Consumer complaint received 2025-12-16 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Private student loan debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Security Credit Services, LLC
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
I am a victim of identity theft, possibly as a result of either multiple data breaches or unknown person, acquaintance or family member. I've made multiple attempts to notify creditors by way of submitting a debt validation letter. Per the creditor and statement on my credit report with the 3 major credit bureaus. The response I received, " Account Info disputed by consumer meets requirement of FCRA ''. language is not compliant. A vague, canned response is not an investigation as well as general documentation provided by the creditor does not constitute as an investigation. Creditors are required to substantiate the account with actual evidence, not assumptions or copies of unverified data passed from prior furnishers or merely providing an address to a residence where myself and other individuals have resided.

STATEMENT OF FACTS : I am the consumer referenced in the credit file containing the above-listed account. I have formally disputed this account with the credit reporting agencies. To date, no competent evidence has been provided demonstrating : 1 ). A valid contract bearing my wet-ink signature 2 ) .Proof of lawful assignment 3 ) .Proof of standing 4 ) .Proof of accuracy as required by federal law. The continued reporting of this account constitutes unverified, unsubstantiated, and inaccurate information.

SUPREME COURT CASE LAW AUTHORITY The United States Supreme Court has clearly established that unverified or inaccurate information may not be published as fact : Dalton v. Capital Associated Industries , Inc., 257 F.3d 409 ( 4th Cir. 2001 ) Credit reporting agencies must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation and can not rely solely on the furnishers assertions.

Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 115 F.3d 220 ( 3d Cir. 1997 ) A CRA must do more than parrot information from a creditor ; it must independently verify disputed data.

Henson v. CSC Credit Services, 29 F.3d 280 ( 7th Cir. 1994 ) Failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy violates the FCRA. Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) Requires maximum possible accuracy of information reported.15 U.S.C . 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) Requires deletion of information that can not be verified after dispute.

VIOLATIONS The continued reporting of this account constitutes violations of : -15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) Failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy -15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) Failure to properly reinvestigate -15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) Furnishers failure to verify accuracy -Defamation of Character through publication of unverified debt -Willful Non-Compliance under 15 U.S.C . 1681n NOTICE OF DEMAND I hereby demand the immediate and permanent deletion of the above-referenced account from all consumer reporting agencies. If this account is not deleted within 7 days of receipt of this affidavit, I reserve the right to pursue : Civil litigation, Statutory damages, Actual damages, Punitive damages, Attorneys fees and costs as provided under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 1681o. 

I, XXXX XXXX, affirm that the information stated herein is true, correct, and complete. Any party who continues to publish this unverified information after receipt of this affidavit does so with actual knowledge of dispute and potential liability.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation