Consumer complaint received 2019-03-31
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: CA
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports
Sub-product: Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report
Sub-issue: Information is missing that should be on the report

Complaint:
i, XXXX XXXX XXXX made a payment " Tender Of Payment with coupon on multiple occasions to XXXX XXXX. They credit my Home Furniture Account in full for the amount tendered on XX/XX/XXXX but then on XX/XX/XXXX, i received an email stated that they had reversed the payment due to fraudulent activity or a suspicious payment tender money order coupon which is one in the same. 

Therefore the amount tendered should be discharged at this point and time showing on my account paid in full zero balance. 

I submitted the payment as directed by XXXX employees. They said that the payment could be in a money order coupon or check. So when i called to speak to someone concerning the reversal payment they said that the payment was suspect and fraudulent. They customer service representative went on to say that i could be in a lot of trouble if i did not make a payment from my personal banking account or debit card. Now i have two accounts but i am only dealing with card ending in XXXX. My reason is because i have spoken to the alleged office of the CEO when it was not the office of the CEO but the office of the President or Vice President, when i demanded to speak with the CEO and or controllers of said Bank. They routed me to three different people claiming that they spoke with me, when this is false. I had only spoken to one person from the Office of Obudsman on XX/XX/XXXX. 

When i attempted to speak with that person on XX/XX/XXXX she said that she could not speak with me but was calling to speak with my wife whom has a different account same bank but different card and card number. She went on to tell me that the payment type was not a legal form of payment that accept. I then asked her about the law of XXXX, XXXX, great need of economy. ( This is in direct reference to the XX/XX/XXXX act and presidential proclamation 2039, where a NATIONAL ECONOMIC BANKING EMERGENCY was declared, facilitating the serious emergency that Congress has stated is still extant )? She stated she didn't know about that type of payment and it looks criminal. 

I then asked her if she new that her company XXXX XXXX  filed a 8-K form with the SEC. She said we file all necessary documents with all government agencies. I then said well if you do then you would know about the Act of 1933 and 1934. She then giggled and said well no matter what we don't accept the payment type you submitted. I then asked so it was not a illegal payment and if you decline said payment type you must discharge the debt, she then giggled and said we will not discharge the debt either. I also asked her if XXXX does business with the Federal Reserve Bank and or the US Treasury, she said no! we don't go and collect payments from the Federal Reserve Bank nor from the US Treasury. 

I was shocked for the law states that " The ownership of all property is in the state by virtue of the government " Under thenew law government obligations, bills of exchange, drafts, notes, trade acceptances, and bankers acceptances, because it is backed by the credit of the nation.It will represent a mortgage on all the homes, and other property of all the people of the nation. '' Senate Document No. 43, 73rd Congress, 1st Session, Congressional Record, March 9, 1933 on HR 1491 p. 83. 

The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federalreserve banksand for all, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, or at any FederalReserve bank. 12 U.S. Code 411 - Issuance to reserve banks ; nature of obligation ; redemption - ( Dec. 23, 1913, ch. 6, 16 ( par. ) ,38 Stat. 265 ; Jan. 30, 1934, ch. 6, 2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ,48 Stat. 337 ; Aug. 23, 1935, ch. 614, title II, 203 ( a ) ,49 Stat. 704. ) I also feel that they have stated falsely that i have somehow committed a crime by making this payment of this type. The phone call was recorded on XX/XX/XXXX XXXX approximately which was a Tuesday evening, all phone calls are recorded. I also called bank on XX/XX/XXXX which was a Saturday evening after receiving more emails and calls saying my payment was fraudulent. I explained that the payment format was not fraudulent but lawful and rule of law, i attempted to explain the act of 1933 but they hung up on me during the call. I called back and got the same answers of my payment was fraud when i again tried to explain the act of 1933 they hung up again. I called back a third time and this time a female said she would notate my account, she then placed me on hold and got a supervisor. She said that i must send the corrected format she told me was acceptable as tender of payment. So i did but when i called in to see if they had received payment they said no, it must be lost so they filed a complaint for lost or missing payment. 

I called back on XX/XX/XXXX and spoke with a supervisor and a manager and they explained to me the proper format of payment to tender and notated my account that they tender of payment was being mailed that day. Since this day they claimed to not have received my payments but the office of Obudsman claims they received it but won't accept the payment or The Tendered Payment.

I feel like this is harassment, she seemed to be taunting me and my family when i have a Infant trust credited account.

When the United States, with constitutional authority, makes contracts, it has rights and incurs responsibilities similar to those of individuals who are parties to such instruments. There is no difference, said the Court in United States v. Bank of Metropolis, 15 Pet. 977, 392, except that the United States can not be sued without its consent. See, also, The XXXX Acceptances ( XXXX v. United States ) 7 Wall. 666, 675 ; XXXX v. United States, 91 US 389, 396. In XXXX v. United States, 292 US 571, 580, with respect to an attempted abrogation by the Act of March 20, 1933 ( 48 Stat. at L. 8, 11, chap. 3, U.S.C. title 38, section 701 ) contracts of the United States, the Court quoted with approval the statement in the Sinking Fund Cases, 99 US 70, supra, and said : " Punctilious fulfillment of contractual obligations is essential to the maintenance of  the credit of public as well as private debtors. No doubt there was in March, 1933, great need of economy. ( This is in direct reference to the March 9, 1933 act and presidential proclamation 2039, where a NATIONAL ECONOMIC BANKING EMERGENCY was declared, facilitating the serious emergency that Congress has stated is still extant )? 

Keep in mind that XXXX has already credited my account over eight months ago for over charging me for a scheme whereas a button on line was preselected without my knowledge or consent charging me for insurance up to {$1200.00} which was refunded. 

Therefore i am requesting mediation and or arbitration ;

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