Consumer complaint received 2025-11-19 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: TD BANK US HOLDING COMPANY
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint to report a serious issue regarding the reporting and handling of a derogatory account appearing on my consumer credit file under the name TARGET/TD, with the identifying digits XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This account is currently listed as a Collection/Charge-Off, and although it appears on my credit report as a derogatory entry, none of the legally required documentation has been provided to verify its accuracy, ownership, completeness, or legitimacy. As a result, I am disputing the account in its entirety based on lack of validation, lack of verification, procedural deficiencies, and potential violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). 

The purpose of this What Happened? statement is to provide a clear, factual, and detailed explanation of the sequence of events, the actions I have taken, the failures of the credit reporting agencies and the furnisher to comply with federal law, and why this complaint requires CFPB involvement for a fair resolution. 

I am not requesting special treatment or removal of legitimate information ; I am requesting enforcement of the law. If the furnisher can not validate the account using original documentation, the derogatory reporting should not be allowed to remain. 

1. How the TARGET/TD Account Appears on My Credit Report The TARGET/TD account ending in XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX appears with the following characteristics : Status : Collection/Charge-Off Past Due Amount : {$0.00} Closed Date : XX/XX/year> Reporting Category : Derogatory Furnisher : TD Bank USA, N.A. ( TARGET/TD ) Negative Payment History : Multiple late-payment markers Notation : Account shows derogatory status despite being reported as Paid Although the account shows a paid status, it still carries negative and damaging derogatory codes, including : Charge-off notation XXXX late payments Closed with derogatory history Negative reporting across all three credit bureaus Because this account is coded with a derogatory history, it significantly impacts creditworthiness whether or not the past-due balance is {$0.00}. 

2. I Never Received Any of the Legally Required Documentation Proving This Account Is Valid The foundation of my dispute is simple : No one has produced any original documentation showing that this account belongs to me or that the information is being reported accurately. 

Despite disputing this tradeline, I have not received : A signed contract A credit application Any form of account origination document A cardholder agreement Copies of statements Any documentation showing purchases A breakdown of transactions Copies of billing cycles Payment history records Proof of any delinquency A valid date of first delinquency ( DOFD ) Charge-off explanation or supporting documentation Without any of these documents, the furnisher can not validate or verify the account. 

3. The Credit Bureaus Verified the Account Without Supplying Any Evidence I filed disputes with all applicable credit bureaus explaining that this account lacked validation, contained inaccurate information, and appeared to be unverifiable.

However, each bureau returned the dispute with : A one-line statement : Verified as accurate No documents No supporting evidence No explanation of what was reviewed No identification of the person or department that verified the account No method of verification No copy of the investigation results No proof that the furnisher provided the required documents No indication of a manual or document-based review Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ), a reinvestigation requires reviewing documentationnot clicking automated confirmation codes through e-OSCAR. 

The speed of the verification strongly implies that the process was purely automated. 
Automation is not a lawful substitute for a real investigation. 

4. I Requested the Method of Verification and Received No Response That Met Legal Standards Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ), when a consumer disputes information and then requests the method of verification ( MOV ), the credit bureau is required to provide : The procedure used The documents reviewed The name and contact of the person who verified it The date of verification Whether verification was manual or automated Details of the furnishers response Proof that the bureau actually obtained evidence I received none of these required elements.

Without a compliant MOV, the reinvestigation can not be considered lawful.

5. TARGET/TD Has Not Validated the Account Under FCRA or FDCPA Standards In addition to contacting the bureaus, I attempted to obtain information directly from the furnisherTARGET/TD. 
At no point has TARGET/TD provided : A copy of the original credit application Statements A contract A record of payments A purchase summary A breakdown of how the final balance was calculated Proper notification of delinquent status Any documents linking me personally to the account If the furnisher can not produce these, the account is legally unverifiable.

6. The Reporting Contains Errors, Omissions, and Inconsistencies There are numerous reporting inconsistencies that make the tradeline incomplete or inaccurate under the FCRA : A. Missing Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ) This is a legally required data point.

If the DOFD is wrong, unclear, or missing, the reporting period can not be validated and may be illegally re-aged.

B. Conflicting Account Status The account is reported as : Paid But also coded as Derogatory And associated with negative late-payment history And coded as Charge-Off This is unclear, contradictory, and misleading.

C. Past Due Amount Shows 0, Yet Derogatory Codes Remain A XXXX  past-due balance paired with charge-off coding is inconsistent, especially without documentation.

D. No Supporting Payment History The credit report shows late payments but no supporting records. 

E. Questionable Charge-Off Date The date appears inconsistent with typical creditor charge-off timelines. 

Errors like these violate : FCRA 602 Maximum Possible Accuracy FCRA 607 ( b ) Reasonable Procedures 7. I Suffered Harm Due to This Inaccurate and Unverified Reporting The TARGET/TD derogatory tradeline continues to negatively impact my credit profile by : Lowering credit scores Causing denials of credit applications Resulting in higher interest rates Increasing insurance premiums Damaging my creditworthiness Affecting access to financial products Causing emotional and financial stress Because the account has not been validated, this harm is unjustified. 

8. Why This Complaint Requires CFPB Involvement I have exhausted all other channels : Disputed with the bureaus Requested method of verification Attempted validation from the furnisher Asked for correction of errors Sought documentation None of these attempts produced substantial information.

The bureaus : Did not obtain documentation Did not validate the account Did not conduct a meaningful reinvestigation Did not comply with FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) MOV requirements The furnisher : Did not supply documents Did not validate anything Did not correct errors Continues reporting the account The situation meets the threshold for a CFPB dispute.

9. What I Am Requesting for a Fair Resolution I am requesting a fair resolution that fully complies with FCRA and FDCPA requirements. 

A. Provide Complete Validation and Documentation TARGET/TD must provide : The signed application Original contractual agreement Billing statements Transaction history Payment ledger DOFD documentation Charge-off explanation Proof I authorized the account If they can not, the bureaus must delete the account. 

B. Require a Proper, Manual Reinvestigation The credit bureaus must : Obtain actual documents Review those documents Ensure accuracy Verify completeness Provide written results C. Require a Fully Compliant Method of Verification Including : Who verified the account What document

s were reviewed How verification occurred Whether it was manual or automated D. Delete the Account if It Can not Be Verified Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) furnisher/bureau must delete : unverifiable information unverifiable late-payment history unverifiable charge-off designation E. Add the Legally Required Disputed by Consumer Notation If this notation is missing at any point, the reporting is incomplete and unlawful.

F. Notify All Users of My Credit File If corrections or deletions occur, the bureaus must notify : lenders insurers creditors any entity that recently accessed the report G. Prevent Illegal Reinsertion If removed, the bureaus must not reinsert the account unless : TARGET/TD certifies its accuracy I receive adva
nce written notification This is required under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( B ).

10. Summary and Closing In summary, a fair resolution to this issue requires : Transparency Proper validation Proper reinvestigation Proper documentation Compliance with the law Correction or removal of inaccurate or incomplete information If the furnisher can not validate the TARGET/TD account ending in XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX with original documentation, the derogatory reporting must be deleted entirely. 

I am simply requesting what federal law grants every consumer : accuracy, fairness, validation, and proper investigation.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation