Consumer complaint received 2025-07-29 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account status incorrect
Company: ENOVA INTERNATIONAL, INC.
State: FL

Complaint narrative:
Subject : Continued inaccurate credit reporting after admitting no ownership or furnishing role Complaint Type : Supplemental complaint to CFPB Complaint ID # XXXX Product : Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports Issue : Furnisher furnished inaccurate information to a consumer reporting agency Narrative : This complaint is submitted against NetCredit ( Enova International ) for continued furnishing of disputed tradeline information to consumer reporting agencies ( CRAs ) namely XXXX  and XXXX violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), even after NetCredits own written admissions demonstrate it no longer owns or furnishes the account. 

In its formal response dated XX/XX/XXXX, to CFPB Complaint ID # XXXX, NetCredit clearly stated : On XX/XX/XXXX, the LOC was XXXX to a third-party debt buyer, XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ). NetCredit notified XXXX of the sale via email. NetCredit is no longer servicing the LOC since it is not currently owned by XXXX XXXX. In addition, NetCredit has not attempted to collect on XXXX debt since the XXXX was sold to XXXX. Therefore, any future inquiries regarding this debt should be directed to XXXX. 

Despite this unequivocal admission that NetCredit no longer owns, services, or furnishes data on this account, XXXX XXXX XXXX both continue to report this tradeline, and both CRAs have responded to my prior disputes by claiming that the account was verified by the data furnisher. 

If NetCredit is not the furnisher, as it claims, then it is legally impossible for the tradeline to be verified through a proper FCRA reinvestigation process under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ). This contradiction implicates serious legal violations by both the CRAs and NetCredit, and warrants immediate enforcement action.

Violations by NetCredit ( FCRA ) : 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) : NetCredit had XXXX duty to cease reporting, and to correct or delete the tradeline once they ceased ownership. 

15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) : NetCredit allowed inaccurate tradeline data to persist despite no longer being the furnisher.

15 U.S.C. 1681g ( a ) : NetCredits failure to disclose current creditor information in tradeline reporting.

15 U.S.C. 1681n : Willful noncompliance by failing to take corrective action after repeated disputes and its own admissions. 

Legal Inconsistencies : NetCredit can not have it both ways. On XXXX hand, it has formally disclaimed any furnishing role, stating : NetCredit has not attempted to collect on XXXX debt since the XXXX was sold to XXXX. 

Yet both XXXX  and XXXX recently as XX/XX/XXXX, XXXXcontinue to report this account as Verified by the furnisher. This inconsistency proves XXXX of XXXX things : Either NetCredit continues to furnish, contrary to its own statement to a federal regulator ; Or the CRAs are falsely attributing verification to a party that legally can not verify the data. 

Either scenario reflects a fundamental breach of the FCRAs accuracy and reinvestigation mandates, and a clear violation of my rights under federal law. 

Legal Demand : You are hereby notified that unless the tradeline associated with XXXX ( NetCredit via XXXX XXXX  XXXX is permanently deleted from all CRAs within 10 days, I will proceed with federal litigation against NetCredit, TransUnion, and XXXX  for knowing and willful violations of the FCRA. 


This matter is no longer in dispute. NetCredits own admissions render further furnishing or failure to correct this tradeline unlawful.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation