Consumer complaint received 2025-11-28 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: CL Holdings LLC
State: LA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this new complaint because the previous case I filed, identified as XXXX, was closed without resolving the core issue. The earlier case was closed even though the company involved failed to provide documentation, validation, verification, or any legally required proof supporting the account they are continuing to report on my credit file. Since the original dispute was left unresolved, and because the company never produced evidence demonstrating that the account belongs to me, I am now reopening the matter by filing a new case. 

The central problem remains the same : the account being reported does not belong to me, and no information, documentation, or verification has ever been provided by the furnisher to prove otherwise. The account continues to appear on my credit reports despite numerous disputes, despite the absence of any proof, and despite my clear statements that I do not recognize the account. The fact that the previous case was prematurely closed does not mean the issue went away ; it simply means it was left unresolved, forcing me to open this new complaint so that the matter can be addressed properly. 

In my earlier case, I disputed the account because I do not own it, I did not authorize it, and I have never received any contract, application, billing statement, itemized history, or validation that would link the account to me. The company responding to the previous dispute did not supply any proof. Instead, the response consisted of generic statements asserting that the account was verified without providing the method of verification, the documents reviewed, or any information showing that a legally compliant investigation took place. Their response lacked transparency, substance, and supporting evidence, making it impossible to conclude that the matter was properly reviewed. 

Federal law under the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires that disputed information be investigated thoroughly and deleted if it can not be verified. In the previous case, none of these requirements were met. The company did not provide a legally adequate explanation, did not produce documentation, and did not prove that the account was mine. Instead, they issued a general statement claiming compliance without showing any actual compliance. 

Because the earlier case was closed without correcting the issue, the inaccurate account remains on my credit report. Its continued presence is harmful, damaging, and unjustified, especially given that no proof has ever been provided. The company has not shown how the account originated, who opened it, what documentation supports it, or why they believe it should remain. The failure to resolve the issue in the earlier complaint forces me to reopen the dispute so that a complete and lawful review can take place. 

A fair and proper investigation should have required the company to provide concrete evidence, including the original signed application or contract, itemized billing records, proof of ownership, and validation documents showing that the account legitimately belongs to me. These items were never provided. Without documentation, a furnisher can not legally verify a disputed account. Simply declaring that the information is correctwithout supporting evidencedoes not satisfy federal requirements.

Additionally, the company failed to provide the method of verification required under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). When a consumer disputes an account and requests validation, the furnisher or the credit reporting agency must supply details explaining how the account was verified, including what documents or information were reviewed. This was not provided in the earlier dispute. Instead, the response was vague and uninformative, indicating that no real verification occurred. 

Because of these shortcomings, it is clear that the previous case was closed without any meaningful resolution. Closing the case did not resolve the issue ; it simply ended the previous complaint without addressing the underlying problem. As a result, the inaccurate account continues to harm my credit profile, misrepresent my financial history, and create obstacles in credit-related decisions.

For these reasons, I am formally filing a new case. I am doing so not because the matter is new, but because the previous attempt to resolve it was mishandled and remains unresolved. The companys failure to provide documentation and to conduct a proper investigation violated its obligations under the FCRA. Therefore, reopening the case is necessary to ensure a fair review and lawful resolution.

It is important for the CFPB to understand that I did everything required under the law when I disputed the account originally. I filed written disputes, requested validation, and followed the proper procedures for reporting inaccurate information. The company, on the other hand, did not meet its obligations. They did not provide proof, did not send documentation, and did not supply verification. Because of these failures, the information they continue to report is both inaccurate and unverified.

Furthermore, I emphasize again that I do not own this account. I did not authorize it, I did not create it, and I never received any legitimate communication supporting it. I do not have any documentation of my own linking me to the account because it is not mine. The only way for the company to justify the accounts presence would be to produce actual evidence. They have not done so.

In the interest of fairness, accuracy, and compliance with federal regulations, I am requesting that the CFPB reopen this matter under a new case number so that a complete investigation can be conducted. The purpose of this new submission is to ensure that the company is required to provide actual documentation or, if they can not, to remove the account from my credit file as required by law.

A new case is necessary because continuing to report an account that is unverified and disputed violates the principles of accuracy under the FCRA. Credit reports must reflect information that is complete, accurate, and verifiable. When an account is disputed and can not be validated, it must be removed. Allowing the account to remain undermines the integrity of the credit reporting system and causes ongoing harm to me as the consumer.

By reopening the matter, I am giving the company another opportunity to provide documentation, verify the account with evidence, or acknowledge that the account should be deleted. If they can not prove that the account belongs to me, the fair and legally required outcome is deletion. My intention with this new case is not to create repetitive complaints, but to ensure that the issue is finally addressed and corrected, since it clearly was not resolved the first time.

This new complaint should also be viewed in light of the continued damage caused by the inaccurate reporting. Every day that the account remains on my credit report, it results in harm. It negatively affects my credit rating, influences lenders ' decisions, and may result in denials or higher interest rates. It also impacts my reputation and financial opportunities. The companys refusal to validate the account contributes to an unfair and harmful situation that can only be corrected through proper review and deletion.

I am asking the CFPB to ensure that this case receives a full and proper reinvestigation. The company should be required to produce documentation or remove the account. The previous case was closed without resolution, but the lack of resolution does not mean the dispute is invalidit simply means it was not handled correctly.

To summarize the key points of this 3,000-word statement : I am opening a new case because the previous case XXXX was closed without resolving the dispute.

The account being reported does not belong to me.

I never received validation, documentation, or proof from the company.

The company failed to provide the legally required method of verification.

The response in the previous case was incomplete and unsupported.

The account continues to report inaccurately and harmfully.

A new case is necessary to ensure the matter is properly investigated.

I am requesting a full and complete review with documentation support.

If the company can not validate the account, it must be removed under federal law.

Continuing to report an unverified account violates the FCRA.

This new case is being filed so that the issue receives a thorough, lawful, and fair investigation. The previous case being closed does not resolve the accounts inaccuracy, nor does it relieve the company of its obligation to provide proof. The continued lack of documentation, lack of validation, and lack of proper investigation necessitate reopening the matter so it can finally be handled correctly.

Thank you for reviewing this new complaint and for allowing me to provide this detailed explanation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation