Consumer complaint received 2020-06-13
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: NJ
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:
THIS IS A REPLY TO TRANSUNION RESPONSE TO COMPLAINT # XXXX AND COMPLAINT # XXXX. LET 'S BE CLEAR. ON NEITHER COMPLAINT WAS THERE RESOLUTION. SINCE TU STILL DOES NOT WANT TO ANSWER THE SUBSTANCE OF THE COMPLAINTS AFTER THE SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTATION, PROVING THE FACTS I HAVE SET FORTH I WILL BE TAKING LEGAL ACTION FOR TRANSUNION VIOLATION OF THE FCRA FOR FAILURE TO INITIATE A INVESTIGATIONS AND REPORTING A PUBLIC RECORD FALSY IN VIOLATION OF THE FCRA. THAT IS YOUR CRIME AND VIOLATIONS, WHICH I CAN PROVE. I WILL BE SERVING YOUR REGISTERED AGENT WITH LEGAL ACTION ON YOUR BEHALF. SO BETWEEN NOW AND SAID COURT APPEARANCE IF YOU WISH TO DELETE PUBLIC RECORD YOU CAN BUT I WILL PROVE MY CASE IN COURT AND REQUEST PENALTIES FOR LYOUR MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS OF THE FCRA. SO MY COMPLAINT READS AGAIN AS FOLLOWS SINCE YOU DID NOT ADHERE TO THE PREVIOUS 2 COMPLAINTS OR 5 DISPUTES LETTERS. I specifically said in my complaint I was disputing Public record. that I submitted on XX/XX/2020 with supporting documentation supporting my position, that XXXX fail to initiate an investigation. TU did not deny that fact., They did not mention the accompanying supporting documentation for the disputed public record. TU is talking about receiving a subsequent dispute from XXXX   XXXX XXXX that is not the topic of this initial complaint. TU sign for my Public Record dispute on XX/XX/2020 according to U.S. Postal Service Records. I have proof of that. Enclosed you find a copy of that dispute. The dispute process time starts when they sign and receive the dispute in there physical possess not when they decide to login the dispute and this is fact. In lieu of that, TU states they did not initiate a second dispute on this matter regardless of receiving documentation and instead of responding to it as they are mandated to do by FCRA guidelines. TU talks about Public record dispute results from a earlier in the month XX/XX/2020 that they verified as accurate, which is the reason for me re-disputing the Public Record with the supporting documentation via certified mail # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/2020 and sign by a TU Rep at the Post Office on XX/XX/2020. The prior disputes before XX/XX/2020 were me on 2 occasion asking for the Method of Verification documents in ( CERTIFIED MAIL # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) and ( CERTIFIED MAIL XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). that they used to get there verified as accurate results which TU still have not turned over per my repeated request. Then TU alludes and jumps to the fact that did a dispute in XX/XX/2020 but that was done in response to Certified Mail # XXXX letter dated XX/XX/2020 from me stating to TU they they were in violation of the FCRA for not initaiting a re-investigation after I submitted documentation with dispute letter Certified Mail # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX sign for by TU on XX/XX/2020. Now TU want it to be known they did all these other disputes but this particular one dated XX/XX/2020 with the documentation substantiating my position they have no knowledge of but I have all the needed to show they failed to start my investiation after receiving my dispute letter. TU made it clear they did not initiate a dispute into the matter after i submitted documentation on XX/XX/2020, which is a violation of the FCRA. TU Did not provide me with the Method of Verification as requested in my written disputes, This is also another violation. TU is not revealing the True Furnisher for the source of the Public Record information on my Credit File which is another violation. TU has not been verifying and investigating this dispute with the original furnisher as they are required to do according to the FCRA, I could quote the sections and paragraphs but TU are aware of them. All disputes must be handled and Disputed with the Original Furnisher of the source of that information. If a Court of Law did not supply TU with a Judge 's Court Order to place a Public Record on my Credit File, then the Public Record was not furnished by The Courts regardless of the type of Court. TU has refuse to accurately reveal source of this information on my Credit File. Meaning the real source of this information and who furnish it to them. TU stated earlier in the reply about getting information from the Public Record of the United States Bankruptcy Court ( Which they did not listed on my Credit File ). If that is the source then my Credit Report should reflect that but it does not which is a violation of the FCRA. Barring a Court Order to place a Public Record on my Credit File which TU has no order to do so, then the only logical conclusion is TU is engaging in Fraudulent behavior pertaining to my Credit file. There are multiple violations here and I have know problem exercising my rights afforded to my under the FCRA for taking further action seeking damages for TU willful and negligent acts that are causing me harm by there incorrect and inaccurate reporting and investigating. CFPB you will find attach to this complaint all dispute letters and and supporting documentation from a Court of Law the TU claims is giving them the authority to report. But the Court Of Law does not bolster TU claims.You will also find dispute results TU claims as verified and accurate from regardless of them providing no proof to their claims of Public Record accuracy when they did not dispute with any individual at all and unwilling to reveal the source of there Furnisher or even provide Validated documentation of The method of verification on this matter. TU claims of not receiving Pubic record dispute via certified mail # XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is a FLAT OUT LIE. They did received Public Record dispute along with other disputes pages mailed along with it but choose not to investigate the Public Record because it had supporting documentation disproving there claims. CFPB Please note the supporting documentation from the courts even after TU told me to send in supporting documentation from the courts. Please take note of what the Court Says. THAT THEY DO NOT REPORT OR VERIFY ANYTHING WITH THE CREDIT BUREAUS. responding to this complaint with anything other than deleted as requested will cost you more in court I will assure you that.

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