Complaint sub-issue: Their investigation did not fix an error on your report

I received a loan from XXXX ( Louisiana ) in XXXX for my vehicle and they were since sued and the case was in favor of the defendant due to predatory lending. I am a victim as well and my loan has acquired many fees and I owe still a major balance and shouldnt at all! I have been with XXXX since XXXX but yet still owe a XXXX balance! how can that even be possible! XXXX is also reporting negative information on my credit reports with XXXX AND EQUIFAX, From my understanding according to the FCRA XXXX shouldnt be reporting at all due to the Litigation. I have sent Equifax and XXXX numerous letters about incorrect late payments but the payments are still coming back verified! How can this negative information be verified and the law clearly states its not supposed to even be reporting on my credit reports! 
But according to the FCRA XXXX is in clear violation of the law. Under 15 USC 1681b. This is what I sent them and they still failed to abide by the law! Which is very concerning to me! The letter that was sent to both equifax and experian -- -- -- -- ->>>>> Your company is in clear violation of the law. Under 15 USC 1681b - permissible purpose of consumer reports, THE LAW CLEARLY STATES : IN GENERAL Subject to subsection ( c ) any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other : ( 2 ) In accordance with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates.

Did I give you written instructions to furnish this account on my credit report?

Furthermore, the FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT 15 USC 1681a ( 2 ) ( a ) ( i ) Exclusions from a consumer credit report clearly states : ( 2 ) EXCLUSIONS.Except as provided in paragraph ( 3 ), the term consumer report does not include Subject to section 1681s-3 of this title, any ( i ) report containing information solely as to transactions or experiences between the consumer and the person making the report ; Delete the above late payments from my consumer report, this agency is in violation of 15 USC 1681. 
Failure to respond satisfactorily with deletion of the above referenced account, and send out a free copy of my report after the changes have been made will result in legal actions being taken against your company, for which I will also be seeking {$1000.00} per violation for : Defamation of Character ( per se ) Negligent Enablement of Identity Fraud Fair Debt Collections Practices Act 15 USC 1692g violations Fair Credit Reporting Act 15USC 1681 violations for willful noncompliance - 616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance [ 15 U.S.C. 1681n ] The law is the LAW! But yet these reporting agencies are still violating my consumer rights! This is affecting me negatively and me able to being approved for funding. 

THIS IS THE LAWSUIT AGAINST XXXX BELOW : Louisiana Attorney General XXXX XXXX, Illinois Attorney General XXXX XXXX, and 32 of their fellow attorneys general have achieved a settlement with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) that includes approximately {$550.00} XXXX in relief for consumers with more relief in additional deficiency waivers expected. 

Thousands of consumers were exposed to unnecessarily high levels of risk when they were placed into auto loans with a high probability of default, said XXXX XXXX. This settlement with the auto loan giant not only provides relief to those consumers, but also requires XXXX to factor in a consumers ability to pay a loan into its underwriting in the future. 

XXXX XXXX and his colleagues allege that XXXX, through its use of sophisticated credit scoring models to forecast default risk, knew that certain segments of its population were predicted to have a high likelihood of default. XXXX exposed these borrowers to unnecessarily high levels of risk through high loan-to-value ratios, significant backend fees, and high payment-to-income ratios. The attorneys general also allege that Santanders aggressive pursuit of market share led it to underestimate the risk associated with loans by turning a blind eye to dealer abuse and failing to meaningfully monitor dealer behavior to minimize the risk of receiving falsified information, including the amounts specified for consumers incomes and expenses. Finally, the coalition alleges that XXXX engaged in deceptive servicing practices and actively misled consumers about their rights, and risks of partial payments and loan extensions. 

XXXX will pay {$65.00} XXXX to the XXXX participating states for restitution, including {>= $1,000,000} to Louisiana, for certain subprime consumers who defaulted on loans between XXXX XXXX, XXXX and XXXX XXXX, XXXX. For consumers with the lowest quality loans who defaulted as of XX/XX/XXXX and have not had their cars repossessed, XXXX is required to allow them to keep their car and waive any deficiency balance on the loan, up to a total value of {$45.00} XXXX in deficiency waivers. XXXX will also pay up to {$2.00} XXXX for the settlement administrator who will administer restitution claims, and pay an additional {$5.00} XXXX to the states. Consumers that qualify for the settlement will be contacted at a later date. 

The settlement also includes significant consumer relief by way of loan forgiveness. In all, XXXX has agreed to waive the deficiency balances for certain defaulted consumers, with approximately {$430.00} XXXX in immediate forgiveness of loans still owned by XXXX, and additional deficiency waivers of loans that XXXX no longer owns but is required to attempt to buy back. 

Going forward, XXXX can not extend financing if a consumer has a negative residual income after taking into consideration a list of actual monthly debt obligations. Additionally, XXXX is required to test all loans that default in the future to see if the consumer, at the time of origination, had a negative income. The test must include an amount for basic living expenses. If the loan is found to be unaffordable and the consumer defaulted within a certain amount of time, XXXX is required to forgive that loan. 

XXXX is barred from requiring dealers to sell ancillary products, such as vehicle service contracts XXXX will also implement steps to monitor dealers who engage in income inflation, expense inflation, power booking, and XXXX will enact additional documentation requirements for those dealers. Further, whereas XXXX previously allowed these problematic dealers to waive documentation requirements on income and expenses, XXXX no longer will allow such exceptions. If XXXX has to use a default mortgage or rent payment value, the amount input must reasonably reflect the payment value for the geographic location. Finally, XXXX will maintain policies and procedures for deferments, forbearances, modifications and other collection matters that all employees must follow. 

Joining XXXX  XXXX and XXXX XXXX in this settlement are the attorneys general of California, Maryland, New Jersey, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.