Consumer complaint received 2025-04-10 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: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: LA

Complaint narrative:
Equifax Credit Report - Metro 2 Compliance and FCRA Violations Analysis Identified Violations in Payment History Grid 1. Incomplete/Inaccurate Payment History Data The payment history grid for XXXX shows No Data Available for all months ( indicated by the crosshatched pattern in all calendar grid boxes ). However, the report also shows Months Reviewed : 1 at the bottom, creating a contradiction. This violates : FCRA Section 607 ( b ) : Requires consumer reporting agencies to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information Metro 2 Format requirements : Mandates standardized reporting of payment history data ECOA compliance standards : Requires accurate reporting of credit information This discrepancy suggests either : Missing data that should have been reported Improper formatting of available data Failure to accurately process or display existing payment information 2. Misleading Payment Status Indicators The report contains payment status indicators ( 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180 days past due ) even though no payment history is displayed in the grid, potentially creating a misleading impression about payment performance. This violates : FCRA Section 605 ( a ) : Prohibits misleading representations Metro 2 Format standards : Requires consistent application of payment codes and indicators TILA disclosure requirements : Mandates accurate disclosure of payment status information 3. Inconsistent Time Period Reporting The report indicates Months Reviewed : 1 but shows a full calendar year grid for XXXX with all months marked as No Data Available. This inconsistency violates : Metro 2 Format guidelines : Requires consistent time period reporting FCRA accuracy requirements : Mandates that information be reported in a non-misleading manner CDIA standards : Requires that No Data indicators only be used when appropriate 4. Ambiguous Payment Status Codes The report includes codes like : V ( Voluntary Surrender ) F ( Foreclosure ) CO ( Charge Off ) B ( Included in Bankruptcy ) R ( Repossession ) TN ( Too New to Rate ) While these codes themselves are standard under Metro 2 Format, displaying them without any corresponding actual payment history creates potential confusion and may violate : FCRA Section 609 ( a ) ( 1 ) : Requires clear disclosure of information in file Metro 2 Format standards : Requires proper context for payment status codes CDIA reporting guidelines : Requires accurate relationship between payment codes and history 5. Improper Months Reviewed Calculation The Months Reviewed : 1 notation contradicts the empty payment history grid, suggesting either : A calculation error in determining review period Improper application of Metro 2 Format standards Failure to accurately count and report payment history periods This violates Metro 2 compliance requirements for accurate temporal representation of payment history. 
Legal Implications 1. These violations potentially constitute : FCRA violations : Failure to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy TILA violations : Improper disclosure of credit terms ECOA violations : Potential disparate impact if inconsistent reporting affects credit decisions Metro 2 Format non-compliance : Multiple technical format errors 2. Recent CFPB enforcement actions against Equifax have targeted similar issues, resulting in significant penalties. In XXXX, the CFPB ordered Equifax to pay {$15.00} XXXX for improper investigations of credit reporting errors. 
3. The contradictory and incomplete nature of the payment history reporting could be grounds for a dispute under FCRA Section 611, which requires consumer reporting agencies to conduct reasonable reinvestigations of disputed information.

Recommended Actions 1. File a formal dispute with Equifax challenging : The contradictory Months Reviewed : 1 versus empty payment grid The display of payment status codes without corresponding payment history The accuracy of any implied payment status 2. Submit a complaint to the CFPB specifically citing : Metro 2 Format violations in payment history reporting FCRA Section 607 ( b ) violations regarding accuracy Technical data inconsistencies in the report

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation