Consumer complaint received 2023-11-04
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: EQUIFAX, INC. (MI)

XXXX XXXX responded to CFPB complaints XXXX and XXXX claiming they were furnishing accurate information for an account to the CRAs. XXXX XXXX alleges the account was charged-off on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. However, my XXXX and Equifax credit fils show no such annotations. While XXXX contends the account was reported as a " satisfactory account, '' for XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX alleges no data was provided to the XXXX for the months XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX : " There was no reporting submitted for XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, this differs from your correspondence which claims your account was reporting as 'Paid as Agreed ' until XX/XX/XXXX. '' Yet, the account/tradeline payment history from both Equifax and XXXX show XXXX provided data showing the account was in a " satisfactory account '' status for those months. If XXXX alleges the account was charged-off on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, then that would imply the account had a date of first delinquency that existed prior to the date of charge-off and the account continued to report delinquent for the nominal payment until charged-off on or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX. No such date of first delinquency exists for the account/tradeline as reported by both Equifax and XXXX. According to Equifax, XXXX furnished data indicating the date of first delinquency was XXXX of XXXX, which is nearly XXXX ( XXXX ) year after the account was alleged to be charged-off. Moreover, the date of first delinquency as reported corresponds to a month in which the account is reported as a " satisfactory account '' by XXXX. XXXX claims the reason no charge-off status is being reported to date ( nearly two years after alleged charge-off ) was because of enrollment in a financial relief program : " It is important to know, this charge off status was never reported to the credit bureaus due to the accounts status as participating in a financial relief plan, '' ( see XXXX XX/XX/XXXX XXXX response ). However, the XXXX XX/XX/XXXX response says " Please know, we were unable locate any COVID-19 relief request from you, '' ( see XXXX XX/XX/XXXX response ). What is dubious about the information XXXX is providing to the CRAs is that the past-due balance increases each month as though I am being billed monthly, nearly XXXX ( XXXX ) years after the account was alleged to have been charged-off. Moreover, the payment history as reported by both Equifax and XXXX is identical, lending credence to the errors for this account stemming from the information furnished by XXXX XXXX to the CRAs ( see attached snippets from Equifax and XXXX ). Finally the XXXX XX/XX/XXXX response from XXXX states " Additionally, the reporting of your account will update after XX/XX/XXXX to reflect as charge off. But, the impact to the credit score occurs from the date of first delinquency and decays with time from that date. That is XXXX continues to try and fix error after error after error stemming from negligence on its part in XXXX. Yet, I am bearing the brunt of this negligence as a consumer nearly two ( 2 ) years later. It is clear the account/tradeline is unreconcileable and needs to be removed from my Equifax and XXXX credit files.