Consumer complaint received 2025-03-31 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Reporting company used your report improperly
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
Subject : Final Legal Notice XXXX  FCRA Violations and Demand for Immediate Deletion of Accounts To : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Support This response is wholly inadequate, dismissive, and riddled with contradictions that demonstrate XXXX 's clear violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and failure to maintain accurate records. Instead of properly investigating and addressing my complaints, you have consolidated distinct disputes, attempted to deflect responsibility onto the credit bureaus, and failed to provide any legitimate justification for your erroneous reporting. 
You have also raised concerns about my filing of XXXX separate complaints, each concerning different XXXX accounts. These separate complaints are entirely justified, as each account has its own unique violations and reporting discrepancies, which must be investigated independently. Consolidating the complaints would allow you to escape scrutiny and responsibility for each accounts specific issues. Let me be abundantly clear : XXXX refusal to correct these violations and delete the inaccurate accounts constitutes willful non-compliance with federal law. 
Violation of FCRA Due to Mishandling of Disputes Your response demonstrates that XXXX failed to properly handle my disputes by combining all three complaints into one generic response. The lack of individual attention to each account and dispute constitutes a violation of the FCRA, which requires accurate reporting and correct dispute resolution. XXXX failure to conduct proper investigations and follow established protocols has led to serious inaccuracies in my credit report, including incorrect dates, payment histories, and status updates. 

If XXXX had followed the proper protocols in reviewing my disputes, they would have identified significant errors, such as the XX/XX/XXXX error in your internal records. This oversight is evidence of XXXX internal failure to maintain accurate data, which is directly in violation of the FCRA. 

. XXXX Error in Claiming No Cancellation Requests The claim that no cancellation request is on file for my accounts is irrelevant. XXXX does not have the right to require an official cancellation request if they have not provided adequate notice or clear instructions regarding account cancellation. The failure to allow a proper account cancellation or provide sufficient means to do so is a further violation of my rights. 
XXXX Provided an Impossible Account Agreement Date ( XX/XX/XXXX ) In their response, XXXX stated my account terms and conditions were accepted on XX/XX/XXXX, which is an impossible date as we are currently in XXXX. 
This calls into question the accuracy of their entire record-keeping system, as no legitimate contract can exist with a future date. 
Given this blatant inaccuracy, I challenge the validity of the agreement they are using to justify negative reporting and demand that all related derogatory information be removed immediately. 

Misrepresentation of Credit Reporting Laws XXXX stated that closed accounts remain on credit reports for XXXX years. 
While negative information can stay for XXXX years, a paid and closed account should not report as delinquent or negatively impact a credit score.

If my closed accounts are affecting my credit unfairly, I demand their immediate removal or correction. 

Selective Reporting to Different Bureaus : Your claim of reporting only to TransUnion and Equifax raises serious questions about your compliance with credit reporting laws, especially as it pertains to reporting data consistently across all bureaus. Kikoffs Improper Consolidation of Separate Disputes Your decision to combine XXXX distinct disputes into a single response is both inappropriate and legally unacceptable. Each account has its own reporting errors, inconsistencies, and violations, and treating them as XXXX is a blatant attempt to dismiss the severity of these issues. This approach directly contradicts XXXX legal obligation to conduct a thorough investigation of each disputed account under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ). 
You do not get to dictate how I file disputes, nor can you ignore valid claims by lumping them together for convenience. 
DEMAND : Provide proof that each dispute was individually investigated and resolved in compliance with FCRA guidelines. If no such investigation was conducted, then you are in blatant violation of federal law, and I demand the immediate deletion of these accounts from my credit report. 

Inaccurate and Contradictory Payment Reporting ( FCRA Violations ) Your response fails to address the glaring contradictions in payment reporting across credit bureaus. Your claim that these discrepancies are just minor differences in labeling is false, misleading, and legally irrelevant. 
Account XXXX Conflicting Payment Histories XXXX : Reports XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX TransUnion XXXX Reports no payment history at all You claim that XXXX reports the same information to all bureaus, yet you can not explain why the bureaus have completely different delinquency progressions and missing data for the same account. This is not a bureau issueit is a XXXX issue. 
Account XXXX Fabricated Late Payments TransUnion : Reports " XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  without prior XXXX or XXXX delinquency Equifax : Reports Not more than XXXX payments past due but without clear delinquency markers This means XXXX  is reporting inconsistent, fabricated delinquenciesa direct violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), which requires accurate reporting. 
Account XXXX Misrepresentation of Status Equifax & TransUnion : Report paid as agreed but closedmisleading and contradictory Experian : Does not show the account at all If the account was closed for non-payment, then it can not simultaneously be reported as paid as agreed. This is a blatant contradiction, further proving XXXX failure to ensure reporting accuracy. 
DEMAND : 1. Immediately correct these reporting inconsistencies OR delete the accounts if you can not ensure compliance with FCRA-mandated accuracy requirements. 
XXXX. Provide proof of each bureaus response to your data submission, showing that XXXX information was accurately furnished. 
XXXX. If XXXX can not explain why the data is inconsistent, then all three accounts must be deleted immediately. 

False Claim That Kikoff Can not Control How Bureaus Display Information Your response states : We do not control how the bureaus process and display that information. 
This is false and misleading. While credit bureaus format reports differently, they only display what XXXX provides. If XXXX bureaus are reporting different delinquency statuses and account details, that is because XXXX has failed to furnish accurate and consistent datanot because of the bureaus formatting. 
This attempt to shift blame onto the bureaus does not absolve XXXX of responsibility. Under 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), XXXX is legally required to ensure all information it furnishes is accurate and consistent.

DEMAND : Provide a legal justification, backed by documentation, proving that the inconsistent reporting is caused by the bureaus and not by XXXX data submission failures. Otherwise, these accounts must be deleted immediately. 

The XX/XX/XXXX Date Error Proof of Reckless Record-Keeping Your response states : Terms and conditions were accepted on XX/XX/XXXX. 
This is an impossible date, proving that XXXX internal record-keeping is fundamentally flawed. If XXXX can not even verify the correct date of account openings, how can you be trusted to report accurate payment histories and delinquencies? 
This is direct evidence of XXXX negligence in maintaining consumer records and further justifies the deletion of these accounts under FCRA standards. 
DEMAND : Explain how this blatant error occurred and provide assurance that similar mistakes are not affecting my credit report. Otherwise, this serves as additional grounds for immediate account deletion. 

False Claim That Late Payments Were Accurately Reported Your response attempts to justify reporting months of late payments after the account was closed due to non-payment. However, if the account was charged off in XX/XX/XXXX, there should be no further delinquency reporting beyond that date. 
XXXX is falsely extending the delinquency timeline to make the account appear more damaging than it should be, a deceptive practice that violates 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ). 
DEMAND : Immediately remove all incorrect late payments that extend beyond the account charge-off date. 


Failure to Address My Cancellation Request You claim there is no cancellation request on file. However, you fail to provide proof that cancellation options were clearly communicated. If XXXX has a history of failing to process cancellation requests, this is a violation of consumer rights and deceptive business practices. 
DEMAND : Provide documentation proving that cancellation options were clearly available and that my requests were properly processed. If no such proof exists, then XXXX must delete my accounts immediately. 
Lack of a Proper Cancellation Process XXXX  claims, " Customers have the right to cancel at any time without penalty, '' yet also stated that they have no record of my cancellation request. 
This suggests they do not have a proper cancellation process in place, making it difficult for consumers to stop unwanted reporting. 
I demand that XXXX provides a clear, documented cancellation process and ensures all closed accounts are properly updated across all credit bureaus. 
Misleading Attempt to Blame Credit Bureaus You incorrectly attempt to place blame on the credit bureaus for the discrepancies in my reports. While XXXX may not control how the bureaus display the information, XXXX is still responsible for ensuring the accuracy of the data it furnishes. Shifting blame to the bureaus is misleading and an attempt to deflect XXXX failure to uphold its responsibility. 
Discrepancy in Late Payment Reporting and Charge-Off Amounts XXXX stated that I had XXXX months of missed {$20.00} payments ( totaling {$120.00} ) before the account was charged off. 
However, they failed to explain why this balance was still reported past the charge-off date or why this amount fluctuated across bureaus. 
These discrepancies indicate inconsistent and potentially incorrect reporting, requiring immediate correction. 

XXXX. XXXX 's Misleading Explanation About Late Payments XXXX blamed credit bureau processing times for reporting differences, stating that XXXX XXXX showed my last payment on the XXXX, while another reported it on the XXXX. 
While minor processing differences are expected, a six-day discrepancy is excessive and suggests XXXX is not furnishing information consistently. 
This inconsistent reporting can mislead lenders and impact credit decisions, requiring immediate rectification. 

XXXX  Misleading Blame on Credit Bureaus for Reporting Inconsistencies ongoing attempts to mislead consumers and deflect responsibility by blaming credit bureaus for their own reporting inconsistencies. Throughout their responses to my dispute, XXXX has failed to acknowledge its responsibility as a data furnisher under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and has repeatedly shifted blame onto the credit bureaus instead of addressing its own reporting errors. 
This dispute details multiple instances where XXXX misrepresented the role of the credit bureaus and attempted to excuse its own inaccurate reporting by shifting accountability. I am demanding that the CFPB investigate XXXX misleading practices and require them to take full responsibility for the accuracy of the data they furnish. 
XXXX. XXXX Blamed the Credit Bureaus for Status Update Discrepancies XXXX stated that my charge-off was reported in XX/XX/XXXX but then admitted that Experian had to " correct '' this information in XX/XX/XXXX after I disputed it. 
If their reporting was accurate in XX/XX/XXXX, there would be no need for Experian to correct anything in XXXX. 
XXXX attempt to blame the credit bureaus for the correction is misleading because it suggests they furnished inaccurate or incomplete information in the first place. 
This proves XXXX original reporting was incorrect, and they are trying to shift the blame instead of taking responsibility. 

XXXX. XXXX Blamed the Credit Bureaus for Inconsistent Reporting Across TransUnion, Equifax, and Experian XXXX stated that my Credit Builder Loan ( XXXX ) was never reported to Experian. 
However, Experian corrected data in XX/XX/XXXX, meaning that they did have reporting from XXXX at some point. 
This contradicts XXXX statement and suggests either : o a ) XXXX previously reported and later removed data, or o b ) XXXX record-keeping is inconsistent across different credit bureaus. 
Instead of admitting an error, XXXX falsely claimed Experian was never involved, which is misleading and deceptive. 

XXXX. XXXX Blamed the Credit Bureaus for Payment Date Discrepancies XXXX acknowledged that XXXX bureau recorded my last payment on the XXXX while another recorded it on the XXXX. 
They blamed the credit bureaus processing times for this discrepancy instead of acknowledging that XXXX itself is responsible for ensuring consistent and accurate reporting. 
If XXXX submits the same data to all bureaus at the same time, there should not be a six-day difference. 
This is an attempt to mislead consumers into thinking the credit bureaus are at fault, when in reality, XXXX own data submission practices are likely inconsistent. 

XXXX. XXXX Blamed the Credit Bureaus for How Closed Accounts Are Displayed XXXX admitted my Credit Builder Loan ( XXXX ) is closed, but also stated that it is still reporting on my credit report. 
If the account is closed in good standing, it should not negatively impact my credit score. 
Instead of explaining why this is happening, XXXX implied that it is out of their control and blamed the credit bureaus. 
XXXX is responsible for furnishing updated, accurate status information to the bureaus, yet they act as if it is the bureaus fault that closed accounts are reporting incorrectly. 
XXXX Misleading and Inaccurate Reporting Practices failing to take responsibility for inaccurate reporting and misleadingly blaming the credit bureaus for its own errors. XXXX actions constitute violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), which holds data furnishers responsible for accurate and consistent reporting. 
The following points provide clear evidence that XXXX is solely responsible for the reporting discrepancies and that its attempts to shift blame to the credit bureaus are misleading and deceptive. 
XXXX Admitted Experian Had to Correct Their Inaccurate Reporting XXXX stated : " In XX/XX/XXXX, you filed a dispute with Experian, and we responded by correcting disputed information, which is why there is an update showing in XX/XX/XXXX. '' Why this proves XXXX is responsible : o If XXXX reporting was accurate in XX/XX/XXXX, Experian would not have needed to correct it in XX/XX/XXXX. 
o Credit bureaus do not change data on their ownthey only update what XXXX submits. 
o XXXX original report was clearly inaccurate or incomplete, requiring correction. 
XXXX is at fault for furnishing incorrect data in XXXX, which led to Experians correction in XXXX. 

XXXX. XXXX Contradicted Itself About Reporting to Experian XXXX claimed : " This account only reports to TransUnion and Equifax, so it was never removed from your Experian report ; it was never reported to Experian in the first place. '' Why this proves XXXX is responsible : o If XXXX never reported to XXXX, how did XXXX receive and later correct the disputed account? 
o This contradiction suggests XXXX either previously reported and removed the account or failed to furnish consistent data. 
o The credit bureaus only display what XXXX provides, so any inconsistencies are due to XXXX reporting failures. 
XXXX misrepresentation of its reporting practices is misleading and deceptive. 

XXXX. XXXX Blamed Credit Bureaus for Payment Date Discrepancies Instead of Taking Responsibility XXXX stated : " We furnish account information on the first business day of every month, but the credit bureaus may have varying processing times, which is why XXXX bureau is reporting your last payment on the XXXX and another is reporting the last payment on the XXXX. '' Why this proves XXXX is responsible : o If XXXX submits payment data on the same day to all bureaus, the dates should be the same across all reports. 
o Processing delays do not explain a six-day difference. 
o The only explanation is that XXXX submitted the data inconsistently or late to different bureaus. 
XXXX is misleadingly blaming the bureaus for discrepancies caused by their own inconsistent reporting. 

XXXX. XXXX Failed to Properly Update Closed Account Status XXXX admitted : " While this account is closed, it is still reporting on your credit report as paid and closed. '' Why this proves XXXX is responsible : o When an account is closed, XXXX must furnish an updated status to all bureaus. 
o If the account is still affecting my credit negatively, that means XXXX failed to update the status correctly. 
o The credit bureaus only reflect the data XXXX submitsthey do not decide how an account is classified. 
XXXX is responsible for updating closed accounts, but instead, they falsely implied that its the credit bureaus fault. 

XXXX. XXXX Actions Violate FCRA Data Furnishing Responsibilities Under FCRA 623 ( 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ), XXXX is legally required to : 1. Report accurate and complete information to credit bureaus.

2. Correct any errors in a timely manner.

3. Ensure consistency across all bureaus.

4. Properly update closed accounts.

Instead of following these legal responsibilities, XXXX has : Furnished inaccurate and inconsistent data. 
Admitted that Experian had to correct their mistakes.

Contradicted their own statements about reporting to Experian.

Blamed the credit bureaus for discrepancies that are entirely their fault. 
These violations of the FCRA warrant immediate regulatory action. 
XXXX  Falsely Claimed They Dont Control How Credit Bureaus Display Data XXXX stated : " We dont control how the credit bureaus label or display this information. '' Why this is false and misleading : o Credit bureaus do not create or modify account information. They only display what XXXX furnishes. 
o XXXX controls the account type, payment history, and status updates when they report to the bureaus. 
o If an account is misclassified or inconsistent across bureaus, it means XXXX submitted it that way. 
o FCRA 623 requires XXXX to furnish accurate, complete, and consistent datameaning XXXX is legally responsible for any errors. 
This statement is a direct attempt to avoid responsibility and mislead consumers. 
If the following accounts are not completely deleted from my credit reports within 30 days, I will : Pursue legal action for statutory damages of up to {$1000.00} per FCRA violation per account. 
Report XXXX deceptive practices to state and federal consumer protection agencies. 
Final Notice Delete These Accounts Immediately XXXX Credit Account ( XXXX ) XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX ) XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) Failure to comply with this demand will result in legal escalation, regulatory action, and financial penalties against XXXX. 
This is your final opportunity to resolve this matter before further legal action is taken. I expect written confirmation of account deletions within 30 days.

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