Consumer complaint received 2025-11-20 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Affirm Holdings, Inc
State: SC

Complaint narrative:
When I reviewed my credit report earlier this year, I discovered that Affirm Inc., listed under account reference XXXX, was being reported as a charge-off and collection account with a past-due balance of {$430.00} and multiple late-payment notations ( 30, 60, and 90 days ). I was alarmed because I have never received any documentation from Affirm confirming the existence of this debt, nor did I ever receive billing statements, written notices, or validation that this account was mine.

From my perspective, this tradeline appeared suddenly, without warning, and without any opportunity for me to review, verify, or dispute the underlying debt before it was reported. The Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ( FDCPA ) both require companies to maintain strict standards of accuracy, fairness, and verification before furnishing derogatory data to a credit bureau. In this case, Affirms reporting does not meet those standards. 

1. How I discovered the issue In XXXX XXXX I began checking all three of my credit reports to prepare for major financial plans. It was during that review that I found this Affirm account, labeled as a collection/charge-off, showing a closure date of XX/XX/2024 and listing a past-due amount of {$430.00}. I immediately knew something was wrong because I had never received any account statements or even an email from Affirm referencing this account number. 

This was the first time I had ever seen or heard of this specific obligation. If I had any legitimate account with Affirm, I would have expected to receive a welcome email, monthly statements, and payment confirmations. Instead, the account appeared as a negative tradeline with no supporting documentation provided to me.

2. No prior notice or opportunity to validate The FDCPA 809 ( b ) clearly states that when a consumer disputes a debt or requests validation, the collector must provide proof of the debt before continuing collection or reporting activity. Affirms failure to send any such validation letter or prior notice violates that right.

I never received a validation of debt notice, which should have included the name of the creditor, the amount owed, and a statement of my right to dispute the debt within 30 days. I never received a breakdown of charges, the original contract, or evidence that this debt was legally owed by me. Without that information, Affirm had no lawful basis to report this tradeline to the credit bureaus.

3. My actions to correct the issue As soon as I saw the entry on my report, I sent a written dispute to all three major credit bureaus XXXX XXXX  and XXXX  clearly identifying the Affirm Inc. account as inaccurate and unverifiable. In my dispute letters, I explained that I had no record of ever receiving an account or credit line from Affirm and that the company had failed to validate the alleged debt.

I requested that the bureaus conduct a full reinvestigation under FCRA 611 ( a ) and provide me with the method of verification, including any documents or data used to confirm Affirms claim. I also asked Affirm directly to provide original documentation showing : A signed credit agreement or contract ; The dates of any alleged transactions ; Payment history or statements ; Evidence that the account was opened by me ; Proof that I was notified of any delinquency or charge-off.

To this day, Affirm has not provided any of these documents. The credit bureaus responded only with a generic notice stating that the account had been verified but no evidence was ever shared. This indicates that the bureaus relied on Affirms automated data response, rather than actual human review or document-based verification.

4. Lack of proper investigation and verification The Fair Credit Reporting Act requires that credit bureaus use reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy ( 607 ( b ) ). When a consumer disputes an account, 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) requires the bureau to provide a method of verification upon request, including the name and contact of the furnisher that confirmed the data. However, in this case, neither the bureaus nor Affirm met these obligations.

It appears that the verification was conducted electronically, through e-OSCAR, a third-party data system that merely exchanges coded messages between furnishers and bureaus. This process does not involve reviewing original signed agreements or any physical documentation. As a result, what is labeled as verified often means nothing more than the furnisher confirmed its own data without evidence a process that violates the intent of the FCRA.

5. The inaccuracy of the reporting Affirm reported multiple late payments ( 30, 60, and 90 days ) and a final charge-off, but since no validated records exist, these entries are unreliable. Without original proof, such as account statements or signed contracts, the reporting can not be confirmed as accurate or even connected to me. 

Additionally, the account was marked as Closed on XX/XX/2024, yet still showed an active past-due balance. This contradiction demonstrates a clear data inaccuracy : if the account is closed and charged off, it should not continue to accrue or display a past-due status. 

The reporting also lacks critical information such as the original loan amount, the date the account was allegedly opened, and the details of any payments supposedly missed. This incomplete reporting violates FCRA 602A, which ensures fairness and completeness in credit reporting.

