Consumer complaint received 2025-01-31 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Reporting company used your report improperly
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Subject : Inaccurate and Unverifiable Bankruptcy Information Reported by Experian, Equifax, TransUnion and XXXX Violation of FCRA Verification Requirements Complaint Description I am filing this complaint against [ Experian/Equifax/TransUnion ] for reporting inaccurate and unverifiable information related to a bankruptcy appearing on my credit report. This complaint is made in accordance with the rights afforded to consumers under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), specifically under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), which mandates that all information included in a consumer credit report must be verifiable and accurate. 
The bankruptcy is currently being reported in my credit file by [ Experian/Equifax/TransUnion ] XXXX Upon initiating a dispute, the credit bureau claimed that they had verified the information. However, the verification process used is fundamentally flawed and violates the requirements of the FCRA for the following reasons : U.SXXXX Bankruptcy Courts do not report information to credit bureaus : \nAs per multiple statements made by U.S. Courts, including the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX' The courts of bankruptcy do not provide information to credit reporting agencies. Credit reporting agencies obtain this information from public records. XXXX XXXX XXXX ) \n\nSince the bankruptcy courts themselves do not verify or provide this information, the burden falls on the credit bureaus to ensure accurate and verifiable data, in compliance with 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). 
Reliance on third-party databases, such as PACER or XXXX, does not meet FCRA standards for verification : \nThe credit bureau is relying on third-party data vendors, such as XXXX or PACER, to report and verify the bankruptcy. However, these entities do not constitute a reliable source under the FCRA. In the case XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  ), the court emphasized that : \n '' Credit bureaus are required to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure maximum accuracy, and reliance solely on public records or third-party data without proper verification fails to meet this standard. " \n\nFurthermore, the FCRA requires direct XXXXerification with the original furnisher of the information, which in this case, the courts have explicitly stated they do not provide. Therefore, the credit bureaus failure to obtain verification directly from a valid source constitutes a violation of FCRA provisions.

Lack of direct verification violates 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) : \nThe FCRA states that if disputed information can not be verified as accurate, it must be deleted. Since the bankruptcy court is not the furnisher of this information, and the third-party sources are insufficient for verification, I am requesting that the credit bureau immediately delete the bankruptcy from my credit file. 
Failure to address this dispute constitutes clear and willful violations of the law : \nThe communication from my end was clear and unambiguous. I provided ample opportunity for the credit bureau to verify or correct the inaccurate bankruptcy reporting. By failing to remove this unverifiable information, the credit bureau is in clear violation of multiple provisions of the FCRA as highlighted above. Their continued noncompliance represents a willful disregard for consumer protection laws. 
To support my argument, I would like to highlight the following precedents and rulings where lack of proper verification led to successful disputes : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX. XXXX ) \nThis case highlights the need for reasonable procedures to ensure accuracy and the responsibility of credit bureaus to conduct proper investigations beyond public records. 
XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXnThe court emphasized that credit bureaus must perform meaningful investigations when consumers dispute the accuracy of the information and can not merely rely on automated data validation. 
XXXX XXXX. Experian Information SolutionsXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nThis case demonstrated that when disputed information is not properly verified, the consumer has the right to demand its removal.

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 explanation