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

I've already disputed the inaccurate information through the credit bureaus and also directly with Department of Ed/XXXX. Department of Ed/XXXX received all six of my disputes sent to them via certified mail on XX/XX/XXXX. Still, to date inaccurate information continues to report on my credit. XXXX 's response to my dispute did not address my concerns. 

Department of Ed/XXXX  continues to misreport 6 accounts on my report. The reporting shows that these accounts were 90 days late on XX/XX/XXXX. It is not possible to be 90 days late, without first having a 30 day late, a 60 day late and then a 90 day late. The FCRA requires a furnisher to verify the validity of the item within 30 days. If the validity can not be verified, you are obligated by law to remove the inaccurate information. 

There were six certified mail letters with tracking numbers listed below, and thus six opportunities for them to fix the errors. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Attached is a copy of the six inaccurate accounts reporting on my credit file.

In light of the recent court case opinion No. XXXX XXXX by the US Court of Appeals XXXX XXXX, XXXX Vs. XXXX XXXX, the court ruled that the creditor has the responsibility to investigate and make sure that correct information is being reported to the bureaus, and that the consumer has a right to sue under the FCRA, should his or her rights be violated. 

While I prefer not to litigate, I will use the courts as needed to enforce my rights under the FCRA. 

Furthermore the response XXXX sent to me dated XX/XX/XXXX stated Attached is the payment history of your 50 most recent transactions. This did not address my dispute of the 90 day late reporting that supposedly occurred on XX/XX/XXXX. I did not ask for a recent payment history. I am disputing the inaccurate reporting that occurred on XX/XX/XXXX. What I expected to received was documentation showing such lates and an accurate reporting of what transpired. In addition the 50th most recent transactions provided by XXXX did not include the transactions around the XX/XX/XXXX time frame and was therefore completely and utterly useless ; and therefore leads me to believe once again that XXXX did not read my dispute and certainly didn't address my concerns or the damage to my credit file. Navient response states that this delinquency occurred prior to the forbearance but again provided no evidence, nor did they provide an explanation as to how the 90 day late report can appear on my file with no corresponding 60 or 30 day late. 

In their second letter responding to me also dated XX/XX/XXXX they state as follows : Although a deferment or forbearance applied to your account resolved your past-due status, the delinquency reporting you want removed occurred prior to the deferment or forbearance start date. Therefore, the delinquency information was accurately reported to the consumer reporting agencies. 

In the above statement XXXX continues to confirm that the reporting is correct, which as I've clearly mentioned in my dispute how is it possible to report 90 days late, without first being 30 days late, then 60 days late and then 90. My dispute is in regards to the accuracy of what they are reporting. XXXX was in receipt of my dispute on XX/XX/XXXX ; they've had well over the 30 days as required by the FCRA and per Nevada law to fix this reporting and have failed to do so. I request removal of the inaccurate 90 day late reporting from my credit reports as outlined in the FCRA.