Consumer complaint received 2025-06-26 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: LEXISNEXIS
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
Unverified information is being reported on my file after notification to the credit reporting companies that the information is unverifiable per the courts. I called XXXX twice on XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  to rectify the error. The Supervisors were of little to no help. All they would do is file another dispute ; I don't believe they used unverifiable as my dispute reason either. That dispute filed on XX/XX/year> is not showing in their portal as an active dispute and there are no dispute results being displayed for that dispute. When I called XXXX XXXX XXXX  XX/XX/year>, that supervisor was talking some mess about getting a stamped and signed copy of the letter from the court. That's not necessary when the courts provide the letter on their official public record of a website that says they don't verify or validate any information. That includes with third-parties and credit reporting companies. The supervisor alleged that they filed a dispute citing unverified information as the reason. 

I am writing to formally dispute the verifiability of the bankruptcy information appearing in my credit file with LexisNexis, XXXX XXXX XXXX Per the Summary of Rights you all provide, Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), consumer reporting agencies must delete inaccurate unverifiable information. Unverifiable information must be removed usually within 30 calendar days.

The bankruptcy listing currently reported is unverifiable and therefore must be removed. The United States Bankruptcy Court has publicly confirmed that it does not report any information to the credit bureaus and is not responsible for verifying or validating information from consumers credit files. According to official statements from the United States Bankruptcy Court, the court : " Does not report any information to the credit bureaus and is not responsible for verifying or validating information from consumers credit files. '' This means there is no original data furnisher to verify the bankruptcy through traditional FCRA-required procedures, such as : The Automated Credit Dispute Verification ( ACDV ) form processed through the e-OSCAR system. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX which is typically used by furnishers to proactively update or correct data. 
Therefore, the presence of this bankruptcy on my credit report lacks an authoritative source of verification. As a result, there is no authorized source that can verify this information through typical reinvestigation channels such as the Automated Credit Dispute Verification ( ACDV ) form used in the e-OSCAR system. As part of your reinvestigation process, I am aware that information about the disputed item is typically transmitted over the e-OSCAR platform via an Automated Credit Dispute Verification form ( ACDV ). However, since the Bankruptcy Court does not furnish information to credit reporting agencies and is not a data furnisher, there is no original source that can verify this bankruptcy through the ACDV process. This makes the reported information unverifiable. 
As the Bankruptcy Court is not a furnisher of information to any consumer reporting agency ( CRA ), it is impossible to verify the accuracy of the bankruptcy listing via ACDV or XXXX  Because no source exists that can confirm the bankruptcys accuracy, it is legally considered unverifiable information. 
Additionally, if this bankruptcy entry was ever updated or modified, it may have been done through an XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXs a tool credit reporting data furnishers use to proactively update or correct information previously reported to CRAs. However, since the bankruptcy court is not a data furnisher, it can not validate, update, or correct information via the AUD process, making any such updates entirely speculative and without a proper foundation or verification. 
Under 15 U.S. Code 1681e ( b ), CRAs are required to : " Follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. '' The inability to verify the reported bankruptcy means that XXXX XXXX and LexisNexis can not meet this statutory requirement. By continuing to report a public record that can not be verified by its original source and relying instead on third-party " scrubbing '' or automated scraping processes you are violating the core intent of the FCRA. 
The use of data aggregation methods, such as LexisNexiss compilation of public record data, does not exempt any CRA from its duty to ensure maximum possible accuracy. Since the Bankruptcy Court does not validate or verify this information, no third party can claim it is definitively accurate. As a result, continuing to publish this information subjects me to reputational harm and financial damage without the legal safeguards FCRA intends to provide. 
LexisNexis, in particular, gathers public records through data aggregation and " scrubbing '' methods. However, if the originating source ( the Bankruptcy Court ) explicitly disclaims responsibility for accuracy, reporting, and verification, then any bankruptcy information LexisNexis obtains or reproduces is, by nature, unverifiable. LexisNexis can not validate or verify the accuracy of this information through public record " scrubbing '' when the original source refuses to validate, verify, or confirm the accuracy of its data.

Furthermore, LexisNexis recently responded to my dispute in CFPB complaint # XXXX with : " Based on the information the consumer provided in this complaint filed with your office, we are unable to fully authenticate the consumers identity and as a result we are unable to provide specific details regarding the consumers file. '' This evasive response highlights a serious compliance failure. If LexisNexis can not verify my identity yet continues to collect and disseminate unverifiable public records, it is in violation of the FCRA. LexisNexis does not have direct communication with the Bankruptcy Court and is therefore scraping data from sources the originator refuses to authenticate. That is not a valid foundation for " maximum possible accuracy. '' This response is unacceptable. It demonstrates that LexisNexis has not properly authenticated my identity yet is still furnishing and disseminating unverifiable information to other consumer reporting agencies and possibly third parties. This contradicts FCRA compliance obligations and further invalidates the accuracy and verifiability of the reported bankruptcy.

I hereby demand the following : 1.

The immediate deletion of the bankruptcy listing from my consumer reports with XXXX XXXX  and LexisNexis. 
XXXX. 
A detailed explanation of how this bankruptcy was verified, including copies of any ACDV or XXXX XXXXrms used during reinvestigation and the name/contact of the entity that claimed to verify the record. 
XXXX. 
A written statement confirming whether the Bankruptcy Court was directly contacted as part of the reinvestigation. 
4.

A written confirmation that this unverifiable information has been permanently deleted, in compliance with the FCRA.

This matter is time-sensitive. Per the FCRA, consumer reporting agencies must delete inaccurate unverifiable information, and unverifiable information must be removed usually within 30 calendar days. If you can not verify the accuracy of the information directly with the original source, you are legally obligated to remove it. Failure to comply with this requirement constitutes willful noncompliance and may result in legal action under 15 U.S.C. 1681n and 1681o. 
You are legally obligated to ensure the accuracy and verifiability of all information on my credit report. This bankruptcy can not be verified through legitimate means and must be removed in accordance with FCRA provisions. Continued reporting of unverifiable information constitutes a breach of federal law Please consider this letter as a formal dispute and reinvestigation request under the FCRA and provide a written response within 30 days.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation