Consumer complaint received 2023-09-09
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: Upgrade, Inc. (MI)

On XX/XX/XXXX, a personal loan was applied for in my name from Upgrade.com. This account was opened fraudulently. I did not apply for, nor did I ever signed a contract to receive a personal loan from Upgrade. I also did not receive money in any bank accounts from this company. This account closed on XX/XX/XXXX, and went into charge-off status weeks later. I have asked for this account to be investigated by XXXX and XXXX, but have been told that the account is valid. Upgrade has also investigated this account, but have not provided proof that this account was applied for and authorized by me. 

Upgrade states that I provided consent to electronically sign application documents through the E-SIGN Act Consent, but have not substantiated this claim by submitting proof that this submission came from me via I.P. or XXXX  address. This consent can not be deemed as valid and contractually binding, unless proof of signature by the client can be confirmed as valid by providing information that this signature was provided to Upgrade from the client 's digital device. 

I submitted an identity theft report from identitytheft.gov to XXXX, XXXX and Upgrade, but Upgrade states that they are unable to move forward to substantiate my claim of identity theft due to the following reasons : No discrepancies were identified with the information provided in the application. 
The transactional history associated with the account is not indicative of fraudulent activity. 

These statements were provided to the CFPB, but they have failed to substantiate these claims. They have not provided the investigation results. Upgrade also states that the E-SIGN Act Consent agreement, Truth in Lending disclosure, and loan agreement to this correspondence. would be attached to the former investigation claim on the CFPB website, but they have failed to do so.

Upgrade is also in violation of FDCPA 1006.34 - Notice for validation of debts ( a ) Validation information required.

( 1 ) In general. Except as provided in paragraph ( a ) ( 2 ) of this section, a debt collector must provide a consumer with the validation information required by paragraph ( c ) of this section. They have failed to provide this information.

I submitted an Upgrade dispute with XXXX and XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. I did not receive a description of the reinvestigation from the credit reporting agencies XXXX and XXXX within 15 days, which is a violation of FCRA 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681I ) ( a ) ( 7 ), which states that this information must be provided. 


XXXX and XXXX is also in violation of FCRA 611 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681I ) ( 5 ) ( B ) ( ii ) ( A ) : The Upgrade account was removed from XXXX and XXXX on XXXX, XXXX, XXXX, but was added back to credit report without notice from the consumer reporting agency within 5 days. 
If any information that has been deleted from a consumers file pursuant to subparagraph ( A ) is reinserted in the file, the consumer reporting agency shall notify the consumer of the reinsertion in writing not later than XXXX business days after the reinsertion or, if authorized by the consumer for that purpose, by any other means available to the agency. I did not receive this notice from XXXX or XXXX.