Consumer complaint received 2025-06-16 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Reporting company used your report improperly
Company: Credit Fresh Holdings Inc
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
I am formally disputing the following accounts on my credit report under my rights granted by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 15 U.S.C. 1681, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) 15 U.S.C. 1692g, and the Truth in Lending Act ( TILA ) 15 U.S.C. 1641 ( g ).

I have identified multiple legal violations regarding these accounts, and failure to correct these errors within 30 days will result in formal legal action against your agency for willful noncompliance. 
ACCOUNTS IN DISPUTE : Account- XXXXCREDFRSH  XXXX XXXX. Inaccurate Account Status & Comments : The account is marked as Collection/Chargeoff, yet also shows Transferred to another lender. These two are mutually exclusive statuses a charge-off implies noncollection and closure, while transfer implies reassignment. Reporting both is misleading and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ) for maximum possible accuracy.

2. Inconsistent Payment History vs. Charge-Off : The payment history is completely blank across all months. There are no delinquencies reported, yet the account is marked as a charge-off. A charge-off requires at least 120 to 180 days of delinquency, which is not reflected anywhere. 
3. Balance & Past Due Show {$0.00} Yet Still Labeled Derogatory : Your records show {$0.00} balance and {$0.00} past due, yet you continue reporting the account as derogatory. This is inherently inaccurate and materially misleading.

4. No Verification of Transferred Creditor or Supporting Documents : If the account was truly transferred, who was it transferred to? You are legally obligated to report the updated status or remove the account entirely if its no longer your responsibility to furnish. The current reporting is incomplete and therefore violates FCRA 611. 
AccountXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Inaccurate Payment History : XXXX is reporting a mix of OK payment history after a charge-off was supposedly placed.

This is factually impossible and a violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ) information must be reported with the utmost accuracy and consistency.

Date Inconsistencies ( Payment vs. Charge-Off ) : XXXX and XXXX report the last payment as XX/XX/XXXX, while XXXX reports it as XX/XX/XXXX a two-month inconsistency on a charged-off account. The Date Last Active also differs across all three bureaus. This kind of inconsistency is a clear violation of FCRA 611.

Credit Limit & High Credit Inconsistency : XXXX lists the high credit as {$0.00}, which is inaccurate given the other bureaus show {$560.00}. Reporting a {$0.00} high credit on a revolving account with a charge-off balance is materially misleading and violates FCRA 1681s-2.

Reporting Past Due Amount on {$0.00} Monthly Payment : The account reflects a $ 0 monthly payment yet shows a {$560.00} past due balance a contradiction that implies negligence in maintaining accuracy and compliance. 
Re-Reporting of Disputed Comments : The Account information disputed by consumer remark appears even though no current investigation is ongoing. FCRA 611 ( b ) requires correction or deletion if the dispute was not verified re-reporting disputed remarks without resolution is unlawful. 
Account- XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Inconsistent Date Last Active vs. Date Opened : XXXX reports a Date Last Active of XX/XX/XXXX, which is before the reported opening date of XX/XX/XXXX. This is chronologically and factually impossible and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), which requires accurate and logically consistent information. 
Conflicting Payment Status Between Bureaus : XXXX XXXX XXXX show Collection/Chargeoff, while XXXX lists Late 120 Days. A single tradeline can not be both. These discrepancies mislead lenders and violate FCRA 611 ( a ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ), which prohibit inaccurate and misleading reporting. 
Inaccurate Payment History While Reporting Derogatory Status : XXXX reports a streak of " OK '' payments while simultaneously marking the account as Derogatory and Past Due. If I was consistently on time, how could the account be in collection? This contradiction violates FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). 
Incomplete and Misleading Account Type Detail : XXXX lists the account as Unknown - credit extension, review, or collection. This is vague, unclear, and does not give a precise account classification, which violates the standard of maximum possible accuracy as per FCRA 1681e ( b ).

Unresolved Dispute Remarks : The phrase Consumer disputes this account information remains on the record despite no proper reinvestigation or change. Reporting disputes without resolution violates FCRA 611 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 3 ). 
Account- XXXX XXXX  XXXX Falsified Date Last Active ( DLA ) : XXXX reports a Date Last Active of XX/XX/XXXX an impossible and fictitious update clearly done to re-age the account. This is a direct violation of FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) and 605 ( c ), which prohibit re-aging for the purpose of extending derogatory reporting.

Incomplete and Deceptive Reporting : The tradeline is missing key fields : no payment history, no monthly payment, no past due amount, no credit limit, and no number of terms. This failure to report complete information misleads lenders and violates FCRA 1681e ( b ).

Improper Account Classification : The tradeline is listed under Collection with no specific detail, despite being a debt buyer ( XXXX ) and not the original creditor. The FCRA mandates accurate reporting of the nature and ownership of accounts. This violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ). 
Missing Last Payment Data While Reporting Collection : No payment was ever made, yet the account is listed as a charge-off/collection without properly substantiating it. Reporting a debt with no verifiable last payment date and no supporting documentation is a violation of FCRA 611 ( a ). 
Account- XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Date Last Active is Falsely Updated by XXXX XXXX XXXX  reports a " Date Last Active '' of XX/XX/XXXX, which is todays date, despite the account being allegedly opened in XXXX and no payment activity reported. This appears to be a tactic to illegally re-age the account a blatant violation of FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) and FCRA 605 ( c ), which prohibit changing the Date of First Delinquency to keep a derogatory account on file longer.

Missing Payment History and Incomplete Fields : There is no payment history, no credit limit, no past due amount, and no monthly payment details. Reporting incomplete information like this violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), which requires consumer reports to be accurate and complete. 
Contradictory Dispute Comments Without Resolution : XXXX continues to show " Account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements '' even though no valid reinvestigation was completed and no new evidence has been presented. Keeping these dispute codes without resolving the issue is misleading and violates FCRA 611 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 3 ).

No Payment Ever Made but Status is Chargeoff : You can not report an account as charged off and collection/chargeoff if no payments were ever made or attempted, as your records suggest. This false reporting further violates FCRA 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) the duty to provide accurate information. 
Account- XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Illegal Re-Aging of the Account : XXXX lists a Date Last Active of XX/XX/XXXX, which is suspiciously recent despite the Date Opened being in XXXX and no payments ever being made. This is a deceptive attempt to re-age the account, violating FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) and FCRA 605 ( c ). 
Missing Critical Reporting Fields : The tradeline is missing essential information such as : Credit Limit Monthly Payment Number of Terms Date of Last Payment Reporting a collection account while omitting these key data points constitutes incomplete and unverifiable reporting, a direct violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ). 
Contradictory and Misleading Dispute Comments : The statement Account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements is misleading. If no reinvestigation was conducted or no documentation was provided by the furnisher ( CREDIT FRESH or XXXX ), this comment is fraudulent under FCRA 611 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 3 ). 
Reporting a Collection with No Proof of Payment or Validation : You can not legally report an account as Collection/Chargeoff if no payment history exists, and no validation has been provided to the consumer. This is a violation of the FCRA and FDCPA ( Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ) when done by a third-party collector. 
Account- XXXX XXXX Business Account Reporting with Personal Guarantee Confusion : This account is a business loan, yet it is being reported on my personal consumer credit report. If the business is legally separate and no personal liability contract is provided, this is a misrepresentation, violating FCRA 602A and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ).

Missing and Conflicting Payment Data : XXXX XXXX XXXX report a {$0.00} monthly payment, while XXXX reports {$500.00}. This inconsistency in critical payment data violates FCRA 1681e ( b ), which requires the information to be accurate and consistent across bureaus. 
Conflicting High Credit Amounts : XXXX XXXX XXXX report a high credit of {$19000.00}, while XXXX  reports only {$13000.00}. A single tradeline can not legally reflect three different high credit values, showing a failure to maintain accuracy per FCRA 1681e ( b ). 
Inconsistent Last Activity and Payment Dates : Date of Last Activity varies : XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX Date of Last Payment varies : XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX This inconsistency in major fields is misleading and unlawful and raises red flags of reaging the account, violating FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) and 605 ( c ). 
Payment History Errors and Fabrication Potential : XXXX shows multiple months as " OK '' even after the account was supposedly charged off. 
XXXX shows contradictory delinquencies despite claim of charge-off and no payment activity. 
These patterns may be an attempt to manipulate payment history or misrepresent the actual state of the account, violating FCRA 1681i.

LEGAL DEMANDS & GROUNDS FOR DELETION 1. PROOF OF DEBT OWNERSHIP REQUIRED ( 15 U.S.C. 1641 ( g ) ) Under TILA 15 U.S.C. 1641 ( g ), if a debt is sold or transferred, the new owner must provide proper notification and proof of assignment. 
The original creditor has already been paid via securitization and no longer owns this account. 
If no legally admissible proof of ownership is provided, this account must be deleted immediately. 
Required Action : REMOVE the account or provide the full chain of ownership with original signed agreements proving legal standing. 
2. FAILURE TO CONDUCT A REASONABLE INVESTIGATION ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ) Under the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), credit bureaus must conduct a reasonable investigation upon dispute.

Simply verifying data with a creditor is NOT a valid investigation.

If you claim this information is verified, provide the method of verification ( MOV ) as required by 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 2 ) ( B ). 
Required Action : REMOVE the account if no legitimate MOV and full documentation is provided. 
3. FALSE & MISLEADING REPORTING BY THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR ( 15 U.S.C.

1681s-2 ( a ) ) If the original creditor sold or charged off this debt, they are no longer the legal owner, yet they are still reporting it.

Under FCRA 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), inaccurate reporting must be corrected or removed.

If the creditor was paid via securitization or insurance write-off, they must update the tradeline to Transferred/Sold or remove it completely. 
Required Action : DELETE the account immediately if the original creditor has no current ownership rights. 
4. FAILURE TO REPORT A CHARGED-OFF ACCOUNT CORRECTLY ( GAAP & IRS LAWS ) According to GAAP ( Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ) and IRS reporting laws, a charge-off means the original creditor wrote off the debt as a loss. 
If a charged-off account was sold, the creditor has no right to continue reporting a balance or updating the status. 
Reporting a balance on a charged-off account is falsifying financial information, which is deceptive under 15 U.S.C. 45 ( FTC Act ).

Required Action : REMOVE the charge-off immediately, or provide accounting records proving the creditor still legally owns the balance.

5. COLLECTION AGENCY VIOLATIONS UNDER FDCPA ( 15 U.S.C. 1692g & 1692e ) If this account is now with a debt collector, I demand full validation under FDCPA 1692g.

Collection agencies must prove : o A valid assignment from the original creditor. 
o A signed contract showing I agreed to this debt transfer. 
o A full payment history proving what is allegedly owed. 
If the collection agency can not provide all of the above, they are in violation of FDCPA, and the debt must be removed. 
Required Action : DELETE the collection account immediately if the collector can not provide all required validation documents.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation