Consumer complaint received 2016-05-19
Product: Credit reporting — 
Issue: Credit reporting company's investigation — Inadequate help over the phone
Company: EQUIFAX, INC. (MI)

I received today, after my previous CFPB compaint today, my newest credit report Confirmation # XXXX dated XXXX XXXX XXXX. It has XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX accounts disputed on XXXX sides of a single page. This complaint refers to the first page 's account which reads : " We researched the credit account. Account # - XXXX The results are : We verified that this item belongs to you. Additional information has been provided from the original source regarding this item. If you have additional questions about this item please contact : XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Phone ( XXXX ) XXXX '' Then* " We have researched the credit account. Account # XXXX The results are : we verified ... If you have additional questions about this item please contact : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX TX XXXX Phone ( XXXX ) XXXX. XXXX these communications are not anything appropriate or relevant to the time-barred XXXX date that account was closed by me and never reopened. It was not the bank 's to report. They ca n't report it. The word " item '' has XXXX meanings. In the above quote, Equifax uses the word to refer to the account itself ; when my dispute is the date and the year XXXX being time-barred. On the report it says : " Items As of Date Reported XXXX/XXXX/XXXX '' which once again makes obvious the reporting data furnished is the word " items '' and not the account in its entirety. XXXX years time-barred reporting since I closed this account with someone other than XXXX XXXX XXXX and that that bank did not own nor did any of its alleged servicers own to sell them until XXXX. But, to carry an account indefinitely on the books that had a zero balance at its acquisution in XXXX and to pretend that in XXXX it is FCRA compliant, is disengenuous in the extreme. The math alone is at issue. The letter this month from XXXX XXXX XXXX said an internal computer issue in XXXX XXXX disseminated this to XXXX credit reports automatically. That too is false. XXXX was XXXX after the acquisition of the bank that XXXX alleges had the acount with me. Then XXXX has the 13 months prior to the stated computer issue reported for positive payment history. There were mo payments to report. XXXX XXXX, supervisor, will mail all XXXX to me from XXXX. Next, the word " payment '' is not to be misconstrued with activity on a closed account in XXXX. That would be false. There was no reason to pay anything on a closed account. There was no negative reporting either. The reason XXXX XXXX XXXX persists on invading my credit report is fraudulently access my credit information as a subscriber of a current account in perpetuity. That is illegal. Second, the SEC will get what I believe is evidence that XXXX is deceiving investors by keeping dead accounts on their books to give the impression these are vurrent assets and there is cash flow coming in from these accounts. I will go even gurther in saying that from what XXXX XXXX told me the bank continues to hold this as a current liability as well since XXXX, but that for annual reports purposes wants to appear to have a payment agreement in force to show the account was not written off. IT WAS NOT WRITTEN OFF. The entire matter is about the year XXXX preventing Equifax from reporting anything on this account. Thereis nothing to report whatsoever. To do so is misleading the readers of this credit report and serves no good purpose. More specifically, it was attracting credit card offers due to it being positive credit reporting which misleads them too. I have not applied nor had credit cards whatsoever for over a decade. Probably, even longer. I do n't understand why the SIMPLE date itself is on face value not sufficient to remove the entire account per FCRA. To support this, a recent case against XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX court car XXXX reiterated my XXXX issue.