Consumer complaint received 2025-12-22 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: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
To Whom It May Concern, I am submitting this follow-up complaint regarding XXXX  continued reporting of a XXXX delinquency on my federal student loan account, despite prior disputes and XXXX  response to my initial CFPB complaint dated XX/XX/XXXX. 

While XXXX claims that notification of the servicing transfer was sent and that billing statements and outreach attempts occurred, no documentary proof has been producedto substantiate these assertions. XXXX has failed to provide copies of any alleged transfer notice letters, billing statements, emails, call logs, mailing records, or delivery confirmations that would allow this information to be independently verified. 

Failure to Provide Verifiable Evidence XXXX states that it sent a welcome notification on XX/XX/XXXX, and monthly billing statements thereafter. However, despite multiple disputes, XXXX has not reproduced a single copy of any letter, email, or billing statement allegedly sent, nor has it provided proof of mailing, proof of delivery, or electronic transmission records. 

Unsupported statements are not evidence. Without documentary proof, XXXX can not reasonably verify that legally required servicing-transfer notifications were provided. 

Violation of Federal Student Loan Servicing Regulations Federal regulations require borrowers to be properly notified of servicing transfers : XXXX XXXX XXXX ( f ) requires the prior servicer to notify the borrower of the transfer and provide new servicer contact and payment information.

34 CFR 685.222 ( e ) similarly requires timely and accurate notice to Direct Loan borrowers. 

XXXX has not produced evidence demonstrating compliance with these requirements. Absent proof of notice, the resulting delinquency can not be attributed to borrower fault. 

Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Investigation ( FCRA XXXX ( b ) ) XXXX has now been placed on notice of this dispute through : Consumer reporting agency disputes A prior CFPB complaint Direct challenge to the accuracy and verifiability of the reported delinquency Despite this, XXXX continues to verify the delinquency to TransUnion and XXXX XXXXXXXX has removed the same delinquency as unverifiable. This inconsistent reporting is evidence that XXXX has failed to conduct a reasonable investigation as required byFCRA 623 ( b ) ( 1 ).

A furnisher can not reasonably conclude that the same information is both accurate and inaccurate depending on the consumer reporting agency. 

Furthermore, XXXX investigation appears limited to internal account data and does not address the underlying cause of the delinquencynamely, the failure to provide legally required servicing-transfer notification. This does not meet the standard of a reasonable investigation under the FCRA. 

Continued Inaccurate Reporting After Notice of Dispute By continuing to furnish this delinquency without producing verifiable evidence of required notice, XXXX is reporting information that it knows or should know can not be verified, in violation ofFCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ).

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief