Consumer complaint received 2025-09-24 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
The issue at hand reflects a serious conflict between the consumer, XXXX XXXX, and Experian, one of the major credit reporting agencies, concerning the handling of her credit information and the accuracy of the data being reported. At the core of the dispute, XXXX raised multiple concerns regarding inaccurate late-payment notations and unauthorized credit inquiries that, according to her, directly violated federal consumer protection laws such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and provisions under 15 U.S. Code. She specifically pointed out that her XXXX mortgage account, identified under account number XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, had been consistently paid on time and in full, yet Experian reported multiple late payments on the account. XXXX emphasized that this was a direct violation of 15 U.S. Code 1666B, which governs the fair handling of billing errors, and also a breach of the FCRAs strict standards for accuracy. Furthermore, she highlighted that the reported information failed to meet Metro 2 compliance standards, which serve as the industry benchmark for accurate and consistent credit reporting across all bureaus. The tables provided in her dispute demonstrated clear discrepancies between Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion with respect to balances, monthly payments, and dates of account openings, reinforcing her argument that Experians records were unreliable and harmful to her credit profile. 

In addition to the inaccurate mortgage reporting, XXXX strongly objected to two unauthorized hard credit inquiries from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX that appeared on her report on XX/XX/year>, and XX/XX/year>. She argued that these inquiries were conducted without her knowledge or consent, making them violations of Section 604 of the FCRA, which requires a permissible purpose before any consumer report may be accessed. XXXX demanded immediate deletion of these inquiries and requested supporting documentation, including any signed applications, to justify their presence. Her insistence stemmed from the principle that no creditor has the right to access consumer information without explicit authorization, and Experians failure to remove or justify the entries constituted yet another infringement on her rights as a consumer. 

Equally concerning was XXXX accusation that Experian engaged in improper delays when processing her disputes. In her communications, she referenced 15 U.S. Code 1681i, which mandates that consumer reporting agencies must investigate disputes in a timely manner and without bias. She underscored that Experian appeared to be disregarding this obligation by issuing standardized template responses and by delaying investigations on the assumption that her disputes may have been prepared with third-party assistance, such as through a credit repair company. XXXX clarified that regardless of whether she sought advice or assistance, she retained full knowledge and consent of the letters submitted, and any delay based on this assumption was unlawful and a deliberate violation of her rights. She warned that such actions demonstrated willful non-compliance and would be grounds for litigation if not rectified. 

Throughout her letters, XXXX maintained a firm and resolute tone, making it clear that she would not tolerate inaccuracies that damaged her financial standing. She demanded the immediate deletion of all false late-payment remarks on her XXXX account, the removal of the unauthorized hard inquiries, and full written confirmation of these deletions within the statutory 30-day timeframe provided under the FCRA. She also expressed her disappointment with Experians lack of diligence, calling their practices both unprofessional and illegal. XXXX further noted that the discrepancies in account balances, monthly payment amounts, and reporting dates not only violated compliance standards but also introduced inconsistencies that could mislead potential lenders, thereby negatively impacting her ability to secure future credit. 

In closing, XXXX issued strong warnings that failure to correct these issues promptly would result in legal escalation, including forwarding the matter to her attorney for litigation. She reminded Experian that as a consumer, she has the right to fair, accurate, and verifiable reporting, and any deviation from these obligations constitutes a violation of federal law. Her position underscored the broader principle that consumer rights must be respected and that credit reporting agencies bear a legal and ethical responsibility to ensure that all information reported is truthful, consistent, and properly substantiated. This case, therefore, illustrates not only an individuals determination to protect her financial integrity but also highlights systemic problems in how disputes are often mishandled by credit bureaus, making it a matter of potential interest for oversight by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ).

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