Consumer complaint received 2016-06-28
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: CA
Product: Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on credit report
Sub-issue: Account status

Complaint:
NEW INFO - XXXX LETTER DATED XXXX/XXXX/XXXX ATTACHED! FTC PLAIN LANGUAGE OF XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) DOES NOT MATCH WHAT FURNISHER IS REPORTING TO CRAs AS DOFD. Furnisher and Equifax continue to report obsolete account on credit file due to furnisher purposely re-aging the account DOFD. Equifax dispute confirmation numbers XXXX and XXXX. Furnisher has been re-aging DOFD for this account every 7 days on credit file since filing these disputes. Several links to FTC Opinion/Guidance included within, clearly confirm this is a violation of FCRA Sections 605 and 623. Unsecured Line Of Credit ( LOC ) with XXXX opened in XXXX, defaulted in XXXX. First delinquency commenced in XXXX ( See attached Statement ). 1 ) XXXX - Creditor restricted credit limit to XXXX ( as noted in XXXX statement ). This was " denial or revocation of credit '' 2 ) XXXX - Creditor terminated the promotional APR and increased the APR due to derogatory/delinquent status of the account ( as noted by in XXXX statement on invoice and last page of statement where Creditor provides explanation that promotional APRs will be terminated if a consumer defaults on the account ). This was " a change in the terms of an existing credit arrangement '' 3 ) XXXX - Creditor transferred the account to internal collections department and sent XXXX LETTER with specific language, " help resolve the delinquency '', " negative information will be reported on your credit '', and is signed by " XXXX '' ( attached ). 4 ) XXXX - Creditor closed account on XXXX/XXXX/XXXX as noted on attached credit file XXXX. Partial payments continued through XXXX, the account was never brought current. 5 ) XXXX - Creditor charged off the account and is attempting to use this date as DOFD as opposed to following FTC guidance to use the earlier DOFD as required by FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) - CHARGE OFF DATE IS IRRELEVANT, FURNISHER MUST USE XXXX AS DOFD PER FTC DOCUMENT ATTACHED ( 40 Years of FCRA FTC Comments with Interpretations ). Creditor delayed reporting the charge-off to the CRAs for 44 months post DOFD which is irrelevant ( exact language used by FTC ) per FTC guidance, the DOFD must remain unchanged and is the date when the account first became delinquent, NOT the date of the charge-off. XXXX Please comply with FCRA Sections 605 ( c ) and 623 ( a ) ( 5 ), failure to comply after receiving this FTC guidance and documentation is considered willful violation of the FCRA by continuing to report inaccurate information with knowledge of its inaccuracy. The Research & Remediation Analyst at XXXX who validated the DOFD inaccurately is XXXX XXXX at XXXX ext. XXXX. The FTC information attached demonstrates the creditor is inaccurately applying the FCRA Section XXXX as they continues to validate the DOFD is the month prior to charge-off while refusing to report the date noted in the XXXX letter from XXXX. Creditor is fully aware of the correct guidance and its application thereof as they had input on the FTC compliance as indicated in the footnotes of the XXXX FTC Report to Congress. Thank you in advance for FINALLY removing this trade-line from my credit file!

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief