Consumer complaint received 2025-09-25 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: OK

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this rebuttal because XXXX XXXX  most recent response to my CFPB complaint is wholly inadequate, recycled from a prior dispute, and fails to meet even the basic requirements of verification under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). 

XXXX continues to rely on boilerplate contract language while refusing to provide any verifiable documentation of the balance they are reporting. This is the second CFPB complaint I have filed on this account, and XXXX has demonstrated a clear pattern of evasive, bad-faith responses. 

Major Failures by XXXX Discretionary Interest = Not Enforceable The contract states XXXX may charge post-default interest. May is discretionary, not mandatory. Reporting discretionary amounts as fixed debt is deliberately misleading and violates FCRA 623.

No Itemized Proof XXXX has never provided daily accrual logs, amortization schedules, or payment applications. A blanket citation to the contract does not verify the specific figures they are furnishing. 

Inconsistent Balances If interest were accruing at the APR, the balance would grow predictably. Instead, figures fluctuate ( e.g., {$110.00} one month, {$100.00} the next ), proving the numbers are arbitrary and unverifiable.

Waiver of Interest Exposes the Truth XXXX has already offered to waive post-default interest. A legitimate, enforceable debt can not be selectively erased. Their own actions prove the reported balance is negotiable and not fixed.

Ongoing False Delinquency Reporting XXXX continues to update the tradeline every month as if newly delinquent, despite charge-off years ago. This creates the false impression of a fresh default and severely damages my credit standing, including mortgage eligibility.

Repeat Bad-Faith Responses Two CFPB complaints, two copy-and-paste replies. This is not a reasonable investigation under FCRA 623 ( b ). It is avoidance.

Why This Matters Legally FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) : A furnisher can not knowingly report inaccurate or misleading information.

FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 8 ) : Information must be complete and verifiable. XXXX has failed twice.

FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) : Bureaus must delete unverifiable information after reinvestigation. 

XXXX has made no effort to substantiate the actual balance they are reporting. They are furnishing discretionary, inconsistent, and negotiable figures as if they were verified obligations. This is inaccurate and unlawful. 

Required Action Because XXXX has repeatedly failed to verify the accuracy of the account : The credit reporting agencies must immediately delete this tradeline as unverifiable. 

The CFPB should recognize XXXX repeated boilerplate replies as a failure to conduct a reasonable investigation and take appropriate enforcement action. 

I have now given XXXX and the bureaus multiple opportunities to correct this. Continued non-compliance will be treated as willful reporting of inaccurate information under the FCRA. ( Attached is their response )

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