Consumer complaint received 2025-10-14 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Personal line of credit
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint against Equifax for failing to remove or correct fraudulent and inaccurate information from my credit report, despite multiple disputes, identity theft affidavits, and supporting documentation. 

The disputed account is an XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX account ( ending in XXXX ) that I have repeatedly identified as fraudulent. Equifaxs continued reporting of this account, without proper verification or supporting documentation, constitutes multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) specifically 607 ( b ), 611, and 623 which require credit reporting agencies and furnishers to ensure accuracy, conduct reasonable reinvestigations, and remove unverifiable information. 

With each dispute, I provided : Police reports and FTC Identity Theft Affidavits establishing that I am a victim of identity theft ; Documentation showing that I did not open or authorize the XXXX XXXX account ; and Written analyses identifying factual errors and contradictions in the reporting data. 

Despite this, Equifax continues to report the XXXX XXXX account as valid, even though it has not been verified with supporting evidence. 

Specific Issues With the XXXX XXXX Account In my most recent written dispute, I identified several violations and inconsistencies, including : Conflicting Account Statuses The tradeline lists both Charged Off and Transferred to Recovery, which can not coexist. 

Improper Re-Aging Equifax is re-aging the charge-off status monthly, artificially extending the period of negative reporting. 

Incomplete and Unverifiable Data Several months display No Data Available, which makes the account unverifiable under the FCRA. 

Balance Discrepancy The account lists a High Credit of {$150000.00}, while the original loan amount was {$130000.00}. No proof supports this discrepancy. 

Inconsistent Payment History For example, XX/XX/XXXX shows {$1000.00} scheduled and {$2200.00} paid, which is mathematically inconsistent and unsubstantiated. 

Improper Handling of Dispute Flags Equifax continues to report the account as verified as reported, despite ongoing disputes and the lack of supporting evidence from the furnisher. 

I also specifically requested that Equifax obtain and verify proof of disbursement of funds showing that the loan proceeds were actually deposited into my account ( s ). To date, neither Equifax nor the furnisher has produced such documentation. 

FCRA Violations and Legal Basis Equifaxs actions constitute multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act : FCRA 611 ( a ) Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Reinvestigation Equifax failed to conduct a meaningful reinvestigation. Simply relying on a furnishers unverifiable verified response, without requiring actual documentation such as proof of disbursement or a signed contract, does not meet the statutory standard of a reasonable reinvestigation. 

FCRA 607 ( b ) Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy Equifax continues to report inaccurate and incomplete information despite clear evidence to the contrary. Reporting conflicting statuses, re-aged charge-offs, and unverifiable payment data violates the duty to ensure maximum possible accuracy. 

FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 7 ) Failure to Provide Method of Verification ( MOV ) After repeated written requests, Equifax has failed to provide the legally required Method of Verification, which must include the name, address, and telephone number of the furnisher or individual who verified the disputed account. 

FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Furnishers Failure to Verify Accuracy XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX continues to furnish data without verifying ownership or disbursement of funds, in violation of 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). 

Case Law Supporting These Violations Courts have repeatedly ruled that credit bureaus and furnishers must conduct reasonable, independent investigations when consumers provide evidence of inaccuracy : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) : CRAs can not simply rely on furnishers confirmations ; they must independently verify disputed information. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) : Failure to perform a meaningful reinvestigation violates 611 ( a ). 

XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) : Furnishers must reasonably investigate disputes before confirming accuracy.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation