Consumer complaint received 2025-05-23 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: LEXISNEXIS
State: MD

Complaint narrative:
LexisNexis has violated my privacy rights and my right to due process by reporting a public record ( bankruptcy ) they can not lawfully verify or furnish. I have disputed this record multiple times via certified mail, phone calls, and formal notice. I even provided a letter directly from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court confirming that they do not verify or furnish information to LexisNexis or any third party. Despite this, LexisNexis continues to claim the record is verified based only on address and partial Social Security number matches from other sources. This is assumption not legal verification. 

LexisNexis is relying on information obtained from XXXX, which is known to make mistakes. Using XXXX  is not sufficient nor is it a validation system. XXXX own Privacy Policy confirms that it does not verify or validate data, and can not be used as a third-party source for furnishing consumer data. On XX/XX/year>, I spoke with a XXXX representative, and they clearly stated this is not allowed under their terms. LexisNexis is misusing public access data and presenting it as if it has been independently verified through lawful channels which it has not. 

LexisNexis explained that the partial address and partial SSN on the bankruptcy docket match what they have on file. But that is not proof of accuracy. That is data-matching, not lawful verification. Who gave LexisNexis the right to use that information? Who confirmed the information was correct? I consent to LexisNexis accessing personal information. I contacted XXXX on XX/XX/year> via phone, and they stated that they did not confirm, verify, or validate this information or provide it to LexisNexis. They confirmed that LexisNexis purchased this information from their user account knowing that this information could not be verified and assumed it was correct. This assumption has caused me serious credit damage. 

LexisNexis can not legally validate a bankruptcy just because some public record happens to contain a matching address and partial SSN. That is data-matching, not legal verification. LexisNexis DOES NOT have direct access to bankruptcy court systems, and XXXX is not a validation service. Even XXXX says so I spoke to a representative, and they sent me the XXXX Privacy Policy. LexisNexis is pulling data from public sources, linking it together without consent, and publishing it as if it were verified. THIS VIOLATES MY PRIVACY RIGHTS, DUE PROCESS, AND PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE. 

The bankruptcy record LexisNexis is reporting has never been independently validated as actually belonging to me. They did not receive it from a court and did not receive confirmation from the Court of Record. Their entire verification process relies on a partial match of an address and the last four digits of a Social Security number not legal proof of identity. This is not legal verification its an assumption. And if LexisNexis cant prove it belongs to me, then LexisNexis has no legal basis to report it under FCRAs requirement for maximum possible accuracy.

I never gave LexisNexis permission to access my PACER record. They had no court order, no written consent, and no legally permissible purpose. This is a direct violation of FCRA 604. They also violated my right to due process by continuing to furnish unverifiable information even after being given formal evidence that the court does not validate or furnish data to them. 

LexisNexis has violated multiple provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) : 15 U.S. Code 1681b ( Permissible Purpose ) : LexisNexis accessed and furnished my XXXXsourced bankruptcy information without my authorization, a court order, or any legally permissible purpose. This violates my right to control how my consumer information is used and shared. 

15 U.S. Code 1681i ( Failure to Properly Investigate Disputed Information ) : I submitted formal disputes along with evidence, including a letter from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, yet LexisNexis failed to properly investigate or delete the unverifiable information. They instead relied on flawed data-matching logic.

15 U.S. Code 1681e ( b ) ( Failure to Ensure Maximum Possible Accuracy ) : LexisNexis continued to report information they could not lawfully verify and used partial matches to justify reporting a public record that may not even accurately apply to me. That is not maximum possible accuracy.

15 U.S. Code 1681n and 1681o ( Civil Liability for Willful and Negligent Noncompliance ) : LexisNexiss continued reporting after being informed that their source ( XXXX ) does not validate or verify data and after receiving official court confirmation that no verification took place shows a pattern of willful and/or negligent noncompliance with federal law. 

Because of this inaccurate and unverifiable reporting, I have been denied credit opportunities, pre-approvals for a mortgage, and have received less favorable loan terms. This is affecting my financial recovery and personal life. I respectfully request immediate deletion of this record from my LexisNexis and credit bureau files, and written confirmation of deletion. I also request that LexisNexis stop accessing or furnishing PACER records without a lawful purpose or valid verification process. 

This is not just a reporting issue. It is a privacy violation, a procedural failure, and a direct breach of federal law. I ask that the CFPB escalate this matter due to ongoing violations of FCRA 604, 623, 1681b, 1681e, 1681i, and civil liability under 1681n and 1681o. I am prepared to escalate this issue to the Attorney General and to Court.

I have attached the following evidence : 1 ) A letter from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court clearly stating that the court does not verify or furnish information to credit reporting agencies like LexisNexis. 2 ) The XXXX Privacy Policy, which confirms that XXXX does not verify or validate any information and prohibits third-party use for consumer credit reporting. 3 ) LexisNexiss official CFPB response, where they admit to using XXXX and data-matching to justify the reporting of the bankruptcy, despite having no legal verification or permissible purpose under FCRA.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation