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

Experian alleges they conducted a thourough investigation that meets maximum possible accuracy requirements. However, had they done so, they would have reviewed the documentation I provided ( from the data furnisher ) that refuted the furnisher 's own explanation regarding the false/misleading reporting. The furnisher alleges that it charged-off the account on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ( see XXXX ). However, Experian continues to report the account simply as a closed account with a delinquent balance because it " believes '' the explanation as to why the account is not reported as CO : " Consumer enrollment in furnisher 's 'relief ' program perpetually prevents reporting of a charge-off. '' ( see XXXX ) The rules regarding the creditor 's alleged relief program were provided to Experian as a aprt of the complaint. And, that relief program makes clear a failure to pay on-time during the relief program would cancel the consumer 's enrollment in that relief program : " If you do not make Monthly Program Payments by the following statement closing date ( on consecutive billing cycles } on any of your enrolled Card or Loan accountls }, you may be removed from the Program '' ( see XXXX ). Moreover, a failure to make such payments while enrolled in the program would cause adverse credit history, such as a CO to be reported : " If you do not comply with the Program Terms, we will report that status, which may negatively impact your credit score '' ( XXXX XXXX ). Since the furnisher has reported increased delinquencies since my alleged enrollment in the alleged relief program, any reasonable individual would believe that I'd been removed from that relief program. Thus, Experian knows, or should know the informatin reported by the furnisher is false/misleading/invalid. It shoul dbe noted this complaint was filed on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. It is now XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. In that time Experian has continued to report the account as past-due, alleging a payment history for at least the prior four ( 4 ) months at XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) days past-due. At that particular threshold, the furnisher would have been required to charge-off the account, which means this account should be reporting as an account that was charged-off on or before that first 180 past-due period lapsed. For context, the furnisher alleges it charged-off the account on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. This means the status of the account, account narratives, and payment history, which the furnisher alleges is valid, does not meet maximum possible accuracy and would be considered false/misleading informattionmisleading under 15 U.S. Code 1681e. It is this false/misleading impression that causes me harm and continues to do so as at least two ( 2 ) apartment complexes rely on Experian tenant screening and credit services to determine qualifications for tenancy. The copy of the tenancy screening report ( generated by Experian ) clearly shows a charged-off account listed as being acceptable, while a seriously delinquent account disqualifies an individual from leasing an apartment. That is Experian 's own tenant screening algorithms are mislead for this account/tradeline because the furnisher of the information has continued to report the account as seriously delinquent instead of as a CO when the account was charged-off, by the furnisher 's own acknowledgement, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX.