Consumer complaint received 2025-07-07 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Consumer Complaint Regarding Equifax Tradeline Errors and Procedural Violations This is a continuation and escalation of my prior complaint XXXX ( filed XX/XX/XXXX ), which remains open and unresolved. The tradeline in question is for XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX ), and this submission details Equifaxs continued failure to conduct a reasonable investigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), introduces new factual inconsistencies since the last response, and exposes platform-level obstruction preventing me from verifying dispute outcomes. 

Issue 1 : Identical Dispute Responses ( XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX ) Equifaxs dispute results dated XXXX and again on XX/XX/XXXX are identical in content, despite the second occurring after my CFPB complaint. This repeated response suggests no new furnisher outreach, metadata update, or fresh analysiscontrary to the FCRAs reinvestigation requirement ( 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ). 
If Equifax conducted a second investigation as triggered by my complaint, why did they reuse the prior resolution verbatim? 
Issue 2 : Invalid Date of Last Reported Update vs. Dispute Receipt - My dispute was mailed on XX/XX/XXXX, received by Equifax on XX/XX/XXXX. 
- The tradeline shows Date of Last Reported Update : XX/XX/XXXX. 
- That update aligns with my payment on XX/XX/XXXX, and the score surge observed between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. 
This implies Equifax did not contact the furnisher after the dispute and used a pre-dispute metadata transmission to satisfy the reinvestigation, which violates FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). 
If Equifax did contact XXXXXXXX XXXX why is the reported update still XX/XX/XXXXXXXX If they did not, the tradeline should be deleted under FCRA for lack of verification response. 
Issue 3 : Contradictory Field Attribution ( High Credit vs. Credit Limit ) - Equifax reports : - Credit Limit : {$500.00} - High Credit : {$730.00} - Yet notes : Amount in High Credit Column is Credit Limit This is logically impossible. If High Credit = Credit Limit, the two values must match. Either the High Credit is incorrect, or the credit limit is misclassified. This inconsistency directly impacts scoring algorithms and qualifies as inaccurate reporting under FCRA 1681e ( b ). 
Issue 4 : Inconsistent Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) Across XXXX - Equifax lists DOFD : XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX has fall-off in XXXX/XXXX, implying DOFD of XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX has fall-off in XXXX/XXXX, implying DOFD of XX/XX/XXXX How did Equifax verify its DOFD as correct? I demand confirmation of the furnishers response : - When was XXXXXXXX XXXX  contacted? 
- How did they verify DOFD as XX/XX/XXXX? 
- Is there any documentation to support this? 
Issue 5 : Illogical Payment History Progression My Equifax credit report, pulled from Equifaxs own portal on XX/XX/XXXX, shows : - XX/XX/XXXX : On-time payment - XX/XX/XXXX : 60-days late This is a logical impossibility. You can not go from on-time to 60 days late in one monththere must be a 30-day late phase first. 
In a prior report ( XX/XX/XXXX ), XXXX showed 30-days late, not 60. Why did the payment history regress into false severity? Neither the XXXX nor XX/XX/XXXX dispute responses acknowledged or corrected this. 
Additionally, XX/XX/XXXX, previously reported as 120 days past due, now shows No Data Available, further invalidating the delinquency sequence. Historical derogatory markers can not simply vanish. 
Issue 6 : Platform Access Obstruction ( XXXX  Error ) I attempted to pull my Equifax report via the Equifax portal on XX/XX/XXXX, and the system stated : You still have 4 of 6 free Equifax credit reports available before XX/XX/XXXX. 
Yet when requesting a new report, I receive : Please give us a call. We can't complete your request at this time. Please call the Customer Care team and mention error code XXXX 
This error blocks me from accessing my Equifax file on the platform that generated these inconsistencieswhile XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) still provides access. 
This is not just inconvenientit actively impairs my ability to verify dispute outcomes during an open investigation, violating the spirit of FCRA 1681j and 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ), which entitle consumers to accurate access to their report data. 
Issue 7 : Unauthorized or Hollow New Dispute Creation Equifax 's system initiated a new dispute case on XX/XX/XXXX, immediately after I filed complaint # XXXX. I did not enter another dispute. Equifax seems to have spawned this internallybut : - It produced results identical to the XX/XX/XXXX dispute - No new XXXX, no furnisher outreach, no updated Date of Last Reported Update If Equifax used my CFPB complaint to trigger a new dispute, they are obligated to perform a true reinvestigationnot reissue a recycled resolution. This misrepresents procedural integrity and falsely implies compliance. 
Resolution Requested : Due to repeated reporting contradictions, XXXX misuse, and failure to meet reinvestigation standards, I demand : - Immediate deletion of the XXXXXXXX XXXX tradeline from my Equifax report, per FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), due to failure to verify accuracy post-dispute - Confirmation of whether Equifax contacted XXXXXXXX XXXX after XXXXand if not, documentation admitting no furnisher response - Correction or deletion of contradictory fields : High Credit, DOFD, and payment history status codes- Resolution of XXXX  error so I may access future reports and verify file integrity This is not simply data errorits a pattern of misreporting, procedural evasion, and consumer obstruction. I respectfully request CFPB intervention and review of Equifaxs reinvestigation practices and platform restrictions. 
Since filing my original complaint against XXXX  I have now confirmed that XXXX  has updated its commentary to reflect only one negative item on my report. This strongly suggests that the XXXXXXXX XXXX tradeline is now suppressed or deleted entirely from XXXX file. 
This further underscores Equifaxs failure to act consistently or reasonably in response to my dispute and complaint. It raises two possibilities : - XXXX XXXX may have agreed with the dispute and instructed XXXX to remove or suppress the itemEquifax failed to do the same. 
- If no verification was receivedXXXX XXXX followed proper FCRA protocol by deleting the tradeline due to non-response, while Equifax continued reporting stale data.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief