Consumer complaint received 2025-11-14 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
This complaint concerns serious issues regarding the accuracy, verification, and reporting practices associated with the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy public record, Ref : XXXX, that appears on my consumer credit reports. I am filing this complaint because the way this Chapter XXXX bankruptcy is being reported is inaccurate, misleading, and not verifiable according to the requirements set forth by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). Additionally, the credit reporting agencies have failed to provide the legally required method of verification when I disputed the reporting, and the information appears to have been sourced from unreliable third-party vendors rather than the actual bankruptcy court. 

The purpose of this narrative is to describe clearly and completely what happened, outline the steps I took to address the issue, identify the failures of the credit reporting agencies, and demonstrate why the reporting of this Chapter XXXX bankruptcy is unlawful and requires correction or deletion. My goal is not to dispute the existence of a prior Chapter XXXX filing, but rather to ensure that what appears on my credit report is : XXXX. Accurate XXXX. Court-verified XXXX. Legally sourced XXXX. Up-to-date XXXX. Reported in compliance with the FCRA Because this bankruptcy entry does not meet these standards and can not be verified using original court documents, its continued reporting constitutes a violation of federal law. 

XXXX. How I Discovered the Problem While reviewing my credit reports, I noticed that a Chapter XXXX bankruptcy, Ref : XXXX, was listed. However, from the very beginning, the listing appeared problematic : The date associated with the case was inconsistent across different credit bureaus. 

Some details were missing or incomplete. 

The bureaus did not provide any original source information. 

There was no indication that the bankruptcy court had been contacted. 

The information did not match the official public record format I obtained from the court system. 

These inconsistencies led me to question not the existence of the case itself, but the accuracy and verification of how the case was reported on my credit profile. 

XXXX. Courts Do NOT Report Bankruptcy Information to Credit Bureaus A critical fact in this situation is that bankruptcy courts do not furnish or verify bankruptcy information to credit reporting agencies. Federal courts, including bankruptcy courts, have repeatedly confirmed : They do not send consumer data to Equifax, Experian, or TransUnion. 

They do not verify bankruptcy information for reinvestigations. 

They do not participate in private credit reporting systems. 

They do not approve or certify third-party vendors to transmit their records. 

This means that anything the credit bureaus claim to have verified did not come directly from the court. Instead, bureaus rely on third-party data collectorscompanies that scrape or compile public information from PACER or other electronic court databases. These companies : Are not the original source Are not legally authorized court agents Are not regulated for consumer reporting accuracy Are prone to transcription errors, incomplete filings, and outdated updates Can not validate or certify accuracy for disputes Because the bureaus used these third-party sources instead of directly reviewing original court documents, the bankruptcy record is not verified in a legally acceptable manner. 

XXXX. I Disputed the Bankruptcy With All Three Credit Bureaus After discovering these issues, I exercised my rights under FCRA 611 ( a ) and disputed the bankruptcy entry with all three major consumer reporting agencies. In my written disputes, I specifically requested : The method of verification The name of the furnisher or entity that supplied the data The original source of the information Copies of the documents used for verification A full description of the procedures used during the reinvestigation The public record information used to confirm the listing These requests are rights guaranteed under FCRA 609 and 611. 

XXXX. The Bureaus Returned Generic Verified as Accurate Responses Despite the detailed and legally supported dispute, each bureau responded with nearly the same language : We have verified the information and it will remain on your credit file. 

However, the bureaus failed to : Provide a method of verification Provide documentation Identify the source Provide the procedures used Provide a copy of the public record Provide any indication the court was contacted These responses make clear that the reinvestigation was not reasonable, as required under the FCRA, and that the bureaus relied on automated systems rather than original legal documents. 

XXXX. The Reinvestigation Was Conducted Using Automated Data Instead of Human Review Most credit bureaus rely on third-party vendors such as XXXX to collect bankruptcy data. These vendors send information electronically, which the bureaus treat as the verified source. This is not a true verification. 

A reasonable reinvestigation requires : Reviewing original bankruptcy court filings Verifying dates directly with XXXX  or through certified documents Ensuring the accuracy of docket numbers Confirming the case disposition/status Ensuring the public record matches bureau reporting fields None of these steps were taken.

Instead : The verification returned instantly No human investigator examined records No official court documents were reviewed No cross-checking of dates occurred No verification of case status happened This does not meet the FCRA 's standard for reasonable procedures. 

XXXX. The Bankruptcy Reporting Contains Inaccuracies Across Bureaus A major concern is that the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy ( Ref : XXXX ) is not reported consistently across all bureaus. I identified the following issues : Different filing dates Different dismissal dates Different reference formatting Missing information in some bureau reports Different update timestamps Inconsistent status descriptions Under FCRA 607 ( b ), the bureaus must assure maximum possible accuracy. Inconsistent reporting violates this requirement because a public record should match exactly across all bureaus if it is accurate and verified. 

XXXX. No Evidence Provided That the Bankruptcy Is Within the Legal Reporting Period Under the FCRA : A Chapter XXXX bankruptcy may remain for XXXX  years from the date of filing. 

If the date of filing is incorrect, the reporting period is incorrect. 

Because the bureaus failed to provide documentation, it is impossible to confirm whether : The date being used is the filing date The bureaus are actually using the dismissal date The bureaus used inaccurate date information from their vendor If the wrong date is used, the bankruptcy may already be expired or beyond the legal reporting period, making it unlawful to continue reporting it. 

XXXX. Failure to Comply With FCRA Method-of-Verification Laws Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ), when a consumer requests the method of verification : The bureau must provide it Within XXXX days In writing With full procedural details None of the bureaus provided this, despite my explicit request. Without the method of verification, the bankruptcy is legally classified as unverifiable, which requires deletion under 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ). 

XXXX. Information From XXXX-Party Vendors Is Not Legally Sufficient The bureaus rely on systems such as : XXXX XXXX XXXX scraping tools CoreLogic Other data warehouses These entities do not : Provide certified public records Provide official court documents Guarantee accuracy Verify case status Confirm dates Serve as the original source Because the credit bureaus rely solely on these XXXX-party sourcesand the vendors themselves are not validating the informationthe bankruptcy can not be said to be verified under the FCRA. 

XXXX. Harm Caused by This Inaccurate Bankruptcy Reporting The incorrect and unverifiable reporting of the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy has caused : Significant drops in credit scores Denial of financing and credit applications Higher interest rates on loans Limited access to housing opportunities Negative effects on employment opportunities Increased insurance premiums Ongoing reputational harm Emotional and financial distress Reduced credit limits Difficulty rebuilding credit Because bankruptcy is XXXX of the most damaging items on a credit file, reporting it without verification has caused and continues to cause substantial harm. 

XXXX Credit Bureaus Failed to Use Reasonable Procedures The FCRA requires consumer reporting agencies to ensure that all public record information is : Accurate Current Complete Verified through reliable sources Instead, the bureaus used : Automated database matches Bulk public record downloads Outdated or incomplete data No human review No court-verified documents This violates the FCRA mandate to maintain reasonable procedures. 

XXXX. Summary of FCRA Violations in This Case Based on the facts, the following FCRA sections were violated : FCRA 607 ( b ) Failure to assure maximum possible accuracy. 

FCRA 611 ( a ) Failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation.

FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) Failure to provide the method of verification.

FCRA 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) Failure to provide the sources of information.

FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) Failure to delete unverifiable information.

FCRA 611 ( d ) Failure to notify past users of corrected information. 

These failures demonstrate that the reporting of the Chapter XXXX bankruptcy is not supported by lawful procedures. 

XXXX. Conclusion In conclusion, the reporting of the Chapter XXXX Bankruptcy, Ref : XXXX, is inaccurate, unverifiable, inconsistent, and not sourced from the original legal authority. The credit bureaus failed to : Contact the bankruptcy court Review original documents Provide method-of-verification details Use reasonable reinvestigation procedures Maintain maximum possible accuracy Because the bankruptcy can not be verified according to federal law, its continued reporting is unlawful and harmful. 

I respectfully request that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau review this matter, require proper verification procedures, and ensure that the credit bureaus correct or delete the bankruptcy if it can not be fully validated with official court documents.

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