Consumer complaint received 2025-08-20 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Reporting company used your report improperly
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
What happened I am disputing inaccurate late payment and derogatory reporting that the credit bureaus and furnishers have not corrected after multiple disputes and a prior CFPB complaint. On XX/XX/XXXX I sent formal disputes to Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. I asked for correction or removal of false late payments and misreported charged off accounts. The bureaus made partial changes later, which confirms the original data was wrong, but they did not fully fix the problems. As of today the same late payment remark and charged off tradelines still appear and continue to harm my credit. 

ONEMAIN account XXXX shows a 30 day late payment for XX/XX/XXXX that is not accurate. I disputed this several times. After my last CFPB complaint, the bureau admitted they had to update past due, balance, and account history fields. That means the original reporting was wrong. Even with those updates, the XX/XX/XXXX late payment still shows. The furnisher and bureaus have never provided any billing records, payment ledgers, or statement evidence to support that specific late. They have not shown a reasonable investigation or verified the late with original records as required. This violates 15 USC 1681e ( b ) accuracy and 15 USC 1681i reinvestigation duties. If I sent a direct dispute to the furnisher, they also had a duty under 15 USC 1681s-2 ( b ) to investigate all relevant information and correct or delete inaccurate or unverifiable data. They did not do so. The tradeline history and status fields also do not align with Metro 2 standards. The Payment History Profile does not match the stated status for that month, which is a common indicator of bad data. 

XXXX  XXXX account XXXX was charged off and closed by the grantor in early XXXX and reported as a total loss. Even so, the bureaus are still furnishing it as a derogatory revolving tradeline with multiple late payments and an outstanding balance. There is no open contract and no curable delinquency. Reporting this as an active derogatory with ongoing past due after charge off is misleading and not consistent with Metro 2. It fails the accuracy standard under 15 USC 1681e ( b ). No one has provided the underlying statements, charge off records, or final accounting that would make this reporting verifiable. If the furnisher sent data to the bureau, they had a continuing duty to update and correct under 15 USC 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 2 ) and 1681s-2 ( b ). That did not happen. If this item was previously removed and later came back, TransUnion and the furnisher had to follow the reinsertion rules in 15 USC 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), including getting a certification and providing a 5 day reinsertion notice. I did not receive that notice. 

XXXX  account XXXX appears on TransUnion as a derogatory charged off installment loan with a reported past due balance of about XXXX. The account is closed and charged off. There is no active billing cycle. Reporting an ongoing past due on a charged off account is inaccurate and suggests an active delinquency that does not exist. The tradeline lacks the month by month payment history needed to support the figure being reported. This is unverifiable as presented and violates 15 USC 1681e ( b ) and 1681s-2 ( b ). The Metro 2 fields for status, past due, and payment history are inconsistent with a final charge off condition. 

Across these items the bureaus did not conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. They relied on automated responses instead of original records. They did not provide method of verification details that identify who verified, when, and how, and they did not provide business contact information for the furnisher that actually verified as required by 15 USC 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ) when requested. In some instances, the bureaus updated certain fields only after I complained, which proves the data was not accurate before. Yet they left the core derogatory remarks in place. This continuing pattern has caused score drops, credit denials, and higher pricing on credit offers. I lost time and money sending certified mail and preparing disputes to correct something the bureaus and furnishers should have kept accurate from the start. 

I am submitting the following evidence with this complaint. Copies of the XX/XX/XXXX dispute letters sent to Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. Screenshots or PDFs showing the disputed late payment and charged off items as they currently report. Prior results letters that show the bureaus had to change fields after earlier disputes. Any payment confirmations available for the periods in question. I will provide additional documents on request. 

If you also want a resolution paragraph for the CFPB form, here is one you can paste into the What would you like to happen field.

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