Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports

Experian is failing to conduct investigations and review information ( and documents ) supplied as part of consumer disputes. I disputed information provided by XXXX for an account/trade line with Experian on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. Experian states it completed its investigation on or aroudn XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. However, the results provided by the specialist are for an entirely different account with XXXX. In general, Experian provides the following statement regarding their handling of consumer disputes : " To help resolve the dispute, we will review all relevant documents submitted with the dispute and will forward them to the furnisher if we are unable to resolve the issue. We review and consider the furnishers or vendors response to determine whether to accept it, reject it, or follow up for additional information. If, after processing, we find that the disputed information is inaccurate, incomplete or can not be verified, we then delete or modify that information, as appropriate. If we do not receive a response from the furnisher or the vendor within the required period, we update the item as you have requested or delete the information and send you the results. In some instances, we are able to determine whether the disputed information should be changed or deleted without having to contact the furnisher or the vendor. '' However, had the specialist taken a look at the dispute and the documents suppied, the results provided would correspond to the account disputed. It is based upon the results from another accounttradeline that Experian " verified '' the " accuracy '' of the account/tradeline under dispute. The information supplied with the XXXX line I disputed clearly shows the status of the account is false/inaccurate/misleading under 15 U.S. Code 1681e and the inclusion of such in my Experian credit file violates a Consumer Reporting Agency 's responsibilities under the FCRA . Moreover, the " investigation '' conducted by Experian, having been completed on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, and having arrived at a conclusion of " accurately '' reported information based upon information for an entirely different account, neither meets the standards for dispute investigation under 15 U.S. Code 1681i, nor enusres the accuracy of the information for the account/tradeline under 15 U.S. Code 1681e. the information reported need not even be " false '' but may equally be " correct '' information that gives a materially misleading impression ( see : Twumasi-Ankrah v. Checkr , Inc. , 954 F.3d 938, 943 ( 6th Cir. 2020 ) ). The fact remains XXXX insists the account was Charged-off on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, but continues to report it as a continuing account whose past-due balance increases approxmimately ever thirty ( 30 ) days. This would would lead any potential lender to believe there is an oustanding monthly obligation. The fact remains XXXX informed me that the age of the alleged debt barred them from reporting adverse information in my credit files. The fact remains XXXX ceased XXXX paper and electronic statements in early XXXX and was notified of such via billing error by its own collections agents. The fact remains XXXX had the account returned to them by their second collections agent citing an enumerated list of vilations of federal banking and consumer law, that were initially articulated by me. The fact remains XXXX attempted to re-age the account to resolve the issues, but in doing so created erroneous ( more recent ) periods of delinquency that do not exists. The fact is XXXX inability to resolve this on-going issue now leads the account to be reported as 180 days past-due for the fourth month in a row, despite it being allegedly charged-off. The fact remains that Experian has been provided with all of this information and unlike at least one ( 1 ) other CRA has decided to do nothing except rely upon XXXX automated XXXXeporting system to " correct '' inaccuracies, when Experian has documents on XXXX letterhead , supplied in response to CFPB complaints, that contradict the information XXXX continues to furnish to Experian. It is therefore incumbent upon Experian to remove the derogatory information from my credit file. This is not an unreasonable request, considering XXXX has done such after reviewing the same information supplied.