Consumer complaint received 2025-12-27 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: OneMain Finance Corporation
State: VA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding OneMain Financials continued reporting of my account in a misleading and inaccurate manner after it was paid in full, and the failure of credit reporting agencies to ensure lawful reinvestigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

The account was opened in XXXX. During the federally declared COVID-19 national emergency, I became ill with COVID and experienced a work interruption. I was not informed of any hardship accommodations, reporting relief, or CARES-related options by OneMain Financial . Instead, I received late notices and collection calls. 

After returning to work, I resolved the matter and paid the account in full in XX/XX/XXXX. The balance is {$0.00} and the obligation is fully satisfied. I have written documentation confirming payoff. 
Despite the account being paid in full, OneMain continues to report the tradeline using charge-off language that emphasizes default while minimizing or obscuring the fact that the debt was fully satisfied.

I am not disputing historical late payments. I am disputing the current framing and presentation of the tradeline, which creates a misleading impression of ongoing credit risk even after the obligation was resolved. 
I disputed this reporting with the credit bureaus and requested correction of the misleading wording. OneMain refused to correct even the wording of the tradeline, despite acknowledging that the account is paid in full.

XXXX, in particular, returned reinvestigation results the same day or the next day, simply stating verified, without explaining how the misleading nature of the reporting complies with the requirement for maximum possible accuracy. 

There was no explanation of how the investigation was conducted, what documentation was reviewed, or how continued charge-off framing after payoff is considered accurate rather than misleading. 
While paid charge-off may be technically true in a narrow sense, reporting must also not be misleading. Continuing to emphasize charge-off status after full payment, without clear and accurate context reflecting satisfaction of the debt, overstates delinquency and misrepresents my current credit risk. 

Courts and regulators have recognized that information can be technically accurate but still legally inaccurate if it creates a misleading impression. 
The delinquencies occurred during the COVID-19 national emergency ( XXXX ). CFPB guidance during this period emphasized that furnishers must exercise special care to avoid misleading or exaggerated negative reporting when consumers were affected by pandemic-related hardship. 

OneMain did not notify me of accommodations or relief options and continues to report in a manner that exaggerates risk after the account was fully resolved.

The OneMain tradeline also appears to be improperly re-aged or presented in a manner that causes the delinquency to be read as more recent than it actually is. 

The date of first delinquency for this account is XX/XX/XXXX. However, the tradeline emphasizes later dates such as the charge-off, last payment, and closure in XXXX, which causes the account to be interpreted as a more recent default. 

Payment or settlement activity does not reset the delinquency timeline under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Reporting that shifts the practical or functional reading of the delinquency to a later date is misleading and extends the negative impact beyond what the law allows. 

This presentation violates the requirement for maximum possible accuracy and raises concerns that the account has been improperly re-aged, either directly or indirectly.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation