Consumer complaint received 2025-12-15 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Public record information inaccurate
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
This complaint is submitted after an exhaustive and well documented dispute history involving the continued reporting of a single XXXX  public record that remains inaccurate internally contradictory and legally unverifiable across Equifax Experian and XXXX. I have acted in good faith at every stage by submitting detailed disputes providing identity verification responding to bureau requests and escalating through the CFPB when normal dispute channels failed. In return the credit reporting agencies have repeatedly ignored material defects relied on third party vendors and continued to publish data they can not lawfully substantiate. 

The XXXX  is being reported under multiple reference formats including XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. Filing dates differ between bureaus with Equifax reporting a different filed date than Experian and XXXX. Release or closing information is missing on XXXX bureau while present on others. Court naming conventions differ across reports. These contradictions are not minor clerical issues. A single XXXX  XXXX can not exist with multiple conflicting core data fields. These inconsistencies alone render the record unreliable and fail the maximum possible accuracy standard required by law. 

Despite these defects each bureau has continued to assert that the bankruptcy was verified. None of the bureaus have produced certified documentation from the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. None have provided docket level proof timestamps certified copies or any evidence showing how the data was interpreted classified and reported in compliance with Metro2 public record standards. Instead the bureaus have relied on conclusory statements and automated responses that do not address the contradictions raised in my disputes. 

The bureaus have also admitted through CFPB responses that they rely on business vendors public record retrieval services or database access to obtain XXXX information. XXXX XXXX courts do not furnish consumer credit data to credit reporting agencies. This means the information being reported is obtained from third party intermediaries who are not original furnishers and who can not legally certify accuracy completeness or lawful attribution. Verification through a vendor or database scrape is not verification under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. 

Equifax explicitly stated that it may use a business vendor to obtain the most recent filing associated with a disputed XXXX. This admission confirms that Equifax does not verify public record data directly with the court itself. Experian and XXXX  similarly failed to identify any direct court verification. This circular process where vendors pull data from public systems and bureaus then claim verification without source level confirmation violates reinvestigation requirements and defeats the purpose of consumer protections under the law. 

I formally requested a lawful method of verification under 15 USC 1681i including identification of the source relied upon and the procedures used to confirm accuracy. The bureaus did not respond with the required information. They did not explain how conflicting filing dates were resolved. They did not explain why reference numbers differ across bureaus. They did not explain how release information could be missing on one report and present on another if the data were accurate. Ignoring these questions while continuing to publish the data constitutes a failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. 

Compounding these violations I am a documented victim of the Equifax data breach and the National Public Data compromise. My personal identifiers were exposed which materially increases the risk of mixed files and improper public record matching. Despite being placed on notice of this heightened risk none of the bureaus demonstrated that they used complete reliable identifiers to associate this bankruptcy with my file. Continued reporting under these circumstances is reckless and shows disregard for data integrity obligations. 

Even more troubling is that after repeated disputes and CFPB complaints one bureau acknowledged deletion while others continued to report the same defective record. This confirms that the data is not uniformly verifiable and that continued reporting by the remaining bureaus is arbitrary and unsupported. If the record were truly accurate and verifiable it would not disappear on one bureau while persisting on others under conflicting formats. 

As a direct and ongoing result of these actions my credit profile has been severely suppressed. I have experienced credit denials increased interest rates reduced access to housing and financial opportunities and significant emotional distress. This harm is not speculative. It is ongoing and entirely preventable had the bureaus complied with their legal obligations when first notified.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation