Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports

I XXXX XXXX, am a victim of identity theft, request removal and deletion of listed accounts on my transunion, experian, and XXXX credit report. XXXX. Portfolio Recovery reported XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX reported XXXX XXXX XXXX reported XXXX. 
XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX reported XXXX. 


I, XXXX XXXX, am writing to demand the immediate removal of multiple fraudulent accounts that have been reported on my consumer credit file. These accountsPortfolio Recovery ( reported on or about XX/XX/XXXX ), National Credit Adjust ( reported on or about XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX XXXX XXXX ( reported on or about XX/XX/XXXX ), and XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( reported on or about XX/XX/XXXX ) were opened and reported without my knowledge or authorization. Their presence constitutes identity theft and violates numerous federal statutes, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ; the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ), 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ; various provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR ) and FDIC standards ; IRS income reporting requirements ; and my Opt-Out Rights under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( 15 U.S.C. 68026805 ). The continued and erroneous reporting of these accounts has resulted in significant financial harm, reputational injury, and emotional distress. 

The actions of these furnishersalong with the ongoing reporting by XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX in direct contravention of 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ), which circumscribes the reporting of derogatory items, and 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), mandating each Credit Reporting Agency ( CRA ) to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy. Further, 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) prohibits any furnisher from knowingly reporting false information. Despite my notification of identity theft, these accounts remain on my credit file, placing each CRA in violation of its statutory obligations under the FCRA. Courts have repeatedly held that CRAs can not simply rely upon a data furnishers say-so. In XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ), the court affirmed the duty of CRAs to investigate disputed items thoroughly, particularly in identity theft cases. Such scrutiny becomes even more imperative when the furnisher, as with XXXX XXXX XXXX in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, No. XXXX ( XXXX XXXX ), has XXXX documented history of failing to adhere to consumer protection requirements. 

Each of these fraudulent accounts further violates XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ) and XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( b ) ( TILA ), which oblige furnishers and CRAs to promptly correct or remove inaccurate data upon receiving notice of dispute, particularly when identity theft is evident. In XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ), furnishers were explicitly charged with ensuring that disputed information is neither incomplete nor inaccurate. Similarly, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( S.D. XXXX. XXXX ) held CRAs liable for refusing to remove a fraudulent account upon receiving corroborating evidence of identity theft, resulting in compensatory damages for the consumer. Moreover, any purported charge-off of these fraudulent balances runs afoul of 26 U.S.C. 61 ( a ), which treats a charge-off as taxable income to the creditor rather than an ongoing consumer debt. The misreporting of these invalid balances continues to undermine the accuracy of my credit profile. 

Their extended retention also contravenes 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( f ), which limits the reporting of a derogatory account to seven years from the Date of First Delinquency or, if established as fraudulent, requires immediate and full deletion. In XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) XXXX CRAs were found liable for delaying or failing to delete fraudulent items, underscoring the nonnegotiable duty to promptly and permanently expunge such entries. Furthermore, under the XXXX XXXX, 15 U.S.C. 68026805, and related FDIC regulations ( Part 391 and Part 334 ), consumers are entitled to restrict the dissemination of nonpublic personal information, particularly in matters involving identity theft. The continued misrepresentation of these debts, under the guise of valid collection accounts, is a direct affront to these statutes and regulations. 

Based on these flagrant legal violations, I hereby demand the immediate and permanent removal of the aforementioned accountsPortfolio Recovery, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXXfrom all consumer reporting databases maintained by XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. I further demand a comprehensive block on any future reporting or transmission of these accounts, alongside a written certification confirming that all references to them have been expunged and will not reappear. Given the extensive harm, the willful nature of these violations, and the disregard for my rights, I also demand a remittance payment of {$220000.00} to cover statutory damages, compensatory relief, and punitive measures for the repeated and egregious noncompliance that has occurred. This sum is nonnegotiable and must be received within 30 days of your receipt of this notice. Should you neglect or refuse to satisfy these demands in full, I will proceed with comprehensive legal action, including formal complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ), the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency ( XXXX ), and the Michigan Attorney Generals Office, and I will pursue heightened damages for any ensuing harm or delay. 

I expect your swift and unconditional compliance with these directives. Any attempt at partial cooperation, delay, or evasion will be considered willful noncompliance, subjecting all parties to the full measure of legal and financial consequences.