Consumer complaint received 2022-01-08
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: MI
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:
I paid on both my XXXX XXXX accounts XXXX and XXXX on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. Both payments were XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) dollars. My XX/XX/XXXX statement, generated around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, reflects these payments on page 3 under " Since Your XXXX XXXX. '' On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX notified me that after re-presenting the XXXX dollar payment three ( 3 ) separate times, the payment for XXXX was returned NSF. On XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX and XXXX were placed into a deferment. No statement was generated thereafter until XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. On page 3 of that statement, the " Since your last statement '' indicates that no payments were made towards XXXX, nor were payments made towards XXXX -- since the payments on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. However, the " XXXX Adjustments '' section records a one-hundred fifty ( XXXX ) dollar offset for XXXX. It appears the payments were manually edited by someone at XXXX XXXX between the XXXX XXXX statement and XXXX XXXX statement. XXXX XXXX has acknowledged that having not received payment for XXXX, the account was CO on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. 

To date XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX refuses to rectify the situation. They have insisted there are no billing or payment errors. Yet, they can not, or have been unwilling to provide me with an explanation for the discrepancy between the account I instructed the payment to be applied to AND the account for which the successful payment was applied. In this case it makes a difference as to whether or not an account was CO, and subsequently whether or not I suffer harm in being denied other financial products as a result of the derogatory annotations on my credit files. 

The only answer Executive Office Case XXXX XXXX XXXX has provided is " We had no contact with you after the XXXX XXXX payment. You did not contact us to let us know the payment was applied to the wrong account. " He does acknowledged that the misapplication in payment was the reason it was CO on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. 

Moreover he inists somehow that late payment notices were issued before the CO. However, that's not possible. The account was not late when it was in deferment from XXXX XXXX until XXXX XXXX ( the next statement generation date ). This implies notification of CO of XXXX would have been generated on or after XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. I received no such notification. Further, the account was CO on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX : BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF THE NEXT PAYMENT ON XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. 

But, how would I know? XXXX XXXX 's system records the XXXX payment was returned -- that was fine. My financial services company notified me an ACH debit was conducted by XXXX on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX and it was successful, implying the payment that was successful was for the intended account, XXXX. No documents were provided for me to inspect to ensure the payment was applied to the correct sub-account and the account appears to have been manually adjusted during deferment, or immediately prior to the generation of the XXXX XX/XX/XXXX statement. 

XXXX XXXX has not provided sufficient explanation for the error in payment application and has begun closing out every single complaint I file, or that is filed by a state or federal agency on my behalf claiming it's a duplicate of an earlier complaint even when additional documentation is provided. In fact XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is so brazen that they have marked complaints as being " duplicates '' that were filed/referred to the CFPB by the FDIC, and the Treasury 's XXXX XXXX XXXX Comptroller of the Currency XXXX That is, they are quickly closing out ( hiding ) complaints that might get them into serious trouble with banking and financial regulators.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation