Consumer complaint received 2020-07-28
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account status incorrect
Company: EQUIFAX, INC. (CA)

Dear XXXX : I am contacting you regarding 30-day derogatory marks that appear on my three credit bureaus reported by XXXX XX/XX/2020. 
I dispute these and demand a full removal of the 30- day late mark based on the enacted Section 4021 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act ( the CARES Act ) which bars ( and makes illegal ) such a derogatory mark, subject to its terms. The purpose of this letter is to ask that the derogatory mark immediately be reported as current to the three major credit reporting agencies, Equifax, XXXX, and XXXX XXXX so that this matter be resolved amicably and without any court intervention. I thank you for your anticipated cooperation. 
Prior to the missed payments I attempted to contact XXXX regarding my charge card payments, albeit unsuccessfully due to hold times several hours long. My income has been temporarily negatively impacted by the COVID-19 outbreak, I have experienced severe financial hardship as a result of the economic standstill that our country is going through. 
Recently, and in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, the CARES Act was signed into law by the President of the United States on Friday XX/XX/2020. The CARES Act modifies the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681, et seq. ( the FCRA ) by precluding furnishers of credit information ( which specifically includes all major banks ) from reporting any deferred payments, forbearances, or other missed payments during the covered period. More specifically, Section 4021 ( F ) titled Reporting Information During COVID-19 Pandemic ( the Act ) states : if a furnisher makes an accommodation with respect to 1 or more payments on a credit obligation or account of a consumer, and the consumer makes the payments or is not required to make 1 or more payments pursuant to the accommodation, the furnisher shall ... 
It is important to note that accommodation is defined broadly in the Act and encompasses any consumer who is affected by the coronavirus pandemic during the covered period. 
..if the credit obligation or account was delinquent before the accommodation ..if the consumer brings the credit obligation or account current during the period described in ( aa ), report the credit obligation or account as current. 
The term covered period means the period beginning on XX/XX/2020 and ending.. 120 days after the date on which the national emergency concerning the novel coronavirus disease ( COVID-19 )  outbreak declared by the President on XX/XX/2020 under the National Emergencies Act ( 50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ) terminates. 
Here, it is clear that my missed payments comes within the scope of the CARES Act ( and specifically Section 4021 ) because : 1 ) the industry that I work in has been eviscerated by COVID-19, who has experienced significant financial hardship ; 2 ) the Missed Payment was within covered period ; 3 ) the Missed Payment was delinquent when it was reported to the credit reporting agencies ; and 4 ) I paid the account and brought it to current by XX/XX/2020. 
Due to the above, such unauthorized reporting on my credit reports has caused and will continue to cause substantial damages. Doing so constitutes a clear violation of the CARES Act which was designed to assist consumers during these unprecedented economic times, not punish them. In addition, violation of the CARES Act also constitutes a violation of Cal. Bus & Prof. Code 17200, et seq. Volvos actions are clearly unlawful ( the CARES Act ) and unfair ( downturn in the economy ). As you may be aware, Cal. Bus & Prof. Code 17206 permits penalties of up to {$2500.00} per violation ( which in our view, is each day that the derogatory mark appears on my clients account, multiplied by three for the three credit reporting agencies ) plus the recovery of all costs and fees. 
In fact,. I was recently denied a loan due to his credit score being slightly below the minimum requirement for the lender a difference that can be specifically attributed XXXX derogatory mark!