurate. The law requires you to do more than simply parrot whatever a furnisher sent in the past you must ensure the info remains current and correct. Given the ample notices and disputes I provided, your procedures ( or lack thereof ) have clearly failed this standard. This is a textbook violation of 1681e ( b ).\n\nFailure to Reinvestigate and Delete ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) : When I disputed these accounts, you were obligated to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. If information is found inaccurate or can not be verified, you must delete it from the file. In my case, either the information was not verified ( e.g., the creditor failed to prove the debt was still owed, especially in light of a 1099-C or UCC filing ), or the reinvestigation was not reasonable. In fact, the continued presence of these accounts indicates you willfully ignored the evidence. Notably, 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) requires that disputed information that is inaccurate or unverifiable shall be promptly deleted from the credit file. Your refusal to delete is unlawful. Even worse, your own records ( as shown on my credit report ) indicate that some of these accounts were updated in response to my disputes rather than deleted an inadequate response since the only proper outcome was deletion, not an artificial update that left the derogatory mark in place.\n\nFurnisher Duties ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ) : After you received my dispute, you were required to notify the furnishers ( creditors ) within 5 business days ( which I believe you did ). Then each furnisher must investigate and report back to you the results, including correcting or deleting any information found to be inaccurate or unverifiable. If the furnisher confirms the info is inaccurate or can not verify it, they must instruct you to modify, delete, or permanently block the information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( E ) ) .Either the furnishers failed to do their job or you failed to implement their instructions, but either scenario is a violation : furnishers are liable under 1681s-2 ( b ) and you, the CRA, are liable under 1681e ( b ) and 1681i. The law even provides a fee-shifting provision for consumers to sue on these violations, which I will utilize if needed.\n\nFailure to Mark Accounts as Disputed : Additionally, under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( c ) and 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 3 ), any information under dispute must be noted as disputed in a consumers file if it is not deleted. My credit reports did not consistently show a dispute notation on these accounts after my disputes ( some show generic comments, others do not ). This is another FCRA violation failing to flag a disputed debt can itself give rise to liability ( its seen as furnishing incomplete information, which courts have held as actionable ).\n\nContinuing to Report After Notice of Error : FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) forbids a furnisher from reporting information after they have been notified of its inaccuracy, if it is in fact inaccurate. My disputes and provided documentation were such notice. Therefore, each month that the furnishers ( creditors ) allowed these tradelines to remain and update on my reports, they violated this section. While direct consumer enforcement of 1681s-2 ( a ) is limited ( primarily enforceable by regulators ), those violations underpin the willfulness of the 1681s-2 ( b ) and 1681i violations, strengthening my case for damages. Moreover, I reserve the right to report those furnishers to the CFPB and banking regulators for regulatory action.\n\nIn short, the FCRA has been violated on multiple counts. Your agencies have willfully reported inaccurate data and failed to correct it after disputes, and the furnishers have failed to conduct proper investigations or inform you of necessary deletions. The law provides for civil liability for willful noncompliance up to {$1000.00} in statutory damages per violation, plus actual damages and punitive damages ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n ). I have enumerated each month of false reporting as a separate violation below for damage calculation purposes.\n\n2.4 Violations of Minnesota Law and Federal Regulations Your conduct also implicates state law and other federal rules : Minnesota Statutes Chapter 47 : Minnesota law ( Chapter 47, Financial Corporations ) reflects a strong policy against false reporting by financial entities. For example, Minn. Stat. 47.26 makes it a felony for any officer or agent of a corporation to willfully violate the law and continue such violation for over 10 days. Reporting patently false credit information about a Minnesota consumer and stubbornly refusing to correct it after repeated notice ( for months on end ), could be construed as the type of willful, continued violation that the state considers criminal. Whether or not a prosecutor pursues such charges, this statute underscores the seriousness of your misconduct.\n\nAdditionally, to the extent the furnishers are financial institutions, providing false information to credit bureaus may violate Minnesotas banking laws ( Chapter XXXX ) and could invite action from the Minnesota Department XXXX XXXX. I will be forwarding a complaint to state authorities to review whether your actions constitute any breach of Minnesota law or regulations ( including but not limited to any unfair or deceptive practice statutes or regulations on reporting obligations ).\n\n12 C.F.R. CFPB Regulations ( Regulation V ) and OCC/FDIC Guidelines : Federal regulations require robust accuracy and integrity policies. The CFPBs Regulation V ( 12 C.F.R. 1022.42 and Appendix E ) obligates furnishers to establish internal controls to ensure the accuracy and integrity of furnished information. The continued reporting of these discharged debts indicates a failure of those controls. It suggests that either the furnishers did not properly update the status to the CRAs, or the CRAs ignored or mishandled the updates. Either way, regulatory guidelines were broken. Moreover, banking regulators ( OCC, FDIC, Federal Reserve ) have issued guidelines ( e.g. the Uniform Retail Credit Classification Policy ) requiring timely charge-off of delinquent debts ( generally at 180 days past due ) and cessation of accruing interest, etc. If after charge-off a bank chooses to cancel the debt ( often to claim a tax benefit or comply with XXXX rules ), that information must be accurately reflected. By failing to note the true status ( canceled ) on credit reports, the furnishers ( and you as their conduit ) are effectively publishing a false account of the banks own credit loss ( making it look as if the bank could still collect money which it has legally discharged ). This could even raise issues with 12 C.F.R. 621.5 ( for institutions governed by the XXXX XXXX XXXX ) which requires writing off uncollectible loans, or other agency-specific rules, by creating a discrepancy between the banks books and consumer credit reports.\n\n31 C.F.R. Treasury Regulations : Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations contains the Federal Claims Collection Standards and other rules regarding debt collection. When a debt is conclusively deemed uncollectible ( as is the case with these accounts ), federal policy ( e.g. 31 C.F.R. 285 and 903 under the Debt Collection Improvement Act standards ) is to stop active collection and update records accordingly. In spirit, continuing to report a canceled debt as if owed is contrary to these federal standards. It also potentially mischaracterizes the debts legal status, which could be seen as an unfair collection practice if done to pressure payment on a nonexistent obligation. \nIn summary, your actions are not only violating the FCRA but also undermine state law protections and regulatory frameworks designed to ensure truthful credit reporting and financial transparency. I will not hesitate to invoke all relevant laws in a court of law to hold you accountable. \nXXXX Federal Securities Law Considerations ( Exchange Act of XXXX ) XXXX, XXXX, and Experian ( through its parent company ) are publicly traded companies subject to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This means you file annual reports ( Form 10-K ) and other disclosures with the Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ) , and you are required to disclose material legal proceedings and risks. By engaging in systemic FCRA violations and accruing significant potential liabilities to consumers like myself, you XXXX also be violating SEC disclosure requirements if you fail to adequately disclose these issues to your shareholders. \nNotably, in Equifaxs most recent Form 10-K, the company acknowledged that the number of consumer lawsuits alleging FCRA violations have increased substantially over the past several years. This indicates that these bureaus are aware of widespread non-compliance problems. TransUnions filings likewise disclosed that the CFPB issued a NORA ( Notice and Opportunity to Respond and Advise ) letter alleging TransUnion violated FCRA dispute investigation requirements.\n\nSuch an allegation from the CFPB is serious ; if TransUnion ( or any bureau ) fails to correct known FCRA issues, it could lead to enforcement action or large fines clearly material information for investors.\n\nIf you continue to willfully flout the FCRA ( as in my case ) and do not disclose the scope of this non-compliance in your SEC filings, you could be engaging in securities fraud by omission. Rule 10b-5 under the 1934 Act prohibits making any untrue statement of a material fact or omitting to state a material fact necessary to make statements not misleading. By now, it is clear that your business faces material risks due to the way you handle consumer disputes and credit reporting accuracy ( the multitude of lawsuits and CFPB inquiries is evidence of that ). Should litigation arise from my case or others like it, or should regulatory fines hit, your investors would rightfully say : why wasnt this fully disclosed?\n\nI put this in my demand letter to underscore that your legal troubles do not exist in a vacuum they affect your duties to regulators beyond the CFPB. I fully intend to submit copies of my complaints and any eventual lawsuit to the SECs enforcement division, so they can evaluate whether you have properly disclosed the legal and compliance risks related to your credit reporting practices. Equifaxs 10-K even warns that the CFPB can seek penalties of up to {>= $1,000,000} per day for knowing violations of consumer finance laws. Consider this letter as notice that your FCRA violations are knowing and willful if you choose to ignore this and not remediate, any resulting penalties ( at potentially {$1.00} million per day per violation ) will be on your heads and will certainly interest your investors and the SEC.\n\nBottom line : It is in your own corporate and shareholder interest, as well as your legal obligation, to delete the inaccurate information immediately. Continuing to report false data not only harms me, but exposes you to mounting liability and regulatory risk, which you can avoid ( or limit ) by doing what the law requires correcting the information now.\n\n3. Inaccurate Accounts and Damage Calculations Below is a breakdown of each inaccurate account that remains on my credit reports, the period of wrongful reporting, and the statutory damages I will seek if this matter proceeds to litigation. Each month that an account was reported with false information after it should have been removed is counted as a separate FCRA violation ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n provides up to {$1000.00} per violation for willful noncompliance ). I will also seek punitive damages and attorneys fees as allowed. The damages calculation here is an estimate of FCRA statutory damages alone, which will be adjusted as necessary.\n\n3.1 Experian Accounts to Delete and Liability The following accounts on my Experian credit file are inaccurately reported and must be deleted. Experian failed to remove these even after disputes, in violation of the FCRA. \nCreditor ( Account ) Account XXXX. Status on Experian Inaccuracy Period Months of Violation Damages ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Bank ) Credit Card # XXXX Charged-Off, {$5600.00} balance ( should be {$0.00} debt canceled ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off with balance ) 17 months {$17000.00} XXXX XXXX  ( Chase ) Credit Card # XXXX Charged-Off, {$6100.00} balance, {$4000.00} past due ( debt canceled; balance should be {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off/collection ) 14 months {$14000.00} XXXX Bank Credit Card # XXXX Charged-Off, {$2300.00} balance ( debt canceled XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX show {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off with balance ) 14 months {$14000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Auto Loan # XXXX ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Charged-Off Auto Loan, ~ {$40000.00} balance ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX set-off should show paid as agreed or {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported monthly as charge-off ) 13 months {$13000.00} Santander/Chrysler Capital Auto Lease # XXXX Charged-Off, {$3800.00} past due ( lease contract terminated, balance not owed ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off XXXX 3 months {$3000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Personal Loan # XXXX ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Open, {$21000.00} balance, {$4200.00} past due ( inaccurate debt was subject to UCC lien, should not be reporting as past XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported XXXX days late continuously ) 6 months {$6000.00} Experian Total Statutory Damages : {$68000.00} for XXXX violation-months XXXX XXXX punitive damages for willful conduct. \nNotes : Each listed account should have been deleted entirely. For example, the XXXX XXXX debt was canceled in XXXX, yet Experian continued to report it as a charge-off every month into XXXX. The XXXX XXXX accounts were subject to my XXXX agreement filings in XXXX, yet Experian did not remove them and even updated them as recently as XX/XX/XXXX, showing substantial delinquency. This demonstrates willfulness Experian had notice but chose to let the damaging, false information persist. \nXXXX XXXX Accounts to Delete and Liability The following accounts remain on my XXXX credit report with similar inaccuracies ( it is expected TransUnions data mirrors Experians, as the furnishers provided the same false information to all bureaus ). XXXX has likewise failed to delete these entries after my disputes. \n( If account details differ slightly on XXXX, they will be identified by the creditor and account number. The same rationale from XXXX table applies. ) Creditor ( Account ) Account XXXX. Status on XXXX Inaccuracy Period Months Damages ( @ $ XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Bank ) # XXXX Charged-Off, balance {$5600.00} ( debt canceled ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 17 {$17000.00} XXXX Card ( Chase ) # XXXX Charged-Off, balance {$6100.00} ( debt canceled ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 14 {$14000.00} XXXX Bank # XXXX Charged-Off, balance {$2300.00} ( debt canceled ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 14 {$14000.00} XXXX Federal XXXX Auto Loan # XXXX Charged-Off XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX balance ( debt set-off ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 13 {$13000.00} Santander/Chrysler Cap Lease # XXXX Charged-Off Lease, ~ $ XXXX past XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$3000.00} XXXX Federal XXXX Pers. Loan # XXXX Open, {$4200.00} past due ( should be {$0.00} ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$6000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : {$67000.00} ( estimated ). \nNotes : XXXX was included in the same disputes and received the same evidence. It is equally liable for each month it continued reporting these accounts. Notably, TransUnions own records should reflect my disputes ( including any CFPB complaint I filed ). Its failure to correct or even mark the accounts as disputed demonstrates a reckless disregard of its duties. \nXXXX XXXX Accounts to Delete and XXXX The XXXX credit report also contains these erroneous accounts. XXXX liability is calculated similarly : XXXX ( Account ) Account XXXX. Status on XXXX Inaccuracy Period Months Damages ( @ $ XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX  ) # XXXX Charged Off, {$5600.00} balance ( canceled debt ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 17 {$17000.00} XXXX XXXX  ( Chase ) # XXXX Charged Off, {$6100.00} balance ( canceled debt ) XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$14000.00} XXXX XXXX  # XXXX Charged Off, {$2300.00} balance ( canceled debt ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 14 {$14000.00} XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Charged-Off Auto, ~ $ XXXX balance ( set-off ) XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  {$13000.00} XXXX XXXX Lease # XXXX Charged-Off XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX past due ( not owed ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$3000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Open, past due {$4200.00} ( inaccurate, not owed ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$6000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : {$67000.00} ( estimated ). \nNotes : XXXX has historically had issues with credit report accuracy ( as its risk disclosures concede and it appears the same pattern occurred here. All three bureaus are expected to coordinate deletion once one confirms an error, yet in my case none took proper action thus all three face parallel liability. \nXXXX XXXX ( All Bureaus ) : {$200000.00} in preliminary statutory damages ( Experian $ XXXX + XXXX $ XXXX + XXXX $ XXXX ), plus any actual damages to my credit and emotional distress ( to be determined ) and punitive damages for willful FCRA violations. These figures far exceed the threshold for federal litigation, and I will seek the maximum allowed, including possibly class-action remedies if applicable ( noting that the patterns here XXXX affect many consumers ). \nI highlight these amounts to make clear that ignoring my rightful demands could prove extremely costly to your companies. And these are per consumer ; regulators can and do seek even higher penalties ( as noted, CFPB can fine up to {$1.00} XXXX per day per violation, which could theoretically dwarf my private claim ). This is entirely avoidable if you simply do what the law requires now. \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDemand for Immediate Action I hereby demand the following relief from each Credit Bureau, to be completed within XXXX calendar days of receipt of this letter : XXXX. Permanent Deletion of Listed Accounts : Remove in their entirety the above-referenced accounts from my credit file. This means deleting the trade line, not just changing the status to paid or disputed. The only acceptable outcome under law is deletion, given the circumstances ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) ). No reinsertion is permitted unless verified by new certified information, and you must notify me if any reinsertion is attemp\n\nted ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) ). However, since the facts show these accounts are not verifiable and not owed, they should not ever be reinserted.\n\n2. Written Confirmation : Provide written confirmation on your company letterhead that each disputed account has been deleted due to inaccuracies. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) and ( 8 ), you must send me notice of the results of my dispute and a copy of my revised credit report showing the deletions within 5 business days. I expect this confirmation by email and mail given the urgency.\n\n3. Cease Reporting to Others : Ensure that these accounts are deleted across all your reporting and no longer provided to any third parties. Additionally, notify any other consumer reporting agency to which you furnish data ( if any, such as secondary bureaus or resellers ) of the deletions, as required by law ( furnishers must update all CRAs, and CRAs should communicate results under 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( D ) ). This includes updating any data you have shared with insurance scoring companies, tenant screening, or employment screening companies that might have obtained my report with these erroneous entries. \nXXXX. Damages and Compensation ( Reservation ) : While deletion is necessary, I also demand that you preserve all records related to these accounts and my disputes, as I am evaluating further legal action for the harm already caused. My XXXX XXXX and opportunities have suffered due to your reporting of false delinquencies ( for instance, I have been denied credit and faced higher interest rates, which are provable actual damages ). I XXXX seek monetary compensation in addition to the statutory damages outlined if we proceed to court. This letter is not an offer to settle my damages claim ; it is a demand for compliance. If you wish to discuss a broader settlement ( including monetary relief to avoid a lawsuit ), you XXXX contact me in writing with an offer after you have deleted the accounts and provided proof. \nXXXX. Refrain from Retaliation or Secondary Reporting : Do not, under any circumstances, reinsert these items or replace them with any coded notation that could indirectly harm my credit ( such as labeling them as consumer disagrees or some obscure code ). The only correct action is a clean deletion. Also, do not sell or transfer information about these disputed debts to any third-party debt XXXX or data aggregators if any such activity is detected, it will be met with additional legal action for breach of the FCRA and XXXX the FDCPA if applicable. \nResponse Deadline 5 Days : XXXX is of the essence. You have XXXX calendar days from receipt of this notice to complete the deletions and confirm in writing. This timeline is reasonable and in fact slightly more lenient than FCRAs own dispute timeline in cases where the information is obviously wrong or unverifiable. Given that you have had months of prior notice through my disputes, and that I have now provided a detailed legal rationale, you should need no additional time to investigate. Any delay beyond 5 days will be considered further willful non-compliance. If by the end of the XXXX day I do not have written confirmation of deletion from each of you, I will proceed with the following without further notice : File a lawsuit against each of you for violations of the FCRA ( and any other applicable laws, such as defamation and Minnesota state law ). I will seek the full $ XXXX in damages itemized above, plus attorneys fees and punitive damages. \nI will also seek injunctive relief as appropriate. Be advised that courts have awarded significant punitive damages in cases of willful FCRA violations where agencies ignored multiple dispute notices. Your conduct here is egregious and meets the standard for willfulness ( especially after this letter puts you on clear notice ). Each bureau will be sued in federal court ( with venue in my district ). \nFile regulatory complaints : I will file formal complaints with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Trade Commission, my states Attorney General, the Minnesota Department of Commerce, and any other relevant oversight body. These complaints XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-07T18:58:04.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"55112","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12858508","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-07T18:57:33.000Z","state":"MN","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 ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Charged-Off Auto <em>Loan</em>, ~ {$40000.00} balance ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX set-off should show paid as agreed or {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported monthly as charge-off ) 13 months {$13000.00} Santander/Chrysler Capital Auto <em>Lease</em> # XXXX Charged-Off, {$3800.00} past due ( <em>lease</em> contract terminated, balance not owed ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off XXXX 3 months {$3000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Personal <em>Loan</em> # XXXX ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX"],"issue":["<em>Problem</em> with a company's investigation into an existing <em>problem</em>"]},"sort":[5.039192,"12858508"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12858504","_score":5.039192,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Summary of Demand Please take notice that I hereby demand the immediate deletion of multiple charged-off and late-payment accounts from my credit files. These accounts ( identified in detail below ) are inaccurately reported and unlawfully retained on my credit reports despite : Debt Cancellation : The debts were canceled/discharged, triggering IRS reporting of canceled debt as income ( 26 U.S.C. 61 ( a ) ( 12 ) ) and implicating IRS Publication 4681 on canceled debts. A canceled debt is no longer an enforceable obligation, and continuing to report it as owed is false. ( Indeed, IRS Pub. 4681 notes that a taxpayer may not have to include canceled debt in income under certain conditions underscoring that the debt is treated as extinguished. ) UCC Public Filings : I have filed and perfected UCC-1 Financing Statements ( Delaware Filing XXXX XXXX ; Minnesota Filing XXXX XXXX ) accompanied by executed security agreements. These filings are public records that put all parties on notice that the referenced debts have been secured and settled. Under the Uniform Commercial Code, an account is defined as a right to payment of a monetary obligation ( including credit card or loan receivables ). The above filings establish my secured interest and rights in these accounts, meaning any remaining debt obligations have been resolved via security interest or set-off. Continuing to report these accounts as delinquent ignores the UCC Article 9 rights and the fact that the obligations have been addressed.\n\nApostilled Documents : The relevant security agreements and affidavits have been apostilled pursuant to the 1961 Hague Convention, confirming their authenticity as public documents internationally. This means the discharge of debt and transfer of rights in those accounts are not only recorded domestically but also recognized internationally. The Credit Bureaus have constructive and actual notice of these apostilled public filings, yet have failed to adjust my reports accordingly. \nPrior Disputes FCRA Non-Compliance : I have disputed these accounts, yet you have failed to investigate and correct the information as required. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), you are obligated to maintain maximum possible accuracy and to promptly delete or correct information that can not be verified or is inaccurate. However, the accounts remain, showing months of false derogatory information. This is a blatant violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), 1681i, and 1681s-2 ( b ). The FCRA and its implementing regulations also require furnishers and bureaus to ensure information reflects the true status of the debt. For example, CFPB regulations define accuracy to mean that furnished information correctly reflects liability and performance on the account Reporting a canceled or otherwise settled debt as a charge-off with a balance due is inaccurate by definition under these standards.\n\nDemand : I demand that each Credit Bureau delete the accounts listed below in full from my credit reports. Written confirmation of deletion and updated credit reports should be provided within 5 calendar days of your receipt of this letter ( note : FCRA also requires that upon deletion after a dispute, the consumer be notified and provided a copy of the updated report within 5 business daysFailure to comply will result in immediate legal action, regulatory complaints, and pursuit of all available remedies against you.\n\n________________________________________ 2. Legal Basis for Removal of These Accounts 2.1 Debt Cancellation IRS Treatment and Federal Law Under federal law, a debt that is canceled or forgiven is treated as income to the debtor, because it is no longer an obligation to repay ( 26 U.S.C. 61 ( a ) ( 12 ) ). I have received IRS Form 1099-C for the relevant accounts ( or the creditors were obligated to issue them ), meaning the creditors formally canceled the debts. Once a debt is canceled, the creditor writes off the debt, and the IRS considers it discharged. In fact, IRS Publication 4681 explicitly notes that a taxpayer may exclude canceled debt from income in cases of insolvency or other exceptions reinforcing that the debt itself has been extinguished.\n\nImplication : If a debt no longer exists for purposes of collection ( and is only an IRS reportable event ), it is patently inaccurate for the Credit Bureau to continue reporting the account as an outstanding balance, past-due, or charge-off. Doing so misrepresents the consumers obligations and creditworthiness. By reporting a canceled debt as a live delinquency, you are furnishing false credit information. This runs afoul of the FCRAs accuracy mandate and also potentially constitutes deceptive conduct, since the true status ( discharged debt ) is not reflected. It also may violate 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), which prohibits furnishers from reporting information they know or have reason to know is inaccurate.\n\nFurthermore, federal regulations and banking guidelines require that creditors charge off delinquent accounts ( e.g. credit cards after 180 days of non-payment ) and cease treating them as assets. Once charged off, the debt is no longer carried on the creditors books, and if its also canceled ( with a 1099-C issued ), it is effectively resolved from a legal standpoint. Continuing to report such an account as if its an enforceable debt is not only inaccurate but also undermines the purpose of those regulations ( which is to accurately reflect when a debt is uncollectible ).\n\nIn summary, the presence of a 1099-C or charge-off on an account means the debt should not be reported as owed. I have included in prior disputes copies of relevant 1099-C forms and affidavits of debt cancellation. Your failure to remove these accounts despite evidence of cancellation is a willful violation of FCRAs requirement to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy XXXX. \nXXXX UCC Financing Statements and Security Agreements I have taken the additional step of securing my rights through the Uniform Commercial Code ( UCC ) filings mentioned above. These UCC-1 Financing Statements, filed with the Delaware Secretary of State and the Minnesota Secretary of State, give public notice of a security interest in the accounts/debts at issue. In the underlying security agreements ( duly executed and notarized ), the original creditors agreed ( by acquiescence or contract ) to transfer rights and title in the accounts to me, the secured party, as part of a settlement and discharge of the debt. These documents have been apostilled for authenticity under the Hague Convention of 1961, making them valid for recognition internationally.\n\nUnder UCC Article 9, an account is broadly defined as a right to payment of a monetary obligation, including those arising from loans or credit card transactions The debts being reported by your agency fall squarely within this definition. As the secured party of record on these accounts, I hold the senior rights to those obligations. In effect, the obligations have been assigned to me and discharged they are no longer owed by me to the original creditors. Therefore, from the perspective of any third-party ( including a CRA ), there is a XXXX balance and no delinquency the original creditor has been made whole or has relinquished its claim, and I, as the secured party, am not reporting any claim of delinquency on myself ( obviously ). \nYour reporting of these accounts as charge-offs or past-due ignores the UCC record and the reality that the debts have been settled via a security interest exchange. This not only violates FCRA ( by reporting fundamentally inaccurate account status ) but also interferes with my rights under UCC law. Minnesotas adoption of the UCC ( Minn. Stat. 336.9-101 et seq. ) and Delawares UCC provisions both dictate that a perfected security interest puts the world on notice of the secured partys rights. By continuing to report the debt as owed to the original creditor ( and in default ), you are publishing information that is inconsistent with public records and derogatory to the secured partys interest.\n\nI remind you that federal law ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ) requires furnishers to update and correct information that is no longer accurate. Here, the furnishers ( original creditors ) have documentation of these UCC filings and should have instructed deletion ; if they failed to do so, both they and you are liable for willful FCRA violations.\n\nThe existence of a publicly filed UCC-1 Financing Statement is easily verifiable evidence that the debt status is disputed and transferred failing to consider or investigate that is a violation of your duty under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ).\n\n2.3 FCRA Violations by the Credit Bureaus and Furnishers The FCRA imposes strict duties on credit reporting agencies ( CRAs ) like Experian, XXXX, and XXXX, as well as on the furnishers of information ( the creditors ). Your handling of these accounts breaches multiple FCRA provisions : Failure to Assure Accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) : Every time you prepare a consumer report, you must have reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information. Reporting a debt as outstanding when it was canceled ( or continuing to report a charge-off with a balance that was forgiven ) is not accurate, let alone maximally accurate. The law requires you to do more than simply parrot whatever a furnisher sent in the past you must ensure the info remains current and correct. Given the ample notices and disputes I provided, your procedures ( or lack thereof ) have clearly failed this standard. This is a textbook violation of 1681e ( b ).\n\nFailure to Reinvestigate and Delete ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) : When I disputed these accounts, you were obligated to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. If information is found inaccurate or can not be verified, you must delete it from the file. In my case, either the information was not verified ( e.g., the creditor failed to prove the debt was still owed, especially in light of a 1099-C or UCC filing ), or the reinvestigation was not reasonable. In fact, the continued presence of these accounts indicates you willfully ignored the evidence. Notably, 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) requires that disputed information that is inaccurate or unverifiable shall be promptly deleted from the credit file. Your refusal to delete is unlawful. Even worse, your own records ( as shown on my credit report ) indicate that some of these accounts were updated in response to my disputes rather than deleted an inadequate response since the only proper outcome was deletion, not an artificial update that left the derogatory mark in place.\n\nFurnisher Duties ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ) : After you received my dispute, you were required to notify the furnishers ( creditors ) within 5 business days ( which I believe you did ). Then each furnisher must investigate and report back to you the results, including correcting or deleting any information found to be inaccurate or unverifiable. If the furnisher confirms the info is inaccurate or can not verify it, they must instruct you to modify, delete, or permanently block the information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( E ) ) .Either the furnishers failed to do their job or you failed to implement their instructions, but either scenario is a violation : furnishers are liable under 1681s-2 ( b ) and you, the CRA, are liable under 1681e ( b ) and 1681i. The law even provides a fee-shifting provision for consumers to sue on these violations, which I will utilize if needed.\n\nFailure to Mark Accounts as Disputed : Additionally, under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( c ) and 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 3 ), any information under dispute must be noted as disputed in a consumers file if it is not deleted. My credit reports did not consistently show a dispute notation on these accounts after my disputes ( some show generic comments, others do not ). This is another FCRA violation failing to flag a disputed debt can itself give rise to liability ( its seen as furnishing incomplete information, which courts have held as actionable ).\n\nContinuing to Report After Notice of Error : FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) forbids a furnisher from reporting information after they have been notified of its inaccuracy, if it is in fact inaccurate. My disputes and provided documentation were such notice. Therefore, each month that the furnishers ( creditors ) allowed these tradelines to remain and update on my reports, they violated this section. While direct consumer enforcement of 1681s-2 ( a ) is limited ( primarily enforceable by regulators ), those violations underpin the willfulness of the 1681s-2 ( b ) and 1681i violations, strengthening my case for damages. Moreover, I reserve the right to report those furnishers to the CFPB and banking regulators for regulatory action.\n\nIn short, the FCRA has been violated on multiple counts. Your agencies have willfully reported inaccurate data and failed to correct it after disputes, and the furnishers have failed to conduct proper investigations or inform you of necessary deletions. The law provides for civil liability for willful noncompliance up to {$1000.00} in statutory damages per violation, plus actual damages and punitive damages ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n ). I have enumerated each month of false reporting as a separate violation below for damage calculation purposes.\n\n2.4 Violations of Minnesota Law and Federal Regulations Your conduct also implicates state law and other federal rules : Minnesota Statutes Chapter 47 : Minnesota law ( Chapter 47, Financial Corporations ) reflects a strong policy against false reporting by financial entities. For example, Minn. Stat. 47.26 makes it a felony for any officer or agent of a corporation to willfully violate the law and continue such violation for over 10 days. Reporting patently false credit information about a Minnesota consumer and stubbornly refusing to correct it after repeated notice ( for months on end ), could be construed as the type of willful, continued violation that the state considers criminal. Whether or not a prosecutor pursues such charges, this statute underscores the seriousness of your misconduct.\n\nAdditionally, to the extent the furnishers are financial institutions, providing false information to credit bureaus may violate Minnesotas banking laws ( Chapter XXXX ) and could invite action from the Minnesota Department XXXX XXXX. I will be forwarding a complaint to state authorities to review whether your actions constitute any breach of Minnesota law or regulations ( including but not limited to any unfair or deceptive practice statutes or regulations on reporting obligations ).\n\n12 C.F.R. CFPB Regulations ( Regulation V ) and OCC/FDIC Guidelines : Federal regulations require robust accuracy and integrity policies. The CFPBs Regulation V ( 12 C.F.R. 1022.42 and Appendix E ) obligates furnishers to establish internal controls to ensure the accuracy and integrity of furnished information. The continued reporting of these discharged debts indicates a failure of those controls. It suggests that either the furnishers did not properly update the status to the CRAs, or the CRAs ignored or mishandled the updates. Either way, regulatory guidelines were broken. Moreover, banking regulators ( OCC, FDIC, Federal Reserve ) have issued guidelines ( e.g. the Uniform Retail Credit Classification Policy ) requiring timely charge-off of delinquent debts ( generally at 180 days past due ) and cessation of accruing interest, etc. If after charge-off a bank chooses to cancel the debt ( often to claim a tax benefit or comply with XXXX rules ), that information must be accurately reflected. By failing to note the true status ( canceled ) on credit reports, the furnishers ( and you as their conduit ) are effectively publishing a false account of the banks own credit loss ( making it look as if the bank could still collect money which it has legally discharged ). This could even raise issues with 12 C.F.R. 621.5 ( for institutions governed by the XXXX XXXX XXXX ) which requires writing off uncollectible loans, or other agency-specific rules, by creating a discrepancy between the banks books and consumer credit reports.\n\n31 C.F.R. Treasury Regulations : Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations contains the Federal Claims Collection Standards and other rules regarding debt collection. When a debt is conclusively deemed uncollectible ( as is the case with these accounts ), federal policy ( e.g. 31 C.F.R. 285 and 903 under the Debt Collection Improvement Act standards ) is to stop active collection and update records accordingly. In spirit, continuing to report a canceled debt as if owed is contrary to these federal standards. It also potentially mischaracterizes the debts legal status, which could be seen as an unfair collection practice if done to pressure payment on a nonexistent obligation. \nIn summary, your actions are not only violating the FCRA but also undermine state law protections and regulatory frameworks designed to ensure truthful credit reporting and financial transparency. I will not hesitate to invoke all relevant laws in a court of law to hold you accountable. \nXXXX Federal Securities Law Considerations ( Exchange Act of XXXX ) XXXX, XXXX, and Experian ( through its parent company ) are publicly traded companies subject to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This means you file annual reports ( Form 10-K ) and other disclosures with the Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ) , and you are required to disclose material legal proceedings and risks. By engaging in systemic FCRA violations and accruing significant potential liabilities to consumers like myself, you XXXX also be violating SEC disclosure requirements if you fail to adequately disclose these issues to your shareholders. \nNotably, in Equifaxs most recent Form 10-K, the company acknowledged that the number of consumer lawsuits alleging FCRA violations have increased substantially over the past several years. This indicates that these bureaus are aware of widespread non-compliance problems. TransUnions filings likewise disclosed that the CFPB issued a NORA ( Notice and Opportunity to Respond and Advise ) letter alleging TransUnion violated FCRA dispute investigation requirements.\n\nSuch an allegation from the CFPB is serious ; if TransUnion ( or any bureau ) fails to correct known FCRA issues, it could lead to enforcement action or large fines clearly material information for investors.\n\nIf you continue to willfully flout the FCRA ( as in my case ) and do not disclose the scope of this non-compliance in your SEC filings, you could be engaging in securities fraud by omission. Rule 10b-5 under the 1934 Act prohibits making any untrue statement of a material fact or omitting to state a material fact necessary to make statements not misleading. By now, it is clear that your business faces material risks due to the way you handle consumer disputes and credit reporting accuracy ( the multitude of lawsuits and CFPB inquiries is evidence of that ). Should litigation arise from my case or others like it, or should regulatory fines hit, your investors would rightfully say : why wasnt this fully disclosed?\n\nI put this in my demand letter to underscore that your legal troubles do not exist in a vacuum they affect your duties to regulators beyond the CFPB. I fully intend to submit copies of my complaints and any eventual lawsuit to the SECs enforcement division, so they can evaluate whether you have properly disclosed the legal and compliance risks related to your credit reporting practices. Equifaxs 10-K even warns that the CFPB can seek penalties of up to {>= $1,000,000} per day for knowing violations of consumer finance laws. Consider this letter as notice that your FCRA violations are knowing and willful if you choose to ignore this and not remediate, any resulting penalties ( at potentially {$1.00} million per day per violation ) will be on your heads and will certainly interest your investors and the SEC.\n\nBottom line : It is in your own corporate and shareholder interest, as well as your legal obligation, to delete the inaccurate information immediately. Continuing to report false data not only harms me, but exposes you to mounting liability and regulatory risk, which you can avoid ( or limit ) by doing what the law requires correcting the information now.\n\n3. Inaccurate Accounts and Damage Calculations Below is a breakdown of each inaccurate account that remains on my credit reports, the period of wrongful reporting, and the statutory damages I will seek if this matter proceeds to litigation. Each month that an account was reported with false information after it should have been removed is counted as a separate FCRA violation ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n provides up to {$1000.00} per violation for willful noncompliance ). I will also seek punitive damages and attorneys fees as allowed. The damages calculation here is an estimate of FCRA statutory damages alone, which will be adjusted as necessary.\n\n3.1 Experian Accounts to Delete and Liability The following accounts on my Experian credit file are inaccurately reported and must be deleted. Experian failed to remove these even after disputes, in violation of the FCRA. \nCreditor ( Account ) Account XXXX. Status on Experian Inaccuracy Period Months of Violation Damages ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Bank ) Credit Card # XXXX Charged-Off, {$5600.00} balance ( should be {$0.00} debt canceled ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off with balance ) 17 months {$17000.00} XXXX XXXX  ( Chase ) Credit Card # XXXX Charged-Off, {$6100.00} balance, {$4000.00} past due ( debt canceled; balance should be {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off/collection ) 14 months {$14000.00} XXXX Bank Credit Card # XXXX Charged-Off, {$2300.00} balance ( debt canceled XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX show {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off with balance ) 14 months {$14000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Auto Loan # XXXX ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Charged-Off Auto Loan, ~ {$40000.00} balance ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX set-off should show paid as agreed or {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported monthly as charge-off ) 13 months {$13000.00} Santander/Chrysler Capital Auto Lease # XXXX Charged-Off, {$3800.00} past due ( lease contract terminated, balance not owed ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off XXXX 3 months {$3000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Personal Loan # XXXX ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Open, {$21000.00} balance, {$4200.00} past due ( inaccurate debt was subject to UCC lien, should not be reporting as past XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported XXXX days late continuously ) 6 months {$6000.00} Experian Total Statutory Damages : {$68000.00} for XXXX violation-months XXXX XXXX punitive damages for willful conduct. \nNotes : Each listed account should have been deleted entirely. For example, the XXXX XXXX debt was canceled in XXXX, yet Experian continued to report it as a charge-off every month into XXXX. The XXXX XXXX accounts were subject to my XXXX agreement filings in XXXX, yet Experian did not remove them and even updated them as recently as XX/XX/XXXX, showing substantial delinquency. This demonstrates willfulness Experian had notice but chose to let the damaging, false information persist. \nXXXX XXXX Accounts to Delete and Liability The following accounts remain on my XXXX credit report with similar inaccuracies ( it is expected TransUnions data mirrors Experians, as the furnishers provided the same false information to all bureaus ). XXXX has likewise failed to delete these entries after my disputes. \n( If account details differ slightly on XXXX, they will be identified by the creditor and account number. The same rationale from XXXX table applies. ) Creditor ( Account ) Account XXXX. Status on XXXX Inaccuracy Period Months Damages ( @ $ XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Bank ) # XXXX Charged-Off, balance {$5600.00} ( debt canceled ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 17 {$17000.00} XXXX Card ( Chase ) # XXXX Charged-Off, balance {$6100.00} ( debt canceled ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 14 {$14000.00} XXXX Bank # XXXX Charged-Off, balance {$2300.00} ( debt canceled ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 14 {$14000.00} XXXX Federal XXXX Auto Loan # XXXX Charged-Off XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX balance ( debt set-off ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 13 {$13000.00} Santander/Chrysler Cap Lease # XXXX Charged-Off Lease, ~ $ XXXX past XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$3000.00} XXXX Federal XXXX Pers. Loan # XXXX Open, {$4200.00} past due ( should be {$0.00} ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$6000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : {$67000.00} ( estimated ). \nNotes : XXXX was included in the same disputes and received the same evidence. It is equally liable for each month it continued reporting these accounts. Notably, TransUnions own records should reflect my disputes ( including any CFPB complaint I filed ). Its failure to correct or even mark the accounts as disputed demonstrates a reckless disregard of its duties. \nXXXX XXXX Accounts to Delete and XXXX The XXXX credit report also contains these erroneous accounts. XXXX liability is calculated similarly : XXXX ( Account ) Account XXXX. Status on XXXX Inaccuracy Period Months Damages ( @ $ XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX  ) # XXXX Charged Off, {$5600.00} balance ( canceled debt ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 17 {$17000.00} XXXX XXXX  ( Chase ) # XXXX Charged Off, {$6100.00} balance ( canceled debt ) XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$14000.00} XXXX XXXX  # XXXX Charged Off, {$2300.00} balance ( canceled debt ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 14 {$14000.00} XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Charged-Off Auto, ~ $ XXXX balance ( set-off ) XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  {$13000.00} XXXX XXXX Lease # XXXX Charged-Off XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX past due ( not owed ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$3000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Open, past due {$4200.00} ( inaccurate, not owed ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$6000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : {$67000.00} ( estimated ). \nNotes : XXXX has historically had issues with credit report accuracy ( as its risk disclosures concede and it appears the same pattern occurred here. All three bureaus are expected to coordinate deletion once one confirms an error, yet in my case none took proper action thus all three face parallel liability. \nXXXX XXXX ( All Bureaus ) : {$200000.00} in preliminary statutory damages ( Experian $ XXXX + XXXX $ XXXX + XXXX $ XXXX ), plus any actual damages to my credit and emotional distress ( to be determined ) and punitive damages for willful FCRA violations. These figures far exceed the threshold for federal litigation, and I will seek the maximum allowed, including possibly class-action remedies if applicable ( noting that the patterns here XXXX affect many consumers ). \nI highlight these amounts to make clear that ignoring my rightful demands could prove extremely costly to your companies. And these are per consumer ; regulators can and do seek even higher penalties ( as noted, CFPB can fine up to {$1.00} XXXX per day per violation, which could theoretically dwarf my private claim ). This is entirely avoidable if you simply do what the law requires now. \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDemand for Immediate Action I hereby demand the following relief from each Credit Bureau, to be completed within XXXX calendar days of receipt of this letter : XXXX. Permanent Deletion of Listed Accounts : Remove in their entirety the above-referenced accounts from my credit file. This means deleting the trade line, not just changing the status to paid or disputed. The only acceptable outcome under law is deletion, given the circumstances ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) ). No reinsertion is permitted unless verified by new certified information, and you must notify me if any reinsertion is attemp\n\nted ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) ). However, since the facts show these accounts are not verifiable and not owed, they should not ever be reinserted.\n\n2. Written Confirmation : Provide written confirmation on your company letterhead that each disputed account has been deleted due to inaccuracies. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) and ( 8 ), you must send me notice of the results of my dispute and a copy of my revised credit report showing the deletions within 5 business days. I expect this confirmation by email and mail given the urgency.\n\n3. Cease Reporting to Others : Ensure that these accounts are deleted across all your reporting and no longer provided to any third parties. Additionally, notify any other consumer reporting agency to which you furnish data ( if any, such as secondary bureaus or resellers ) of the deletions, as required by law ( furnishers must update all CRAs, and CRAs should communicate results under 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( D ) ). This includes updating any data you have shared with insurance scoring companies, tenant screening, or employment screening companies that might have obtained my report with these erroneous entries. \nXXXX. Damages and Compensation ( Reservation ) : While deletion is necessary, I also demand that you preserve all records related to these accounts and my disputes, as I am evaluating further legal action for the harm already caused. My XXXX XXXX and opportunities have suffered due to your reporting of false delinquencies ( for instance, I have been denied credit and faced higher interest rates, which are provable actual damages ). I XXXX seek monetary compensation in addition to the statutory damages outlined if we proceed to court. This letter is not an offer to settle my damages claim ; it is a demand for compliance. If you wish to discuss a broader settlement ( including monetary relief to avoid a lawsuit ), you XXXX contact me in writing with an offer after you have deleted the accounts and provided proof. \nXXXX. Refrain from Retaliation or Secondary Reporting : Do not, under any circumstances, reinsert these items or replace them with any coded notation that could indirectly harm my credit ( such as labeling them as consumer disagrees or some obscure code ). The only correct action is a clean deletion. Also, do not sell or transfer information about these disputed debts to any third-party debt XXXX or data aggregators if any such activity is detected, it will be met with additional legal action for breach of the FCRA and XXXX the FDCPA if applicable. \nResponse Deadline 5 Days : XXXX is of the essence. You have XXXX calendar days from receipt of this notice to complete the deletions and confirm in writing. This timeline is reasonable and in fact slightly more lenient than FCRAs own dispute timeline in cases where the information is obviously wrong or unverifiable. Given that you have had months of prior notice through my disputes, and that I have now provided a detailed legal rationale, you should need no additional time to investigate. Any delay beyond 5 days will be considered further willful non-compliance. If by the end of the XXXX day I do not have written confirmation of deletion from each of you, I will proceed with the following without further notice : File a lawsuit against each of you for violations of the FCRA ( and any other applicable laws, such as defamation and Minnesota state law ). I will seek the full $ XXXX in damages itemized above, plus attorneys fees and punitive damages. \nI will also seek injunctive relief as appropriate. Be advised that courts have awarded significant punitive damages in cases of willful FCRA violations where agencies ignored multiple dispute notices. Your conduct here is egregious and meets the standard for willfulness ( especially after this letter puts you on clear notice ). Each bureau will be sued in federal court ( with venue in my district ). \nFile regulatory complaints : I will file formal complaints with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Trade Commission, my states Attorney General, the Minnesota Department of Commerce, and any other relevant oversight body. These complaints XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-07T18:58:04.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"55112","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12858504","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with non-monetary relief","submitted_via":"Web","company":"EQUIFAX, INC.","date_received":"2025-04-07T18:57:33.000Z","state":"MN","company_public_response":null,"sub_issue":"Their investigation did not fix an error on your report"},"highlight":{"complaint_what_happened":["# XXXX ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Charged-Off Auto <em>Loan</em>, ~ {$40000.00} balance ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX set-off should show paid as agreed or {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported monthly as charge-off ) 13 months {$13000.00} Santander/Chrysler Capital Auto <em>Lease</em> # XXXX Charged-Off, {$3800.00} past due ( <em>lease</em> contract terminated, balance not owed ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off XXXX 3 months {$3000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Personal <em>Loan</em> # XXXX ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX"],"issue":["<em>Problem</em> with a company's investigation into an existing <em>problem</em>"]},"sort":[5.039192,"12858504"]},{"_index":"complaint-public-v1","_id":"12858035","_score":5.01484,"_source":{"product":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","complaint_what_happened":"Summary of Demand Please take notice that I hereby demand the immediate deletion of multiple charged-off and late-payment accounts from my credit files. These accounts ( identified in detail below ) are inaccurately reported and unlawfully retained on my credit reports despite : Debt Cancellation : The debts were canceled/discharged, triggering IRS reporting of canceled debt as income ( 26 U.S.C. 61 ( a ) ( 12 ) ) and implicating IRS Publication 4681 on canceled debts. A canceled debt is no longer an enforceable obligation, and continuing to report it as owed is false. ( Indeed, IRS Pub. 4681 notes that a taxpayer may not have to include canceled debt in income under certain conditions underscoring that the debt is treated as extinguished. ) UCC Public Filings : I have filed and perfected UCC-1 Financing Statements ( Delaware Filing XXXX XXXX ; Minnesota Filing XXXX XXXX ) accompanied by executed security agreements. These filings are public records that put all parties on notice that the referenced debts have been secured and settled. Under the Uniform Commercial Code, an account is defined as a right to payment of a monetary obligation ( including credit card or loan receivables ). The above filings establish my secured interest and rights in these accounts, meaning any remaining debt obligations have been resolved via security interest or set-off. Continuing to report these accounts as delinquent ignores the UCC Article 9 rights and the fact that the obligations have been addressed.\n\nApostilled Documents : The relevant security agreements and affidavits have been apostilled pursuant to the 1961 Hague Convention, confirming their authenticity as public documents internationally. This means the discharge of debt and transfer of rights in those accounts are not only recorded domestically but also recognized internationally. The Credit Bureaus have constructive and actual notice of these apostilled public filings, yet have failed to adjust my reports accordingly. \nPrior Disputes FCRA Non-Compliance : I have disputed these accounts, yet you have failed to investigate and correct the information as required. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), you are obligated to maintain maximum possible accuracy and to promptly delete or correct information that can not be verified or is inaccurate. However, the accounts remain, showing months of false derogatory information. This is a blatant violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), 1681i, and 1681s-2 ( b ). The FCRA and its implementing regulations also require furnishers and bureaus to ensure information reflects the true status of the debt. For example, CFPB regulations define accuracy to mean that furnished information correctly reflects liability and performance on the account Reporting a canceled or otherwise settled debt as a charge-off with a balance due is inaccurate by definition under these standards.\n\nDemand : I demand that each Credit Bureau delete the accounts listed below in full from my credit reports. Written confirmation of deletion and updated credit reports should be provided within 5 calendar days of your receipt of this letter ( note : FCRA also requires that upon deletion after a dispute, the consumer be notified and provided a copy of the updated report within 5 business daysFailure to comply will result in immediate legal action, regulatory complaints, and pursuit of all available remedies against you.\n\n________________________________________ 2. Legal Basis for Removal of These Accounts 2.1 Debt Cancellation IRS Treatment and Federal Law Under federal law, a debt that is canceled or forgiven is treated as income to the debtor, because it is no longer an obligation to repay ( 26 U.S.C. 61 ( a ) ( 12 ) ). I have received IRS Form 1099-C for the relevant accounts ( or the creditors were obligated to issue them ), meaning the creditors formally canceled the debts. Once a debt is canceled, the creditor writes off the debt, and the IRS considers it discharged. In fact, IRS Publication 4681 explicitly notes that a taxpayer may exclude canceled debt from income in cases of insolvency or other exceptions reinforcing that the debt itself has been extinguished.\n\nImplication : If a debt no longer exists for purposes of collection ( and is only an IRS reportable event ), it is patently inaccurate for the Credit Bureau to continue reporting the account as an outstanding balance, past-due, or charge-off. Doing so misrepresents the consumers obligations and creditworthiness. By reporting a canceled debt as a live delinquency, you are furnishing false credit information. This runs afoul of the FCRAs accuracy mandate and also potentially constitutes deceptive conduct, since the true status ( discharged debt ) is not reflected. It also may violate 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), which prohibits furnishers from reporting information they know or have reason to know is inaccurate.\n\nFurthermore, federal regulations and banking guidelines require that creditors charge off delinquent accounts ( e.g. credit cards after 180 days of non-payment ) and cease treating them as assets. Once charged off, the debt is no longer carried on the creditors books, and if its also canceled ( with a 1099-C issued ), it is effectively resolved from a legal standpoint. Continuing to report such an account as if its an enforceable debt is not only inaccurate but also undermines the purpose of those regulations ( which is to accurately reflect when a debt is uncollectible ).\n\nIn summary, the presence of a 1099-C or charge-off on an account means the debt should not be reported as owed. I have included in prior disputes copies of relevant 1099-C forms and affidavits of debt cancellation. Your failure to remove these accounts despite evidence of cancellation is a willful violation of FCRAs requirement to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy XXXX. \nXXXX UCC Financing Statements and Security Agreements I have taken the additional step of securing my rights through the Uniform Commercial Code ( UCC ) filings mentioned above. These UCC-1 Financing Statements, filed with the Delaware Secretary of State and the Minnesota Secretary of State, give public notice of a security interest in the accounts/debts at issue. In the underlying security agreements ( duly executed and notarized ), the original creditors agreed ( by acquiescence or contract ) to transfer rights and title in the accounts to me, the secured party, as part of a settlement and discharge of the debt. These documents have been apostilled for authenticity under the Hague Convention of 1961, making them valid for recognition internationally.\n\nUnder UCC Article 9, an account is broadly defined as a right to payment of a monetary obligation, including those arising from loans or credit card transactions The debts being reported by your agency fall squarely within this definition. As the secured party of record on these accounts, I hold the senior rights to those obligations. In effect, the obligations have been assigned to me and discharged they are no longer owed by me to the original creditors. Therefore, from the perspective of any third-party ( including a CRA ), there is a XXXX balance and no delinquency the original creditor has been made whole or has relinquished its claim, and I, as the secured party, am not reporting any claim of delinquency on myself ( obviously ). \nYour reporting of these accounts as charge-offs or past-due ignores the UCC record and the reality that the debts have been settled via a security interest exchange. This not only violates FCRA ( by reporting fundamentally inaccurate account status ) but also interferes with my rights under UCC law. Minnesotas adoption of the UCC ( Minn. Stat. 336.9-101 et seq. ) and Delawares UCC provisions both dictate that a perfected security interest puts the world on notice of the secured partys rights. By continuing to report the debt as owed to the original creditor ( and in default ), you are publishing information that is inconsistent with public records and derogatory to the secured partys interest.\n\nI remind you that federal law ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ) requires furnishers to update and correct information that is no longer accurate. Here, the furnishers ( original creditors ) have documentation of these UCC filings and should have instructed deletion ; if they failed to do so, both they and you are liable for willful FCRA violations.\n\nThe existence of a publicly filed UCC-1 Financing Statement is easily verifiable evidence that the debt status is disputed and transferred failing to consider or investigate that is a violation of your duty under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ).\n\n2.3 FCRA Violations by the Credit Bureaus and Furnishers The FCRA imposes strict duties on credit reporting agencies ( CRAs ) like Experian, XXXX, and XXXX, as well as on the furnishers of information ( the creditors ). Your handling of these accounts breaches multiple FCRA provisions : Failure to Assure Accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) : Every time you prepare a consumer report, you must have reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information. Reporting a debt as outstanding when it was canceled ( or continuing to report a charge-off with a balance that was forgiven ) is not accurate, let alone maximally accurate. The law requires you to do more than simply parrot whatever a furnisher sent in the past you must ensure the info remains current and correct. Given the ample notices and disputes I provided, your procedures ( or lack thereof ) have clearly failed this standard. This is a textbook violation of 1681e ( b ).\n\nFailure to Reinvestigate and Delete ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ) : When I disputed these accounts, you were obligated to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. If information is found inaccurate or can not be verified, you must delete it from the file. In my case, either the information was not verified ( e.g., the creditor failed to prove the debt was still owed, especially in light of a 1099-C or UCC filing ), or the reinvestigation was not reasonable. In fact, the continued presence of these accounts indicates you willfully ignored the evidence. Notably, 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) requires that disputed information that is inaccurate or unverifiable shall be promptly deleted from the credit file. Your refusal to delete is unlawful. Even worse, your own records ( as shown on my credit report ) indicate that some of these accounts were updated in response to my disputes rather than deleted an inadequate response since the only proper outcome was deletion, not an artificial update that left the derogatory mark in place.\n\nFurnisher Duties ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ) : After you received my dispute, you were required to notify the furnishers ( creditors ) within 5 business days ( which I believe you did ). Then each furnisher must investigate and report back to you the results, including correcting or deleting any information found to be inaccurate or unverifiable. If the furnisher confirms the info is inaccurate or can not verify it, they must instruct you to modify, delete, or permanently block the information ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( E ) ) .Either the furnishers failed to do their job or you failed to implement their instructions, but either scenario is a violation : furnishers are liable under 1681s-2 ( b ) and you, the CRA, are liable under 1681e ( b ) and 1681i. The law even provides a fee-shifting provision for consumers to sue on these violations, which I will utilize if needed.\n\nFailure to Mark Accounts as Disputed : Additionally, under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( c ) and 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 3 ), any information under dispute must be noted as disputed in a consumers file if it is not deleted. My credit reports did not consistently show a dispute notation on these accounts after my disputes ( some show generic comments, others do not ). This is another FCRA violation failing to flag a disputed debt can itself give rise to liability ( its seen as furnishing incomplete information, which courts have held as actionable ).\n\nContinuing to Report After Notice of Error : FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) forbids a furnisher from reporting information after they have been notified of its inaccuracy, if it is in fact inaccurate. My disputes and provided documentation were such notice. Therefore, each month that the furnishers ( creditors ) allowed these tradelines to remain and update on my reports, they violated this section. While direct consumer enforcement of 1681s-2 ( a ) is limited ( primarily enforceable by regulators ), those violations underpin the willfulness of the 1681s-2 ( b ) and 1681i violations, strengthening my case for damages. Moreover, I reserve the right to report those furnishers to the CFPB and banking regulators for regulatory action.\n\nIn short, the FCRA has been violated on multiple counts. Your agencies have willfully reported inaccurate data and failed to correct it after disputes, and the furnishers have failed to conduct proper investigations or inform you of necessary deletions. The law provides for civil liability for willful noncompliance up to {$1000.00} in statutory damages per violation, plus actual damages and punitive damages ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n ). I have enumerated each month of false reporting as a separate violation below for damage calculation purposes.\n\n2.4 Violations of Minnesota Law and Federal Regulations Your conduct also implicates state law and other federal rules : Minnesota Statutes Chapter 47 : Minnesota law ( Chapter 47, Financial Corporations ) reflects a strong policy against false reporting by financial entities. For example, Minn. Stat. 47.26 makes it a felony for any officer or agent of a corporation to willfully violate the law and continue such violation for over 10 days. Reporting patently false credit information about a Minnesota consumer and stubbornly refusing to correct it after repeated notice ( for months on end ), could be construed as the type of willful, continued violation that the state considers criminal. Whether or not a prosecutor pursues such charges, this statute underscores the seriousness of your misconduct.\n\nAdditionally, to the extent the furnishers are financial institutions, providing false information to credit bureaus may violate Minnesotas banking laws ( Chapter XXXX ) and could invite action from the Minnesota Department XXXX XXXX. I will be forwarding a complaint to state authorities to review whether your actions constitute any breach of Minnesota law or regulations ( including but not limited to any unfair or deceptive practice statutes or regulations on reporting obligations ).\n\n12 C.F.R. CFPB Regulations ( Regulation V ) and OCC/FDIC Guidelines : Federal regulations require robust accuracy and integrity policies. The CFPBs Regulation V ( 12 C.F.R. 1022.42 and Appendix E ) obligates furnishers to establish internal controls to ensure the accuracy and integrity of furnished information. The continued reporting of these discharged debts indicates a failure of those controls. It suggests that either the furnishers did not properly update the status to the CRAs, or the CRAs ignored or mishandled the updates. Either way, regulatory guidelines were broken. Moreover, banking regulators ( OCC, FDIC, Federal Reserve ) have issued guidelines ( e.g. the Uniform Retail Credit Classification Policy ) requiring timely charge-off of delinquent debts ( generally at 180 days past due ) and cessation of accruing interest, etc. If after charge-off a bank chooses to cancel the debt ( often to claim a tax benefit or comply with XXXX rules ), that information must be accurately reflected. By failing to note the true status ( canceled ) on credit reports, the furnishers ( and you as their conduit ) are effectively publishing a false account of the banks own credit loss ( making it look as if the bank could still collect money which it has legally discharged ). This could even raise issues with 12 C.F.R. 621.5 ( for institutions governed by the XXXX XXXX XXXX ) which requires writing off uncollectible loans, or other agency-specific rules, by creating a discrepancy between the banks books and consumer credit reports.\n\n31 C.F.R. Treasury Regulations : Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations contains the Federal Claims Collection Standards and other rules regarding debt collection. When a debt is conclusively deemed uncollectible ( as is the case with these accounts ), federal policy ( e.g. 31 C.F.R. 285 and 903 under the Debt Collection Improvement Act standards ) is to stop active collection and update records accordingly. In spirit, continuing to report a canceled debt as if owed is contrary to these federal standards. It also potentially mischaracterizes the debts legal status, which could be seen as an unfair collection practice if done to pressure payment on a nonexistent obligation. \nIn summary, your actions are not only violating the FCRA but also undermine state law protections and regulatory frameworks designed to ensure truthful credit reporting and financial transparency. I will not hesitate to invoke all relevant laws in a court of law to hold you accountable. \nXXXX Federal Securities Law Considerations ( Exchange Act of XXXX ) XXXX, XXXX, and Experian ( through its parent company ) are publicly traded companies subject to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This means you file annual reports ( Form 10-K ) and other disclosures with the Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ) , and you are required to disclose material legal proceedings and risks. By engaging in systemic FCRA violations and accruing significant potential liabilities to consumers like myself, you XXXX also be violating SEC disclosure requirements if you fail to adequately disclose these issues to your shareholders. \nNotably, in Equifaxs most recent Form 10-K, the company acknowledged that the number of consumer lawsuits alleging FCRA violations have increased substantially over the past several years. This indicates that these bureaus are aware of widespread non-compliance problems. TransUnions filings likewise disclosed that the CFPB issued a NORA ( Notice and Opportunity to Respond and Advise ) letter alleging TransUnion violated FCRA dispute investigation requirements.\n\nSuch an allegation from the CFPB is serious ; if TransUnion ( or any bureau ) fails to correct known FCRA issues, it could lead to enforcement action or large fines clearly material information for investors.\n\nIf you continue to willfully flout the FCRA ( as in my case ) and do not disclose the scope of this non-compliance in your SEC filings, you could be engaging in securities fraud by omission. Rule 10b-5 under the 1934 Act prohibits making any untrue statement of a material fact or omitting to state a material fact necessary to make statements not misleading. By now, it is clear that your business faces material risks due to the way you handle consumer disputes and credit reporting accuracy ( the multitude of lawsuits and CFPB inquiries is evidence of that ). Should litigation arise from my case or others like it, or should regulatory fines hit, your investors would rightfully say : why wasnt this fully disclosed?\n\nI put this in my demand letter to underscore that your legal troubles do not exist in a vacuum they affect your duties to regulators beyond the CFPB. I fully intend to submit copies of my complaints and any eventual lawsuit to the SECs enforcement division, so they can evaluate whether you have properly disclosed the legal and compliance risks related to your credit reporting practices. Equifaxs 10-K even warns that the CFPB can seek penalties of up to {>= $1,000,000} per day for knowing violations of consumer finance laws. Consider this letter as notice that your FCRA violations are knowing and willful if you choose to ignore this and not remediate, any resulting penalties ( at potentially {$1.00} million per day per violation ) will be on your heads and will certainly interest your investors and the SEC.\n\nBottom line : It is in your own corporate and shareholder interest, as well as your legal obligation, to delete the inaccurate information immediately. Continuing to report false data not only harms me, but exposes you to mounting liability and regulatory risk, which you can avoid ( or limit ) by doing what the law requires correcting the information now.\n\n3. Inaccurate Accounts and Damage Calculations Below is a breakdown of each inaccurate account that remains on my credit reports, the period of wrongful reporting, and the statutory damages I will seek if this matter proceeds to litigation. Each month that an account was reported with false information after it should have been removed is counted as a separate FCRA violation ( 15 U.S.C. 1681n provides up to {$1000.00} per violation for willful noncompliance ). I will also seek punitive damages and attorneys fees as allowed. The damages calculation here is an estimate of FCRA statutory damages alone, which will be adjusted as necessary.\n\n3.1 Experian Accounts to Delete and Liability The following accounts on my Experian credit file are inaccurately reported and must be deleted. Experian failed to remove these even after disputes, in violation of the FCRA. \nCreditor ( Account ) Account XXXX. Status on Experian Inaccuracy Period Months of Violation Damages ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Bank ) Credit Card # XXXX Charged-Off, {$5600.00} balance ( should be {$0.00} debt canceled ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off with balance ) 17 months {$17000.00} XXXX XXXX  ( Chase ) Credit Card # XXXX Charged-Off, {$6100.00} balance, {$4000.00} past due ( debt canceled; balance should be {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off/collection ) 14 months {$14000.00} XXXX Bank Credit Card # XXXX Charged-Off, {$2300.00} balance ( debt canceled XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX show {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off with balance ) 14 months {$14000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Auto Loan # XXXX ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Charged-Off Auto Loan, ~ {$40000.00} balance ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX set-off should show paid as agreed or {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported monthly as charge-off ) 13 months {$13000.00} Santander/Chrysler Capital Auto Lease # XXXX Charged-Off, {$3800.00} past due ( lease contract terminated, balance not owed ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off XXXX 3 months {$3000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Personal Loan # XXXX ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Open, {$21000.00} balance, {$4200.00} past due ( inaccurate debt was subject to UCC lien, should not be reporting as past XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported XXXX days late continuously ) 6 months {$6000.00} Experian Total Statutory Damages : {$68000.00} for XXXX violation-months XXXX XXXX punitive damages for willful conduct. \nNotes : Each listed account should have been deleted entirely. For example, the XXXX XXXX debt was canceled in XXXX, yet Experian continued to report it as a charge-off every month into XXXX. The XXXX XXXX accounts were subject to my XXXX agreement filings in XXXX, yet Experian did not remove them and even updated them as recently as XX/XX/XXXX, showing substantial delinquency. This demonstrates willfulness Experian had notice but chose to let the damaging, false information persist. \nXXXX XXXX Accounts to Delete and Liability The following accounts remain on my XXXX credit report with similar inaccuracies ( it is expected TransUnions data mirrors Experians, as the furnishers provided the same false information to all bureaus ). XXXX has likewise failed to delete these entries after my disputes. \n( If account details differ slightly on XXXX, they will be identified by the creditor and account number. The same rationale from XXXX table applies. ) Creditor ( Account ) Account XXXX. Status on XXXX Inaccuracy Period Months Damages ( @ $ XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Bank ) # XXXX Charged-Off, balance {$5600.00} ( debt canceled ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 17 {$17000.00} XXXX Card ( Chase ) # XXXX Charged-Off, balance {$6100.00} ( debt canceled ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 14 {$14000.00} XXXX Bank # XXXX Charged-Off, balance {$2300.00} ( debt canceled ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 14 {$14000.00} XXXX Federal XXXX Auto Loan # XXXX Charged-Off XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX balance ( debt set-off ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 13 {$13000.00} Santander/Chrysler Cap Lease # XXXX Charged-Off Lease, ~ $ XXXX past XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$3000.00} XXXX Federal XXXX Pers. Loan # XXXX Open, {$4200.00} past due ( should be {$0.00} ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$6000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : {$67000.00} ( estimated ). \nNotes : XXXX was included in the same disputes and received the same evidence. It is equally liable for each month it continued reporting these accounts. Notably, TransUnions own records should reflect my disputes ( including any CFPB complaint I filed ). Its failure to correct or even mark the accounts as disputed demonstrates a reckless disregard of its duties. \nXXXX XXXX Accounts to Delete and XXXX The XXXX credit report also contains these erroneous accounts. XXXX liability is calculated similarly : XXXX ( Account ) Account XXXX. Status on XXXX Inaccuracy Period Months Damages ( @ $ XXXX ) XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX  ) # XXXX Charged Off, {$5600.00} balance ( canceled debt ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 17 {$17000.00} XXXX XXXX  ( Chase ) # XXXX Charged Off, {$6100.00} balance ( canceled debt ) XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX {$14000.00} XXXX XXXX  # XXXX Charged Off, {$2300.00} balance ( canceled debt ) XX/XX/XXXX Feb 2025 14 {$14000.00} XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Charged-Off Auto, ~ $ XXXX balance ( set-off ) XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  {$13000.00} XXXX XXXX Lease # XXXX Charged-Off XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX past due ( not owed ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$3000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Open, past due {$4200.00} ( inaccurate, not owed ) XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX {$6000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX : {$67000.00} ( estimated ). \nNotes : XXXX has historically had issues with credit report accuracy ( as its risk disclosures concede and it appears the same pattern occurred here. All three bureaus are expected to coordinate deletion once one confirms an error, yet in my case none took proper action thus all three face parallel liability. \nXXXX XXXX ( All Bureaus ) : {$200000.00} in preliminary statutory damages ( Experian $ XXXX + XXXX $ XXXX + XXXX $ XXXX ), plus any actual damages to my credit and emotional distress ( to be determined ) and punitive damages for willful FCRA violations. These figures far exceed the threshold for federal litigation, and I will seek the maximum allowed, including possibly class-action remedies if applicable ( noting that the patterns here XXXX affect many consumers ). \nI highlight these amounts to make clear that ignoring my rightful demands could prove extremely costly to your companies. And these are per consumer ; regulators can and do seek even higher penalties ( as noted, CFPB can fine up to {$1.00} XXXX per day per violation, which could theoretically dwarf my private claim ). This is entirely avoidable if you simply do what the law requires now. \n\n\n\n\n\n\nDemand for Immediate Action I hereby demand the following relief from each Credit Bureau, to be completed within XXXX calendar days of receipt of this letter : XXXX. Permanent Deletion of Listed Accounts : Remove in their entirety the above-referenced accounts from my credit file. This means deleting the trade line, not just changing the status to paid or disputed. The only acceptable outcome under law is deletion, given the circumstances ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) ). No reinsertion is permitted unless verified by new certified information, and you must notify me if any reinsertion is attemp\n\nted ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ) ). However, since the facts show these accounts are not verifiable and not owed, they should not ever be reinserted.\n\n2. Written Confirmation : Provide written confirmation on your company letterhead that each disputed account has been deleted due to inaccuracies. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) and ( 8 ), you must send me notice of the results of my dispute and a copy of my revised credit report showing the deletions within 5 business days. I expect this confirmation by email and mail given the urgency.\n\n3. Cease Reporting to Others : Ensure that these accounts are deleted across all your reporting and no longer provided to any third parties. Additionally, notify any other consumer reporting agency to which you furnish data ( if any, such as secondary bureaus or resellers ) of the deletions, as required by law ( furnishers must update all CRAs, and CRAs should communicate results under 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( D ) ). This includes updating any data you have shared with insurance scoring companies, tenant screening, or employment screening companies that might have obtained my report with these erroneous entries. \nXXXX. Damages and Compensation ( Reservation ) : While deletion is necessary, I also demand that you preserve all records related to these accounts and my disputes, as I am evaluating further legal action for the harm already caused. My XXXX XXXX and opportunities have suffered due to your reporting of false delinquencies ( for instance, I have been denied credit and faced higher interest rates, which are provable actual damages ). I XXXX seek monetary compensation in addition to the statutory damages outlined if we proceed to court. This letter is not an offer to settle my damages claim ; it is a demand for compliance. If you wish to discuss a broader settlement ( including monetary relief to avoid a lawsuit ), you XXXX contact me in writing with an offer after you have deleted the accounts and provided proof. \nXXXX. Refrain from Retaliation or Secondary Reporting : Do not, under any circumstances, reinsert these items or replace them with any coded notation that could indirectly harm my credit ( such as labeling them as consumer disagrees or some obscure code ). The only correct action is a clean deletion. Also, do not sell or transfer information about these disputed debts to any third-party debt XXXX or data aggregators if any such activity is detected, it will be met with additional legal action for breach of the FCRA and XXXX the FDCPA if applicable. \nResponse Deadline 5 Days : XXXX is of the essence. You have XXXX calendar days from receipt of this notice to complete the deletions and confirm in writing. This timeline is reasonable and in fact slightly more lenient than FCRAs own dispute timeline in cases where the information is obviously wrong or unverifiable. Given that you have had months of prior notice through my disputes, and that I have now provided a detailed legal rationale, you should need no additional time to investigate. Any delay beyond 5 days will be considered further willful non-compliance. If by the end of the XXXX day I do not have written confirmation of deletion from each of you, I will proceed with the following without further notice : File a lawsuit against each of you for violations of the FCRA ( and any other applicable laws, such as defamation and Minnesota state law ). I will seek the full $ XXXX in damages itemized above, plus attorneys fees and punitive damages. \nI will also seek injunctive relief as appropriate. Be advised that courts have awarded significant punitive damages in cases of willful FCRA violations where agencies ignored multiple dispute notices. Your conduct here is egregious and meets the standard for willfulness ( especially after this letter puts you on clear notice ). Each bureau will be sued in federal court ( with venue in my district ). \nFile regulatory complaints : I will file formal complaints with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Trade Commission, my states Attorney General, the Minnesota Department of Commerce, and any other relevant oversight body. These complaints XXXX","date_sent_to_company":"2025-04-07T18:58:03.000Z","issue":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","sub_product":"Credit reporting","zip_code":"55112","tags":null,"has_narrative":true,"complaint_id":"12858035","timely":"Yes","company_response":"Closed with explanation","submitted_via":"Web","company":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","date_received":"2025-04-07T18:45:23.000Z","state":"MN","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 ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX ) Charged-Off Auto <em>Loan</em>, ~ {$40000.00} balance ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX set-off should show paid as agreed or {$0.00} ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported monthly as charge-off ) 13 months {$13000.00} Santander/Chrysler Capital Auto <em>Lease</em> # XXXX Charged-Off, {$3800.00} past due ( <em>lease</em> contract terminated, balance not owed ) file- XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( reported as charge-off XXXX 3 months {$3000.00} XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Personal <em>Loan</em> # XXXX ( Opened XX/XX/XXXX"],"issue":["<em>Problem</em> with a company's investigation into an existing <em>problem</em>"]},"sort":[5.01484,"12858035"]}]},"aggregations":{"has_narrative":{"meta":{},"doc_count":16,"has_narrative":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":1,"key_as_string":"true","doc_count":16}]}},"product":{"doc_count":16,"product":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":5,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":5}]}},{"key":"Mortgage","doc_count":4,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Conventional home mortgage","doc_count":2},{"key":"FHA mortgage","doc_count":2}]}},{"key":"Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Credit reporting","doc_count":3}]}},{"key":"Vehicle loan or lease","doc_count":3,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Loan","doc_count":2},{"key":"Lease","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Student loan","doc_count":1,"sub_product.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Private student loan","doc_count":1}]}}]}},"issue":{"doc_count":16,"issue":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Incorrect information on your report","doc_count":4,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Account status incorrect","doc_count":4}]}},{"key":"Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":3,"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":3}]}},{"key":"Applying for a mortgage or refinancing an existing mortgage","doc_count":2,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Dealing with your lender or servicer","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Received bad information about your loan","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Getting a loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Changes in terms mid-deal or after closing","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Investigation took more than 30 days","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Problems at the end of the loan or lease","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Problem while selling or giving up the vehicle","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay mortgage","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}},{"key":"Struggling to pay your loan","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Lender trying to repossess or disable the vehicle","doc_count":1}]}},{"key":"Trouble during payment process","doc_count":1,"sub_issue.raw":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[]}}]}},"timely":{"doc_count":16,"timely":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Yes","doc_count":16}]}},"company_response":{"doc_count":16,"company_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Closed with explanation","doc_count":13},{"key":"Closed with non-monetary relief","doc_count":3}]}},"submitted_via":{"doc_count":16,"submitted_via":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Web","doc_count":16}]}},"company":{"doc_count":16,"company":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"EQUIFAX, INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"Experian Information Solutions Inc.","doc_count":2},{"key":"TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.","doc_count":2},{"key":"AES/PHEAA","doc_count":1},{"key":"Americas Car-Mart, Inc.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Byrider Franchising, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"FORD MOTOR CREDIT CO.","doc_count":1},{"key":"Fay Servicing, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"LoanCare, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Movement Mortgage LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"Ocwen Financial Corporation","doc_count":1},{"key":"Rocket Mortgage, LLC","doc_count":1},{"key":"WELLS FARGO & COMPANY","doc_count":1}]}},"state":{"doc_count":16,"state":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"UT","doc_count":4},{"key":"MN","doc_count":3},{"key":"CA","doc_count":1},{"key":"FL","doc_count":1},{"key":"MO","doc_count":1},{"key":"NC","doc_count":1},{"key":"NM","doc_count":1},{"key":"NV","doc_count":1},{"key":"NY","doc_count":1},{"key":"SD","doc_count":1},{"key":"TX","doc_count":1}]}},"company_public_response":{"doc_count":16,"company_public_response":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response","doc_count":6},{"key":"Company believes it acted appropriately as authorized by contract or law","doc_count":2}]}},"tags":{"doc_count":16,"tags":{"doc_count_error_upper_bound":0,"sum_other_doc_count":0,"buckets":[{"key":"Servicemember","doc_count":7},{"key":"Older American","doc_count":1}]}}},"_meta":{"license":"CC0","last_updated":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","last_indexed":"2026-07-14T12:00:00-05:00","total_record_count":16441818,"is_data_stale":false,"has_data_issue":false,"break_points":{}}}