Consumer complaint received 2025-11-14 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint because a derogatory account reported by JPMCB CARD, associated with the account ending in XXXX, has been reported inaccurately, without proper documentation, and without the verification required under federal law. The way this account has been handled by the furnisher and the credit reporting agencies has resulted in harm to my credit profile and has prevented me from obtaining accurate information about the basis for the reporting. Over time, I have repeatedly attempted to obtain validation, documentation, and a meaningful explanation of the negative information attached to this account, but I have not received anything that satisfies the requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) for accuracy, transparency, or proper reinvestigation. 

The JPMCB CARD account ending in XXXX is currently appearing as a derogatory account with a charge-off status. Although the reported past-due amount is listed as XXXX, the account still displays multiple late-payment notations, including XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX late entries. These late markers, despite showing no current balance owed, have substantially harmed my credit profile because they are categorized as severe delinquencies. What concerns me is that these derogatory indicators appear without any supporting documentation showing how the delinquencies were assigned, whether the reporting timeline reflects actual account activity, or whether the information was accurately transmitted from JPMCB CARD to the credit bureaus. 

When I noticed the derogatory reporting, I filed formal disputes with the national credit reporting agencies to request full validation and verification. My request was simple : I wanted proof that the account was legitimately mine and that the derogatory informationincluding the late-payment patternwas accurate, complete, and supported by documentation. My disputes included detailed requests for supporting documentation such as billing statements, records of payments, account histories, notices of delinquency, charge-off notices, and especially any signed agreements or contracts that would establish my connection to the account. 

Despite this, the credit bureaus closed my disputes quickly, stating that the furnishing entity verified the information. This verification, however, was not accompanied by actual evidence. I did not receive any documents, statements, or information demonstrating how the verification was conducted. The bureaus did not explain what steps they took, what information they reviewed, or what documents JPMCB CARD provided to support the derogatory reporting. This raises the question of whether their verification consisted only of an automated response through a system like XXXX, which often relies on brief electronic codes rather than actual documentation. Simply marking something as verified without producing meaningful proof does not meet the reinvestigation standard set by FCRA 611 ( a ). 

The absence of documentation is especially concerning because the reported delinquencies for account ending XXXX include several XXXX late paymentssix in total according to the reporting history. These are major derogatory indicators that significantly impact my credit score. It is entirely reasonable to request a detailed account record proving how these late payments occurred. Without billing statements, due-date histories, payment records, or notices, there is no way to confirm whether these delinquencies were properly assigned. Yet none of these materials have been provided, despite repeated requests. 

Additionally, I can not confirm whether this account was ever transferred, internally reassigned, or sold to another entity. It is unclear whether the reporting reflects activity from the original creditor or from a debt buyer or collection unit. If the account was transferred or sold, there should be documentation demonstrating the complete chain of assignment or ownership. Without such proof, the data becomes unreliable. The credit bureaus and JPMCB CARD have not supplied any documentation showing how data was transmitted, by whom, or under what process. Therefore, I can not confirm accuracy. 

What makes this situation worse is that I have asked the credit bureaus specifically for the method of verification required under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ). This requires the bureaus to explain the procedure used to verify the accuracy of the disputed information. They did not provide this information. Instead, I received generic notices that the account was verified as accurate. However, they did not disclose what documentation was reviewed, whether the review was manual or automated, whether the furnisher provided actual account records, or whether they relied solely on automated system codes. Without these details, the verification is incomplete and potentially non-compliant. 

I also asked for information such as : The date the account was verified The name or ID of the individual who verified the account The system or database that was used The documents supplied by JPMCB CARD The timestamped logs related to the furnishers response None of this was provided. Without transparency, I can not trust that a proper reinvestigation took place. 

My concerns also extend to whether the account was properly marked as disputed as required by FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ). During the periods when I filed disputes, there were times when the account did not appear as consumer disputes this account. If the furnisher did not notify the bureaus of the dispute, that is a direct violation of their obligations. This also misleads any creditor who pulls my report during the dispute period, because they do not see that the account is being actively challenged. 

Another issue is the possibility that the credit bureaus dismissed my dispute as frivolous without proper notice. Under federal law, if a dispute is considered frivolous, they must notify the consumer and explain what additional information is required. That never occurred. Instead, disputes were closed rapidly with no explanation, further suggesting that my dispute may not have been given proper handling or due process.

Additionally, the reporting of this account carries internal inconsistencies. For example, the account reflects severe delinquencies but shows a past-due balance of {$0.00}. This discrepancy raises questions about whether the account was charged off in a manner inconsistent with the activity or whether the reporting is based on incomplete historical data. If the balance is XXXX, I need documentation explaining why multiple major delinquencies remain present. Without transparency, this reporting appears contradictory and incomplete. 

The pattern of late payments reportedspecifically XXXX XXXX late entrieshas a major impact on my creditworthiness. It is essential that the furnisher supply detailed documentation proving the validity of each late marker. If they can not produce billing statements showing the exact amounts due, payment histories showing nonpayment, and correspondence reflecting delinquency notices, then the reporting is unverifiable. Without documentation, the consumer is forced to accept negative reporting without evidence, which undermines the principles of fairness and accuracy established under the FCRA. 

In addition, I am concerned that the data provided to the credit bureaus may have originated from automated internal systems, archived data, or legacy systems with limited detail. Automated furnishing systems often transmit only minimal data, and if the original detailed records no longer exist, the accuracy can not be proven. If JPMCB CARD can not retrieve full documentation for the account ending in XXXX, then the reporting can not be justified. 

I also attempted to contact customer service representatives at various times seeking more information, hoping to obtain more clarity or at least understand whether the account could be validated. In these interactions, I did not receive any substantive information or documentation. In some cases, representatives were unsure of how to assist or stated that the credit bureaus were responsible for the reinvestigation. This creates a circular situation where each entity shifts responsibility to the other. Under the law, both entities have their own responsibilities : the furnisher must provide accurate data and respond to disputes with documentation, and the bureaus must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. Neither party appears to have fulfilled these obligations thoroughly. 

The derogatory reporting of this account has negatively affected my ability to secure credit, lower my interest rates, or qualify for various financial opportunities. Even though the balance is showing as XXXX, the presence of repeated XXXX late payments and the designation of the account as derogatory harms my credit in the same way as a high-balance charge-off. This makes the need for accurate reporting critical. 

All of these issues point to a failure on the part of the furnisher and the credit reporting agencies to provide the documents and verification required by law. Without proper documentation, without a clear chain of custody, without verified evidence showing that the account information is accurate, and without a complete and transparent reinvestigation, the continued reporting of this account is unfair, potentially unlawful, and significantly harmful. 

What happened is that I attempted to follow the proper procedures for disputing a derogatory account and requesting the validation that is required under federal law. Despite multiple attempts, I have not been given the information I need. Instead, I received generic and automated responses that do not fulfill the requirements of a meaningful reinvestigation or proper verification. 

I am filing this complaint so that an external regulatory body can intervene and ensure that JPMCB CARD and the credit reporting agencies comply with their legal obligations. My goal is not to avoid responsibility but to ensure that all information being reported is complete, accurate, verified, and supported by proper documentation. If the account can not be validated with original documents, then it should not continue to appear as a derogatory account on my credit report. 

I am requesting that the CFPB review the handling of this account, require proper documentation from the furnisher, and ensure that the bureaus conduct a full reinvestigation that meets legal standards. If validation can not be provided, the account should be removed entirely to prevent further harm. 

Thank you for your assistance and for reviewing this complaint.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation