Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports

Please be advised that this is my FOURTH AND FINAL WRITTEN REQUEST, before I pursue litigation in accordance with the FCRA to enforce my right and seek relief and recover all monetary damages that I may be entitled to under Section 616 and Section 617 regarding your continued willful and negligent noncompliance. I am a victim of identity theft. I have submitted multiple FTC identity theft reports UNDER PERJURY, as well as requested a FCRA 605B block request per my rights under the FCRA. Experian and XXXX is reporting inaccurate and incorrect information on my consumer report and has failed to follow federal laws and guidelines stated under FCRA Sec 605B ( 15 U.S.C 1681c-2 ) Section 605B of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), which is codified at 15 USC 1681c-2 , contains provisions related to the blocking of information resulting from identity theft. Under Section 605B, if a consumer submits an identity theft report to a consumer reporting agency and requests a block on the reporting of information that resulted from the identity theft, the agency must comply with the request within four business days. Also, they failed to honor their responsibility under Sec 611 ( a ) of the Fair Credit Reporting act codified at 15 U.S.C 1681i ( a ) which requires consumer reporting agencies to " follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. Denying a claim or request that meets the requirements under the FCRA Section 605B on its face is not adequate under the FCRA Section 611 ( a ) you must follow the guidelines of THE FCRA. 

Experian and XXXX have furnished multiple charged off accounts fraudulently. Firstly, under 15 U.S. Code 1681b ( 2 ) requires written consent of which I never gave Experian and XXXX to furnish these items on my consumer credit report. All consent to Experian and XXXX. whether it be verbal, non-verbal, written, implied or otherwise is revoked. Secondly, reporting charged-off accounts as still collectible or owed is not only fraudulent and dishonest but also constitutes an illegal attempt at double recovery. 
The legal principle prohibiting double recovery is well-established in case law, as evidenced by the following precedents : XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) : The U.S. Supreme Court established that a taxpayer must recognize income when a debt is discharged, preventing them from benefitting from both a deduction and a continued claim on the debt. 

XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX  XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) : The Tax Court highlighted the importance of substantiating a bad debt deduction, ruling that once a debt is claimed as uncollectible, it can not be treated as still owed. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX ) : The Tax Court emphasized that a taxpayer can not claim a deduction for a bad debt while simultaneously asserting the debt 's collectability, thereby avoiding double recovery. 

XXXX XXXX  XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) : This case reinforced that a debt must be proven worthless before a deduction is claimed, and any subsequent assertion of the debts collectability constitutes an improper double recovery. 

Rev. Rul. 70-367, 1970-2 C.B. 37 : The IRS clearly stated that once a bad debt deduction is taken, the debt is considered worthless, and the taxpayer can not later attempt to collect on it. 
The companies listed in the FTC reports I have submitted have also filed a 1099-C and canceled the debt which in return they received a bad debt deduction per the IRS Tax Code and the debt is reclassified as worthless and canceled. For the obligor the debt is now considered INCOME ( Certificate of Indebtedness ) and is nonpublic information and reporting nonpublic information is illegal under the Privacy Act of 1974. 15 USC 6802 ( b ) ( c ) also states that a financial institution may not disclose nonpublic personal information to a nonaffiliated third party unless- the consumer is given an explanation of how the consumer can exercise that nondisclosure option, of which I never received nor given consent. I strongly urge the CFPB to step in and demand that Experian and XXXX follow the Law under the FCRA.