Consumer complaint received 2021-03-22
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: WA
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Sub-issue: Account status incorrect

Complaint:
On XX/XX/XXXX my Mortgage Lender XXXX a XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, Credit Report on my application for a Home Mortgage ( Att. p. 1-2 ). On XX/XX/XXXX I wrote a letter to XXXX Disputing 10 accounts they were reporting. On : XXXX XXXX XXXX sent me the results of the dispute you recently filed with XXXX. Where the Information contained in this new report demonstrated a completely different set Account History. Where the US Bank, account # XXXX, the Late dates were completely different from the XXXX trport. Where US Bank reported to XXXX ; Late Dates : XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, XXXX. Then reported to XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX XXXX. ( EF 1=30 days late ). In response I then wrote a Direct Dispute to US Bank dated XX/XX/XXXX and sent it by US Mail, Certified Mail, Receipt # XXXX. Where I cited : National Consumer Law Center ; Fair Credit Reporting, 6th Edition : 4.2 ; What is Accuracy? " A report can be inaccurate, even if the report is technically true in some narrow sense, but the report is overly general, incomplete, out of date or misleading ''. ( See Henson v. CSC Credit Services, Diprinzio v. MBNA, et all ). 4.2.1 : The concept of " accuracy '' is an objective one. ( See Cushman v TransUnion Corp., 115 F3d 220, 225, 3rd Cir. 1995 ) A consumer report either is or is not accurate. If it is accurate when prepared a certain way, it will always be accurate when prepared that same way. On XX/XX/XXXX, US Bank wrote back to say ; We reviewed the information and determined that the information submitted to the consumer reporting agencies is accurate. Claiming that both of these completely different and incomparable sets of information are both correct, at the same time? 

Title 12 - Banks and Banking 1. CHAPTER X - BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 2. PART 1022 - FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ( REGULATION V ) 3. Subpart E - Duties of Furnishers of Information 4. 1022.43 Direct disputes. ( 3 ) Theconsumer 's performance or other conduct concerning an account or other relationship with thefurnisher, such asdirect disputesrelating to the current payment status, high balance, date a payment was made, the amount of a payment made, or the date an account was opened or closed ; 12 CFR 1022.43 Direct disputes. ( a ) General rule. Except as otherwise provided in this section, a furnisher must conduct a reasonable investigation of a direct dispute if it relates to : ( 3 ) The consumers performance or other conduct concerning an account or other relationship with the furnisher, such as direct disputes relating to the current payment status, high balance, date a payment was made, the amount of a payment made, or the date an account was opened or closed ; or ( 4 ) United States XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. XXXX v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Cir. XXXX ). The key term at issue here, investigation, is defined as [ a ] detailed inquiry or systematic examination. Thus, the plain meaning of investigation clearly requires some degree of careful inquiry by creditors .... It would make little sense to conclude that, in creating a system intended to give consumers a means to dispute-and, ultimately, correct-inaccurate information on their credit reports, Congress used the term investigation to include superficial, unreasonable inquiries by creditors. We therefore hold that [ the FCRA ] requires creditors, after receiving notice of a consumer dispute from a credit reporting agency, to conduct a reasonable investigation of their records to determine whether the disputed information can be verified. 

XXXX : XXXX Case XXXX Document 1 Filed XX/XX/XXXX Page 1 of 9 PageID 1 UNITED STATES XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX TEXAS XXXX XXXX UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff , XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, a limited liability company, Defendant Case No. XXXX. | Case XXXX Document 1 Filed XX/XX/XXXX Page 5 of 9 PageID 5 COUNT II No Reasonable Investigation of or Response to Direct Disputes | Case XXXX Document 1 Filed XX/XX/XXXX Page 6 of 9 PageID XXXX XXXX. Through the acts and practices described in paragraph 19, XXXX, after receiving direct disputes from consumers, as that term is defined in the Furnisher Rule at 16 C.F.R. 660.2 ( b ), recodified at 12 C.F.R. 1022.41 ( b ), has failed to : a ) conduct reasonable investigations of direct disputes ; b ) review all relevant information provided by the consumer with respect to disputes ; c ) complete its investigation of the dispute and report the results of the investigation to the consumer before the expiration of the period prescribed by Section 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ; d ) where appropriate, provide notice of a determination that a dispute is frivolous or irrelevant within the time period specified by Section 623 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( F ) ( ii ), 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 8 ) ( F ) ( ii ), 16 C.F.R. 660.4 ( f ) ( 2 ), recodified at 12 C.F.R. 1022.43 ( f ) ( 2 ) ; and e ) in instances where it has determined that a dispute is frivolous or irrelevant, include the reasons for its determination that a dispute is frivolous or irrelevant and identify any information required to investigate the disputed information. XXXX thereby has violated Section 623 ( a ) ( 8 ) of the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 8 ), and the Furnisher Rules direct dispute provisions, 16 C.F.R. 660.4 and 12 C.F.R. 1022.43.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation