Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports

I am filing this formal complaint against Equifax Information Services LLC due to its continued violations of my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( GLBA ). Equifax has failed to adhere to statutory obligations regarding the accuracy, investigation, and permissible purpose requirements for credit reporting. Despite my repeated, diligent efforts to rectify these issues, Equifax has not conducted a sufficient investigation or provided the necessary documentation to support its reporting, resulting in significant financial and emotional damages to me. 

Background and Basis for Complaint On XXXX XXXX XXXX I sent a formal reinvestigation request to Equifax, specifying multiple accounts on my credit report that I believed to be inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable. I cited 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), which mandates that consumer reporting agencies ( CRAs ) maintain accurate and complete information, and 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ), which requires that CRAs provide a description of their reinvestigation procedures upon request. 

Equifax received my letter on XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  ( as confirmed by USPS tracking, number XXXX ). Despite having 15 days to respond, as mandated by federal law, Equifax has not provided the reinvestigation details requested, nor has it demonstrated compliance with the requirements to maintain accurate information. Additionally, Equifax has neglected to substantiate the accuracy of the disputed information or produce proof of permissible purpose for reporting certain accounts. 

The accounts in question include, but are not limited to : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Violations and Consumer Rights Breached Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) Equifax is required to follow reasonable procedures to ensure that reported information is as accurate and complete as possible. Despite having been provided with ample documentation indicating inaccuracies, Equifax has continued to report erroneous information on my credit file, showing a failure to meet its legal obligations. These inaccuracies have directly impacted my creditworthiness and exposed me to unnecessary financial harm, which is unacceptable given Equifaxs duty under the FCRA.

Noncompliance with Reinvestigation Requirements ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) ) Under federal law, Equifax was obligated to provide me with a detailed description of the reinvestigation procedures it employed, including any methods and contacts made with furnishers. Despite my formal request, I have received no documentation or indication of any substantive investigation. This lack of response demonstrates an utter disregard for my rights as a consumer and raises substantial doubt as to whether Equifax conducted any reasonable reinvestigation at all.

Unauthorized Access and Failure to Provide Permissible Purpose ( 15 U.S.C. 1681b ( a ) ( 2 ) and 15 U.S.C. 1681b ( a ) ( 3 ) ( F ) ( i ) ) Per 15 U.S.C. 1681b ( a ) ( 2 ), Equifax is only authorized to furnish a consumer report if there is permissible purpose consented to by the consumer. I requested any written authorization or permissible purpose documentation Equifax possesses related to these accounts. Not only has Equifax failed to provide such documentation, but my consumer report also shows multiple inquiries that I did not initiate. These inquiries are not connected to any business transaction initiated by me, as required under 15 U.S.C. 1681b ( a ) ( 3 ) ( F ) ( i ), resulting in an invasion of my privacy and further exposing me to financial harm.

Violation of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ( 15 U.S.C. 6802 ) Under the GLBA, Equifax is required to present me with privacy disclosures regarding any sharing of my nonpublic personal information ( NPI ) with third parties. Despite multiple requests, Equifax has not provided any documentation or indication that it adhered to these disclosure requirements, which is a clear violation of my privacy rights under federal law.

Damages Sustained As a direct result of Equifaxs actions, I have endured substantial harm. The damages I have sustained include but are not limited to : Credit denials, resulting in lost financial opportunities.

Higher interest rates on existing credit, leading to additional and avoidable financial strain.

Lost business opportunities that have affected my financial growth and stability.

Severe emotional distress and mental anguish, including anxiety and frustration stemming from Equifaxs lack of action.

Legal and administrative costs related to addressing these disputes and attempts to rectify these violations.

My Good Faith Efforts to Resolve This Matter In an attempt to resolve these issues without escalating to litigation, I sent a pre-demand letter on XX/XX/XXXX, via certified mail to Equifaxs registered agent in XXXX XXXXLawyers Incorporating Service, located in XXXX. This pre-demand letter outlined my specific requests for correction, removal of unauthorized inquiries, and compensation for damages incurred due to Equifaxs noncompliance. I attached a detailed invoice ( Invoice # XXXX ) totaling {$51000.00} to cover FCRA violations XXXX unauthorized inquiries, and damages sustained due to Equifaxs negligence. My pre-demand letter was met with silence, leaving me with no recourse but to submit this formal complaint to the CFPB. 
Relevant Case Law Supporting My Claims Federal case law underscores the legal responsibilities of consumer reporting agencies and provides precedent for consumer protection in these circumstances : Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 115 F.3d 220 ( 3d Cir. 1997 ) In Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit underscored the obligation of consumer reporting agencies ( CRAs ) to perform a reasonable reinvestigation when a consumer disputes information in their credit file. This landmark case established that a CRAs duty goes beyond the mere acceptance of information supplied by data furnishers ( such as creditors ) as inherently accurate.

The court highlighted that the reinvestigation process must involve more than simple verification with the creditor. Specifically, Cushman ruled that when a consumer raises a dispute, CRAs must actively and independently investigate the legitimacy of the information. In other words, a CRA can not simply confirm the disputed data with the furnisher and mark the dispute as resolved ; instead, it must take reasonable steps to ascertain the true accuracy of the information. 
The XXXX decision made it clear that a CRAs blind reliance on furnishers can lead to liability for noncompliance under the FCRA. The court articulated that a superficial investigation or a mere reliance on automated responses from furnishers without further scrutiny violates the FCRAs requirement for reasonable reinvestigations. This case set a high standard for CRAs by holding them accountable for conducting independent and rigorous investigations, especially in cases where the consumer provides documentation challenging the reported information.

Richardson v. Fleet Bank of Massachusetts, FSB, 190 F. Supp. 2d 81 ( D. Mass. 2001 ) In Richardson v. Fleet Bank of Massachusetts, FSB, the court built upon the principles established in XXXX by further defining what constitutes a reasonable reinvestigation under the FCRA. The XXXX case involved a consumer who disputed inaccurate information on their credit report. The CRAs failure to properly address the inaccuracies led the court to find that this negligence could be viewed as willful noncompliance with the FCRA. 
The XXXX court emphasized that when a CRA is informed of potential inaccuracies by a consumer, the agency has a heightened duty to investigate and verify all disputed data independently. Failure to do so could be considered willful misconduct, especially if the CRA shows an indifference to correcting erroneous data despite being alerted by the consumer. This case clarified that a lack of thoroughness or failure to pursue additional steps to verify disputed information can expose CRAs to legal consequences for willful noncompliance, thus imposing stricter accountability on CRAs. 

Both XXXX and XXXX reinforce that CRAs can not disregard consumer disputes or treat them as trivial. These cases hold CRAs to a rigorous standard of verification and accuracy, setting critical precedents that underscore the consumers right to a fair and accurate credit report. 

Conclusion and Demand for Immediate Action Equifaxs ongoing violations of federal law, its failure to conduct a proper reinvestigation, and its disregard for consumer rights have resulted in serious harm to my financial and personal life. I am filing this complaint with the CFPB to hold Equifax accountable for these violations. I respectfully request that the CFPB : Conduct an investigation into Equifaxs failure to comply with its reinvestigation requirements as per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ).

Compel Equifax to delete the disputed accounts from my credit report immediately or substantiate their accuracy with verifiable evidence.

Enforce corrective action requiring Equifax to provide compensation for damages totaling {$51000.00}, as detailed in Invoice XXXX XXXX 

Should Equifax fail to meet these requests, I am prepared to proceed with litigation to obtain full redress for Equifaxs willful and negligent noncompliance. I intend to pursue all legal remedies available to me under 15 U.S.C. 1681n for willful noncompliance and 15 U.S.C. 1681o for negligent noncompliance to ensure my rights as a consumer are upheld and my damages are compensated. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX