Consumer complaint received 2025-12-04 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this formal complaint against TransUnion for willful and negligent violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). TransUnion repeatedly verified late-payment information on my credit file without obtaining or reviewing the legally required documentary proof from the furnisher. TransUnion refused to produce any billing statements, account ledgers, due-date records, or payment-posting histories showing when a payment was actually due, whether it was paid, and when it was posted. Instead, TransUnion relied solely on automated, coded responses from the furnisher, which are legally insufficient to establish accuracy under federal law. 
TransUnion is reporting the following late payments, each of which is inaccurate, unverifiable, and unsupported by tangible documentation : XXXX  XXXX Acct XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX ( 30 days ) XXXX XXXXXXXX Acct XXXX : XX/XX/XXXX ( 30 days ), XX/XX/XXXX ( 60 days ) Dept. of EducationXXXX : XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX ( late codes applied while loans were in deferment/forbearance ) None of these alleged late payments can be substantiated. TransUnion has failed to obtain : ( XXXX ) the exact date any payment was due ; ( XXXX ) the exact date any payment was actually received ; ( XXXX ) the posting timestamp; or ( XXXX ) a ledger proving a delinquency occurred. Without these records, no CRA can legally verify a late payment. Yet TransUnion marked every disputed account as verified, despite possessing no evidence capable of proving the claims. 
Under FCRA 611, TransUnion is required to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. A reinvestigation that relies solely on superficial, automated codes is not reasonable. Under FCRA 607 ( b ), TransUnion must maintain maximum possible accuracy, which requires actual evidence, not conclusory data. Under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), furnishers may not provide information that is inaccurate or unverified. Under 623 ( a ) ( 3 ), furnishers must supply documentation supporting the dispute, which did not occur. 
In XXXX XXXX TransUnion Corp., 115 F.3d 220 ( 3d Cir. 1997 ), the court made clear that the burden of proof rests with the furnisher, not the consumer, and that a CRA can not rely on unverified notations. TransUnion ignored this controlling precedent by refusing to require furnishers to produce actual records. Without proof of a missed payment, TransUnion must delete or correct the information immediately. 
TransUnions failure to obtain evidence, coupled with its continued reporting of unverified derogatory information, has caused significant harm, including credit denials, lower credit scores, increased interest rates, financial losses, and reputational injury. I have suffered measurable damages due to TransUnions refusal to comply with federal law and its reliance on unverifiable data. 
I request that the CFPB immediately investigate TransUnion for systemic, reckless, and willful violations of the FCRA. TransUnion must be compelled to obtain real documentation from furnishers, correct or delete all unverifiable late-payment information, and implement compliance measures to prevent further harm. Their repeated refusal to follow federal verification requirements demonstrates a clear need for regulatory intervention and enforcement action.

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 non-monetary relief