Consumer complaint received 2026-05-26 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: OneMain Finance Corporation
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
Core position This unified CFPB rebuttal coverXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reporting for OneMain account identifiers XXXX / XXXX. It asks the CFPB to require OneMain and the bureaus to remove all adverse payment information or delete the tradeline if field-level accuracy can not be verified. This is not a duplicate, not a XXXX statement request, and not an invalid third-party submission. Any dispute, complaint, mailing, or upload made by me or with assistance from XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX another authorized representative is expressly ratified by me and reflects my position. Please mail all results, updated reports, and method-of-verification details to my current address. Why OneMain 's response is not enough l Policy refusal is not an investigation. OneMain responded that its policy is to report accurately and completely and therefore it declines goodwill. That does not answer the FCRA dispute : which exact records prove the XX/XX/XXXX and XXXX XXXX fields, XXXX status, balance, account identifiers, and bureau-specific differences? l The attached transaction history undercuts its own claim. OneMain says a complete transaction history was attached, but the transaction-history exhibit says it XXXX not be complete and is not an official business record of OneMain. A non-official summary can not be the source-record verification required after a specific dispute. l The late-payment months are technically suspect. The loan agreement shows due dates on the XXXX and a late-charge grace period. The transaction summary shows payments posted on XX/XX/XXXX, XX/XX/XXXX, and XX/XX/XXXX, followed by later retractions/reversals. If a payment posted on the due date and was later retracted, OneMain must prove the date the installment became 30 days delinquent, the reporting cutoff, and why the derogatory month is accurate. l Credit insurance was ignored. The loan documents show financed premiums for single-disability and involuntary-unemployment insurance. OneMain did not address whether job-loss or disability/medical documentation triggered coverage, claim rights, cancellation/refund credits, or payment credits before reporting adverse information. XXXX XXXX mismatch is unresolvedXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX show different balances, update dates, account numbers, and delinquency labels. XXXX simultaneously shows None Reported as worst delinquency while older derogatory events identify XXXX lates. l Identity-theft and address evidence was not addressed. The package included IRS XXXX identity-verification evidence and FTC Identity Theft Report No. XXXX. OneMain did not explain whether it reviewed identity-theft/mixed-file concerns, account access records, payment method changes, correspondence history, or application/transaction records under FCRA identity-theft provisions. l Prior/refinanced account confusion requires review. The report shows an older OneMain account closed due to refinance and a newer active OneMain account with overlapping XXXX identifiers. OneMain must confirm it did not conflate the prior refinance account, account suffix, payment history, or balance fields.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief