Consumer complaint received 2025-11-19 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Bread Financial Holdings, Inc.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint because the account reported under CB/VICSECRXXXX, with the identifying digits XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  appears on my credit report as a derogatory Collection/Charge-Off, yet it has never been validated, verified, or supported with the legally required documentation. Despite disputing the account through proper channels and attempting to obtain clarity, neither the furnisher nor the credit reporting agencies have provided evidence showing that this account is legitimate, belonged to me, was accurately reported, or was handled in compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and all other applicable federal regulations. 

This complaint outlines the events leading up to this filing, the actions taken, the lack of proper responses, and why CFPB intervention is now necessary. 

1. How the CB/VICSECRXXXX  Account Appears on My Credit Report The CB/VICSECRXXXX account reflects the following on my credit profile : Status : Collection/Charge-Off Date Closed : XXXX Balance : {$0.00} Past Due : {$0.00} Reporting Category : Derogatory History : Negative reporting codes and late-payment indicators Furnisher : Typically Comenity Bank ( XXXX XXXX Closed Credit Account ) Although the balance is listed as XXXX, the account still appears with : Charge-off notation Derogatory classification Multiple negative late-payment markers A closed account being reported with persistent derogatory codes This ongoing derogatory status continues to negatively impact my creditworthiness even though the account shows a {$0.00} balance and is closed. 

The appearance of this account raises serious questions about validation, reporting accuracy, investigation procedures, and data completeness. 

2. I Have Never Received Documentation Proving This Account Is Valid or Belongs to Me To date, I have not received a single document from the furnisher that validates this account. 

Specifically, I have not been provided : A signed original application A copy of the cardholder agreement Any terms or disclosures presented at account opening Any billing statements A full account history A detailed payment ledger Any evidence regarding missed or late payments Any calculation showing how the account became a charge-off Any DOFD ( Date of First Delinquency ) documentation Adverse action notices Collection notices or default letters Without such documentation, the furnisher can not lawfully verify or validate any reported information. 

Unvalidated information is not permitted to remain on my credit report under the FCRA. 

3. I Disputed the Account With All Three Credit Bureaus, but They Did Not Properly Investigate or Verify It Upon seeing the derogatory reporting on my credit file, I filed disputes with : XXXX XXXX XXXX  However, each bureau quickly responded with : The account has been verified as accurate. 

This response did not include : Documentation Explanation Proof Verification details Method of verification details Copies of records used Any investigation results The speed and uniform simplicity of the responses strongly suggest the verification was completed through automated data exchange programs like XXXX, not through a meaningful reinvestigation as required under FCRA 611 ( a ). 

No documentary evidence was shared with me, and the bureaus gave no indication that they reviewed any original documents from the furnisher. 

Under the FCRA, data furnishers and bureaus must substantively investigate disputes, not simply rely on automated code-matching.

4. I Requested the Method of Verification ( MOV ), but the Responses Were Not Legally Compliant Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ), the credit bureaus must provide a legally compliant Method of Verification upon request. A proper MOV requires : The name and contact information of the person or department who verified the account The documents used to verify the account Whether verification was manual or automated A description of the procedures used Dates of communications with the furnisher Whether the bureaus obtained original source documentation None of these elements were provided. 

Instead, the bureaus responded with generic templates that did not disclose : Who verified anything What they reviewed ( if anything ) Whether documents were requested Whether documents were received Whether the furnisher complies with data retention laws Whether the account is legally verifiable This lack of transparency violates the intent of the MOV requirement and prevents consumers from confirming accuracy or fairness in the dispute process. 

5. The Furnisher Failed to Provide Validation Under FCRA and FDCPA Standards I also attempted to obtain documentation directly from the furnisher. 

At no point did CB/VICSECRXXXX ( or Comenity Bank ) provide : Any contract linking me to this account Proof of my identity at account opening Any billing statements A chronological payment history Evidence of delinquency DOFD documentation Charge-off calculations Ownership/servicing chain-of-custody details Without these documents, the furnisher can not meet its duty to investigate and can not continue reporting this account. 

6. The Reporting Contains Numerous Inconsistencies and Errors In reviewing the CB/VICSECRXXXX tradeline, I identified serious inconsistencies : A. Conflicting Account Statuses The account is listed with : A {$0.00} balance A {$0.00} past due But still marked as derogatory with charge-off status This combination is contradictory. 

B. Missing DOFD The Date of First Delinquency is required to determine the 7-year reporting period.

Failure to provide DOFD violates FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ).

C. Missing Charge-Off Documentation There is no evidence of : The charge-off date The charge-off amount Internal bank accounting records Any charge-off decision documentation D. No Payment History Backing Up Late Codes Late-payment codes appear, but no statements or payment ledgers were provided.

E. No Proof the Account Belongs to Me No application, agreement, or identity verification documents exist.

F. No Evidence of Permissible Purpose There is no documentation proving that the furnisher had a lawful reason to furnish the data.

These inconsistencies violate FCRA 602 and 607 ( b ), which mandate maximum possible accuracy.

7. This Derogatory Reporting Has Caused Significant Harm Because of this unresolved derogatory account, I have experienced : Lower credit scores Higher interest rates Credit denials Reduced borrowing capacity Loosened or tightened credit availability Increased insurance premiums Overall financial harm These harms are unjustified when the reporting is unverified. 

8. I Attempted to Resolve the Matter Before Filing This CFPB Complaint Before bringing this issue to the CFPB, I made every reasonable effort to resolve it : Filed disputes Requested reinvestigation Requested Method of Verification Attempted to obtain documents from the furnisher Reviewed bureau responses Waited for a meaningful explanation None of these efforts resulted in documentation, correction, or transparency. 

The bureaus : Did not supply the MOV Did not review documents Did not demand documentation from the furnisher Did not identify inconsistent status codes Did not provide any evidence supporting their verified claim This demonstrates procedural failures requiring CFPB intervention. 

9. Why CFPB Assistance Is Necessary The lack of documentation, clarity, and verification indicates : A failure of reasonable procedures Non-compliance with reinvestigation requirements Failure to validate information before or after disputes Improper reliance on automated systems Inconsistent reporting Incomplete or inaccurate credit data The furnisher and bureaus did not fulfill their responsibilities under : FCRA 602 FCRA 607 ( b ) FCRA 611 ( a ) FCRA 623 ( a ) FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( Method of Verification ) Only the CFPB can require the companies involved to provide documentary evidence, correct or remove inaccurate information, and ensure legal compliance. 

10. Summary of What Happened To summarize : CB/VICSECRXXXX is reporting a derogatory charge-off account. 

No documents exist showing that I opened or authorized the account. 

The bureaus did not conduct a lawful reinvestigation. 

Automated systems were wrongly used to verify the account. 

The furnisher did not provide validation. 

The reporting contains multiple inconsistencies and missing data. 

The reporting has caused significant financial harm. 

My attempts to resolve this without CFPB involvement were unsuccessful. 

Because the account has not been validated or supported with documentation, its continued appearance on my credit report is not lawful or fair.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation