Consumer complaint received 2025-09-02 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: Affirm Holdings, Inc
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
XXXX bills itself as a credit builder program yet my experience shows the opposite. Instead of helping me establish or rebuild positive credit, they inflicted greater damage than I would have had without ever using their service. 

Deceptive Marketing / False Advertising XXXX advertises itself as a safe, low-cost way to build credit. In reality, the product is structured so consumers pay for nothing except the reporting. There is no usable credit line, no meaningful benefit, and the risk of harm is greater than the promised help.

They promote themselves as a path to better credit, but in practice, they penalize consumers with late payments that negate years of progress.

Late Payments for App/Access Issues Beyond My Control I experienced repeated problems logging into the app, updating my payment method
, and managing my account after my debit card was stolen. XXXX system failed to allow me to update my payment information in a timely manner, even though I attempted.

Despite these issues being clearly outside of my control, XXXX chose to report two late payments. These two lates inflict far more harm on a credit file than the minimal positive trade line XXXX supposedly provides. 

Unfair and Abusive Practices Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), furnishers have a duty to report accurately and conduct reasonable investigations ( 623 ). XXXX ignored all reasonable context and simply rubber-stamped derogatories against me.

This is the definition of an abusive financial practice : charging consumers to build credit, then sabotaging them with late reports.

Materially Misleading Program Design A consumer pays XXXX monthly for an illusory line of credit that can not be used. They are not buying or receiving goods or services ; the only purpose is supposed to be credit-building.

The moment a technical or access issue occurs, XXXX flips that model on its head punishing the consumer with derogatories that outweigh all prior benefit.

Harm to Consumers These late payments remain on my credit reports for seven years, doing vastly more harm than the entirety of the program could ever do good.

I paid XXXX for the promise of better credit. Instead, they caused me measurable damages : lower scores, higher interest rates, and blocked financial opportunities.

Pattern and Practice / Likely Systemic Issue A review of consumer forums shows many others have experienced similar problems with XXXX reporting late payments after app access issues, system errors, or confusion about their unusual product.

This appears to be a pattern of harm, not an isolated incident.

Requested Resolution : Immediate deletion of all negative marks ( late payments ) from my credit reports across all bureaus.

Full audit of XXXX reporting practices, marketing claims, and system reliability.

Restitution/compensation for the damages caused by their deceptive credit builder model.

Enforcement action for ongoing violations of the FCRA and UDAAP standards.Both XXXX and Affirm advertise themselves as safe, consumer-friendly financial tools XXXX as a credit builder and Affirm as buy now, pay later without hurting your credit. In reality, both inflicted negative credit reporting that directly contradicts their marketing.

1. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX sold me on the idea of a credit builder account, but when I experienced login issues and could not update payment info after my debit card was stolen, they reported two late payments.

These late marks destroy the very purpose of the program. A single late from XXXX outweighs the tiny benefit their {$5.00} $ 10 monthly reporting ever creates.

Under the FCRA 623, furnishers must report accurately and investigate disputes fairly. XXXX instead rubber-stamps derogatories, even when they stem from system failures.

Their model is abusive : they bill consumers for nothing but reporting, and then weaponize late marks that permanently harm credit files.

2. Affirm , Inc .

Affirm has marketed itself as flexible BNPL and often states in public messaging that its product doesnt harm credit.

Yet Affirm reported a late payment on my account. I had documented login loops and app failures that prevented me from making a payment on time. I even sent screenshots to Affirm showing I was stuck in their apps loop and unable to complete payment.

Despite proof of a technical failure on their end, they chose to punish me with a negative tradeline.

This is misleading, unfair, and abusive. A BNPL account with a small balance should not translate into a 7-year derogatory mark when the delay was caused by Affirms defective platform.

3. Systemic Harm Both XXXX and Affirm run the same harmful playbook : they promise safety, growth, and protection, but deliver lasting credit damage.

Consumers can not be expected to pay for credit building or safe BNPL programs only to have app glitches and hidden traps destroy their credit profiles.

These practices are deceptive under UDAAP and violate the duties of accurate reporting under the FCRA.

Requested Resolution : Immediate deletion of all late payments from XXXX and Affirm across all credit bureaus.

Regulatory investigation into deceptive advertising and reporting practices by both companies.

Enforcement actions and penalties.

Restitution/compensation for the damages caused, including higher costs of credit and lost opportunities.

Bottom line : I paid XXXX and Affirm under the promise of help instead, their technical failures and abusive reporting have caused lasting harm. This is exactly the type of misconduct the CFPB is meant to stop.Both XXXX and Affirm advertise themselves as safe, consumer-friendly financial tools XXXX as a credit builder and Affirm as buy now, pay later without hurting your credit. In reality, both inflicted negative credit reporting that directly contradicts their marketing.

1. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX s

old me on the idea of a credit builder account, but when I experienced login issues and could not update payment info after my debit card was stolen, they reported two late payments.

These late marks destroy the very purpose of the program. A single late from XXXX outweighs the tiny benefit their {$5.00} XXXX XXXX monthly reporting ever creates. 

Under the FCRA 623, furnishers must report accurately and investigate disputes fairly. XXXX instead rubber-stamps derogatories, even when they stem from system failures.

Their model is abusive : they bill consumers for nothing but reporting, and then weaponize late marks that permanently harm credit files.

2. Affirm , Inc .

Affirm has marketed itself as flexible BNPL and often states in public messaging that its product doesnt harm credit.

Yet Affirm reported a late payment on my account. I had documented login loops and app failures that prevented me from making a payment on time. I even sent screenshots to Affirm showing I was stuck in their apps loop and unable to complete payment.

Despite proof of a technical failure on their end, they chose to punish me with a negative tradeline.

This is misleading, unfair, and abusive. A BNPL account with a small balance should not translate into a 7-year derogatory mark when the delay was caused by Affirms defective platform.

3. Systemic Harm Both XXXX and Affirm run the same harmful playbook : they promise safety, growth, and protection, but deliver lasting credit damage.

Consumers can not be expected to pay for credit building or safe BNPL programs only to have app glitches and hidden traps destroy their credit profiles.

These practices are deceptive under UDAAP and violate the duties of accurate reporting under the FCRA.

Requested Resolution : Immediate deletion of all late payments from XXXX and Affirm across all credit bureaus. 

Regulatory investigation into deceptive advertising and reporting practices by both companies.

Enforcement actions and penalties.

Restitution/compensation for the damages caused, including higher costs of credit and lost opportunities.

Bottom line : I paid XXXX and Affirm under the promise of help instead, their technical failures and abusive reporting have caused lasting harm. This is exactly the type of misconduct the CFPB is meant to stop.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation