Consumer complaint received 2025-08-28 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account status incorrect
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX DOB : XXXX SSN : XXXX  Date : XX/XX/XXXX Equifax Information Services LLC XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Re : Formal Dispute XXXX XXXX  / Account # XXXX ( High Balance : {$590.00} ) To Whom It May Concern, I am formally disputing the accuracy, completeness, and continued reporting of the account referenced above as it appears on my Equifax credit file. This account is being reported as derogatory/charged-off/collection despite the fact that : 1. The information is not accurate, not complete, and not verifiable as required by law.

Under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ( FCRA ), credit reporting agencies must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation when a consumer disputes information.

If the information can not be verified, it must be deleted.

Case Law : Cushman v. Trans Union , LLC, 115 F.3d 220 ( 3d Cir. 1997 ) CRAs can not simply parrot data from furnishers ; they must conduct an independent and reasonable investigation.

2. The account is obsolete and reporting beyond compliance.

Under 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( a ) ( 4 ) - ( 5 ), accounts placed for collection or charged off can not be reported beyond 7 years from the date of first delinquency. 
The account shows last activity in XXXX and should not continue reporting beyond the legal limit. Any updates beyond this point constitute re-aging, which is illegal.

Case Law : Pinner v. Schmidt, 805 F.2d 1258 ( 5th Cir. 1986 ) prohibits misleading reporting and re-aging of debt.

3. Continued reporting after dispute is unlawful.

Under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), furnishers must cease reporting information if they can not provide proper verification.

Case Law : Richardson v. Equifax, 2004 WL 304976 ( E.D. Tex. 2004 ) re-reporting previously disputed, unverifiable information constitutes willful noncompliance.

Case Law : Dalton v. Capital Associated Indus., 257 F.3d 409 ( 4th Cir. 2001 ) willful noncompliance with FCRA requires deletion, not correction.

4. Failure to maintain maximum possible accuracy. Under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), Equifax must follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy.

Reporting this account as currently owed ( {$590.00} ) despite being charged off is misleading and materially inaccurate.

Case Law : Guimond v. Trans Union Credit Info. Co., 45 F.3d 1329 ( 9th Cir. 1995 ) consumers can recover damages when CRAs fail to ensure accuracy.

5. Even if the account is deemed verified, it must still be deleted if misleading.

Courts have ruled that data can be technically accurate yet still misleading, which makes it inaccurate under FCRA.

Case Law : Koropoulos v. Credit Bureau , Inc., 734 F.2d 37 ( D.C. Cir. 1984 ) Info that creates a misleading impression is inaccurate under the FCRA.

Saunders v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., 526 F.3d 142 ( 4th Cir. 2008 ) Reporting may be verified but still unlawful if misleading.

Under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), unverifiable or misleading information must be permanently deleted, not corrected.

DEMAND FOR REMEDY In accordance with federal law, I hereby demand : Permanent deletion of this account from my Equifax credit file under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) and 1681e ( b ), as it is inaccurate, unverifiable, misleading, and obsolete. Written confirmation of deletion within 30 days of receipt of this letter.

Failure to comply will leave me no choice but to escalate this matter by filing complaints with the CFPB, FTC, and the State Attorney General, as well as pursuing legal action under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 1681o for willful and negligent noncompliance, seeking actual, statutory, and punitive damages.

Sincerely, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation