Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports

The Consumer ( Consumer ), brings this complaint and seeks non-monetary relief from Experian Information Solutions , Inc. ( Experian ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX under the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681, et. seq ). 
2. The Consumer is a natural person and is a person and consumer as defined by the FCRA at 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( b ) and ( c ). At all times material hereto, the Consumer had at least one disability as defined under the ADA at 42 U.S.C. 12102. 
XXXX. Experian Information Solutions , Inc. is a California corporation that regularly evaluates and reports consumer credit information to XXXX  parties through interstate commerce and is a consumer reporting agency as defined by the FCRA at 15 U.S.C. 1681a ( f ). 
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  is a Delaware state-chartered bank and credit card issuer that regularly furnishes credit information to Experian. XXXX XXXX has its principal place of business in Delaware with a registered agent for service of XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, DE XXXX. 

XXXX. EXPERIAN REPORTS FACIALLY INACCURATE DATA XXXX. A consumer reporting agency 's policies and procedures are required to identify and prevent illogical reporting of a Date of XXXX  Delinquency in connection with an account [ 1 ]. The Date of XXXX  Delinquency ( XXXX  ) is the date of default that leads to a charge-off. It is the XXXX  delinquency reported to a consumer reporting agency by a furnisher that purportedly reflects the month and year on which the [ charge-off action ] being reported in connection with a consumer 's account commenced [ XXXX  ]. 
XXXX. The XXXXXXXX XXXX account XXXX information in Experians files for Consumer reports an on record until date of XX/XX/XXXX. Subtracting seven ( XXXX  ) years from XX/XX/XXXX yields a XXXX  of XX/XX/XXXX [ 3, 4 ]. However, the payment rating for XX/XX/XXXX does not reflect a default, ie. a payment that was XXXX  ( XXXX  ) days past-due. 
XXXX. The payment rating for XX/XX/XXXX is preceded by an XX/XX/XXXX payment rating alleging XXXX  ( XXXX ) days past-due. Likewise the payment rating for XX/XX/XXXX is followed by an XX/XX/XXXX payment rating alleging XXXX  ( XXXX  ) days past-due [ XXXX  ]. 
XXXX. The XXXX  reported by Experian, for account XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX is considered an error for reporting purposes because the payment rating for XX/XX/XXXX is neither a month indicating a XXXX  ( XXXX  ) day late payment, nor the XXXX  XXXX  ( XXXX  ) day delinquency in a sequence of alleged successive delinquencies. 
XXXX. The payment history reported by Experian for XXXX alleges a charge-off in XX/XX/XXXX. The payment rating for the preceding month XX/XX/XXXX reports a delinquency of XXXX  ( XXXX  ) days past-due. The worst delinquency alleged is reported for XX/XX/XXXX as XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) days and is followed by a XX/XX/XXXX payment rating indicating an alleged delinquency of XXXX  ( XXXX  ) days. 
XXXX. While consumer does not agree with any alleged charge-off of account XXXX, XXXX believes account XXXX was charged-off in XX/XX/XXXX [ XXXX ]. 
11. The XXXX  reported by Experian for account XXXX is considered an error for reporting purposes because the Date of XXXX  Delinquency [ post-dates ] the charge-off date alleged by XXXX [ 7 ]. 
XXXX. By demonstration in supra para XXXX through XXXX the payment history and payment ratings for all months in XXXX, all months in XXXX, and all months to-date in XXXX, are false/incomplete/inaccurate or so misleading as to be inaccurate [ XXXX XXXX ]. 

XXXX. CONSUMERS PRIOR ATTEMPTS TO RESOLVE AND OBTAIN RELIEF XXXX. From to XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, Consumer sent Experian detailed notices disputing the accuracy of his credit reports with respect to XXXXXXXX XXXX  credit card debt. Specifically, Consumer disputed the patently false date of XXXX  delinquency and inaccurate payment history. 
14. Upon receiving the Consumers initial dispute, Experian, communicated the Consumers dispute notices to XXXXXXXX XXXX 
15. Initially, neither Experian, nor XXXX conducted a reasonable timely investigation [ XXXX  ] after receiving Consumers dispute notices, resulting in the continued reporting of false and misleading derogatory information on the consumers credit reports with respect to XXXXXXXX XXXX debt. 
XXXX. After receiving dispute responses from Experian that continued to contain false and inaccurate derogatory information with respect to XXXXXXXX XXXX debt, Consumer again sent Experian detailed notices disputing the accuracy of his credit reports. 
XXXX. Experian continued to report false and inaccurate derogatory information on Consumers credit reports with respect to XXXXXXXX XXXX debt, alleging XXXX XXXX  verified the accuracy of the information reported. 
XXXX. Responding on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX to a CFPB XXXX XXXX XXXX  asked the Consumer to understand that XXXXXXXX XXXX  is responsible for providing [ the information for account ending XXXX ] to the credit reporting agencies ; [ but ] the credit reporting agencies have their own policy for reporting the information that is displayed. [ XXXX XXXX XXXX ] IV. CONSUMERS XXXX XX/XX/XXXX FCRA DISPUTE XXXX. Consumer last filed a dispute with Experian for account XXXX on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. Consumer again notified Experian of the false XXXX  for the account and a false/misleading/inaccurate/incomplete payment history. Consumer provided documentation that included a copy of Experians own statement to XXXX on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX [ XXXX ]. 
20. Upon receiving Consumers notice of dispute, Experian communicated the dispute notice. Upon receiving responses from XXXX, Experian continues to report derogatory false/misleading/inaccurate/incomplete payment history and patently false XXXX [ XXXX  ]. 
21. Experian provided results in response to Consumers XXXX XX/XX/XXXX dispute on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. In those results Experian alleged a re-investigation was conducted and the information now reports accurately for the XXXX XXXX  account XXXX, and that the information was updated and verified by XXXX. 
XXXX. The XXXX XX/XX/XXXX results for XXXX card account XXXX reported an on record until date of XX/XX/XXXX, which implies an alleged XXXX  in XX/XX/XXXX [ XXXX ]. The payment rating for XX/XX/XXXX is neither a month indicating a XXXX  ( XXXX  ) day late payment, nor the XXXX  XXXX  ( XXXX  ) day delinquency in a sequence of alleged successive delinquencies. 
XXXX. The XXXX XX/XX/XXXX results for XXXX XXXX  account XXXX continues to show an inaccurate payment history with inaccurate payment ratings. 

V. EXPERIAN CONTINUES TO HARM CONSUMER XXXX. As of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX account XXXX XXXX credit file currently reports with a patently false XXXX  that does not match the payment history for XXXX account XXXX reported by Experian. 
XXXX. As of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Experian continues to report a payment rating of XXXX XXXX ( XXXX  ) days delinquent for the month XX/XX/XXXX. 
XXXX. As of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Experian continues to report a sixty ( XXXX ) day delinquent payment rating for XX/XX/XXXX. 
XXXX. As of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Experian continues to report a XXXX  ( XXXX  ) day delinquent payment rating for XX/XX/XXXX. 
XXXX. As of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Experian continues to report a charge-off for account XXXX in XX/XX/XXXX. 
XXXX. As a result of the negligent or willful conduct of Experian and XXXX XXXX  above, Consumer has suffered severe ongoing emotional harm including and not limited to frustration, stress, XXXX  worry, damage to reputation, and economic losses including and not limited to damage to his credit, lower credit scores, and lost opportunities to receive credit [ 17 ].

Footnotes : [ XXXX  ] See Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, Fair Credit Reporting ; Facially False Data, 87 FR 64689 ( XXXX ) [ XXXX  ] See supra 1 [ XXXX  ] The Date of XXXX  Delinquency herein is recovered from the on record until date reported by Experian and is calculated using the methodology in XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX. 23-10543 ( XXXX ) [ XXXX ] Experian itself provides a definition of the XXXX  by example as follows If you missed XXXX  payments in a row, your account would be reported XXXX  days late. The XXXX period would begin with the XXXX  payment you missed in that series. All three payments would be deleted seven years from that date. The date of the XXXX  missed payment in the XXXX- day series is called the " original delinquency date, '' or sometimes the " date of XXXX  delinquency. '' ( Experian, " How to Determine an Original Delinquency Date '' by XXXX XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) XXXX XXXX //www.experian.comXXXX  experianXXXX ) [ XXXX  ] Examiners found that coding errors resulted in furnishers inaccurately reporting dates of XXXX  delinquency as the XXXX  day of the statement cycle following the consumers missed payment, rather than XXXX  days after the missed payment due date. Examiners also found that furnishers reported inaccurate dates of XXXX  delinquency for accounts by reporting the dates of XXXX  delinquency as more recent than they should have been, including by changing the dates of XXXX  delinquency for accounts that remained delinquent month after month ( i.e., accounts for which the dates of XXXX  delinquency should not have been changed ). ( CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, Supervisory Highlights : consumer reporting companies and furnishers, Issue XXXX, Spring XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) at Section 2.2.4 with footnote to 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 5 ) ). 
[ 6 ] See XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX response to CFPB complaint XXXX [ 7 ] See supra XXXX  at 64691 [ XXXX  ] On the 6th Circuit adopting an inaccurate or misleading standard : We have interpreted the phrase [ ] incomplete or inaccurate [ ] to encompass not only [ ] false information, [ ] but also [ ] correct information [ ] that nevertheless [ ] create [ XXXX ] a materially misleading impression. [ ] XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX F.3d 611, 617 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) " ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, XXXX ) ) ; and quoting from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, 868 F.3d 1275, 128 ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) : [ T ] he better reading of the [ FCRA ] requires that credit reports be both accurate and not misleading [. ] We see no reason to depart from this consensus. ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX [ XXXX  ] By so misleading to be inaccurate we are saying misleading in such a way and to such an extent that it [ could have been ] expected to have an adverse effect [ on the consumer ]. ( see XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX ) [ XXXX  ] " A [ Consumer ] reporting agencys reliance on information gathered by outside entities is reasonable [ if and only if ] the information is [ neither ] obtained from a source that was known to be unreliable [ nor ] inaccurate on its face [. ] XXXX, XXXX XXXX at XXXX ( citations omitted ). '' ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ) [ XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  has allegedly verified the accuracy of the information as reported by Experian, on multiple occasions from XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX and is therefore equally culpable for the reporting of patently false and/or inaccurate information in Consumers credit file [ 12 ] To support XXXX. can quote from the 4th Circuit : " Section 1681s-2 at times uses incomplete or Federal Agency ( Fair Credit Reporting ; Facially False Data 87 FR 64689 ( XX/XX/XXXX ) inaccurate. E.g., 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( E ). Section 1681e, on the other hand, speaks only in terms of 'maximum possible accuracy. ' XXXX  might draw the inference, then, that accuracy and completeness are different... We think not [. ] A CRA can best fulfill its obligation to report accurately under 1681e if it receives accurate information from a furnisher under 1681s-2 '' ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 526 F.3d 142 ( XXXX Cir. XXXX ) ) [ XXXX ] For further guidance on reciprocal responsibilities under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 and 15 U.S.C. 1681e see Fair Credit Reporting ; Facially False Data 87 FR 64689 ( XX/XX/XXXX ) and 12 CFR 1022.42 [ 14 ] The account should report with no derogatory information ( See Experian response to XXXX  Complaint XXXX XXXX ) [ 15 ] A recent CFPB quarterly report states In recent reviews of [ CRAs ], [ CFPB ] examiners found that [ CRAs ] accuracy procedures failed to [ follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates, defined at 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), ] because the CRAs ( 1 ) failed to adequately monitor dispute metrics that would suggest a furnisher may no longer be a source of reliable, verifiable information about consumers, and ( 2 ) continued to include information in consumer reports that was provided by unreliable furnishers without implementing procedures to assure the accuracy of information provided by unreliable furnishers. ( CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, Supervisory Highlights : consumer reporting companies and furnishers, Issue XXXX, Spring XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) at XXXX. ( see also Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau, Spring XXXX Supervisory Highlights, at XXXX ( XX/XX/XXXX ) ). 
[ XXXX  ] See supra XXXX  and supra XXXX  [ XXXX  ] A consumer reporting agencys policies and procedures are required to identify and prevent illogical reporting of a Date of XXXX Delinquency in connection with an account, but clearly failed here, evidenced as follows. XXXX alleges the account was charged-off in XX/XX/XXXX. The Date of XXXX  Delinquency indicated is XX/XX/XXXX. Under the FCRA this is considered facially false because it is A Date of XXXX Delinquency that is more recent than the start of a delinquency and may lead a report user to believe a consumer had financial difficulty more recently than is the case. ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ;