Consumer complaint received 2025-12-22 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
This complaint concerns the continued inaccurate reporting and handling of a fraudulent account associated with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which I do not own, did not open, and did not authorize. I am a verified victim of identity theft, and despite filing an FTC Identity Theft Report and submitting supporting documentation, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has refused to properly correct the inaccurate information. Instead, the company has relied on misleading, legally irrelevant assertions to avoid compliance with federal consumer protection laws. 

This complaint is being filed as a new case because a prior CFPB complaint, case number XXXX, was closed without resolving the underlying issue. The harm caused by this fraudulent account remains ongoing. 

Background of the Dispute At some point, a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account appeared on my consumer credit reports. I immediately recognized that this account was not mine. I never applied for, opened, authorized, or benefited from any XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX product. I did not sign any agreement, provide consent, or receive any funds related to this account. 

Upon discovering the fraudulent account, I took prompt and appropriate action as required under federal law. This included : Filing an Identity Theft Report with the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) through IdentityTheft.gov Submitting an identity theft affidavit, sworn under penalty of law Disputing the account with consumer reporting agencies Filing a complaint with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) These actions are exactly what identity theft victims are instructed to do under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act ( FACTA ). 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Improper Response Rather than complying with its legal obligations, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX responded by asserting that the FTC Identity Theft Report I submitted seems to have been modified and is not the form generated by IdentityTheft.gov. 

This statement is misleading, unsupported, and legally irrelevant. 

At no point did Self / Lead Bank identify what was allegedly modified, nor did it provide any evidence that the report was altered in a way that would invalidate it. More importantly, federal law does not require an identity theft report to appear in a specific visual format chosen by a furnisher. 

Why XXXX Claim Is Legally Irrelevant Under FCRA 603 ( q ), an identity theft report is defined as a report : Alleging identity theft Filed by the consumer With the FTC, a law enforcement agency, or both The statute does not require that the report be unedited, unredacted, visually identical to an online PDF, or accepted only if it meets a companys internal preferences. 

Many FTC Identity Theft Reports are : Downloaded and saved Printed and scanned Combined with affidavits Uploaded through portals Converted to PDF format None of these actions invalidate the report. The substance of the reportnot its appearancecontrols its legal effect. 

Self / Lead Banks attempt to discredit my identity theft report based on perceived formatting differences is a diversionary tactic that has no basis in the FCRA. 

Identity Theft Reporting Is Not Discretionary Once an identity theft report is submitted, FCRA 605B requires that fraudulent information be blocked from consumer credit reports unless the furnisher can demonstrate that the account was not the result of identity theft. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX did not : Provide proof that I authorized the account Provide evidence that funds were disbursed to me Provide a valid, authenticated application bearing my consent Instead, the company focused on questioning the appearance of the FTC report while ignoring its legal duty to prove ownership. 

Burden of Proof Was Shifted to the Furnisher By filing an FTC Identity Theft Report, I satisfied my obligations as a consumer. At that point, the burden of proof shifted to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

If the account were legitimate, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX should have been able to provide : A signed agreement with my authorization Verifiable proof of consent Independent evidence tying me to the account None of this has been produced. Internal records, automated system logs, or data matches do not constitute proof of authorization. Identity theft inherently involves the misuse of accurate personal information. 

Prior CFPB Case Was Closed Without Resolution CFPB case XXXX was closed without correcting the inaccurate reporting. The closure of a complaint does not resolve the underlying factual dispute, nor does it legalize continued inaccurate reporting. 

Because the fraudulent account remains on my credit profile and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX continues to rely on improper reasoning, I am filing this new case to document the ongoing harm and to seek compliance with federal law. 

Ongoing Harm Caused by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Actions The continued reporting of this fraudulent account has caused and continues to cause significant harm, including : Damage to my creditworthiness Negative impacts on lending decisions Time and expense associated with repeated disputes Emotional distress caused by prolonged identity theft resolution This harm is compounded by the companys refusal to properly acknowledge my identity theft documentation. 

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Response Undermines Identity Theft Protections If furnishers were allowed to disregard identity theft reports based on subjective opinions about formatting, identity theft protections would be meaningless. Consumers would be forced into endless resubmissions, and companies could avoid accountability by inventing procedural objections. 

Federal law does not permit this. 

What XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Should Have Done A reasonable and lawful response would have included : Accepting the FTC Identity Theft Report as valid Conducting a meaningful reinvestigation Blocking the fraudulent account under FCRA 605B Deleting the account from all consumer reporting agencies Providing written confirmation of correction Instead, the company focused on disputing the appearance of the report rather than addressing the substance of the identity theft claim. 

This Account Is Not Mine To be absolutely clear : I did not open this XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account I did not authorize this account I did not receive funds from this account I did not benefit from this account I am a victim of identity theft, and I have complied with every requirement imposed on consumers under federal law. 

Purpose of This Complaint This complaint is intended to document : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX failure to properly recognize my identity theft report The companys reliance on misleading and irrelevant arguments The ongoing harm caused by continued inaccurate reporting The need for corrective action that was not taken in prior case XXXX Conclusion XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX assertion that my FTC Identity Theft Report seems to have been modified is misleading, unsupported, and legally irrelevant. The Fair Credit Reporting Act does not allow furnishers to reject identity theft reports based on appearance or formatting. 

I do not own this account. I am a victim of identity theft. I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report and supporting documentation in good faith and in full compliance with federal law. 

Because the prior CFPB case was closed without resolution and the inaccurate reporting continues, this new complaint is necessary to ensure compliance, accountability, and correction of the harm caused.

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 non-monetary relief