6. Emotional and financial impact Because of this inaccurate and unverifiable reporting, my credit score has been unfairly lowered, which directly affects my financial opportunities. A single charge-off or collection item can significantly reduce credit scores, leading to higher interest rates, denials of credit, and reputational damage. 

Beyond financial harm, the XXXX  and frustration of repeatedly disputing an unverified account has caused significant emotional strain. It is discouraging to see a company continue to report damaging information without providing proof or even basic communication. 

I have acted in good faith throughout this process submitting timely disputes, providing all required identification, and waiting for responses yet the situation remains unresolved.

7. Affirms responsibilities under law Under the FCRA and FDCPA, Affirm, as a data furnisher, is legally obligated to : Report accurate, complete, and verifiable information ; Investigate all consumer disputes promptly and thoroughly ; Provide documentation proving the legitimacy of any alleged debt ; Cease reporting unverifiable or inaccurate information ; and XXXX disputed accounts as in dispute while the investigation is pending. 

To my knowledge, Affirm has not complied with these requirements. No documentation was provided, no formal validation notice was ever sent, and my disputes have not been honored in accordance with federal law.

8. Procedural issues with data handling It is also concerning that Affirms data was likely transmitted and verified through third-party electronic channels, without oversight. The e-OSCAR system is widely criticized for relying on automated codes rather than human review. Because of this, the bureaus verification process does not meet the legal standard of a reasonable reinvestigation.

I have requested, under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ), full details of how the verification was conducted, including data transfer logs, timestamps, and the identity of any person who confirmed the account. None of that has been provided. This lack of transparency prevents me from verifying whether Affirms reporting was based on factual evidence or simply recycled data.

9. Pattern of negligence This situation is not an isolated mistake it reflects a pattern of negligence. Many consumers have faced similar problems with fintech companies like Affirm that rely heavily on automated credit data. Instead of confirming data accuracy with documentation, these furnishers often submit or verify data automatically, trusting that the bureaus will not question it.

When I attempted to contact Affirm through their customer service department, I was unable to obtain any human assistance capable of discussing this specific credit-reporting issue. I was directed only to online FAQs and automated systems. Despite my efforts to resolve this amicably, I was left without answers.

10. My expectations and rights Under the law, I have the right to : Dispute inaccurate or incomplete information ( 611 ) ; Receive a written response explaining the method of verification ( 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ) ; Have unverifiable data deleted ( 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ) ; and Receive an updated report confirming corrections.

I also have the right under the FDCPA to receive written debt validation before any collection activity continues. Because Affirm has not satisfied these requirements, its continued reporting is unlawful and unfair.

11. Requested outcome I am requesting that this account Affirm Inc. XXXX be deleted from all credit bureau files unless Affirm can produce clear, complete, and original evidence of the debt. That means a copy of a signed agreement, billing statements, payment records, and proof of my authorization for the account.

If no such proof exists, then Affirms reporting constitutes willful noncompliance with the FCRA and FDCPA, and the bureaus must immediately delete this account.

I also request that Affirm be required to notify all three credit bureaus to remove any negative marks, including charge-off, collection, or past due, associated with this account. The removal should be confirmed in writing, and I should be provided with an updated credit report reflecting the correction.

Additionally, I request that Affirm and the credit bureaus conduct an internal audit to ensure that their systems are not reporting unverifiable accounts. This will help prevent other consumers from facing similar issues.

12. Broader implications and conclusion This experience has shown me how vulnerable consumers are when large data furnishers and credit bureaus fail to follow proper procedures. Automated systems can not replace lawful validation. Consumers should not have to carry the burden of disproving debts that were never validated to begin with.

I have acted with complete transparency and cooperation throughout this process. My only request is that Affirm and the credit bureaus adhere to the same level of integrity and accountability that federal law demands.

I am not asking for any special treatment only that my credit report accurately reflect verified, lawful, and truthful information. Since Affirm has failed to meet its obligations, the only fair resolution is for the tradeline to be permanently deleted from my credit file.

This issue has caused measurable harm to my credit standing and emotional well-being. A prompt, complete deletion and written confirmation of correction would restore fairness and compliance to this situation.

I respectfully request that this matter be reviewed by the appropriate compliance departments at both Affirm and the credit bureaus, and that all supporting documentation or deletion confirmation be provided to me within the statutory timeline.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation