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

I am filing a three Credit Reporting Agency complaint the big-3. The subject is the same for each bankruptcy reported on my credit reports. I believe they have not followed the law on reporting, and request the information be deleted. My original disputes with each of them was submitted in writing by certified US Mail, asking only what the FCRA provides consumers can reasonably ask ; ( 1 ) authentication and ( 2 ) verification.

To their credit, they all three responded within the allowed 30-day time frame. However, note the extent and effort put forth in their responses : *************************************************************************************************** XXXX : ( 1 ) Response was ; the company that reported the information has certified to XXXX that the information is accurate. Additional comment, no change.

( 2 ) Thats what I requested in writing, and expected in response ; certification, documentation, and proof to have the information verified directly to me, the consumer. This did not happen.

( 3 ) The FCRA, our nations credit reporting law, established back in XXXX states [ FCRA ] consumers have the right to obtain this information ( 4 ) I was told the company that got the information certified it to XXXX.

( 5 ) I made a lawful demand for certification. The consumer ( myself and any others making the same request ) do not care that an unnamed company says to them, its certified. Were trusting all the CRAs to [ FCRA ] assume a vital role in assembling and evaluating consumer credit and other information on consumers. ss602. ( a ) ( 3 ) a. Their response totally misses the point of the FCRA, ss602. ( a ) ( 2 ) & ( 4 ). As far as Im concerned, XXXX is reporting very negative information on my credit report that they had no part in collecting directly from a source. This in and of itself falls short of the intents of Section 602, Findings and Purpose. All CRAs must work within FCRAs guidelines of [ FCRA ] assure accuracy, preserve the general reputation of consumers, and demonstrate the respect for consumers right to privacy.

( 6 ) Who got the information? What company? Is there proof that anybody verified this negative information BEFORE it was used? Perhaps the answer is, it has never been validated.

( 7 ) Then, no change, meaning, theyve made no changes in the stated information. Hopefully when a responsible consumer writes one of the big-3 with such concerns, they realize theres a real-live family going on at the other end of the letter. Shouldnt XXXX have a better response than the company that reported it says.? To me its the same as if I never submitted a dispute. 
( 8 ) Clearly, the CRA failed to obtain documentation to meet the requirements and requests of the consumer. Unacceptable. They deal with this kind of situation all the time.

( 9 ) XXXX has shown its position which equate to several examples of non-compliance of the FCRA. A consequence should be awarded the consumer in this case deletion. 
( 10 ) Referring directly to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, ss611. ( a ) : a. [ FCRA ] If the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in his file is disputed by a consumer, and such dispute is directly conveyed to the consumer reporting agency by the consumer, the consumer reporting agency shall within a reasonable period of time reinvestigate and record the current status of that information unless it has reasonable grounds to believe that the dispute by the consumer is frivolous or irrelevant. If after such reinvestigation such information is found to be inaccurate or can no longer be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete such information. 
b. Emphasis added : any item, inaccurate, delete such information. 




************************************************************************************* XXXX : ( 1 ) Response was ; Information Updated, then they printed the information which looks exactly like the first version of the disputed information saying this is what it looks like now. This is not in keeping with the Title VI, SS602, Findings and Purpose.

a. [ FCRA ] There is a need to ensure that consumer reporting agencies exercise their grave responsibilities with fairness, impartiality and a respect for the consumers right to privacy.

i. XXXX response of information updated is unclear. I had to read the information several times before I saw one item different the name of the alleged court. They changed from the first version to a new version. No mention of verification, no explanation of any investigation, no follow-up, and no supporting documentation as requested. 
ii. The information remains unverified, and as such is incorrect. 
1. This information is a violation of SS611 ( a ) : ( a ) If after such reinvestigation such information is found to be inaccurate or can no longer be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete such information.

( b ) Emphasis added : inaccurate, delete such information.

( 2 ) Procedure in case of disputed accuracy a. [ FCRA ] If the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in his file is disputed by a consumer, and such dispute is directly conveyed to the consumer reporting agency by the consumer, the consumer reporting agency shall within a reasonable period of time reinvestigate and record the current status. Ss611. ( a ) i. XXXX was obligated to conduct a thorough, validating re-investigation. Obligated to prove what theyd written in my credit report. Why? Because the consumer followed the law challenging the information, challenging its validity, depending on them to do their jobs and meet certain mandates. 
ii. This amounts to nothing more than XXXX following their normal standard operating procedures following the laws of the FCRA, its their business. 
iii. They did not do this. They simply replied a change was made. 
iv. Obviously, a change was made, a name. However, XXXX failed in a major way by short-shirting its responsibilities and not living up to the expectations of the federal law. 
v. A remedy should favor support by the CFPB of deletion. 
1. [ FCRA ] If the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in his file is disputed by a consumer, and such dispute is directly conveyed to the consumer reporting agency by the consumer, the consumer reporting agency shall within a reasonable period of time reinvestigate and record the current status of that information unless it has reasonable grounds to believe that the dispute by the consumer is frivolous or irrelevant. If after such reinvestigation such information is found to be inaccurate or can no longer be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete such information. 
Fair Credit Reporting Act, ss611. ( a ) ************************************************************************************* EQUIFAX : ( 1 ) Response was ; This section includes public record items Equifax obtained from local, state and federal courts through a third-party vendor, XXXX, This bankruptcy is currently reporting as discharged. If you have additional questions about this item please contact ( the court ), a. IF Equifax has public record items obtained from court as claimed, upon receipt of my dispute and requests in writing, they were obligated to comply and provide these records.

b. Equifax failed to satisfy the request of validation of the information ; ss609. ( a ) ( 1 ) ( 2 ) : i. [ FCRP ] Disclosures to Consumers Every consumer reporting agency shall, upon request and proper identification of any consumer, clearly and accurately disclose to the consumer the nature and substance of all information in its files on the consumer at the time of the request and the sources of the information.

( 2 ) [ FCRA ] : An elaborate mechanism has been developed for investigating and evaluating the credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, and general reputation of consumers. [ ss602. ( a ) ( 2 ) ] a. If Equifax ( and possibly XXXX and XXXX ) relies on a third-party vendor ; a. How does the information get to the consumer when the CRA does not verify? 
b. How can even a third-party-vendor be allowed to go around the FCRA and not verify with accountability to the consumer? 
c. Am I supposed to be satisfied with the possibility a disgruntled employee could mix up paperwork, documents, forget some detail, mishandle something that could be vital in my information? 
d. IF information isnt actually obtained by Equifax or other CRAs, whose held accountable when called to task by ss602. ( a ) ( 1 ) ( 2 ) ( 3 ) & ( 4 )?

( 3 ) The idea that Equifax does Americas credit rating by accepting unverified documentation and having no intent to produce such evidence to consumers when requested is unhealthy business ethics which brings harm to all CRAs. At the same time, they bring non-positive feelings to public confidence against those charged with managing our credit scores, credit standings, credit capacities, character and general consumer reputations. This is exactly what Congress meant in ss602. ( Findings and Purpose ) when it said [ FCRA ] there is a need to ensure that consumer reporting agencies exercise their grave responsibilities with fairness, impartiality, and a respect for the consumers right to privacy. [ ss602. ( a ) ( 4 ) ] a. I feel Equifax certainly has failed to live up to those standards in my dispute of the information. 
b. A remedy should favor support by the CFPB of deletion. 






************************************************************************************* THE COURT : Equifax suggested I seek additional information from the court.

Anticipating such a response, I contacted the United States Bankruptcy Court, District of New Hampshire, Clerk of the Court XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
XXXX XXXX letter is attached to this file, however here is her basic response : The Clerks Office does not supply information to credit reporting agencies. 
From this information one would ask how does the CRAs get the alleged information? 
They dont get it directly from the court as Equifax claimed. 
o Not keeping with SS602. ( b ) Someone else is saying they obtained the information from a court.

o Not keeping with SS602. ( b ) Sometimes were not told who that someone else is Experian.

o Not keeping with SS602. ( b ) Then when they claim theyve obtained information from another source, is that meeting the standards of the Fair Credit Reporting Act?

o Not keeping with SS602. ( b ) ************************************************************************************* XXXX : ( 1 ) My wife and I have been notified in 6 or 7 credit breaches since XX/XX/2015.

a. Documentation submitted. 
( 2 ) To mention the better known of these ; Equifax, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, and others. Weve also been the victims of at least one Credit Card Fraud just a month ago ( XXXX XXXX ). Were ever watchful of additional activities on our credit reports fearing identity theft from that recent fraud event. 
( 3 ) Subsequently, Ive placed a Security Alert on all three major CRAs.

a. Ive also placed a Freeze and Opted-Out on XXXX information suppression program. Copies of confirmations are attached. 
b. I feel especially vulnerable knowing the big-3 rely on 3rd Party vendors and fail to provide validations of highly important and sensitive information before putting it on a public record.

AS A CONSUMER and after really reading the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the following opening remarks, I believe, set the tone of the laws intent : The ( United States ) Congress makes the following findings : the banking system is dependent upon fair and accurate credit reporting. Inaccurate credit reports directly impair the efficiency of the banking system, and unfair credit reporting methods undermine the public confidence which is essential to the continued functioning of the banking system. [ ss602 ] I ask your support in recognizing when the big guys dont follow the law consumers lose. 
When consumers lose the economy loses. 
When the economy loses the country struggles. 
That struggle, includes continued successes of big business the circle completes. 
Based on in-actions, non-compliance, and a lack of respect for consumers right to privacy, supporting delete the information is the right remedy in this case. 

XXXX XXXX, NH