Consumer complaint received 2023-02-22
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a credit reporting company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: EQUIFAX, INC. (MI)

On or around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX I submitted CFPB complaint XXXX against Equifax regarding XXXX information supplied by XXXX XXXX. The complaint included a statement and sixty-five ( 65 ) pages of documentation showing the account was alleged to have been charged-off due to the negligence of XXXX XXXX, and with statements from XXXX XXXX acknowledging reporting inaccurate information regarding the account to reconcile the issues highlighted in the several billing error notices I have filed over the past one ( 1 ) year. No payment has been made on the account since I stopped receiving bills in late XXXX. The circumstances surrounding that situation were summarized in a response I received from ( 1 ) of XXXX XXXX XXXX agents, XXXX, as I'd articulated the issues to them. Yet, on XXXX XX/XX/XXXX I was notified by my credit monitoring service that Equifax had changed the status from " Consumer disputes -- Re-investigation in progress, '' to " Consumer Disputes after resolution. '' Given Equifax did not supply the CFPB with an interim response acknowledging receipt and commencement of re-investigation/review, it is highly unlikely that as of XXXX XX/XX/XXXX Equifax thoroughly reviewed the XXXX I provided and simply, as stated in XXXX, ran the automatic verification process available through eOSCAR. If the account has not been paid on since the activity date of XX/XX/XXXX, and if no payment was made by me or on my behalf, then how would the account be brought current and then subsequently marked +30, +60, +90 days past-due to have the cycle repeat again twice within the last year? That is the epitome of unverifiable information and the repeated marking of poor payment history without ability to retrieve statements is the epitome of an unfair practice. Moreover, if 12 U.S.C. 5533 in general requires consumers be able to retrieve information electronically through a system accessible by a consumer, the cessation in ability to retrieve electronic statements is unfair, especially given XXXX XXXX ' own systems continue supply data attesting the account is still open. Given I am a XXXX individual, and given my repeated requests for access to electronic statements as a reasonable XXXX accommodation, XXXX XXXX improper reporting of patently unverifiable information regarding payment history is abusive. A full amount equal to the balance would be past-due IF the account is alleged to have been charged-off. Yet, at present, the account is alleged to be a factor of N times an expected monthly payment and XXXX XXXX ' website confirms this. That itself constitutes unlawful practices by XXXX XXXX and thus invalid and unverifiable payment history to the CRAs. It goes without saying that XXXX XXXX ' own statements alleging CO of the account around XXXX XX/XX/XXXX and failure to report it as such to the CRAs unlawful, and additionally constitutes abusive, and false and misleading practices. Moreover, XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX law limits notice to me ( attached here ) from XXXX reads : " Because of the age of your debt we can not report it to a consumer reporting agency. Payment or non-payment of your debt will not affect your credit score, '' would indicate that ZERO adverse history should report for the account/tradeline. For XXXX XXXX to do otherwise constitues false and misleading practices and is patently abusive. The truth is, an examination of the documentation supplied in XXXX showed all of this with highlights from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX statements. That Equifax would choose to ignore this documentation when at this point Equifax knows, or should know the reporting by XXXX XXXX is inaccurate/unverifiable, constitutes a violation of the FCRA.