Consumer complaint received 2025-09-05 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account status incorrect
Company: TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY
State: GA

Complaint narrative:
Relief demanded : Permanent deletion/suppression of the TD Bank N.A . tradeline across all CRAs. No corrections or updates.

Summary of the problem ( inconsistent bureau reporting ) : The same TD Bank N.A. credit card account ( opened XX/XX/XXXX ; last payment XX/XX/XXXX ) is reported materially differently by XXXX  and XXXX, while XXXX  shows no tradeline at all. These contradictions violate the FCRAs accuracy and reinvestigation duties and Regulation V ( Furnisher Rule ), and fail XXXX XXXX standards for accurate, consistent coding. 

What each bureau shows ( evidence attached ) : XXXX  ( report generated XX/XX/XXXX ) : Status = Paid in settlement. {$9600.00} written off. Comment = Account paid in full for less than full balance. ( Internally contradictory : it can not be paid in full and less than full simultaneously. ) Extensive CO/late history displayed. 

XXXX  ( report generated XX/XX/XXXX ) : Status = Payment after charge-off/collection ; Comment = Settled ; less than full balance ; Balance = {$0.00} ( updated XX/XX/XXXX ) ; Payment history not available. 

XXXX : No TD Bank tradeline appears.

Why this violates federal law and industry standards : FCRA 607 ( b ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) ) Maximum possible accuracy.

Different statuses/remarks/balances/payment histories across CRAs ( and a total absence at XXXX  ) are inaccurate and misleading for the same account.

FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ), ( a ) ( 5 ), ( a ) ( 7 ) Reinvestigation duties & Method of Verification ( MoV ). 
I previously disputed and was told the tradeline was verified, yet no actual documentation or MoV was provided. Under 611 ( a ) ( 7 ) I demand the precise method, data, and documents used to verify. If unverifiable, it must be deleted, not corrected.

FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), 623 ( a ) ( 2 ), 623 ( b ) Furnisher accuracy & investigation duties.

TD Bank ( or any assignee ) must only furnish accurate information and must reasonably investigate upon notice from a CRA. Furnishing contradictory statuses and remarks ( e.g., XXXX  paid in full for less than full vs. XXXX settled ; less than full ; balance blank vs. {$0.00} ; payment history present vs. none ) breaches 623.

FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) & 15 U.S.C. 1681c ( c ) DOFD/obsolescence framework.

Any re-aging or inconsistent DOFD would be unlawful. Provide the documented DOFD furnished to each CRA and reconcile differences. If DOFD can not be proven consistently, the tradeline must be deleted.

Regulation V ( 12 C.F.R. Part 1022, Subpart E ) : 1022.42 ( Furnisher policies for accuracy/integrity ) 1022.43 ( Direct dispute duties ) These require policies ensuring consistent and reliable furnishing. The current cross-bureau contradictions show a failure of accuracy/integrity controls. 

XXXX XXXX compliance failures ( industry standard adopted by CRAs ). 
The account status/remarks, current balance field ( blank at XXXX  vs. {$0.00} at XXXX  ) , payment history display, and special comment language conflict across bureaus. XXXX XXXX requires aligned coding for : Account Status, Payment Rating/History, Current Balance, Special Comment ( e.g., Settled for less ), and Date fields. These inconsistent codings mislead lenders and violate 607 ( b ).

Securitization/ ownership & UCC presentment ( for 623 direct-to-furnisher issues ) : If the account was sold, assigned, securitized, or otherwise transferred, the furnisher must show lawful authority to continue furnishing : UCC 3-501 Present the original instrument/contract upon demand.

UCC 9-210 Provide proof of claim and chain of assignment.

If TD Bank or any assignee can not produce proof of ownership and assignment, continued furnishing is false and unlawful under FCRA 607 ( b ) /623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) and must cease with deletion at all CRAs.

Permissible purpose ( FCRA 604 ) as applicable.

If any entity has accessed or continues to access my report for this account without a current, lawful purpose tied to a valid obligation it owns, that is an additional violation ; remove any such inquiries and include documentation of permissible purpose.

Consumer harm : These contradictions depress my creditworthiness, jeopardize financing, and harm my business and personal finances. I have spent time and money disputing a tradeline the companies failed to verify accurately.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation