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

I sent a dispute to the credit reporting agencies on XX/XX/XXXX. According to the FCRA, credit reporting agencies must follow reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy, ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX , XXXX XXXX XXXX, at XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX. XXXX, XXXX ) ; XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX. Appx. XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) ). At this time, Ive provided the information to the credit reporting agency on XX/XX/XXXX and they have failed to conduct that reasonable investigation which indicates a violation of the act ( Andrews v. Equifax Info. Serv., XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX XXXX ) ). 
In my dispute to the credit reporting agency on XX/XX/XXXX, I explained my dispute in detail and requested for an investigation to be conducted regarding the information on my credit profile. In my research, one court noted : [ t ] he standard of conduct by which the agencys action is to be judged is deeply rooted in the law of negligence : what a reasonably prudent person would do under the circumstances. ( XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX XXXX ), citing XXXX v. XXXX , XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX. XXXX XXXX ), affd, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) ). 
I want to see what that the credit reporting agencys procedures are reasonably designed to prevent inaccuracies, but also whether the agency actually followed its own procedures. ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX Or. Apr. XXXX, XXXX ) ). It is not enough that a CRA have procedures in place. The employees must follow those procedures in each and every report they prepare ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). See Williams v. First Advantage LNS Screening Sols., Inc. , 238 F. Supp. 3d 1333, 1346 ( N.D. Fla. 2017 ) ( CRAs failure to following its own procedures for matching consumers with common names was evidence of willfulness ) ). The CRA must not just have reasonable rules, but the employees must strictly follow those internal CRA rules. ( XXXX v. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX. La. XXXX ). Cf. XXXX v. XXXX  XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ) ( fact that furnisher ignored its own policy and procedure manual could raise issue of fact as to whether it conducted reasonable investigation ) ). 
In XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, the XXXX XXXX explained that a consumer satisfies their initial burden by presenting evidence tending to show that the CRA published a consumer report containing inaccurate data. Ive done this on XX/XX/XXXX. 
Per the settlement with a multistate group of Attorneys General, ( Assurance of Voluntary Compliance/Assurance of Voluntary Discontinuance, In the Matter of Equifax XXXX. XXXX. XXXX, Experian XXXX. XXXX, XXXX XXXX and TransUnion XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) ( XXXX ) ( XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX, and supervision by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX the system was somewhat reformed, but serious deficiencies remain ( XXXX  XXXX XXXX , XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Injustice Redux : Ten Years after a Key Report, Consumers Are Still Frustrated Trying to Fix Credit Reporting Errors ( XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) ). 
In my research, according to FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), the credit reporting agency must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate and record the current status of the disputed information, or delete the item from the file..... before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the agency receives the notice of the dispute from the consumer or reseller. Since I mailed the letter, Ive allowed 5 days for mail time to the credit reporting agency which would mean the credit reporting agency, according to my calculations, had until XX/XX/XXXX to provide their response to my investigation. 
The problem that comes into play is that the bureau has never sent me proof that an actual investigation took place, nor did they show me their method of verification that I requested on XX/XX/XXXX. I also requested verification so that I can see what the credit reporting agency is reviewing before entering inaccurate information onto my credit report. Based on the lack of requested verification from Metro Area, how are 1 ) they allowed to verify the accuracy of what they are reporting to the credit reporting agencies, when what they are reporting are inconsistent with the other credit reporting agencies and 2 ) how are the credit reporting agencies actually conducting a reasonable investigation when they dont have all of the required information based on my dispute?