Consumer complaint received 2025-11-12 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account status incorrect
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
OppLoans and XXXX XXXX  have knowingly furnished false, deceptive, and re-aged information to all three major credit bureaus in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ), the Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. ), and CFPB Regulation Z. The account at issueidentified on credit reports as XXXX  with account number XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX was a small-dollar installment loan opened in XX/XX/XXXX. It was fully closed and charged off that same year. Yet, as of XX/XX/XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  continue to furnish this account as Closed Charged Off with a current balance of {$2500.00}, and show Date of Last Activity and Date Reported as XX/XX/XXXX. 

This reporting pattern is a textbook case of illegal re-aging under FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ) and willful misrepresentation of credit data under FCRA 607 ( b ). The account can not lawfully be updated four years later to suggest new delinquency activity. Such manipulation artificially depresses credit scores and unlawfully extends the seven-year reporting period under FCRA 605 ( a ) ( 4 ).

Additionally, the furnisher identification XXXX is deliberately vague and deceptive. The loan was originated by XXXX XXXX  and merely serviced by XXXX, yet both entities are publishing data under a merged label that fails to identify the true creditor. This violates the Truth in Lending Act 131 ( a ) ( 15 U.S.C. 1641 ( a ) ) and Regulation Z 1026.39 ( d ), which require clear creditor identification. XXXX ongoing representation that it is both lender and owner of this debt constitutes a material misstatement that misleads both consumers and credit bureaus. 

Each bureaus data is XXXX  lists the account as Charged off as bad debt with XXXX balance ; Experian reports a continuing {$2500.00} balance with CO marks every month through XXXX ; XXXX  reports all payments as XXXX. These contradictions prove XXXX and XXXX have failed to implement reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy, violating FCRA 607 ( b ) and 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ). 

The damage from these unlawful updates is ongoing and severe. The re-aged tradeline inflates total debt, lowers the utilization ratio, and causes measurable harm to creditworthiness. XXXX and XXXX XXXX  have acted with reckless disregard for statutory obligations, meeting the legal definition of willful noncompliance under XXXX XXXX. Co. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ). 

Despite prior disputes and direct communications, the furnisher continues to verify false data with all three credit bureaus, in defiance of FCRA 623 ( b ). The evidence is clear : this account should have been reported as closed, charged off, and with a XXXX balance since XXXX. Updating it in XXXX is not a clerical errorit is a calculated act of data manipulation that deceives both consumers and the credit system. 

XXXX and XXXX have demonstrated complete contempt for federal consumer-protection law. Their conduct violates both the FCRA and TILA, and constitutes a pattern of unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts and practices ( UDAAP ) under 12 U.S.C. 5531 ( a ). The CFPB should compel immediate deletion of this tradeline and impose sanctions for willful and systemic misreporting. 

This complaint is submitted for public posting so others can learn how XXXX and XXXX XXXX  manipulate and re-age credit data to the detriment of consumers. The evidence demonstrates a blatant disregard for compliance obligations and exposes a broader pattern of misconduct in small-dollar lending and data furnishing.

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 explanation