Consumer complaint received 2018-11-07
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: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL (MA)

This complaint is based on violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act by SYNCB/XXXX, XXXX, XXXX and XXXX. 

___ On XX/XX/XXXX, I reviewed my XXXX, XXXX and XXXX  credit reports and saw a derogatory account reported by SYNCB/XXXX. All three ( 3 ) of my credit reports contained damaging information that was contradictory to each other. It is not possible for information to be different on three ( 3 ) separate credit reports yet accurate at the same time. 

___ On XX/XX/XXXX, I disputed the account with XXXX, XXXX  and XXXX. In my dispute, I included the following : The creditor reported different information on all three of my credit reports, including the date of first delinquency, the high balance, and the payment history. Please delete this inaccurate account. 

___ Between the dates of XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, I received the results of the investigations from all three credit reporting agencies. The results continued to reflect information that was contradictory to each other, which can not be accurate if the information is not reported in an even and uniform manner. I have provided the following examples of false information that was verified and updated on my credit reports ___ Example No. 1 : XXXX updated the original charge off date to XX/XX/XXXX while XXXX and XXXX updated the original charge off date to XX/XX/XXXX. 

___ Example No. 2 : XXXX and XXXX updated the original charge-off amount to {$1400.00} while XXXX updated the original charge-off amount to {$0.00}. 

___ The results of the investigations conducted by the credit bureaus and the furnisher are both misleading and damaging, including false statements that I originally defaulted for different amounts from one credit report to another, and with charge off dates that are earlier on one report yet later on other reports. These inaccuracies all pertain to negative information which can cause the remarks to remain on my credit reports for longer than allowed by law. Finally, credit scores are further impacted by recent negative activity more than older negative activity. 

___ SYNCB/XXXX failed to mark the disputed account as " disputed '' upon completion of their reinvestigation on my XXXX and XXXX credit reports. 

___Based on the aforementioned facts ( and supported by the attached updates provided to me by the credit bureaus ), the companies in my complaint have engaged in the following violations of the FCRA : ___ ( a ) That SYNBC/XXXX   violated the FCRA 15 USC 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( A ) in that they failed to conduct a reasonable investigation of my dispute thru the credit reporting agencies which is reflected in their inconsistent reporting. 

___ ( b ) That SYNBC/XXXX violated the FCRA 15 USC 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B ) in that they failed to review all relevant information provided in my dispute to the credit bureaus ( including the fact that information can not possibly be verified as accurate if it is in direct conflict to information they provided to different credit bureaus ). 

___ ( c ) That SYNBC/XXXX  violated the FCRA 15 USC 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( E )  in that they failed to modify, delete, and/or permanently block the reporting of inaccurate information on my credit reports. 

___ ( d ) That SYNBC/XXXX  violated the FCRA 15 USC 1681s-2 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( E ) ( i ) in that they failed to modify the account with a notation that it was disputed upon the completion of their investigation to one or more of the credit bureaus, as required by 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 3 ). The Tenth Circuit, applying XXXX, found XXXX   argument insufficient to support an award of summary judgment, stating that a jury could reasonably conclude that [ the defendants ] decision to report the debt without any mention of a dispute was misleading in such a way and to such an extent that it can be expected to have an adverse effect [. ] Id. at 1186 ( emphasis in original ) ( quoting XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). 

___ ( e ) That XXXX, XXXX and XXXX violated 15 USC 1681i ( 1 )  ( A ) in that they failed to conduct a reasonable investigation of my dispute of inaccurate and conflicting information. If the credit bureaus had actually participated in the investigation and/or at least reviewed the furnishers records, the information would be reported in a consistent and uniform manner and not be in contradiction with each other. 

___ In a recent decision in the U.S. District Court of MD, the court ruled that reporting inconsistent information to varying credit bureaus in response to a consumers dispute is a violation of the FCRA : This inconsistency between the type of account reported supports an inference of carelessness on [ Defendants ] part sufficient for a cognizable section 1681s-2 ( b ) claim. See XXXX, XXXX XXXX   XXXX, at XXXX ( finding that alleged inconsistencies between information provided by the furnisher to different credit bureaus sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss ). Accordingly, XXXX XXXX XXXX motion to dismiss XXXX claims under XXXX ( b ) will be Denied. XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX. XXXX, XXXX ).