Consumer complaint received 2025-11-18 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: LA

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this complaint regarding the reporting of a XXXX XXXX XXXX that appears on my credit reports under reference number XXXX. I believe the way this bankruptcy has been reported, verified, maintained, and handled by the credit bureaus and data furnishers has not been accurate, complete, or compliant with the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). Despite multiple disputes and requests for documentation, I have not been provided with the information necessary to confirm that this bankruptcy record is being reported lawfully, accurately, or based on permissible sources. This complaint explains what has happened, the actions I have taken, the responses I have received, and the issues I believe need CFPB intervention to resolve.

1. Background of the Issue A XXXX XXXX XXXX  filing was added to my credit reports with the reference number XXXX. When I noticed this reporting, I reviewed it carefully because bankruptcy records should meet strict accuracy requirements under the FCRA, especially since they are public records and carry significant weight in credit decisions. The bankruptcy was reported across multiple credit bureaus, but the details did not appear consistent or verifiable. The dates, descriptions, and reporting sources seemed incomplete or vague. Because of this, I initiated disputes with the credit bureaus to confirm the accuracy and legitimacy of the information.

My intention was not to dispute bankruptcy records arbitrarily but to ensure that the information being reported was truly mine, truly accurate, based on legally obtained records, and being maintained according to FCRA requirements. Public records, especially bankruptcy filings, must be obtained from verified sources and reported with a high degree of precision. What I encountered instead was a lack of clarity and a lack of documentation.

2. Initial Dispute and Request for Verification Once I saw the bankruptcy entry, I submitted disputes to the credit bureaus asking them to investigate the bankruptcy reporting and provide the documentation used to verify it. Under the FCRA, consumers have the right to request reinvestigation of information they believe may be inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable. My disputes included requests for the following : Confirmation of the court source used to obtain the bankruptcy record Documentation showing the official court filing Copy of the public record from the court Verification methodology, including whether the record was manually obtained or retrieved through third-party vendors Confirmation that the record was matched using full identifying information Exact filing date and docket information Proof that the bankruptcy was attributed to the correct person The credit bureaus responded quickly, but their responses were generic. They did not provide any actual documentation verifying the bankruptcy, nor did they explain the method of verification. Instead, they simply stated that the record had been verified and would continue to be reported.

3. Issues With Accuracy and Completeness of the Bankruptcy Reporting One of the major concerns I had was the inconsistency and incompleteness of the information being reported about the XXXX XXXX XXXX. In some reports, the filing date appeared one way ; in others, it appeared differently. Some bureaus provided a partial description ; others provided no contextual details. In some instances, the status or update date appeared inconsistent or vague. These inconsistencies raised serious concerns because bankruptcy reporting must be precise.

Public records are not reported directly by the courts to credit bureaus. Instead, credit bureaus use third-party vendors to gather information from court portals, and this process is known to produce errorsespecially when the information is not properly matched. Because of this known risk, I requested documentation showing exactly how the record had been verified.

I wanted confirmation that the bankruptcy record was : Obtained directly from an official court source Matched using full and accurate personal information Correctly associated with the proper identity Reported with accurate filing and status dates Maintained according to the legal reporting timeline None of the bureaus provided the documentation I requested.

4. Failure to Provide a Method of Verification Under the FCRA, after a dispute, consumers have the right to request the Method of Verification. This requires credit bureaus to explain how they verified the disputed information. When I submitted this request for the bankruptcy record, the bureaus did not provide any details. They did not identify the source of the record, the vendor used, the court system consulted, the verification method, or the individual or system that completed the reinvestigation.

Instead, the responses were vague and simply indicated that the bankruptcy had been verified. There was no explanation of how it was verified, what documentation was reviewed, or what court data was consulted. Without a meaningful method of verification, I have no way of confirming that the data is accurate.

This failure undermines the credibility of the reinvestigation process and contradicts the requirements set forth in the FCRA.

5. Concerns About the Use of Third-Party Vendors Most bankruptcy public records are sourced from third-party vendors, not directly from official court records. Because of this, errors can easily occur. Vendors may use automated scraping tools or bulk data purchases, which sometimes result in mismatches or outdated information. Because of the known issues with public-record vendors, I requested confirmation of the vendor used, the date the data was obtained, and the process by which it was matched to my file.

None of this information was provided.

