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

On XX/XX/XXXX, I filed a complaint with First Citizens Bank on the CFPB website. The Companys responded on XX/XX/XXXX. There are still a number of questions and discrepancies arising from the First Citizens response. I was advised by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that the proper way to handle this situation was to file a new complaint to re-address the outstanding issues. 
In its XX/XX/XXXX response, First Citizens admits it is currently reporting two tradelines to the credit bureaus for the same loan ; however, First Citizens is also reporting these tradelines as two separate loans. Since both of these loans contain very negative comments, my credit score is being severely penalized twice, which Im sure First Citizens would agree is unfair. Is there any reason why First Citizens can not combine these tradelines into one loan with a comment that the loan was transferred from their South Carolina branch to their North Carolina branch? Unless the two tradelines are combined into one loan and reported as such, I would appreciate it if First Citizen would explain their position.

In First Citizens XX/XX/XXXX response, they state they believe the information being reported to the credit bureaus is accurate, with the exception of the balance outstanding. I find it hard to understand as to how First Citizens could possibly reach this conclusion. There are a number of clearly contradictory statements being reported by First Citizens to the credit bureaus. Using the XX/XX/XXXX XXXX Credit report as a reference ( pertinent pages attached ), I cite the following errors - ( 1 ) First Citizens is reporting the Date of Last Payment as XX/XX/XXXX in one section and XX/XX/XXXX in another ; ( 2 ) First Citizens is reporting the Balance Due is {$38000.00} in one section and {$35000.00} in another ; ( 3 ) First Citizens is likewise reporting the Past Due Balance as {$38000.00} in one section and {$35000.00} in another ; ( 4 ) First Citizen is reporting the loan Date Closed as XX/XX/XXXX, even though First Citizens, in their own letter ofXX/XX/XXXX, clearly acknowledges the loan is still open, but being reported under two tradelines. ( 5 ) First Citizen is reporting all monthly Account Histories with Status Codes L, which means Charge Off, while, in another section, First Citizens is reporting that payments of {$130.00} per month were made fromXX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX ; ( 6 ) First Citizen is reporting no monthly Account Histories for XX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX andXX/XX/XXXX thru XX/XX/XXXX, when there was clearly activity ( per First Citizens monthly Statements of Account ), which show a {$130.00} payment in each and every month ; ( 7 ) First Citizen is reporting the loan was charged off as recently as XX/XX/XXXX in one of the Account Histories and XX/XX/XXXXin the other Account History, whereas the last negative activity occurred back inXX/XX/XXXX ( over six years ago! ).

I am confused why First Citizens does not refer to the agreement executed on XX/XX/XXXXas a Loan Modification and continues to report the loan as a Charge-off to the credit bureaus. On my original XX/XX/XXXX complaint, I attached a copy of the XX/XX/XXXXletter received from First Citizens own attorney informing me, that under the South Carolina Supreme Court orderXX/XX/XXXX, I had the right to be considered for Foreclosure Intervention which included a loan modification. Is First Citizen saying that their attorney was incorrect in their offer? I also attached with myXX/XX/XXXX CFPB claim, a copy of my XX/XX/XXXX request to First Citizen for a Loan Modification. Is First Citizen saying they did not receive this letter? Subsequently, I received a phone call from a First Citizen employee to discuss a modification to the loan. Is First Citizen saying this phone call was not in response to my letter? As a result of that phone call, I agreed with the First Citizens employee to a modification of the original loan terms. Is First Citizen saying that their employee did not refer to this agreement as a modification but something else? I would appreciate it if First Citizen would explain their position on this point, if they continue to insist this XX/XX/XXXX agreement was not a Loan modification.