Consumer complaint received 2025-06-19 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 — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: HI

Complaint narrative:
To : Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Re : Follow-up Demand for Enforcement CFPB Dispute # XXXX Subject : Formal Demand for Immediate Deletion of Unverified Information by XXXX for Non-Compliance with FCRA & Reinvestigation Dear CFPB Officer, I am writing to formally resubmit and escalate my dispute with XXXX, originally filed under CFPB complaint reference # XXXX, and to demand enforcement action on the basis of XXXX 's failure to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). 

Although XXXX responded within the statutory 30-day period, their response is legally deficient and clearly non-compliant with the investigation requirements under the FCRA ( 15 U.S.C. 1681i ). I outline below the specific violations and demand immediate corrective action, including the deletion of all disputed items, and further CFPB enforcement and oversight. 

1. Inadequate Investigation under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) XXXX claims to have verified the disputed information, yet fails to provide any supporting documentation or a description of the investigation process, as required by law. The FCRA obligates consumer reporting agencies to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation, and that means : Reviewing all relevant information provided by the consumer ; Contacting the original data furnishers to verify or correct disputed data ; Ensuring the investigation is more than a mere confirmation of prior information. 

XXXX failed to do any of the above. Instead, they provided a generic, templated response asserting the datas accuracy without any specific substantiation. 

2. No Evidence or Documentation Provided Violation of 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( A ) Per 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( A ), if a disputed item is found to be accurate, the CRA must provide a written description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and a summary of the results, along with the name and address of the furnisher. 

XXXX response fails this requirement. I requested evidence and asked : What specific documents were used to verify the information? 

What investigation methods were employed? 

What justification exists for maintaining the data despite my dispute? 

XXXX answered none of these questions. They did not disclose sources, did not describe their reinvestigation methods, and instead referred me to contact the furnishers directly, which is not my responsibility under the FCRA. The burden of verification falls entirely on the CRA. 

3. No Reasonable Basis to Retain Data 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) If information disputed by a consumer can not be verified, then per 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), the CRA must delete the item from the file. By not substantiating the information with verifiable documentation, XXXX default action should have been deletion, not blind affirmation.

They claimed the following items were " verified '' yet presented no proof : Incorrect date of birth ; Incorrect address ( XXXX, HI ) ; Unrecognized email and phone number ; An employer I never worked for ; A trade line from XXXX I never authorized ; A bank account I have never opened or used. 

Not a single supporting document, account record, or verification detail was shared in their response. This is not an investigation it is a procedural violation. 

4. Failure to Conduct Reasonable Procedures 1681e ( b ) Even beyond reinvestigation, XXXX has a continuing obligation under 1681e ( b ) to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy in the information they report. The inclusion of false identifiers ( wrong address, wrong employer, unknown bank account ) raises serious questions about the validity of their entire verification system. 

XXXX has made no effort to confirm the informations accuracy beyond simply repeating that it exists. Existence is not evidence. Accuracy must be substantiated and they have failed. 

XXXX. Continued Retention of False Information = Willful or Negligent Noncompliance 1681n & 1681o By continuing to retain unverified data despite clear notice and a formal dispute, XXXX  is potentially in willful or negligent noncompliance with the FCRA. Per : 1681n ( Willful Noncompliance ) 1681o ( Negligent Noncompliance ) a consumer has the right to recover damages from a CRA that fails to follow proper reinvestigation procedures and maintains false information.

Relief and Enforcement Demanded : I respectfully request that the CFPB take the following actions : Enforce XXXX legal obligation to remove all disputed data that it failed to verify through proper investigation. 

Demand from XXXX a copy of their investigation procedures and documentation used in verifying each disputed item. 

Impose appropriate penalties or sanctions for XXXX failure to comply with the FCRAs requirements. 

Ensure that XXXX issues a corrected consumer report to all third parties who received the inaccurate report within the last six months, per 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ).

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