Consumer complaint received 2016-06-08
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: NY
Product: Credit reporting
Issue: Credit reporting company's investigation
Sub-issue: Inadequate help over the phone

Complaint:
This is an Identity Theft reporting issue about CREDIT REPORTING AGENCIES ( CRA ). In particular, Experian.com of XXXX Texas and their ID Theft supervisor, XXXX at ext. XXXX. 

I spoke with a Experian credit Dispute Identity Theft supervisor named XXXX in early XXXX XXXX. My concern was as a victim of I D Theft, there should be a FCRA block under sec 605B to allow victims the right to rebuild their credit. 

I had XXXX item in public records that was negative : a XXXX/XXXX/XXXX Ch. XXXX filing in my name while I was out of town working, made by my wife 's attorney as an emergency, that was dismissed the next day by a Judge who never served me any notice nor any papers to review due to the Creditor who stole our house filing fraudulent docs with the court. The Pretender Lender XXXX claimed that XXXX ( me ) had no standing to bring a Ch. XXXX ( creditor lied ) stating he was not on loan secretly foreclosed in XXXX. 

So, the Judge, having no response from me since I was not there, nor invited nor served with any complaint or motion from the Creditor, dismissed the BK Court Stay and dismissed the case! Our house was stolen the next day. We were kicked out & our records & furnishings locked up for TWO years in the hopes that we would quit on our efforts to recover the stolen home. Incredibly, I filed a complaint against XXXX XXXX with CFPB in XXXX. Then CFPB investigated and found that XXXX XXXX indeed had placed my name and my wifes name on a loan secretly. on XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX admitted that my name was on the loan! .So our home recovery is ongoing, but, the Ch.XXXX was only open for one day and its dismissal sits as a reminder of our Identity theft of my identity and should be blocked under FCRA Sec. 605B. 

Experian supervisor XXXX stated I should pay a lawyer to remove filing by vacating it. That cost too much money & I was an Identity theft victim entitled to mandate Experian to block negative inaccurate items from my CR under FCRA sec 605B. Experian supervisor XXXX advised me that the cheapest way to remove the one remaining NEGATIVE item on my CR was to contact the the Data warehouse and public records manager for Experian and ask for it to be removed. XXXX promised me that if I convinced Experian 's subcontractor, XXXX, to remove this BK filing as a mistake due to I D theft or for any reason, XXXX would delete the filing under FCRA sec 605B. So I did. 

I faxed the XXXX/XXXX/XXXX XXXX report letter from XXXX to XXXX twice during XXXX XXXX. XXXX is the consumer reporting arm of XXXX. XXXX reviewed my request and agreed to delete the XXXX Ch. XXXX case # XXXX from their data base and the personal report they did on me. I was very happy XXXX XXXX was helpful and aware of the damage that an Identity Theft issue could do to my personal credit report with all XXXX CRAs. As you know, XXXX is the GATEKEEPER of data for all public records reporting in America for ALL XXXX CRAs! 

Incredibly, XXXX ( another CRA ) gladly removed the Ch.XXXX public record and other items involving Identity theft from my XXXX report, but, not Experian. XXXX checked with his manager XXXX, who vetoed his promise to delete. 

So I checked with the NYAG about why CRAs violate the FCRA law. NYAG sued all XXXX CRAs in XXXX, forcing each of them to sign a Consent Agreement on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX that mandates them to give their workers the discretion to remove any Identity Theft related content or credit inquiries or credit files immediately. The CRAs agreed in the Consent Agreement with NYAG to delete these inaccurate items related to ID theft immediately or suffer additional fines and penalties. The CFPB must order Experian to delete this identity theft content from my file. 

Experian supervisor XXXX said Door to Door Sales Act would allow him to delete this public record : XXXX vetoed that too

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