Consumer complaint received 2026-02-20 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
I respectfully submit this detailed rebuttal in response to the letters issued by Comenity Bank and Comenity Capital Bank dated XX/XX/XXXX, regarding the XXXX Credit Card and XXXX XXXX XXXX Credit Card accounts. 

Your response states that you have reviewed the accounts and found no violations of law, that you verified the reporting is accurate, that a fraud investigation was conducted and found no basis to support my fraud claim, and that the accounts were charged off and subsequently sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX You further state that you are reporting a XXXX balance owed to you after sale of the accounts. 

The XXXX account response is reflected in your letter dated XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX-CB-Final Respo . 
The XXXX account response is reflected in your letter dated XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXXCCB-Final Resp . 

While I acknowledge receipt of these letters, I do not agree with the conclusions reached, nor do I accept that the reporting of these accounts is accurate or compliant under the circumstances. 

I. The Core Issue Remains Unresolved The central issue is ownership and authorization. I have consistently maintained that I did not authorize these accounts. I filed identity theft documentation and raised a formal fraud dispute. Your letters state that your Account Protection ( Fraud ) team completed investigations and found no basis to support the fraud claim. However, your responses do not provide : The documentation reviewed The basis for rejecting the fraud claim Any signed application Any identity authentication record Any proof that I personally opened or authorized these accounts A conclusory statement that no basis was found does not resolve a fraud dispute. A meaningful investigation requires documentary evidence, not internal affirmation.

II. Reporting a Charged-Off Account That Was Sold Your letters confirm : The XXXX account was charged off XX/XX/XXXX and sold XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX-CB-Final Respo The XXXX account was charged off XX/XX/XXXX and sold XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX-CCB-Final Resp You state that you are reporting a XXXX balance owed to you after sale. 

However, the issue is not simply balance reporting. The issue is whether : The accounts were validly opened by me. 

The reporting of charge-off status is accurate if fraud was asserted. 

The tradelines continue to reflect derogatory status despite sale. 

If the accounts were opened fraudulently, then the subsequent charge-off and sale do not cure the original defect. A fraudulent account can not become legitimate merely because it was charged off and sold.

If I did not authorize the accounts, then : The charge-off is improper.

The reporting is inaccurate.

The sale transfers a disputed and potentially fraudulent debt.

III. Fraud Investigation Was Not Substantiated Your letters state that a fraud investigation was conducted and no basis was found.

However, you have not provided : The application used to open the account IP address logs if opened online Identity verification method used Copies of drivers license or documents used to approve the account Signature comparisons Device fingerprinting records Phone recordings ( if applicable ) Without providing these materials, it is impossible to determine whether the fraud investigation was meaningful.

A fraud investigation can not be considered complete if the consumer is not shown the evidence used to deny the fraud claim.

IV. Sale to XXXX XXXX XXXX Does Not Eliminate Responsibility Both letters state that the accounts were sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX and that XXXX may report under its own name XXXX XXXX-CB-Final Respo XXXX XXXX-CCB-Final Resp.

However : Sale of an account does not eliminate responsibility for accurate reporting.

A furnisher can not avoid resolving fraud claims by selling the account.

If the account was disputed as fraud prior to sale, that dispute follows the account.

If the original account opening was unauthorized, then XXXX received a disputed and potentially invalid account. 

I will address XXXX separately, but Comenity can not simply redirect responsibility.

V. XXXX Balance Does Not Cure Derogatory Reporting You state that you are reporting a XXXX balance owed to you. 

However : The tradeline still reflects charge-off status. 
The charge-off continues to impact credit scoring. 
The history of delinquency remains attached. 

XXXX balance reporting does not eliminate derogatory status. 

If the account does not belong to me, deletionnot XXXX balance notationis required. 

VI. Failure to Provide Proof of Authorization If you maintain that the accounts are valid, please provide : Original signed or electronically authenticated application.

Timestamped application submission data.

Identity verification records.

Proof of delivery of cards.

Transaction history showing usage attributable to me.

Documentation proving I made payments voluntarily.

If you can not provide these materials, then there is insufficient basis to continue reporting.

VII. Harm Caused by Continued Reporting The continued reporting of these accounts has caused : Credit score suppression Increased lending scrutiny Higher interest exposure Emotional distress Time spent disputing A charge-offeven with XXXX balancehas long-term consequences. 

VIII. Reasonable Procedures and Accuracy Standards Reporting must meet the standard of maximum possible accuracy. That requires : Verification beyond internal database confirmation Consideration of identity theft documentation Correction where uncertainty exists A generic statement that we verified were reporting correctly is not evidence.

IX. What Is Required to Resolve This Matter To fully resolve this dispute, the following must occur : Provide documentary proof of account authorization.

If documentation can not be produced, delete both tradelines.

Confirm in writing that the accounts will not be reinserted. 

Ensure XXXX is notified of the dispute and fraud claim. 

Provide method of verification details. 

X. Conclusion Your XX/XX/XXXX letters XXXX XXXX-CB-Final Respo XXXX XXXX-CCB-Final Resp do not resolve the fraud dispute. They provide conclusions but not supporting documentation. 

If the accounts were fraudulently opened, then : The charge-offs are invalid. 
The sale is improper. 
The reporting must be deleted. 

If you possess evidence that I authorized these accounts, please provide it. 

Absent such proof, continued reporting is unjustified. 

I respectfully request a renewed review and full documentary substantiation. Until that occurs, this matter remains unresolved.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation