Consumer complaint received 2025-06-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
I am challenging the results of your XX/XX/XXXX Report # XXXX reinvestigation regarding the XXXX XXXX tradeline . Your decision to mark this account as verified as accurate is unfounded. The information reported is XXXX XXXX inaccurate, inconsistent, and unverifiable. The contradictions outlined below demonstrate that the account can not be verified, and therefore must be deleted under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). 

XXXX. Inaccurate and Conflicting Account Details TransUnions reporting reflects multiple material inaccuracies : Account Open Date : TransUnion lists XX/XX/XXXX, while XXXX confirms the account was opened on XX/XX/XXXX. 
Last Payment Date : TransUnion XXXX XX/XX/XXXX, yet XXXX documentation and TransUnions own payment history clearly reflect a confirmed payment in XX/XX/XXXX. This discrepancy shows TransUnion failed to properly review or reflect available evidence. 
Date Closed : Listed as XX/XX/XXXX, yet the account shows continued updates into XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. This is improper. Once a tradeline is closed, no further updates should occur unless correcting an error. These continued post-closure updates violate FCRA accuracy obligations. 
Pay Status & Remarks : Labeled Sold; was in collection and Purchased by another lender ; paid in collectionthe latter of which is demonstrably false, as no payment or settlement occurred. 
The inconsistencies across basic account fields prove that TransUnion could not have verified this account with reliable or current data, and therefore, the tradeline is legally unverifiable under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ). 

XXXX. Conflicting Ownership and Lack of Legal Standing The ownership history of this account is deeply inconsistent and unsupported by any verifiable documentation. Each party involvedXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX offered conflicting claims about ownership, none of which have been validated or aligned with credit reporting standards. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX emailed confirmation that the account was sold to XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 
On XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX sent a collection letter and email stating they had received the account on that same date and were collecting on a balance of {$2400.00}, significantly higher than the original {$1700.00} credit limit. 
Yet in a CFPB response dated XX/XX/XXXX, Asset Recovery claimed they had received the account on XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX days after XXXX stated it was sold to Plaza. 
Then, in a XX/XX/XXXX CFPB response, XXXX claimed the account had been sold to XXXX XXXX, contradicting their own XX/XX/XXXX statement and the sale to Plaza. 
This erratic timeline raises significant red flags : How did XXXX XXXX transfer the account to XXXX XXXX without validating the debt or providing proof of ownership? 
Why did XXXX XXXX later claim they were sending the account back to XXXX XXXX, while XXXX has never responded to my legal request for documentation? 
XXXX has consistently stated that they no longer own or service the debt, and have relinquished all rights since the sale. 
I have never disputed that I once held an account with XXXX. My dispute is with the unverifiable and contradictory ownership claimsno entity has provided legal documentation confirming who currently owns or is authorized to report on this debt. This is a fundamental requirement for accurate credit reporting under FCRA XXXX ( a ) and FDCPA validation standards. 
Furthermore, TransUnions tradeline lists XXXX XXXX under the account sold to field. But if XXXX is not furnishing data ( as confirmed ), and no party is validating the ownership, how was this listing verified as accurate? What documentation or entity certified this to TransUnion? 
Supporting Facts : XXXX XXXX does not report to any credit bureau, including TransUnion. 
XXXX XXXX XXXX confirmed in writing they are not credit reporting. 
No party has submitted proof of ownership or chain of title, despite multiple direct and regulatory requests. 
A balance of {$2400.00} is being pursuedsignificantly higher than the {$1700.00} credit limitwith no explanation or itemization, which raises concerns under FDCPA and UDAAP. 
This tradeline is currently being reported without a legally authorized furnisher, without verified ownership, and in direct conflict with the information provided by each party involved. Under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ), TransUnion must delete the account if it can not be verified. The burden of proof rests with the data furnishernot the consumerto justify continued reporting. That burden has not been met. 
Ownership and Verification Timeline Summary Date Entity Action or Statement XX/XX/XXXX TransUnion Reports account opened on this date ( conflicts with XXXX stated open date ). 
XX/XX/XXXX XXXX Confirms actual account open date. 
XX/XX/XXXX XXXX / TransUnion Last payment shown in XXXX payment history ( conflicts with TransUnions last payment date of XXXX ). 
XX/XX/XXXX XXXX Email Confirms account sold to XXXX XXXX, XXXX. 
XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX CFPB response states they received the account on this date. 
XX/XX/XXXX XXXX ( CFPB reply ) Claims account was sold to XXXX XXXX, contradicting earlier confirmation. 
XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Sends email and letter stating account was received from XXXX on this date. 
XX/XX/XXXX CFPB Complaint Filed Consumer requests XXXX to provide legal proof of ownership no response received to date. 
XX/XX/XXXX XXXX / XXXXXXXX XXXX Confirm to KY XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that they no longer report or service the account. 
FebMar XXXX TransUnion Updates tradeline after XX/XX/XXXX closed date, despite no active furnisher or ownership proof. 

This timeline clearly illustrates the lack of a consistent narrative, conflicting dates, and absence of any verified, authorized party reporting the tradeline. These issues make the account unverifiable and subject to mandatory deletion under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ). 

XXXX. False and Contradictory Status and Remark Codes TransUnion is reporting multiple, conflicting labels for the XXXX XXXX  tradeline : Pay Status : Sold ; was in collection Remarks : Purchased by another lender Remarks : Paid in collection These are factually inconsistent and mutually exclusive. An account can not simultaneously be : Sold, In collections, Purchased by another lender, and Paid in collections when no payment or resolution ever occurred. 

The paid in collection designation is demonstrably false. I have not paid, settled, or resolved this debt with any party, and no documentation has been submitted by any creditor or collector to support this remark. This misrepresentation is materially misleading to lenders and a violation of FCRA XXXX ( b ). 
If this tradeline was truly verified as accurate, there would not be XXXX separate and contradictory labels used to describe the same account status. This alone proves that TransUnions verification process was either flawed, incomplete, or not conducted in compliance with FCRA XXXX ( a ). 
I demand to know : What method was used to verify this account? Who furnished the data, and how did TransUnion determine the accuracy of remarks that contradict both one another and the actual account history? 

XXXX. Legal Basis for Deletion Under FCRA Under FCRA XXXX ( a ) ( XXXX ) ( A ), if a disputed account is inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable, and no evidence is provided to confirm its accuracy, it must be deleted from the consumers credit file. 

This account is : Unverifiable : XXXX XXXX has failed to validate ownership ; TransUnion has not disclosed its method of verification. 
Inaccurate : Dates, payment history, and remarks conflict with actual records. 
Incomplete : Current ownership is unknown, and no active furnisher is authorized to provide data. 
Misleading : The paid in collection remark implies resolution that did not occur. 
TransUnions continued furnishing of this data, without a certified source of truth, constitutes willful or negligent noncompliance under FCRA XXXX and XXXX. 


DEMAND FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION XXXX. Permanently delete the XXXX XXXX tradeline from my credit report due to verified inaccuracies, contradictions, and the accounts legal unverifiability. 
XXXX. Disclose the method of verification used during your investigation, including the name of the verifying party, the date of verification, and copies of documentation relied upon. 
XXXX. Cease all post-sale updates on this tradeline and correct all false or misleading status and remark codes.

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