Consumer complaint received 2021-06-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting, credit repair services, or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Credit inquiries on your report that you don't recognize
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: WV

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/XXXX This is a follow up to complaint number XXXX. 
The response from XXXX and Experian has created more questions than will fit in a 100 word limit response. 

Experian : Was all the generous detailed instruction on how to read my " personal credit report '' simply lip service to deceive the CFPB regulators that monitor this complaint process? 
You may have set a new low! I have spent 15 months requesting what is guaranteed to me by section 609 of the FCRA. At this point there must be a dozen requests via direct letters to you, the CFPB complaint process and multiple requests by the Office of the Attorney General West Virginia ( who you would not even respond to multiple requests ). As I said before you have refused to answer, stonewalled or have given evasive replies that have nothing to do with the request. In your last complaint response, how generous it was of you to provide such detailed instruction regarding my personal credit report. Things like inquiries shared with others and inquiries shared only with you. And the mention by federal law, your personal credit report must list all organizations that have requested you credit history. And now the big new low -- -you never sent my personal credit report to me. Was all the generous detailed instruction simply lip service to the CFPB regulators that monitor this complaint process? With your 15 month track record with me it would be foolish for anyone to give you the benefit of the doubt. Your response was written in complete bad faith. Just like in the past 15 months you had no intention of delivering my consumer disclosure and fulfilling your obligation as a CRA. It certainly appears you think you are above the law. 
This is all I want. A simple one word response on the CFPB, sent. At which time you send me my consumer disclosure meaning the long version of my file, the one only I can request, that list every inquiry on my file including promotional inquiries as well as all information that has been suppressed or edited/deleted for whatever reason. Considering you are footnoted in this definition on XXXX you know exactly what I want. This consumer disclosure will also be back dated to a previous request, complaint number XXXX, filed XX/XX/XXXX. 

XXXX : My letter to you dated XX/XX/XXXX indicated that I had 30 XXXX pulls on my Experian report. Your XXXX XXXX letter indicated your investigation could only " ... identified three soft pulls. '' XX/XX/XXXX, you said in a company response : If you are seeing as many as 30 soft credit inquiries on your credit, please contact Experian regarding these inquires. What you are telling me? Could you not find these 27 pulls in your file or were you not expecting them to be listed on my regular Experian credit report? What is the reason the pulls showed up on the report if that is the case? Your response on XX/XX/XXXX these 27 pulls that were unaccounted for have now have magically become prescreen mailer pulls. Obviously, prescreen mailers come with the legal record keeping and firm offer obligations under the FCRA. It appears you didnt have a record of these 27 pulls your XXXX XXXX response which is most likely the reason I never received offers/mailers from you. Also, pre-screen offers are designed as a cost effective way to market to consumers that meet whatever thresholds. XXXX must buy millions of names from the CRAs annually. To think that XXXX does a soft credit check on each name every time a mailer is sent would negate any cost efficiency and to think that each consumer would get a soft pull every mailer that would show on their report would result in a huge number of complaints. XXXX does not have a lot of complaints. So what happened?? 
Here are a couple of questions from your previous complaint response. 
First, when asked how you obtained my social security number you indicated it was not necessary for pulls? That being the case, your own website indicates in the absence of a social security number consent is required : Website : " Did you know that a company can pull your credit information with just your name, address, date of birth, and consent? '' Could you please elaborate as to when, where, and who did you obtain my consent? I expect that the consent requirements are different between the 3 separate soft pulls and the prescreen pulls discussed above. Please itemize. 
Second, you stated we began sending you direct mailers in XX/XX/XXXX. This is shortly after the XXXX  data breach which I responded to with the security freeze/opted out. Were you accessing my data through XXXX  prior to XX/XX/XXXX? If so when did it start, how many pulls and what are the details of my consent? 
Third, as discussed, there are several ways the prescreen process works. The most common is the CRA provides the list. The other way is the creditor provides the consumers name to the CRA. Considering the date of the first mailer, did you migrate my name to Experian because you could no longer access my data through XXXX? 
Fourth, like I said before, I do not recall receiving a single mailer from you in the past three years. And considering the Experian report indicates that these were sometimes sent twice a month XXXX should be a household name around here. As you know the FCRA requires a firm offer as well as record keeping. This being the case could you please tell what you were marketing to me? Experian tells me these 27 pulls were preapprovals. There seems to be a big difference between a mortgage preapproval and a credit card preapproval. You mention the word " loan '' in previous correspondance, was someone indicating I was interested in a loan and providing you with my consent? 

I look forward to you response. 
Sincerely, XXXX

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