Consumer complaint received 2026-01-19 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Took or threatened to take negative or legal action — Sued you in a state where you do not live or did not sign for the debt
Company: Southern Auto Finance Co
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this response as part of a new CFPB case, as my prior case # XXXX was closed without resolving the underlying dispute or addressing my identity theft claim in a manner consistent with federal consumer protection laws. The closure of the prior case does not resolve this matter, as the SAFCO account continues to be reported and defended as accurate despite my formal identity theft filings. Accordingly, this submission represents a renewed and active dispute requiring continued CFPB review. 

I do not agree that this matter has been resolved. I do not own this SAFCO account, did not open it, did not authorize it, and did not knowingly benefit from it. This is the reason I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report and identity theft affidavit in good faith and under penalty of perjury. This account is specifically included in my identity theft filing. My dispute is not based on dissatisfaction with account terms, balances, or payment history ; it is based entirely on identity theft and lack of ownership. 

1. Acknowledgment of Documents Without Admission of Ownership I acknowledge receipt of the documents SAFCO attached to its response, including a copy of a retail installment sales contract and an account payment history. However, the submission of these documents does not establish that I personally opened, authorized, or knowingly agreed to this account. 

Identity theft frequently results in contracts, transaction histories, and account records being created without the victims knowledge or consent. The existence of a document bearing my name, or internal records reflecting activity, does not rebut a sworn identity theft claim. A fair and lawful resolution requires SAFCO to address whether I personally authorized the account, not merely whether records exist. 

2. Identity Theft Was Properly Asserted I formally asserted identity theft by filing an FTC Identity Theft Report, which is a legally recognized document created specifically to protect consumers from being held responsible for fraudulent accounts. This report was filed truthfully and in good faith. 

Once identity theft is asserted, the burden shifts to the furnisher to demonstrate lawful authorization. The consumer is not required to disprove every document created as a result of fraud. Continued reliance on internal records without addressing the identity theft claim undermines the purpose of federal identity theft protections. 

3. Contract Does Not Resolve Identity Theft SAFCOs response references a signed contract. I continue to dispute that I knowingly signed or authorized this contract. The existence of a contract in SAFCOs records does not establish that the signature is mine or that it was executed with my informed consent. 

A fair investigation must consider : Whether the signature is authentic Whether identity verification was performed at the time of signing Whether the contract could have been executed using stolen or misused personal information SAFCOs response does not explain how identity theft was ruled out or what steps were taken to verify that I personally executed the agreement. 

4. Payment History Does Not Establish Ownership The payment history SAFCO provided reflects internal transaction activity over time. However, transaction activity does not establish ownership or authorization. Fraudulent accounts are often used, funded, or partially paid by third parties for various reasons. 

Payment history demonstrates only that an account existed and activity occurred ; it does not demonstrate that I knowingly opened or authorized the account. Treating payment history as proof of ownership is inconsistent with identity theft realities. 

5. Internal Records Alone Are Insufficient SAFCOs response relies on internal records and reporting accuracy requirements under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). While the FCRA requires accurate reporting, it also requires reasonable investigation when a dispute is raised. 

A reasonable investigation in an identity theft case must address whether the account was lawfully opened by the consumer. Confirming that information matches internal records does not meet this standard when fraud is alleged. 

6. Continued Reporting Causes Ongoing Harm The continued reporting of this account as a charge-off causes ongoing harm to my credit profile, financial reputation, and access to credit. Identity theft victims should not be required to endure prolonged damage while furnishers rely on internal conclusions rather than addressing authorization. 

A fair resolution must correct inaccurate reporting promptly and completely. 

7. Closure of Prior CFPB Case Does Not Resolve the Issue The closure of prior CFPB case # XXXX did not establish that the account is accurate or that identity theft did not occur. It merely closed a procedural complaint. The underlying dispute remains unresolved. 

This new case exists because SAFCO has not addressed the substance of my identity theft claim or provided evidence that I personally authorized the account. 

8. What a Reasonable Investigation Should Include A reasonable investigation should include : Verification of signature authenticity Review of identity verification procedures used at account origination Consideration of the FTC Identity Theft Report as substantive evidence Assessment of whether authorization can be proven, not merely asserted Absent these steps, the investigation is incomplete. 

9. Requested Corrective Actions To resolve this matter fairly and in compliance with federal law, SAFCO must take one of the following actions : Provide clear and convincing evidence that I personally and knowingly opened and authorized this account despite my identity theft filing, or Delete the SAFCO tradeline from all consumer reporting agencies due to identity theft and inability to resolve the dispute Anything short of these actions leaves inaccurate and unverifiable information on my consumer reports. 

10. Written Confirmation Required As part of a fair resolution, I request written confirmation that : I am not responsible for this account The tradeline has been deleted from all consumer reporting agencies No further reporting, verification, or collection activity will occur The account will not be sold, assigned, or transferred Written confirmation is necessary to prevent future harm. 

11. Compliance With Consumer Protection Laws A fair resolution must ensure compliance with : The Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) Federal identity theft protections CFPB guidance regarding dispute resolution and accuracy Maintaining or reporting unverifiable information after identity theft is asserted undermines these protections. 

12. Why Deletion Is Fair and Reasonable Deletion is fair because : I acted promptly and in good faith I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report I followed all required dispute procedures SAFCO has not met its burden of proof Federal law prioritizes accuracy over convenience I am not seeking monetary compensation. I am seeking correction of inaccurate reporting. 

13. Closing Statement In conclusion, I am creating this new CFPB case because my prior case # XXXX was closed without resolving the dispute. I do not own this SAFCO account. I filed an FTC Identity Theft Report and identity theft affidavit because the account was opened fraudulently. 

A fair resolution requires SAFCO to either prove lawful authorization or delete the tradeline. Continued reporting without addressing identity theft causes ongoing harm and fails to protect an identity theft victim. 

I respectfully request continued CFPB oversight to ensure this matter is resolved lawfully and fairly. 

Thank you for your time and attention.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation