Consumer complaint received 2025-08-26 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Problem with personal statement of dispute
Company: Avant Holding Company, Inc.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX Date : XX/XX/XXXX VIA CFPB PORTAL Consumer Financial Protection Bureau XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, IA XXXX Re : Formal Dispute of Avant/XXXX  Reporting Complaint ID No. XXXX To Whom It May Concern, This letter is a formal rebuttal to Avant/XXXX  response dated XX/XX/XXXX, regarding my CFPB complaint referenced above. I strongly dispute their claims and demand that the derogatory late payment entries ( XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and subsequent months ) be deleted from my credit reports unless Avant/XXXX  can provide complete, verifiable, and lawful documentation supporting their reporting. 

XXXX. Avants Response is Inadequate and XXXX Avants letter relies on generic statements, boilerplate explanations, and selective documentation, none of which constitute proper validation. For example : Avant claims that payments were missed but refuses to provide a full payment ledger or direct proof from the payment processor. Directing me to log into a dashboard does not satisfy the requirements of the FCRAs duty to investigate. 

Avant admits to inaccurate communication regarding a 60-day delinquency, yet expects me to accept the integrity of their records without question. This admission raises serious doubt about their reporting practices. 

XXXX. FCRA Violations Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation Under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ), furnishers of information are required to conduct a reasonable investigation when a consumer disputes information. Avant has failed this standard by : Recycling prior responses without addressing the specific deficiencies raised.

Refusing to provide documentary evidence beyond screenshots, emails, and selective statements. 

Ignoring the fact that inaccurate and misleading information was communicated to me regarding delinquency reporting. 

A reasonable investigation is not a rubber stampit requires actual verification. Avants process falls short and constitutes a willful violation of the FCRA. 

XXXX. Demands for Proper Validation I hereby demand that Avant/XXXX  provide the following within 15 days : A full payment ledger showing every transaction, including dates funds were received, posted, and credited. 

Documentary proof from the payment processor or financial institution verifying Avants claim that payments were not received by the due date. 

A copy of the evidence Avant relies upon to report a 30-day delinquency in XX/XX/XXXX and subsequent entriesnot a summary, not an assertion, but actual verifiable proof. 

If Avant can not produce this documentation, they must immediately request deletion of all derogatory marks they furnished to XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. 

XXXX. Notice of Escalation Failure to comply will result in : Additional CFPB complaints for failure to properly investigate disputes. 

A formal complaint tXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXnst XXXX as the issuer. 

Consideration of civil action for violations of the FCRA, including statutory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys fees. 

XXXX. Conclusion Avant/XXXX  has failed to meet its obligations. Their response is insufficient, evasive, and legally inadequate. Until Avant provides verifiable proof, this reporting remains unverified, inaccurate, and misleading, and must be deleted. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX FL XXXX XXXX : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation