Consumer complaint received 2025-11-29 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: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint because my credit report contains multiple late-payment entries across different accounts that I strongly believe are inaccurate, unverifiable, misleading, and not compliant with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). These late-payment entries are currently harming my creditworthiness and do not reflect accurate or properly validated reporting. I am requesting a full investigation into all late-payment histories being furnished on my credit report, including but not limited to those reported by XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX late notations ), as well as any and all other accounts displaying late payments or delinquency markers. 

To begin, the FCRA requires that all information furnished to the credit reporting agencies be accurate, complete, verifiable, and reported in a manner that does not mislead lenders or harm the consumer unfairly. Late-payment information is considered a derogatory category and has an outsized impact on a consumers credit profile. Because of that, any creditor or furnisher who reports a late payment must maintain strict accuracy and maintain all documentation that supports their reporting. In my situation, the late-payment entries shown on my report are not supported with any documentation, not validated upon request, and not reported consistently across bureaus. Furthermore, several of these entries appear without proper notice, supporting evidence, or acknowledgement of disputes previously filed. 

Regarding XXXX XXXX, my credit report reflects a series of late-payment notations, including multiple XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX late entries. However, I have never received documentation from XXXX XXXX  proving the accuracy of these entries, nor have they provided a complete payment history, billing statements, or communications showing when and how these alleged late payments occurred. The FCRA requires furnishers to conduct a meaningful investigation when a consumer disputes an account, but the investigations conducted by these companies if they happened at all appear to have relied solely on automated XXXX responses rather than a manual or substantive review of actual documents. This is not acceptable under FCRA 611 or 623.

Additionally, several other accounts may have been marked late at various times even though I did not receive proper billing, notifications, or documentation that payments were missed. If a creditor can not provide proof of billing statements, payment ledgers, notices of delinquency, or internal account handling logs, then they can not legally continue reporting late payments under the FCRA. Furnishers must retain enough records to verify the accuracy of negative information ; if they can not validate their claims, then the information must be removed. 

Another significant concern is that these late-payment entries are not consistent across all three credit bureaus, which indicates poor data handling, lack of verification, and potential reporting errors or mixed-file issues. For example, some accounts show late-payment information on XXXX bureau but not on another, even though the data should be identical if it were accurate. This inconsistency demonstrates that the data was not validated and is unreliable under the standard of maximum possible accuracy required by FCRA 607 ( b ). 

I have also previously disputed some of these accounts directly with the credit bureaus and furnishers. However, the responses I received were incomplete, dismissive, and failed to supply any original documentation. A furnisher can not legally verify an entry unless they have examined the underlying documentation, not simply responded with a code through an automated system. FCRA requires the furnisher to review all relevant evidence and provide it upon request, but I have never received any such evidence from any company that reported late payments. 

Additionally, I never received copies of billing statements with due dates that matched the dates they claim I was late. Without proper documentation showing when the bill was issued, when payment was expected, and when payment was received, no creditor can prove that a late payment legitimately occurred. Some of the accounts reporting late payments also appear to have been closed long before the late-payment entries were added, which raises serious concerns about account integrity and accuracy. 

Another issue is that some furnishers, including XXXX XXXX  and others, have not marked these accounts as disputed by consumer even though I filed disputes, which is a violation of FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ). When a consumer disputes an account, the furnisher is legally required to notify the bureaus and reflect the dispute on the credit file. Their failure to do so indicates procedural non-compliance and further calls into question whether they followed mandated reinvestigation protocols. 

There are also accounts in which I made consistent payments or settled balances, yet the furnisher continues to list derogatory payment history without considering payment arrangements, hardship accommodations, or billing errors. If a consumer enters a payment arrangement, temporary hardship status, or receives any accommodation, then the reporting of late payments must reflect that arrangement and must not mislead or punish the consumer for periods of approved relief. 

It is also possible that some of these late-payment entries stem from internal system errors, misapplied payments, delays in posting payments, or failures to process payments on time. If a creditor received a payment but posted it late on their end, that should not be reported as a consumer late payment. Without a full accounting audit, there is no way to determine whether any of the companies involved properly handled my payments. 

For the accounts that report late payments but show no past-due amount and no ongoing delinquency, this suggests that the creditor may have updated the account status but failed to remove or correct inaccurate historical reporting. A company can not selectively update only part of an account ; any update must reflect the full and accurate status of the entire history. 

Additionally, some late-payment entries appear during periods where I did not receive mail, had documented mail delivery issues, or experienced other communication failures. If a consumer never received a bill, they can not be penalized for not paying something they did not know was due. The creditor must prove that proper billing communications were sent and received. 

The FCRA also requires that furnishers maintain adequate procedures to ensure the accuracy of information they report. Given the inconsistencies, lack of documentation, and lack of evidence upon request, it appears that the furnishers reporting these late-payment entries did not meet this standard. 

I am not questioning whether creditors have the right to report accurate late-payment information ; rather, I am stating clearly that these specific late-payment entries are not accurate, not validated, not consistent, and not lawfully reported under federal requirements. Until a furnisher can provide : A full ledger showing payment receipt dates Copies of all billing statements reflecting due dates Any delinquency notices they claim were sent Internal payment-processing logs Evidence of proper dispute handling Records showing how they verified the information they can not legally continue furnishing these late payments. 

Because none of the furnishers have provided any of this information, and previous disputes did not yield meaningful reinvestigation results, I am now escalating this issue to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. 

It is not fair, reasonable, or lawful for multiple companies to continue reporting late-payment histories when : the entries are inconsistent across bureaus the furnishers have not produced documentation the furnishers rely on automated systems instead of real investigations disputes were not handled properly the reporting may stem from internal errors no verification evidence has ever been provided some entries appear after account closure some accounts show no corresponding past-due balance I was not notified about supposed missed payments I have an FTC identity-theft report on file for other unauthorized accounts the records contain contradictions and missing information My goal is not to avoid legitimate reporting but to correct inaccurate reporting that has never been validated. 

I am requesting : A full reinvestigation of all late-payment entries across every account reporting delinquencies. 

Removal of any late-payment entries that can not be fully validated with original supporting documentation. 

Enforcement of the FCRA requirement for maximum possible accuracy. 

Corrections to all accounts that should be marked as disputed. 

A requirement that furnishers provide proof, not automated responses. 

Because these late-payment entries are unverified, inconsistent, and not properly documented, they must be corrected or deleted under the FCRA.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief