Consumer complaint received 2025-07-04 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: NY

Complaint narrative:
Disclosure : As a consumer fully exercising my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), I am documenting each step in preparation for formal legal escalation, if necessary. 
Clarification : This complaint is separate and distinct from any previously filed complaints against Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. It addresses new violations and failures, specifically their refusal to provide verification documentation related to the XXXX dispute, as required under FCRA 1681g and 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). It is not duplicative in subject matter or legal basis. This is not a re-dispute. 
Reference : Disputed XXXX XXXX account beginning with XXXX ( Transunion and Experian format ) or ending in XXXX ( Equifax format ), depending on the formatting used. This account currently reflects a charge-off status, past due balance {$5000.00}, Credit limit {$4000.00} and derogatory payment history on my credit report. 
Subject : Complaint Against Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion for FCRA Violations Improper Verification of a XXXX Account and Refusal to Provide Verification Documentation ( FCRA 1681g, 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), and Related Provisions Narrative This complaint is directed against the XXXX nationwide consumer reporting agencies Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion for willfully and negligently violating multiple provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) in their handling of my dispute regarding an inaccurate and unverifiable tradeline from XXXX XXXX. 
Background Facts The XXXX tradeline has been the subject of prior disputes and legal inquiries, with certified dispute letters sent in XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, I submitted a supplemental dispute to Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax identifying the XXXX XXXX as unverifiable, incomplete, and misleading, and specifically requested : - Full payment history - Signed agreements - Itemized statements - Proof of debt ownership or immediate deletion if documentation could not be produced.

This dispute cited FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and demanded compliance. To date, no documentation has been provided by either XXXX or the credit reporting agencies. The tradeline remains legally unverifiable and must be deleted. 
XXXX failed to respond to the dispute and did not furnish any signed contracts, transactional records, or itemized billing history, undermining any claim of verification. 
Experian marked the tradeline as Verified and Updated, but failed to produce any new data or explanation. This suggests the investigation was superficial or automated a likely violation of FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ). 
Experian altered the past due as of date from XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX without any legitimate basis or new account activity a post hoc manipulation that falsely extends the accounts derogatory status and misrepresents account activity in violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 607 ( b ) TransUnion returned a similarly vague outcome, labeling the account as 'verified ' without providing any documentation from XXXX or describing the method of verification. 
TransUnion and XXXX report a XXXX XXXX of {$5000.00}, while simultaneously reporting a charge-off and current balance of {$5000.00} exceeding the {$4000.00} credit limit. No documentation has been provided to justify the {$4.00} discrepancy, nor explain how or when this high balance occurred. The inconsistency raises concerns of unverified interest, fees, or internal reporting inflation, and violates the requirement for maximum possible accuracy under FCRA 607 ( b ). This High Balance was not disclosed in earlier reports, and its appearance only after my dispute suggests a possible post hoc or reconstructed update, not a verified fact. Without itemized statements or creditor explanation, this change is unverifiable and must be treated as such under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). 
Balance and Timeline Inconsistencies o The Transunion dispute result report labels the account as having an Original Charge-off of {$5000.00} in XX/XX/XXXX, yet separately lists a High Balance of {$5000.00} a value that exceeds the charge-off amount. Since charge-off represents the final balance deemed uncollectible, a higher balance appearing after the account was charged off is both procedurally and logically inconsistent. 
o Furthermore, the term Original Charge-off misleadingly implies that there were multiple charge-off events, but no additional charge-off dates or updates are listed. There is also no date provided for when the High Balance occurred, nor was any supporting documentation offered.

o These inconsistencies violate the Fair Credit Reporting Acts standard for maximum possible accuracy ( FCRA 607 ( b ) ) and materially misrepresent the nature of the debt. The CRAs updated this account without verifying its accuracy or ensuring consistency between fields. 
The charge-off balance ( {$5000.00} ) exceeds the original credit limit ( {$4000.00} ), raising major concerns about unverifiable over-limit fees or interest which must be validated but were not. 
No payments or updates have occurred since XX/XX/XXXX, yet the account is still listed as updated as of XX/XX/XXXX likely using stale or recycled data. This violates FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). 
The reported account balance exceeds the credit limit, suggesting unverified fees or interest accruals, which were neither explained nor validated during the reinvestigation. 
Scheduled payment and actual payment history remain at {$0.00} for over XXXX  months, yet the account is still reported as a valid, active charge-off contradicting the requirement to report accurate and current data. 
None of the CRAs provided notice of the changes made to the tradeline, violating FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ), which mandates that consumers be informed of results and the method used during reinvestigation. 
Unverified Account Elements : XXXX failed to produce any of the following when requested through dispute or reinvestigation : Itemized balance history or account statements Signed applications or cardholder agreements Records of authorized or signed transactions Evidence of mailed or delivered late payment/charge-off notices Proof of consent to fees, interest, or terms of credit Full payment posting history Evidence of ownership or authorization to report the debt The absence of this documentation from both the furnisher and the CRAs shows that the account was not properly verified and remains unsubstantiated under FCRA standards. These failures also likely violate : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which prohibits inclusion of information that can not be verified as accurate and complete XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, prohibiting deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of business Failure of the Verification Process Only XXXX Possibilities, Both Unlawful : 1. Reliance on e-OSCAR System Checkbox Responses : If the CRAs relied solely on automated responses from the furnisher via the e-OSCAR platform without reviewing actual documentation they failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation in violation of FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) and 607 ( b ). Such blind reliance is negligent and fails to meet the standard of maximum possible accuracy.

2. Review of Incomplete or Unsent Documentation : If the CRAs received documentation from XXXX  XXXX and either : o Chose not to review it ; or o Reviewed it but ignored the lack of responsive data ; Then they engaged in willful violations of FCRA 1681i, 1681g, and possibly 616617 concerning civil liability.

Violation of the 30-Day Deadline ( Equifax and XXXX Bank ) : As of this filing, Equifax has failed to provide the results of its reinvestigation, despite receiving my dispute by certified mail on XX/XX/XXXX. This exceeds the XXXX limit established under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) and 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ). The disputed XXXX tradeline continues to appear on my report ( as confirmed via XXXX XXXX ), despite no timely reinvestigation result being issued. An immediate deletion of the account is a must. 
Furthermore, XXXX XXXX failed to respond to my direct dispute within this 30-day period, and did not supply any of the required verification documents ( e.g., signed agreements, billing records, proof of ownership ). The continued presence of this tradeline after the expiration of the statutory reinvestigation period without verified supporting evidence constitutes a violation of the FCRA and triggers the CRAs duty to delete the account under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). An immediate deletion of the account is a must.

Failure to Provide Required Disclosures : All three CRAs failed to com
ply with FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) and 1681g, which require : The method of verification Documentation or evidence reviewed Name and contact information of the verifying party Key Violations Include : 1. FCRA 1681i Failure to Conduct Reasonable Reinvestigation 2. FCRA 1681e ( b ) / 607 ( b ) Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy 3. FCRA 1681g / 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) Failure to Provide Verification Method and Documentation 4. FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) Failure to Notify of Dispute Outcome Properly 5. FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Obligation to Delete Tradeline When Information Can not Be Verified Any continued attestation that this account is verified or updated without producing responsive documentation may constitute false certification, constructive fraud, or deceptive practices in violation of federal and state laws. 
LEGAL NOTICE AND FINAL OPPORTUNITY FOR RESOLUTION I am documenting this matter in good faith and notifying all parties that, unless this unverifiable tradeline is permanently deleted from my credit file within XXXX calendar days, I will proceed with formal legal escalation. This includes : Filing small claims lawsuits against each CRA in XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Filing complaints with the XXXX XXXX State Attorney General and XXXX XXXX XXXX Submitting additional FCRA claims to federal regulators This is not a demand for financial compensation, but a legal demand for the immediate and permanent deletion of the unverified tradeline. If deletion occurs in good faith within the timeframe stated, I will consider the matter resolved and will not pursue further action.

Documentation Request Under FCRA Pursuant to FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) and 1681g, this communication also serves as my formal request for all records, data, and descriptions of the procedures used to verify the accuracy and completeness of the XXXX XXXX  account referenced in this complaint. 
Please provide : The method of verification, All documentation or evidence reviewed, and The name and contact information of the party who verified the account. 
This information must be provided within XXXX calendar days of this notice, in accordance with federal law. 
Please refer to the attached Exhibit Index for a complete list of supporting documentation Respectfully Submitted, XXXX XXXX

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