Consumer complaint received 2026-05-29 00:00:00
Product: Payday loan, title loan, personal loan, or advance loan — Installment loan
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Problem with personal statement of dispute
Company: World Acceptance Corporation
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint against World Finance XXXX ( World Acceptance Corporation ) regarding multiple FCRA violations established by their own documents and admissions. This complaint is separate from and in addition to my prior complaint ( ID XXXX ) and is based on new facts that emerged from World Finance 's own CFPB response and attached documents submitted on XX/XX/XXXX. 1. WORLD FINANCE 'S OWN DOCUMENTS PROVE THEY SUBMITTED THE SALE DATE INTO THE XXXX XXXX DATE OF LAST PAYMENT FIELD World Finance attached an XXXX XXXX raw data file to their CFPB response. That file shows LAST XXXX : XXXX in the XXXX XXXX Last Paid field -- the field that corresponds to the Date of Last Payment on my XXXX credit report. World Finance sold this account to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. My last actual consumer payment to World Finance was XX/XX/XXXX -- confirmed by World Finance 's own transaction history, also attached to their CFPB response, showing one payment of {$60.00} on XX/XX/XXXX as the only consumer payment ever made. World Finance entered the sale date into the Date of Last Payment field in violation of XXXX XXXX specifications and FCRA Section 623 ( a ) ( 1 ). This is not an XXXX display error as World Finance claimed in their CFPB response. It is a furnisher data submission error proven by their own attached documents. 2. WORLD FINANCE RE-VERIFIED INACCURATE DATA DURING THE XX/XX/XXXX REINVESTIGATION In XX/XX/XXXX XXXX contacted World Finance during a reinvestigation and asked them to verify the Date of Last Payment of XX/XX/XXXX. World Finance verified it as accurate. Their own CFPB response and attached documents now prove that date is a sale date, not a consumer payment. At the moment of the XX/XX/XXXX reinvestigation World Finance had an obligation under FCRA Section 623 ( a ) ( 2 ) to correct any inaccuracy they were aware of. Instead they verified a sale date as a consumer payment date, allowing the re-aging violation to remain on my credit report for an additional year. That re-verification is an independent FCRA violation. World Finance 's CFPB response provides no explanation for this failure. 3. WORLD FINANCE 'S INTERNAL RECORDS SHOW {$750.00} ACCRUING ON A SOLD ACCOUNT World Finance 's internal account inquiry attached to their CFPB response shows TODAY DUE : XX/XX/XXXX -- {$750.00}. This account was sold to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on XX/XX/XXXX. As of XX/XX/XXXX -- nearly three years after the sale -- World Finance 's internal system is still running an accruing balance of {$750.00} against me at an APR of 103.049 % on a debt they no longer own. World Finance no longer owns this debt. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX is the owner. This demonstrates that World Finance 's internal records were never properly closed following the sale, which directly explains why inaccurate XXXX XXXX data including the sale date in the Last Paid field continued to be furnished to XXXX after the sale. 4. WORLD FINANCE 'S CFPB RESPONSE WAS LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT AND FAILED TO ADDRESS CORE VIOLATIONS World Finance 's response failed to address the following specific issues raised in my original complaint : a ) They provided no explanation of why they populated the XXXX XXXX Last Paid field with the XX/XX/XXXX sale date rather than the actual last consumer payment date of XX/XX/XXXX. b ) They provided no explanation of why they verified the XX/XX/XXXX date as accurate during the XX/XX/XXXX XXXX reinvestigation rather than correcting it. c ) They provided no confirmation that they submitted a corrected XXXX XXXX data file to XXXX after acknowledging the display error in their CFPB response. d ) They provided no explanation for the {$750.00} accruing balance on a sold account. XXXX ) They made no statement about steps taken to properly close this account in their internal records following the XX/XX/XXXX sale. 5. RE-AGING VIOLATION By entering XX/XX/XXXX into the XXXX XXXX Last Paid field World Finance caused the Date of Last Payment on my XXXX credit report to reflect XX/XX/XXXX instead of the actual last consumer payment of XX/XX/XXXX. This artificially extended the 7-year derogatory reporting period by over three years in violation of FCRA Section 605 ( c ). Per World Finance 's own CFPB response the Date of First Delinquency is XX/XX/XXXX, placing the mandatory removal no later than XX/XX/XXXX. Any date field suggesting a more recent consumer payment extends this timeline improperly. 6. WORLD FINANCE 'S DEFLECTION DEFENSE IS DISPROVEN BY THEIR OWN DOCUMENTS World Finance 's stated defense -- that they do not control how XXXX displays their data -- is directly refuted by the XXXX XXXX attachment they submitted with their own CFPB response. That document proves World Finance populated the Date of Last Payment field with the sale date. Furnishers are responsible for accurate XXXX XXXX field placement under FCRA Section 623 ( a ) ( 1 ). World Finance can not submit data in the wrong field and then blame XXXX for displaying it. 7. DOCUMENTED ACTUAL DAMAGES The inaccurate tradeline caused eight documented adverse actions : two auto loan denials ( XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX/XX/XXXX ), constructive denial of vehicle financing when XXXX offered 15.99 % APR on a {$76000.00} vehicle making financing commercially unreasonable ( XX/XX/XXXX ), a XXXX XXXX credit card denial ( XX/XX/XXXX ), a XXXX credit limit reduction ( XXXX ), a XXXX loan closure ( XXXX ), a XXXX credit limit reduction ( XXXX ), and two XXXX credit card account closures ( XXXX ). A {$650000.00} mortgage is anticipated and will be materially affected by continued derogatory reporting. REQUESTED RESOLUTION I am requesting that the CFPB investigate World Finance XXXX for the following : submitting the account sale date into the XXXX XXXX Date of Last Payment field in violation of FCRA Section 623 ( a ) ( 1 ), re-verifying inaccurate data during the XX/XX/XXXX XXXX reinvestigation in violation of FCRA Section 623 ( a ) ( 2 ), maintaining an accruing balance of {$750.00} on a sold account in violation of proper debt transfer procedures, and failing to submit corrected XXXX XXXX data to XXXX after acknowledging the display error in their CFPB response. I have sent a formal follow-up certified dispute letter to World Finance . I have retained legal counsel. I am preserving all rights under FCRA Sections 616 and 617.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief