Consumer complaint received 2025-11-18 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: NC

Complaint narrative:
I am writing to you today after carefully reviewing the credit files each of you maintains on me, and I was stunned to see how inconsistently and inaccurately several late-closed accounts are being reported across your systems, in direct violation of FCRA 607 ( b ) and 611. The XXXX account XXXX * * * *, which carries a {$0.00} balance, is being reported by all three bureaus, yet each version shows different late-payment patterns and dates that do not match my actual payment history. Adding to this confusion, I discovered multiple TIME FIN accounts, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, each also showing {$0.00} balances, but reported only in Equifax, and the payment histories attached to them are inconsistent, incomplete, and unverifiable, which misrepresents the true closure status of these accounts. Even more concerning is the XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, also holding a {$0.00} balance, but appearing only in XXXX, creating a fragmented and misleading portrayal of my credit obligations. These discrepancies collectively violate the requirement of maximum possible accuracy, and I am requesting that you correct all late-closed entries by conducting a proper reinvestigation and ensuring that only verified, complete, and uniform data is maintained across all three bureaus. 
As I read deeper into my reports, I encountered a series of charge-off accounts that immediately raised alarms due to their inconsistent bureau-to-bureau reporting, missing data, and unverifiable balance information, all of which violate FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). The XXXX XXXX XXXX * * account, showing a {$0.00} balance * *, is being reported only by XXXX, without any supporting payment history or verification indicating why it is classified as a charge-off despite reflecting no remaining balance. The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account with a {$1700.00} balance, the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account with {$1300.00}, and the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX account showing {$0.00}, are all appearing only in XXXX, and all contain conflicting dates, missing payment notations, and unverifiable charge-off details that leave the legitimacy of these entries uncertain. Because no creditor is permitted to furnish incomplete or misleading data under federal law, I am requesting that each bureau thoroughly reinvestigate these entries and correct any unverified or inaccurately reported charge-off information. 
The errors became even more troubling when I reviewed the collection section of my files, where I found that the XXXX XXXX ( Original Creditor : Progressive Insurance ) XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, showing a {$680.00} balance, is being reported only in XXXX yet lacks proper dates, verification of assignment, validation of the debt, and any documentation proving that this collection was legally transferred or belongs on my credit file. The absence of matching entries in Experian and XXXX shows that the reporting is incomplete and inconsistent, which violates the FCRAs accuracy requirements and creates an unfair depiction of my credit standing. Because collections have a severe impact on consumer creditworthiness, I require that this entry be reinvestigated thoroughly, and any unverifiable or inaccurately reported information be corrected immediately to reflect only valid, fully substantiated data. 
Finally, I must address the inquiries currently listed on my reports, as I discovered several that appear only in XXXX, which raises questions about whether they were properly certified, permissible, or authorized under FCRA 604. These include XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, none of which appear in Experian or TransUnion, and none of which show uniform date patterns or creditor certification across the bureaus. A permissible-purpose inquiry must meet strict legal standards, and the inconsistent reporting of these inquiries suggests that they were not properly verified before being furnished. Therefore, I request that each bureau conduct a full reinvestigation of every inquiry listed here and delete any that can not be validated with proper permissible purpose documentation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation