Consumer complaint received 2025-07-24 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
TransUnion and XXXX  are both reporting a derogatory late payment from CAPITAL XXXX ( Account No. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX dated XX/XX/XXXX, that is not only outdated but completely unjustified and damaging. This entry remains on my credit reports despite the fact that this account is closed and well outside any reasonable window in which a late payment should still be having derogatory impact. There is no valid reason why a nearly decade-old delinquency tied to a long-closed tradeline should continue to suppress my credit standing in XXXX. 

Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, both TransUnion and XXXX  are obligated by 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) to uphold the maximum possible accuracy of any information included in a consumers credit file. Reporting a single late payment from XX/XX/XXXX without current, relevant contextespecially on an account that has since been closedfails that standard entirely. The continued appearance of this isolated and aged delinquency is misleading to lenders and out of sync with the purpose of credit reporting, which is to reflect current risk and behavior. Instead, it portrays a distorted snapshot of my creditworthiness, suggesting ongoing risk when none exists. 

Even worse, I have submitted disputes to both bureaus in good faith, requesting either removal or updated verification from the original creditor to justify the continued reporting of this late payment. What I received in return was a generic notification that the account was verified. There was no documentation, no billing statements, no supporting recordsjust a one-line conclusion designed to close the dispute without actually addressing the core issue. That is not a proper reinvestigation under the law. 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) requires a timely and reasonable reinvestigation of any disputed item. Merely regurgitating what the furnisher saysespecially when the furnisher offers no documentationdoes not meet this legal obligation. Its negligent, and it allows inaccurate and harmful data to persist without oversight or accountability. 

There is no legitimate reason for a late payment from nearly a decade agoon an account that has been closedto be allowed to drag down my credit profile today. Whether this data was carried over improperly, left unreviewed in a batch update, or never scrubbed after internal account closures, it has no place on my report anymore. These kinds of legacy errors are often overlooked by automated systems and persist due to the lack of human intervention or bureau oversight. But thats not my burden to carryespecially when it continues to affect my financial options, interest rates, and credit eligibility every single day. 

The presence of this outdated and unverifiable late payment has already cost me significantly. Ive had lenders ask about it during manual reviews, even though it has no relevance to my current financial status. Ive been quoted higher rates, had to defend my credit report in applications, and seen my score drop over a single payment reported nearly 10 years agoon an account that has long been closed and settled. Thats not just unfair. Its infuriating. This is a system designed to track current consumer behavior, and I refuse to let outdated and inaccurate data ruin the progress Ive made.

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