Consumer complaint received 2019-04-16
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: MN
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:
General-In XX/XX/XXXX, I noticed a 30 late payment to my mortgage company that had been on my credit report since XX/XX/XXXX. I filed a dispute. The incorrect info was deleted from my account. Then a late payment suddenly showed up under that same account for XXXX. I filed a new dispute. US Bank agrees that the XXXX payment should NOT be recognized as late. They submitted pertinent info to XXXX, but the mark still exists. I have been working on getting this corrected for over 2 months now. NO LUCK. I have been typing " real time '' notes of individuals I have spoke with from US Bank. The notes are listed below. There are other calls that I have made to XXXX   as well. 

US Bank Conversation Regarding information that shows on my credit file. 
Called US Bank - XX/XX/XXXX During lunch Call began at XXXX XXXX. I spoke with XXXX ( could not give his last name ) ID # XXXX. The conversation lasted 1 hour and 14 minutes ( see image below ). I described my issue which surrounds two negative entries to my credit file for XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. I explained that I filed a dispute with XXXX in late XX/XX/XXXX. I explained further that the results came back that the XXXX entry was incorrect, and now shows to be on time and NOT late. 
I explained that the XXXX payment still remains. I also explained that now my credit report displays that XXXX of that same year was supposedly late. One of my questions was this ; What caused the XXXX report to be originally filed as late and also, since I filed the dispute, how did they find the error? XXXX explained that the payment was processed on the XXXX of XXXX, well within the month. I made sure to explain that I got a second mortgage in XXXX and that I paid a higher interest rate due to the XXXX error. He said he would put in a work order to find out. 
We then discussed the XXXX payment ( which I believe shows as a XXXX entry ), he said that the payment should have an effective date of XX/XX/XXXX. The payment was processed a few days into XXXX, but that is just typical processing. The date that matters is the date the payment was called in which was the XXXX. I stressed to XXXX that I would like to have someone ( like a Supervisor ) take a look at the same information that XXXX has visibility to and see if they can have it removed quickly as I am trying to get a loan. He said that he has put in a work order to have this looked at, but he agreed to speak with his supervisor to see if a rush could be put on it. I asked him if he sees anything that should cause XXXX to have been added. He said he did not. 
XXXX took down my email address and said that I will receive a response once the Customer Research Department finds out why XXXX was originally reported as late ( 3 years ago ) and also what was the actual error that was discovered that allowed them to delete the negative information from my credit file once I disputed the item. The other information that this team will report to me, is the reason for determining that XXXX would need to be reported as 30 days late despite the fact that the effective date should show as XX/XX/XXXX. 
Called US Bank XX/XX/XXXX After Lunch Spoke with XXXX ID # XXXX I explained to XXXX the conversation I had with XXXX one week prior. I asked her if she was able to retrieve the notes of that conversation. She did find the Work Order that XXXX initiated. She described that the notes show that it was expected to be completed by XX/XX/XXXX ( yesterday ). I asked her if she had visibility to review the alleged late payment from XXXX ( Reported in  XXXX ) of XXXX. She went into the system and was unable to see that same info or go back far enough. 
She said she would reach out to the Investigation Team to see what was happening presently with the research. She put me on hold and reached out to the team. She came back on the line indicating that there is a letter that is scheduled to be sent out to me. Then she read the letter to me. The letter indicated that the XXXX Payment ( Reported in XXXX ) will be reported to the credit bureaus that it was NOT late. I asked XXXX about her thoughts that I had to endure a 30-day late payment on my credit history for a total of 3 years. She said she felt bad and completely understood how I would likely feel. 
After reading the letter, I asked XXXX if she had any additional information regarding the removal of the XX/XX/XXXX error. She did not find any information that described details on the US Banks error from XX/XX/XXXX. I requested that she ensures that the already completed letter be sent to me as soon as possible, but that the Research Committee continue to review the XX/XX/XXXX error and follow-up with a letter when complete. I stressed that even if they were unable to uncover the true reason for the error, that they still supply a plausible reason for the error. XXXX indicated that she would be willing to enter a Work-order to have that investigation and letter supplied to me. She did take a moment to ask the Investigation Department if they could think of a possible reason to explain this. She said that they indicated that it is possible that if it were a phone payment, it could have been misapplied. Another possible reason is that the computer system could have caused the error. 
Received Email with Letter from US Bank XX/XX/XXXX The letter was brief, with a couple of details. It mentioned that back in XX/XX/XXXX, the payment transaction went through on the XXXX of the following month. It was reported late to the credit bureau, but was then corrected, acknowledging that the effective date was the XXXX of the necessary month. At that time ( if I understand it correctly ), the credit bureau was notified that the late payment entry should be removed. This did not, however, explain why in XX/XX/XXXX, when I filed a dispute, did the XXXX late payment once again show up on my credit file. I had made a previous request to XXXX and XXXX at US Bank about this. 
This letter also made a brief note that the XX/XX/XXXX US Bank records did not indicate that this payment was late. I was having trouble trying to understand why it would show up on my credit file which I have a copy ( and screenshot ) of. As a reminder, when I filed the dispute in XX/XX/XXXX, the determination was made that XXXX should have not been on my record ( for the past three years ). As a result of that dispute and determination, the XXXX late payment record was removed from my credit file. In my previous conversations with XXXX and XXXX, I requested from both of them that I needed answers in a couple areas. 1. I needed to know why XXXX had been listed as a late payment since XXXX. I also wanted to know what work was done to determine that it should be removed after I filed my dispute. 2.  How did XX/XX/XXXX all of a sudden show up on my credit report as being 30 days late. This hadnt been reported previously, meaning since XX/XX/XXXX. How did my dispute of XX/XX/XXXX prompt a review/discovery/change to XX/XX/XXXX? I wanted to know how this happened. Was this a manual discovery or a computer discovery? The main takeaway here is that the letter I received did not spell out why these things happened. As a result, I called US Bank on Friday, XX/XX/XXXX. 
Called US Bank XX/XX/XXXX Spoke with XXXX. I explained that I had just received a letter from US Bank with intentions of explaining that the XX/XX/XXXX payment was originally entered as late in XXXX, but soon after, corrected. I also spoke with her about the statement in the letter about XXXX. I requested that XXXX pull up the same letter if it were available. She did find the letter and we talked through it. She understood my concern when I explained how I did not get all of the answers that I was looking for as previously requested to XXXX and XXXX. XXXX also found those historical conversation/notes in my file. She agreed that I deserve an explanation on why the XXXX and XXXX errors happened. She told me that she would file a request that someone work to find out why this happened and send me a letter explaining this. I reminded her that I made this similar request to XXXX and also XXXX. XXXX said that it is possible that someone was still working on that letter but that her request would hopefully prompt them to complete this task. I asked her how long it would take for the credit bureau to get an update on the XXXX error. She stated that it was reported on XX/XX/XXXX and the correction to my file ( at the credit bureau ) should happen very soon. I told her that I would allow a short period of time to pass in anticipation of the letter explaining the details of the errors and would call back at a later time. We ended the conversation with that. 
Called XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Spoke with XXXX # XXXX. I explained the situation in brief and that I am curious why my XXXX  credit file still shows that the letter was sent on XX/XX/XXXX. He described that they also sent a copy to the credit bureau and should have arrived by XX/XX/XXXX. I explained that the missing information ( not contained in the letter ) surrounds my request to know WHY this happened in the first place. That is, how XXXX had originally been added and how XXXX was added later. He said that he needed to escalate the call to a higher authority. I was put on hold. Then XXXX # XXXX came on the line. I explained to her that I am seeking a letter to explain what had happened in XX/XX/XXXX that caused an inaccurate reporting to the credit bureau as well as the removal of that month after I disputed it, but the XX/XX/XXXX getting added as a late pmt. to the credit bureau. That caused me to do more work in disputing that month as well. I am also wondering whether or not the credit bureau has been notified. I asked WHICH ONES were notified. She took a brief timeout to read the notes listed in the file. I was put on hold. When she came back on the line, she mentioned that it was quite a long file and that she was still reading the notes. I told her that it was totally fine and that I would wait. Then she came back on the line and said that the correction letters were not detailed at all. She said that she was going to request that the investigation team dig into this and supply a letter. I explained that she is now # 4 on the list that would work to get this info. I asked how it would be possible for her to make this happen. I said I was worried that 6 months from now I would be talking to the 22nd person that would be making a similar promise. I asked her if she understood my concern. She said she looked at the names and recognized some of them. She said that she has a bit more experience than them and wanted to really get to the root cause. She then said she needed to put me on a brief hold. She came back on the line and said, it appears that they are NOT going to explain why it happened. They did not say why they would supply that information. She said that they always notify all XXXX. She said that the info has already been sent, but its a problem that they told them that XXXX should be listed as correct but NOT XXXX. I explained that the law only provides a certain amount of time. She said that as of today, the credit bureau does NOT know that XXXX needs to be removed. I said that I was trying to get a loan and that my interest rates would be higher as a result of this problem. I asked if, due to this clumsy error, this could be escalated and that the credit bureaus could be notified quickly. We both concluded that they do not yet know that XXXX needs to be removed. I could hear in the background her typing very quickly. She put me on hold once again. She came back on the line and said she is looking at the notes. She said that she was hoping it would get accomplished by XX/XX/XXXX. I said thats a huge delay. She said someone would get an email to rush this. I asked if I could get an email. I asked if the letter could be emailed once its complete. She put in the request. I told her that US Bank did this very same thing last time. We discovered that that the error was telling US Bank that XXXX needed be cleared, and not XXXX like it should have been. She went back into her system to look at XXXX of XXXX and it shows that XXXX was not late. I explained that for the past 3 years, neither XXXX or XXXX has shown to be late on my credit file. It was only added just a couple months ago. I told her that if she looked at that same file 3 months ago, XXXX would NOT show as late. She said she would leave this urgent request open to have this investigated. We ended the call after a total of 59 minutes and 51 seconds. 



Called XX/XX/XXXX Spoke with mortgage dept. I asked to be connected with the research department that was working on my file. The assistant put me on hold, then came back on the line to say that she was checking into it. Her name was XXXX ID XXXX. I explained that I was hoping to get an update on where the Investigation Team was at with my file. She said that the file had not yet been updated and that they were still working on it. I asked from her working history if she could tell if there was actually a difference between something that was put on rush vs something like this that was handled in a normal fashion. She indicated that this was the first time she had seen something be put on rush. I told her I would probably just wait until Monday to call back. She said that she was actually going to suggest the same thing. I thanked her and we ended the call. 

I received a letter from US Bank on XX/XX/XXXX. It was dated XXXX, XXXX, XXXX. It states that the XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX installments reflect as current. 
I spoke with XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX ID XXXX I asked her to pull up the letter I just received. She read the letter and did not comment. Went back to review the pmt. history. She commented that XXXX was actually late. I made her aware of the effective date. 
I asked her to re-read the letter. She agreed that it seems to read that XXXX and XXXX were current. 
At this point I am unsure what the credit bureau has on file. 
She said she needed a moment to check on something. I was put on hold. She came back on the line stating that she spoke with a Supervisor and that XXXX and XXXX are considered on time from a US Bank standpoint. She said it could take up to 30 days for the credit bureaus to update their files. 
It is interesting to note that it states that they submitted a correction for XXXX when XXXX is actually the problem. Why would this letter state that information submitted is accurate when they had to make a correction for XXXX? 

XX/XX/XXXX After sending the letter ( stating XXXX and XXXX current ) to XXXX, I called US Bank once again. XXXX with XXXX ID # XXXX. I described the issue. She confirmed that XX/XX/XXXX was received on time. She said the file was closed. I told her that XXXX STILL remains at XXXX. I explained my frustration. She said she was going to get a member of Senior Management on the line. There was a brief pause. When she came back on the line, she said that they spoke senior management and also their supervisor. They reviewed my situation and said that the case will be reopened and that there will be a rush placed on this order. I asked her what the difference in timing would be when something is place on a rush status. She said that the Supervisor has 24 hours to look into this. She said she asked them if they could call XXXX direct and they said the system does not work that way. She said she would call me back on Monday to give me the results. Once again, she went on to explain that the XX/XX/XXXX payment shows as NOT being late. I will wait for the call. 


Called XX/XX/XXXX Spoke with the mortgage dept. I asked them if they had an update on my file. The person I spoke with an individual named XXXX ID XXXX to see what the status was on their end. I shared that I received an email from XXXX stating that my file had been updated. This was unfortunate because it is incorrect. She stated that it has been reported to XXXX that the file was correct. I asked her to read the letter that US Bank sent to me suggesting that both XXXX and XXXX were made on time. She found and read the letter agreeing with this fact. XXXX explained that US Bank has until the XXXX to finalize the work order. I asked when the last time was that US Bank spoke with XXXX. She indicated that it was around XX/XX/XXXX. I reminded her that I just received an email this morning indicating that my XXXX file had been updated. The update shows that XX/XX/XXXX is still reporting as being 30 days late. I told XXXX that I am thinking that the work order is actually complete and that the XXXX is only the date that US Bank is planning on getting back to me. I also told her that I believed that this will simply continue until I get a job at XXXX or US Bank and physically hit the delete key myself. I told her that my efforts to upload the letter with a US Bank letterhead to XXXX obviously did not work in my favor despite the fact that it states that XXXX and XXXX were current. I asked if XXXX was prohibited from allowing me to speak with a Supervisor. She indicated that she is not prohibited and put me on hold. At this point, 25 minutes had passed. XXXX came back on the line and said that she has a rep on the line and was just going over details with that person. Then XXXX came on the line. She said she is brought up to speed. She referenced the letter from the XXXX. She said that there is a lot of mis-communication going on and that the letter that was drafted was not clear. Our call got dropped somehow. It came back to XXXX and she worked to get XXXX back on the line. She also confirmed my cell if the call got dropped. XXXX was no longer available. A new person XXXX ID-XXXX, I mentioned to her that I have a Word document that goes all the way back to XX/XX/XXXX. He was confirming that they sent a letter on XX/XX/XXXX to XXXX noting that XXXX was current. I let him know that XXXX is the main issue, not XXXX. I went on a long historical rant. XXXX now better understood what was up. He agreed that XXXX were correct. Please correct the credit report. He made these notes. I asked if there was a training issue with his team. He said that it would be a mis-interpretation. He said that he may have used his tools better to correct this issue. He said he can not rush this order. He said he tried in the past and it has gotten kicked back. He said he could issue a free-form letter that helps clear up this issue that I could send to the Credit Bureau myself. I said I would like that. He said it would be emailed and mailed to me. It is hoped that his new notes would improve the odds of this getting corrected at the credit bureau. Our conversation has now crossed the one-hour mark ending at XXXX. There are 3 orders open, - credit report correction, the letter, and a rush for the letter to be sent to me. We ended the call at XXXX XXXX.

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