Consumer complaint received 2025-10-08 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Credit card debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/XXXX Leadership : General Counsel XXXX XXXX Second Complaint to no avail from XXXX XXXX XXXX Department and Executive Leadership Team I am filing a second complaint based on XXXX XXXX 's egregious statements made to the credit reporting agencies. a second complaint against XXXX XXXX for furnishing inaccurate and defamatory information to credit reporting agencies. Despite numerous requests, XXXX XXXX has failed to provide any documentation proving I am responsible for the alleged debt. Their only response has been that their investigation concluded the debt belongs to me. 

This is unequivocally false. During the period this account was opened and used, I was XXXX  due to a severe injury sustained when a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, resulting in a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and a XXXX XXXX XXXX. Therefore, I could not have opened, charged, or authorized this account. 

Furthermore, this debt was removed from my credit report twice, only to be reinserted by XXXX XXXX. My credit file was then updated, indicating that additional details were received, and it was concluded that the account belongs to me. XXXX XXXX 's response stating the file would show " disputed '' is insufficient, as the debt is not mine. 

Experian subsequently sent a deeply hurtful and embarrassing letter, accusing me that, based on information from XXXX XXXX, I misrepresented facts, leading them to lock my credit file. The letter even accused me of obtaining goods and services under pretenses, which is entirely untrue. 

I have contacted XXXX XXXX 's XXXX XXXX and XXXX department, offering to sign a release for my medical records, including video footage that substantiates my incapacitation. Instead of seeking further details, they have subtly implied my statements are inconsistent. 

I have attached emails sent to XXXX XXXX 's legal team requesting a draft of a release to review my medical files, which will exonerate me and clear my name. I urge you to investigate this matter thoroughly and ensure my credit report is corrected. Additionally, look into my repeated request to review any files XXXX  XXXX XXXX accused me of being dishonest and refuse to provide me access to but apparently has either made statements or provided the XXXX credit reporting agencies something to make them conclude outside of the records I provided which was the police report, the FTC fraud affidavit, and pictures which are limited medical information why I was incapacitated during the alleged time the account was opened and charges made even a cash advance. I am a victim of a sophisticated identity theft using VPN and proxy number and XXXX XXXX XXXX 

XXXX. In account takeover fraud, criminals use a Virtual Private Network ( VPN ) or proxy server to make it appear as if they are accessing an account from the victim 's legitimate geographical location. This technique helps them bypass fraud detection systems that flag unusual login activity, such as a user suddenly accessing their account from a different country. 
XXXX. Location spoofing After obtaining the credentials, the fraudster uses a VPN or proxy service to mask their actual IP address. 
These services route the fraudster 's internet traffic through a remote server. The victim 's bank or e-commerce site will then only see the IP address of the VPN or proxy server, making it appear that the login is coming from that server 's geographic location. 

Mimicking the victim : By choosing a VPN or proxy server located near the victim 's addressthe location where the account originated or is typically accessedthe criminal can fool a key security check. 

Adversary-in-the-Middle '' ( AitM ) phishing : Attackers set up a proxy web server that acts as an invisible layer between the victim and the legitimate website. 
Relaying credentials : When the victim enters their username, password, and the one-time passcode ( OTP ) on the fake site, the proxy server instantly relays the information to the real website. 
Session hijacking : Once the legitimate service validates the authentication and issues a session cookie, the fraudster 's proxy server intercepts and steals it. This allows the fraudster to access the victim 's account without needing the XXXX againProxy detection : Many fraud detection systems include technology to identify and flag IP addresses known to be associated with proxies and VPNs. 
IP intelligence : Analyzing an IP address can reveal not just its general location but also if it's high-risk or tied to botnets, helping to build better fraud detection algorithms. 
Behavioral biometrics : This method focuses on user behavior patterns rather than just XXXX addresses. It can detect anomalies like unusual typing speed, mouse movements, or navigation patterns, which can signal that the user is a bot or a fraudster. 
Stronger XXXX : Using XXXX methods that are more resilient to AitM attacks, such as hardware security keys, can provide greater protection than traditional SMS or email-based OTPs. 
A XX/XX/XXXX class-action lawsuit alleges that XXXX XXXX improperly denied fraud claims based on faulty fraud-detection technology. The suit claims the bank relied on flawed data searches to " mechanically '' reject fraud claims, failing to conduct reasonable investigations as required by federal law. 

Details of the class-action lawsuit The plaintiff 's case : The suit was filed in the XXXX XXXX XXXX for XXXX Northern District XXXX California XXXX XXXX woman who reported {$1500.00} in unauthorized charges after her wallet was stolen. XXXX XXXX denied her claim with a form letter and no explanation, closing her checking account shortly after. 
Allegation of flawed technology : According to the complaint, XXXX XXXX 's fraud-detection process is a " black-box '' system that wrongfully blames the consumer, ignoring the bank 's own legal obligation to prove a transaction was authorized. 
Violation of federal law : The lawsuit claims XXXX  XXXX violated the Electronic Funds Transfer Act ( EFTA ), which requires banks to conduct a proper investigation into unauthorized transactions. The EFTA places the burden of proof on the bank, not the customer, and requires the bank to provide documentation of its investigation. 
XXXX XXXX has been the subject of numerous FCRA complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) and various lawsuits over the years. The most frequent violations include : XXXX. Failure to Properly Investigate Disputes XXXX of the most prevalent complaints involves XXXX  XXXX failing to conduct reasonable investigations as required by the FCRA when consumers dispute information. Instead of thoroughly examining evidence provided by consumers, XXXX  XXXX often : Conducts cursory, surface-level reviews Simply verifies that reported information matches their internal records ( without investigating whether those records are accurate ) Uses automated systems rather than human investigators for complex disputes A proper FCRA dispute investigation requires more than just checking internal databases. The law demands that furnishers like XXXX XXXX conduct a reasonable investigation that examines all relevant evidence. 

XXXX. Continued Reporting of Disputed Information Without Verification The FCRA requires that if information can not be verified as accurate following a dispute, it must be corrected or deleted. However, XXXX XXXX has been known to : Continue reporting disputed information even after failing to fully verify its accuracy Re-report previously deleted information without new evidence of accuracy Fail to mark accounts as disputed by consumer while investigations are pending XXXX. Inadequate Responses to Dispute Investigations Many consumers report receiving vague, form-letter responses from XXXX  XXXX that : Lack specific details about what was investigated Fail to address the particular points raised in their dispute Provide no explanation for why the information was deemed accurate Omit copies of any documents relied upon during the investigation XXXX. Failure to Correct Information Across All Credit Bureaus When XXXX XXXX does correct erroneous information, they sometimes fail to notify all three major credit bureaus ( Experian, XXXX, and XXXX  ) of the correction, leaving inaccurate information on some of your credit reports. 

XXXX XXXX Policies on Credit Reporting Understanding XXXX XXXX approach to credit reporting can help you navigate potential FCRA issues : Dispute Procedures XXXX XXXX published dispute procedures include : An online portal for submission of disputes Stated investigation timeframe of up to 30 days ( the maximum allowed by the FCRA ) Options to add consumer statements to credit files Limited direct communication during the investigation process Unfortunately, this online dispute process often leads to superficial investigations. XXXX  XXXX representatives handling online disputes typically have limited training in credit reporting laws and may simply match information against internal records rather than conducting genuine investigations. Even though XXXX XXXX wants you to dispute online, you are not limited to and should not use online dispute tools. Disputes made to the credit bureaus are routed to XXXX XXXX and give them fewer reasons to reject disputes. 

Internal Systems and Challenges XXXX XXXX credit reporting system faces several structural challenges : Heavy reliance on automated reporting systems with limited human oversight Departmental disconnects between fraud investigation teams and credit reporting teams Limited documentation systems for tracking dispute history Insufficient staff dedicated to dispute resolution compared to their massive customer base These systemic issues often result in a pattern of FCRA violations that can significantly impact consumers. XXXX XXXX conclusion subliminally says, There is no need for any further investigation because we did one and BELIEVE the account belongs to you, AND we are not releasing anything other than this letter from our database showing you lived at the address and the phone number, email address, and bank account belong to you. 

Under duress and to clear my name, I have offered my private medical records to clear my name for once and for all. I am struggling financially and can not work within my field, and am facing homelessness because of XXXX XXXX 's bullying tactics. This is not my account, and I am being victimized all over again by XXXX XXXX 's false reporting and the credit reporting agencies ' reporting derogatory information based on verification obtained electronically. Based on recent reports regarding XXXX XXXX, what makes their credibility more credible than mine? I am being bullied at this point. 
Respectfully submitted XXXX XXXX

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