Consumer complaint received 2025-06-22 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Other personal consumer report
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing issue — Difficulty submitting a dispute or getting information about a dispute over the phone
Company: LEXISNEXIS
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
I demand the immediate and unredacted release of my complete consumer file, in full compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act XXXX. This includes, without limitation : all access logs ; inquiry records ; suppression indicators ; risk or behavioral scoring metrics ; adverse employment-related flags such as do not rehire ; system-generated watchlist or exclusion codes ; all XXXX ; source attribution ; and all data shared with, or received from, affiliated or XXXX-party consumer reporting agencies, including XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX. I also demand disclosure of any internal assessments, behavioral indicators, profile segmentations, or analytic models used to evaluate me in any employment, insurance, or reputational context. 

LexisNexis Risk Solutions falsely asserted that I could not be authenticated, despite receiving my valid state-issued identification, signed written request, and all required personal identifiers as defined under federal law. This assertion was factually false and procedurally indefensible. They then imposed an extralegal burden, demanding a utility bill, despite the clear standard under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ), which requires only proper identification such as a state-issued ID. This is not a misunderstanding ; it is an intentional act of concealment and procedural gatekeeping designed to subvert consumer access through manufactured delay. 

Their behavior constitutes willful obstruction under federal law. The evolving excuses, beginning with a vague boilerplate reply on XX/XX/XXXX, followed by a fraudulent rejection on XX/XX/XXXX, then a sanitized partial disclosure on XX/XX/XXXX, paint a pattern of bad faith. These are not clerical errors ; they are strategic. They have not only failed to comply with a lawful request, they have erected unlawful barriers designed to chill further pursuit. This is a direct violation of both the letter and intent of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. 

I also raise the concern of spoliation. Given the extended delay between my initial request on XX/XX/year>, and LexisNexis Risk Solutions eventual delivery of a limited, sanitized file on XX/XX/XXXX, there exists a reasonable suspicion that information may have been altered, withheld, or destroyed during that window. This risk is amplified by their shifting explanations, their refusal to comply under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ), and their production of a document lacking audit logs, metadata, and internal system flagsall of which are required components under XXXX. Their conduct raises a legitimate question as to whether my consumer file was manipulated, tampered with, or retroactively scrubbed in anticipation of regulatory review. 

Furthermore, I have reason to believe LexisNexis Risk Solutions may be operating in coordination with other consumer reporting entities, including XXXX  ( via XXXX XXXX XXXX ), and possibly under the influence or at the direction of The XXXX XXXX, who may have a vested interest in the suppression or concealment of derogatory employment-related codes. The timing, content, and procedural irregularities in LexisNexiss response pattern suggest more than mere negligence ; they suggest a coordinated effort to limit transparency and shield third parties from accountability. 

I therefore demand a full investigative review of all access to my file between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, including the names of any parties who viewed, altered, or influenced its content. I request the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau determine whether any coordination or shared policy exists between LexisNexis Risk Solutions, XXXX, or The XXXX XXXX that would compromise the independence, accuracy, or integrity of consumer file disclosures under federal law. 

If any tampering, backchannel coordination, or improper redactions occurred, I reserve the right to pursue spoliation sanctions, civil penalties, and full damages under XXXX for willful violations and XXXX for negligent violations. The longer they delay, the deeper the paper trail I build. The deeper the paper trail, the heavier the consequences. 

I am not requesting courtesy ; I am invoking my statutory rights. I am not seeking resolution through appeasement ; I am demanding accountability through exposure. I followed the law. LexisNexis did not. And if this agency fails to compel compliance, I will pursue every legal, public, and financial recourse available to ensure this misconduct is documented, prosecuted, and prevented from harming others. I do not bluff. I do not beg. I move forward.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation