Consumer complaint received 2025-06-24 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: TX

Complaint narrative:
This account is being reported under XXXX different namesIN UNIV STLN on Transunion and XXXX XXXX on XXXX assigned XXXX different account numbers : XXXX * * * * and XXXX * * * *, respectively. Despite these discrepancies, both entries reflect the same educational debt, reportedly opened in XXXX with identical terms. However, they are being reported with conflicting balances ( {$1900.00} vs. {$1900.00} ), different monthly payment amounts ( {$40.00} vs. {$0.00} ), inconsistent last active and last payment dates, and contradictory payment statuses. 

Additionally, I must question the validity of this account entirely. The name IN XXXX XXXX does not clearly identify any known or legitimate creditor, and I have never had a financial relationship or debt obligation with any entity reporting under that name. It is intentionally vague, lacks transparency, and fails to meet the FCRAs requirement for clearly identifying the source of the information. As such, this reporting is not only inaccurate but unverifiable, and I formally dispute its legitimacy. 

These issues constitute multiple violations of federal law and regulatory standards, including : FCRA 607 ( b ) Maximum Possible Accuracy Requirement FCRA 623 Furnisher Responsibilities for Accurate Reporting 15 U.S. Code 1681e ( b ) Duty of XXXX XXXX XXXX to Maintain Reasonable Procedures to XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Format Guidelines Requiring uniform, consistent, and non-conflicting data reporting In addition, the accounts appear to have been illegally re-aged, with last active dates now listed as XXXX and XXXX, despite the accounts original open date being in XXXX. This violates FCRA 605 ( a ), which prohibits the reporting of derogatory information beyond

seven years from the original date of first delinquency. The presence of two separate derogatory entries for the same debt also constitutes duplicate reporting, which inflates the perceived severity of derogatory data and is inherently misleading and unlawful under the statutes listed above. This practice materially impacts my creditworthiness and misrepresents my financial obligations.

Furthermore, a prior dispute regarding this account was submitted, and yet no method of verification was ever provided, nor was the account updated to reflect its disputed status, as required under FCRA 611. A certified mail request for method of verification was sent to the credit bureaus, and no response was received within the 15-day timeframe. In addition, no method of verification was provided even after a formal complaint was submitted to the CFPB on XX/XX/XXXX. This constitutes willful noncompliance with federal law and a blatant failure to meet reinvestigation and consumer notification requirements. 

Based on these extensive legal and factual violations, I am demanding the immediate deletion of this account from all credit reporting agencies. The entries are inaccurate, unverifiable, misleading, and in direct violation of multiple provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Please conduct a full reinvestigation per FCRA 611 and provide written confirmation of the outcome. If you are unable to verify and correct every aspect of this reporting in strict compliance with federal law, then the information must be permanently deleted.

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