This lack of transparency raises questions about whether the bankruptcy record was properly matched or whether it may have been attributed to my credit file through an automated process without proper human review. Given that bankruptcy filings are serious and long-lasting, I believe I have a right to understand how this information was sourced and whether it is accurate.

6. Impact of the Bankruptcy Reporting The reporting of the XXXX XXXX XXXX has had a significant negative impact on my credit profile. Even when accurate, bankruptcy reporting affects a consumers ability to secure loans, qualify for mortgages, obtain reasonable interest rates, and demonstrate financial stability. When bankruptcy reporting is inaccurate or unverifiable, the harm is even greater because the consumer may be unfairly penalized.

Because the bankruptcy reporting has discrepancies, inconsistencies, and has not been verified with documentation, it has affected my ability to access credit and financial opportunities. A bankruptcy listing often triggers automatic denials from lenders, regardless of additional information or context.

This record has likely influenced : Loan applications Housing applications Credit card approvals Auto loan terms Insurance rates Because none of the bureaus have provided any evidence confirming that this bankruptcy information is accurate or properly sourced, I believe the harm caused by incorrect or unverifiable reporting is substantial.

7. Repeated Disputes Not Properly Addressed I have disputed this bankruptcy reporting multiple times. Each time, I clearly explained the reason for the dispute and requested documentation. However, each response was nearly identical, stating only that the information had been verified but providing no details. This pattern suggests that the reinvestigation process may not be meaningful.

Under the FCRA, credit bureaus must conduct a reasonable reinvestigation. A reasonable reinvestigation should include : Reviewing documentation Contacting the furnisher or source Comparing identifying information Ensuring accuracy and completeness Providing the consumer with the results None of this appears to have occurred.

Additionally, when I asked for further information about the reinvestigation, the bureaus did not provide any internal notes, vendor documentation, or records showing how the bankruptcy was matched to my file.

8. Inconsistent Reporting Across Bureaus Another issue I encountered is that the bankruptcy reporting is inconsistent across the three credit bureaus. Some bureaus report different dates, different statuses, or different descriptions of the bankruptcy. Some include additional information ; others include very little. These discrepancies are significant because all three bureaus should be reporting identical information when referencing the same public record.

The inconsistencies raise additional concerns, including : Possible data-matching errors Lack of uniformity in how the record was acquired Outdated or incorrectly updated information Missing or incomplete status updates Potential reporting beyond the allowable time period Because bankruptcy information must be matched with precision, even small errors can result in an incorrect reporting.

9. Lack of Documentation From Furnishers and Bureaus No entity involved has provided : The original bankruptcy filing documentation Case docket Filing confirmation Court source information Verification logs Vendor data Chain-of-custody information Court retrieval records Without this information, I can not confirm that the bankruptcy reporting is accurate or that it was obtained legally and in compliance with FCRA accuracy requirements.

10. Why I Am Requesting CFPB Intervention I am requesting CFPB assistance because : The credit bureaus did not provide the method of verification.

They did not provide documentation showing how the bankruptcy was matched to my file.

They did not confirm the source of the public record.

They did not provide documentation from the court.

They did not correct discrepancies across bureaus.

They did not explain inconsistencies in reporting.

They did not address inaccuracies or procedural issues.

They did not conduct meaningful reinvestigations.

Because bankruptcy reporting is extremely influential and carries a long-term impact, accuracy is essential. Without documentation, accuracy can not be assumed.

Therefore, CFPB oversight is necessary to ensure : That the bankruptcy record was correctly matched That the information was obtained from a permissible and accurate source That the reporting meets the standard of maximum possible accuracy That any unverifiable information is removed That the bureaus comply with FCRA requirements I am requesting that the CFPB require the credit bureaus to provide full documentation or remove the bankruptcy record if verification can not be established. 

Conclusion The XXXX XXXX XXXX reporting under reference number XXXX has not been properly verified, documented, or explained by the credit bureaus or any involved party. I have made multiple good-faith attempts to obtain documentation and clarification. The lack of transparency, inconsistency across bureaus, failure to provide a method of verification, and absence of supporting documentation suggest that the reporting may not be accurate, complete, or compliant with federal law.

I am requesting CFPB intervention to ensure that : Proper verification is conducted Documentation is provided Inaccurate or unverifiable information is removed My rights under the FCRA are upheld This is not a request for unfair deletion ; it is a request for lawful accuracy, proper verification, and compliance with consumer protection standards.

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