Consumer complaint received 2020-05-18
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: MN
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Sub-issue: Information belongs to someone else

Complaint:
CFPB Orders XXXX XXXX to Pay {$85.00} XXXX Refund to Consumers Harmed by Illegal Credit Card Practices XX/XX/XXXX SHARE & PRINT Federal Regulators Fine XXXX XXXX an Additional {$27.00} XXXX WASHINGTON, D.C. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) today announced an enforcement action with orders requiring three XXXX XXXX subsidiaries to refund an estimated {$85.00} XXXX to approximately 250,000 customers for illegal card practices. This action is the result of a multi-part federal investigation which found that at every stage of the consumer experience, from marketing to enrollment to payment to debt collection, XXXX XXXX violated consumer protection laws. 

Several XXXX XXXX companies violated consumer protection laws and those laws were violated at all stages of the game from the moment a consumer shopped for a card to the moment the consumer got a phone call about long overdue debt, said CFPB Director XXXX XXXX. Todays orders require the XXXX XXXX companies to fully refund about {$85.00} XXXX to consumers and it requires them to make specific changes in their business practices. The XXXX XXXX companies will identify the harmed customers, notify them, and make sure they get back their money. 

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ( FDIC ) together with the Utah Department of Financial Institutions discovered the illegal activities during a routine examination of an XXXX XXXX subsidiary, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The FDIC transferred portions of the investigation to the CFPB when the Bureau opened its doors last year and together the agencies pursued the matter. The CFPB later concluded that many of the same violations that occurred at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  also took place at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX , XXXX. 

The investigations found that the violations occurred at various points in time between XXXX and spring XXXX. They occurred at every stage of the consumer experience, from shopping for cards, to applying for cards, to paying charges, and to paying off debt. More specifically, XXXX XXXX subsidiaries : Deceived consumers who signed up for the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX credit card program : Consumers were sometimes led to believe they would receive {$300.00} in addition to bonus points if they signed up for this XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  program. But consumers who met the qualifications did not receive the {$300.00}. This violates federal laws prohibiting deceptive practices. 
Charged unlawful late fees : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX billed late fees on certain cards based on a percentage of the debt in violation of the Credit CARD Act. 
Unlawfully discriminated against new account applicants on the basis of age : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  used a credit scoring system that treated charge card applicants differently on the basis of age. For a period of time, the bank did not fully implement the system for applicants over the age of XXXX. This violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act because it requires credit scoring systems that take age into account to be properly designed and implemented. 
Failed to report consumer disputes to consumer reporting agencies : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX failed to report the existence of certain customer disputes to credit bureaus, which is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. 
Misled consumers about debt collection : All three of the XXXX XXXX subsidiaries deceived consumers into believing there were certain benefits to paying off old debt. Consumers were wrongly told that if they paid off the old debt, the payment would be reported to credit bureaus and could improve their credit scores. In fact, XXXX XXXX was not reporting the payments and the debts were so old that even if they had tried to report them, many of the payments would not have appeared on these consumers credit reports or affected their credit scores. XXXX XXXX also told some consumers that a portion of their debt would be waived or forgiven if they accepted certain settlement offers. But for customers who applied for a new XXXX XXXX card, the company was not really forgiving or waiving the debt. 


XXXX AND

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