Consumer complaint received 2025-06-26 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this written notice of continued dispute and demand for reinvestigation regarding multiple inaccurate, unverified, and potentially unlawful tradelines reported on my Equifax credit report. I was recently informed during a call with an Equifax representative that due to the specific nature of my prior disputes, the company has determined that those prior disputes constitute an acknowledgment of debt or ownership, and therefore you are refusing to block, delete, or reinvestigate these accounts. 

This reasoning is legally baseless, misleading, and a direct violation of my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S. Code 1681i and 1681s-2, as well as relevant consent orders and enforcement precedents.

1. Prior Disputes Are Not Admissions of Ownership or Liability There exists no statutory or regulatory basis to assert that a consumers attempt to dispute an accounts status, balance, or derogatory reporting should be interpreted as waiver of ownership challenges or an admission of liability. Disputes under the FCRA can encompass any aspect of the furnished data, including dates, balances, charge-off status, payment history, and reporting methodology. 

Nowhere in my prior disputes have I stated or implied that I affirm ownership or liability. Furthermore, my intentions were to highlight inconsistencies, unverifiable data, conflicting payment history, and inaccurate charge-off procedures. You can not lawfully penalize me for exercising my statutory right to dispute incorrect data. 

See : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) [ A ] credit reporting agency may not rely solely on the original source of the information but must conduct a reasonable investigation. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) XXXX that a credit bureaus failure to conduct an adequate reinvestigation was a violation of the FCRA even where prior disputes were filed. 
FTC v. Equifax Inc. Equifax was previously sanctioned and fined for failing to respond adequately to reinvestigations and failing to correct systemic inaccuracies. 

2. Failure to Reinvestigate and Refusal to Accept FTC Identity Theft Report The FTC Identity Theft Report, combined with my sworn statements, constitutes sufficient documentary evidence under the FCRA to trigger account blocking and deletion obligations under 15 U.S.C. 1681c-2. Your failure to honor this document violates the FCRA and demonstrates willful noncompliance, actionable under 15 U.S.C. 1681n. 

Additionally, the continued furnishing of derogatory tradelinesdespite inconsistent data, no signed agreements, no payment history, and furnishers who have confirmed they have no recordsis evidence of systemic data inaccuracy and non-compliance. 

3. Refusal to Block Data After Furnisher Fails to Verify Violates the FCRA According to 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ), any disputed item that can not be verified must be deleted within 30 days of a dispute. Your refusal to delete items based on assumptions from prior disputesrather than actual current verification or investigationis unlawful. 

Accounts such as the following remain improperly listed or were verified without supporting documentation : 1. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Listed as Pays account as agreed despite no active balance or recent account activity. The information lacks context, is vague, and misleading. 
2. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Inaccurately reports an actual payment amount of {$2800.00}, despite no balance or further account context. No verification has been provided. 
3. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Similar reporting anomalies. Payment and status do not align with historical or verified account documentation. 
4. XXXX XXXX  XXXX ( listed twice ) This account appears twice with identical numbers and information, suggesting duplicate reporting which misrepresents the actual debt load. 
There is no updated or detailed verification of balances, ownership, or repayment history. This causes severe harm to my creditworthiness and is misleading under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). 
XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Closed account but with 6 late payments reported. This account has not been verified and was not actively authorized by me. I have received no communication or billing records substantiating this debt. 
XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Similarly, closed with 4 late payments and no valid verification ever provided. 
XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX Closed with no late payments, but the reporting is inconsistent with the same card number appearing elsewhere with different statuses. 
XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Very old closed account ; should have aged off the credit report. Keeping it active with no late payment history has no legitimate permissible purpose. 
XXXX. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX Closed account with no activity, and again, reported inconsistently with no dispute options available through Equifaxs system. 

These accounts were never properly validated, contain multiple internal inconsistencies ( e.g., repeated charge-offs, conflicting dates, duplicate accounts ), and in some cases, representatives of the furnishers have confirmed to me directly that they have no records of these accounts or that I must contact third-XXXX  XXXX for which they have no contractual record of assignment.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation