Consumer complaint received 2019-07-30
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: FL
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem
Sub-issue: Their investigation did not fix an error on your report

Complaint:
To Whom it may concern, I'm filing a complaint with Transunion. I wrote a letter on XX/XX/19 to Transunion requesting the copies of the original source of the information reported including but not limited to, original contract of the service agreement with my signature. For 2 accounts that they had reporting in my credit report. ( XXXX- card service balance {$32000.00} and XXXX XXXX balance {$18000.00} collection ) This is something i can request and they must supply according the Fair Credit Reporting Act Section 609. In my request I had attached a copy of there credit report with these accounts and a copy of my current drivers license and my signed social security card to provide proper identification. There response was a generic account verified response for both accounts. In other words a complete disregard for my request. So on XX/XX/19 I wrote a second letter requesting method of verification with details and again the copies of the original source of the information reported including but not limited to, original contract of the service agreement with my signature. This is something i can request and they must supply according the Fair Credit Reporting Act Section 611. In my request I had attached a copy of My original letter and there response and a copy of my current drivers license and my signed social security card to provide proper identification. There response to my letter was clear. Sending me a generic letter stating what there standard protocal is when they do any investigation it hence not addressing my requests. More importantly in the letter it states right under What to do next section if I have more questions regarding the recent investigation I need to contact the furnisher directly. It is willful non compliance even if it means not following federal law. The reason why is the stated below. 

The 1681s-2 ( b ) duties arise only after a furnisher receives notice of dispute from a CRA. Notice of a dispute to a furnisher by a consumer directly does not trigger a furnishers duty to reinvestigate under 1681s-2 ( b ). See, e.g., XXXX, supra, 282 F.3d at 1059-60. The consumer must dispute to a CRA, which, in turn, forwards the dispute to the furnisher. This indirect filtering mechanism must be followed by a consumer to give rise to a duty of investigation under the FCRA to the furnisher. XXXX, supra. A furnisher need not honor a dispute received directly from the consumer, whether oral or written, under the FCRA. Such a dispute, it should be noted, likely does create a legal obligation under 1692g of the FDCPA however. 

What Is A Reasonable Obligation? 

Although 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A ) seemingly only requires a mere investigation, virtually every court that has construed this language has interpreted it to require a reasonable investigation. See, e.g., XXXX, supra, at *5 ; XXXX v. XXXX   ( 4th Cir. XXXX ) XXXX  XXXX.XXXX XXXX, XXXX-XXXX. What constitutes a reasonable reinvestigation by a furnisher is dependent on the nature of the reinvestigation request forwarded by the CRA which, in turn, is generated by the consumers investigation request or dispute. 

The XXXX court recently observed : the pertinent question is thus whether the furnishers procedures were reasonable in light of what it learned about the nature of the dispute from the CRAs notice of dispute. Id. at *7 ; accordXXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( 7th Cir. XXXX ) XXXX XXXX.XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( reasonableness of reinvestigation is dependent on the nature of consumers dispute to CRA ). In other words, in conducting the investigation, the furnisher need only respond to the specific dispute as described or outlined by the CRA on a consumer dispute verification ( CDV ) form. See, e.g., XXXX, supra ; XXXX v. XXXX   XXXX ( SB ), N.A. ( D.Minn. XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX at *6 ; XXXX v. Trans   Union , LLC ( N.D. Ill. XXXX ) XXXX XXXX  XXXX # XXXX-XXXX ; XXXX  v. XXXX   XXXX  XXXX ( N.D. Ill. XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX *XXXX.

They never supplied me with what I specifically requested in the investigation. Instead decide to stonewall me. If you need any more info feel free to contact me. Thank you for your help.

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