Consumer complaint received 2025-11-13 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: U.S. BANCORP
State: NJ

Complaint narrative:
I am filing a complaint about the inaccurate reinsertion and misleading reporting of an Elan XXXX XXXX  credit card tradeline on my credit reports. 

The account is reported as ELANXXXX XXXX XXXX # XXXX. XXXX previously deleted this tradeline after a dispute. On or about XX/XX/year>, XXXX sent me Your Investigation Results REINSERTED, File Number XXXX, stating that the previously deleted item was verified and added back to my credit report. 

This reinsertion violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ), because XXXX did not provide the required reinsertion notice or any description of the furnishers certification or the procedure it used to determine that the information is accurate. They simply restated the tradeline data. This also fails to comply with the method-of-verification requirements in 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) and 1681i ( a ) ( 7 ). 

In addition, the information being reported by Elan and the credit bureaus is inaccurate and materially misleading in violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) and 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) : XXXX reports the remark PAYING PARTIAL PMT AGMT ; UNPAID BALANCE CHARGED OFF and shows a past-due balance of {$9700.00}. I have not entered into any partial payment agreement with Elan XXXX XXXX, so this remark is false and mischaracterizes the status of the account. 
XXXX  shows this same account as a closed, charged-off account with a {$9000.00} credit limit and a balance of {$9700.00}, and labels my credit usage as 100 % and over or at your credit limit. This coding makes it appear to be an actively over-limit revolving account when it is actually a closed charge-off. That is inaccurate and highly misleading and does not reflect the maximum possible accuracy required by 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). 
XXXX lists an estimated date that this account will remain on my file until XXXX. Based on my history of delinquency and charge-off, this appears inconsistent with the actual date of first delinquency and suggests possible illegal re-aging in violation of the 7-year obsolescence rules in 15 U.S.C. 1681c and the furnisher duties under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 2 ). 

I have previously disputed this tradeline with the credit bureaus and Elan XXXX XXXX, but they continue to verify it without providing competent documentation or correcting these inaccuracies. As a result, my reports and scores are being unfairly damaged by a reinserted, inaccurately coded charge-off that is being treated as an over-limit revolving account and falsely described as being under a partial payment agreement. 

I am attaching copies of : ( 1 ) the XXXX Investigation Results REINSERTED letter dated XX/XX/year> ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) and ( XXXX ) Experian screenshots showing the Elan tradeline, 100 % utilization/over-limit notice, charge-off status, and other account details.

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 non-monetary relief