Consumer complaint received 2025-12-10 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: AR

Complaint narrative:
When I opened my credit report recently, I expected to see a reflection of the financial discipline and consistency that I have worked tirelessly to maintain. Instead, I found myself staring at a confusing, contradictory, and deeply unsettling collection of entries that do not tell the truth of my financial history. It felt as if someone had rewritten several chapters of my life without my consent. The shock of seeing late payments, charge-offs, medical collections, and unauthorized inquiries, many of which I never made and others which were already removed from another bureau, left me feeling vulnerable and frustrated. It is difficult to describe the sinking feeling that comes from realizing that inaccurate reporting is damaging the reputation I have built through responsible living. I have always believed that credit reports should tell a fair and accurate story ; however, what I am seeing here is a story filled with errors and inconsistencies that do not reflect reality.

The first issue that caught my attention was the XXXX  account ( XXXX, balance {$0.00} ), which is currently reporting a late payment, even though the account is closed and already deleted by another credit bureau . This inconsistency alone calls into question the validity of the information being reported. When one bureau removes an item due to the furnishers inability to verify it, yet another bureau continues to report it, it shows a failure to maintain consistent and accurate data. Under FCRA 607 ( b ), you are required to have reasonable procedures to ensure accuracy, and under FCRA 602, the entire purpose of the Act is to ensure fairness and reliability in consumer reporting. A late payment that has not been verified across all agencies, and that another bureau has already determined to be invalid, can not remain on my report without violating these principles. I am demanding proper verification under FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ), including documentation from the furnisher proving the late payment occurred. If verification can not be provided, federal law requires the item be deleted immediately under FCRA 611 ( a ).

As I continued reviewing my file, I found myself increasingly troubled by two other accounts that seem to tell a story that does not accurately portray the truth. XXXX XXXX charge-off ( Account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  with a balance of {$25000.00} ) * * is reported in completely different ways across the three bureaus, different status dates, different balance updates, and conflicting payment histories. A charge-off is a serious derogatory mark, and yet it appears that there is no unified or verifiable record of what actually occurred. Under FCRA 607 ( a ), information reported must be accurate, and under FCRA 611, any disputed information must be properly reinvestigated, verified, or removed. If the three major credit bureaus can not even agree on basic facts such as the date of first delinquency or the status of the account, that alone suggests a breakdown in verification. I am requesting that you obtain actual proof from the furnisher, not simply rely on automated data checks or unverifiable electronic responses. This includes actual documentation showing the signed agreement, the full payment history, the date of first delinquency, and any records validating the charge-off status. If any part of the information can not be verified, federal law requires immediate deletion. 
Similarly, the XXXX XXXX XXXX collection ( Original Creditor : XXXX XXXX XXXX, Account XXXX, balance {$670.00} ) * raises serious concerns. This medical collection has already been removed by XXXX of the other credit bureaus, meaning it was either not verifiable or improperly reported. It is extremely distressing to see a medical collection appear in one place but not another. Medical debt carries stricter reporting standards, especially considering consumer protections surrounding medical billing accuracy. A debt that can not be verified across all bureaus should not remain on any one of them. Under FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ), I am requesting the exact documentation used to verify this medical debt, including itemized billing statements, proof of responsibility, and proof that the debt was legally assigned to the collector. If these documents can not be produced, the debt must be removed immediately under FCRA 611 ( a ).

By the time I reached the inquiry section of my report, the sense of unease had grown into something much deeper. Numerous hard inquiries appear only on my file, clustered around the same dates, and many from lenders I have never interacted with. Seeing this long list of companies, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX and others, was overwhelming and alarming XXXX I did not authorize many of these pulls, and I was not actively seeking credit during those periods. To see repeated pulls on the same days suggests shot gunning, a practice where multiple lenders access a consumers report without clear permission. Under FCRA 604 ( a ) ( 2 ), a credit inquiry requires a permissible purpose and consumer consent. Any inquiry that can not be verified as authorized must be removed. I am demanding documentation proving that I personally authorized each inquiry. If such proof can not be provided, such as signed credit applications or digital authorization logs, the inquiries must be deleted immediately, as they violate federal law and harm my creditworthiness.

Seeing strangers access my financial information without my knowledge made me feel exposed and unprotected, as if someone had opened a private door into my life without permission. This situation is precisely why the FCRA was created, to prevent misuse of consumer reports and ensure that only accurate, verified, and properly authorized information is included.

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