Consumer complaint received 2025-12-04 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint because the account being reported under SYNCB/VALUEC on my credit report contains information that is inaccurate, incomplete, and unverifiable. I do not recognize this account, I never opened or authorized it, and I have no relationship with SYNCB/VALUEC. Because of that, I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report to formally document that this account does not belong to me and may be the result of identity theft or misuse of my personal information. Despite taking all appropriate steps as a consumerincluding filing disputes with the credit bureaus and submitting the FTC reportthe SYNCB/VALUEC account continues to appear on my credit file, and the information furnished by this company remains unverified and unresolved. Therefore, I am requesting assistance from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to ensure that SYNCB/VALUEC complies with federal law, properly investigates my dispute, and removes or corrects any inaccurate or fraudulent information. 

The first time I noticed this account, I was immediately concerned because I have never applied for, opened, used, or authorized any credit card or credit line associated with SYNCB/VALUEC. I am familiar with Synchrony Bank as a financial institution that issues private-label credit cards for many retailers, but I have not opened any such accounts. Seeing this unfamiliar entry on my credit report caused immediate concern that someone may have used my identity to open fraudulent accounts or that my personal information was somehow compromised and used without my knowledge.

Upon reviewing the details being reported, I noticed several red flags that made the account appear even more suspicious. The reported account information was inconsistent across the credit bureaus. Certain dates, balances, and payment histories appeared to differ from one bureau to another, and in some instances, the reporting seemed incomplete or contradictory. This inconsistency is often a sign of either fraudulent activity or errors in how the information was furnished. Either way, the information was not something I recognized or authorized. 

Because of these concerns, I promptly filed disputes with all three major credit bureaus to challenge the accuracy of the SYNCB/VALUEC account XXXX In each dispute, I clearly stated that I did not open or authorize this account and that the information was fraudulent. I requested that the credit bureaus conduct a thorough reinvestigation and require SYNCB/VALUEC to provide supporting documentation, such as any application, signed agreement, credit authorization, transaction history, or recorded communication that would prove I was the one who opened or used the account. However, instead of receiving any documentation or meaningful explanation, I was told that the account had been verified as accurate. The bureaus did not provide details of what verification was conducted or what documents SYNCB/VALUEC supplied . This raises serious concerns about whether a proper investigation was carried out at all.

Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, both the credit bureaus and the furnisher of information are required to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of disputed items. A reasonable reinvestigation would require SYNCB/VALUEC to provide actual proof that I opened and used the account. This could include an application with my signature, documentation showing where and how the account was opened, transaction records matching my conduct, or any communication logs showing my involvement. Yet none of this was provided to me, and I have no evidence that any such documentation exists. If it does not exist, SYNCB/VALUEC should not be reporting this account, and the credit bureaus should not be keeping it on my file. 

Because of the seriousness of the situation, I also filed an FTC Identity Theft Report. Filing the FTC report was necessary because it is the official method for documenting identity theft concerns under federal law. When a consumer submits an identity theft report, furnishers are required by law to block or remove the disputed information unless they can prove its legitimacy. This proof must be documentednot inferred or assumed. I submitted my FTC Identity Theft Report to the credit bureaus, but even after doing so, the SYNCB/VALUEC account remains on my reports. This means that either SYNCB/VALUEC failed to comply with identity theft procedures or the credit bureaus failed to enforce the proper handling of the account. 

The presence of this fraudulent SYNCB/VALUEC account has caused significant harm to my credit profile and overall financial stability. It has lowered my credit score, affected my creditworthiness, and created obstacles when applying for financial products or services. Having an unauthorized account labeled as negative or derogatory creates unnecessary barriers and exposes me to higher interest rates, declined applications, and long-term financial consequences. This harm is not theoreticalit is real, measurable, and ongoing. 

In addition to the financial harm, this situation has caused emotional stress and frustration. Dealing with fraudulent accounts is time-consuming and exhausting, especially when the companies responsible do not follow proper procedures or provide necessary documentation during the dispute process. As a consumer, I followed every required step : I disputed the information, I requested documentation, I provided an FTC Identity Theft Report, and I attempted to engage in the process responsibly. Yet the disputed information remains unresolved, which indicates a failure by SYNCB/VALUEC and the credit bureaus to comply with their legal obligations. 

Another issue is that SYNCB/VALUEC has not provided any information that demonstrates how the account was allegedly opened. If this were a legitimate account, SYNCB/VALUEC should be able to produce an application with my personal information, signature, or electronic consent. They should also be able to provide transaction histories showing purchases that match my behavior, addresses that match my residence history, or communications that show interactions between me and the company. The fact that none of this has been provided strongly suggests that either the account is fraudulent or that the company does not possess the documentation required to justify its reporting. 

It is also concerning that the verification process appears to have relied heavily on automated systems like XXXX rather than human investigation. Automated systems often fail to capture the complexity of identity theft disputes and can result in inaccurate verified findings. When a consumer disputes an account on the basis that they did not open it, a proper reinvestigation should involve more than simply confirming that the account exists in the furnishers database. It should require reviewing original applications, comparing signatures, reviewing IP logs or device information for online account openings, and verifying identity at a detailed level. 

Furthermore, SYNCB/VALUEC has not provided any fraud investigation results, even though such results should exist if they properly assessed my identity theft claim. A fair and thorough fraud investigation would include reviewing how the account was opened, determining whether identity verification procedures were followed at the time of opening, checking whether any unusual activity occurred, and examining whether the account shows signs of synthetic identity use. The lack of such information indicates that SYNCB/VALUEC may not have performed the necessary due diligence required when a consumer asserts identity theft.

I am also concerned that SYNCB/VALUEC may have furnished incomplete or incorrect information to the credit bureaus. Furnishers are required to report accurate and complete information. If they can not verify the identity of the account holder, or if they can not provide documentation showing that the account was legitimately opened, they should not be reporting it at all. The lack of supporting documentation as well as inconsistent reporting across different bureaus strongly suggests that SYNCB/VALUEC may have failed to meet these obligations.

Additionally, the failure to remove or block the information after receiving my FTC Identity Theft Report is a violation of federal identity theft procedures. Under FCRA 605B, once a consumer provides an identity theft report, the furnisher must stop reporting the fraudulent information unless they provide the consumer with documentation proving that the account belongs to them. SYNCB/VALUEC has failed to provide any such documentation, and therefore they should have stopped reporting the account.

Because SYNCB/VALUEC has not proven that I opened this account, has not provided documentation supporting the reporting, and has not complied with identity theft procedures, I am requesting CFPB assistance to ensure that this matter is resolved properly. A fair resolution to this issue would include the following steps : SYNCB/VALUEC must provide full documentation showing how the account was opened.

SYNCB/VALUEC must provide a copy of the signed application or electronic authorization.

SYNCB/VALUEC must provide all transaction histories associated with the account.

SYNCB/VALUEC must provide fraud investigation records and internal notes.

SYNCB/VALUEC must provide communication logs showing any interaction with me.

SYNCB/VALUEC must provide identity verification procedures used at account opening.

If they can not provide this documentation, the account must be deleted permanently.

The credit bureaus must update my report to remove this account.

Any hard inquiries associated with the fraudulent account must be deleted.

All furnishers must comply with the FTC Identity Theft Report blocking requirements.

Until SYNCB/VALUEC provides legitimate supporting documentation proving that I opened the account, the information should not be reported on my credit file. I am requesting CFPB assistance to ensure that SYNCB/VALUEC complies with federal laws and resolves this fraudulent and harmful reporting.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation