Consumer complaint received 2025-10-31 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Problem with a company's investigation into an existing problem — Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: CA

Complaint narrative:
XXXX XXXX issued a Fraud Solutions Team letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, referencing Account ending XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX ). The letter stated that XXXX reviewed your claim and is unable to approve it, citing reasons such as you authorized, participated in, or benefited from the purchase and you accepted responsibility for the charges. 

Mischaracterization : This response grossly misinterprets the nature of my complaints filed with the CFPB and all three credit bureaus on XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. 

My complaint did not allege third-party or identity theft. 

It alleged XXXXXXXX XXXX own erroneous and bad-faith credit reporting of late payments on Account # XXXX ; unlawful account # XXXX creation, balance transfer, reinserting and back dating. 

TransUnion deleted the account following my dispute and supporting documentation, confirming that XXXX furnishing was inaccurate and unsupported. 

XXXX  decision to route this matter to its Fraud Solutions Departmentand to treat it as an unauthorized-use claimdemonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue and a failure to address the regulatory basis of the complaint concerning furnisher accuracy under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and Regulation V ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). 



Record of XXXX XXXX Call XX/XX/XXXX, at XXXX PM XXXX ( XXXX ) XXXX On XX/XX/XXXX, at approximately XXXX PM, I received a call from a XXXX Bank representative in response to my report of fraudulent creation of account involving account # XXXX, to all CRA 's, and to the CFPB.. 
During the call, the representative stated that when a consumer reports fraud, we have to close the account and reopen a new account, and further claimed that the new account # XXXX had been opened in XX/XX/XXXX. I immediately informed her that her statements were factually incorrect. And that I didnt think she had the full set of facts in this case. 
I clarified that the prior account ( # XXXX ) was deleted by XXXX. The newly created account ( # XXXX ) was opened unilaterally by XXXX Bank, and reinserted to my credit file, on or around XX/XX/XXXX, not in XXXX. 
When I corrected the representative and explained that the account was not from XXXX and that her statement was inaccurate, she became defensive and combative. She then accused me of being disrespectful, despite my measured tone, and terminated the call abruptly without providing further assistance. 
This incident demonstrates a continued pattern of evasive, misleading, and obstructive behavior by XXXX XXXX, which is consistent with their prior mismanagement of this account and their ongoing violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1681 ) and Truth in Lending Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1601 ). 


Legal/Procedural Violations : By issuing a generic fraud denial instead of conducting a furnisher investigation, XXXX XXXX  has XXXX Misclassified the complaint and failed to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation as required by 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( b ) ; Ignored its furnisher obligations triggered by the CFPB dispute and XXXX deletion notice ; and Potentially violated CFPB complaint-response standards by providing a misleading, non-responsive template letter. 

Similarly, XXXX actions reflect continued bad-faith handling of consumer reporting obligations, resulting in adverse credit impact and denial of fair credit evaluation. 

Relief Requested : I request that the CFPB direct XXXX Bank to : Reopen and properly reinvestigate the dispute as a furnisher accuracy issue under FCRA XXXX ( b ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX not as a fraud claim ; Provide a written certification of investigation results and identify the data furnished to each credit reporting agency ; Permanently delete Account # XXXX from XXXX and Equifax, consistent with XXXX  prior deletion, or provide documented proof of lawful basis to leave it closed ; Issue a letter of correction acknowledging Synchronys prior inaccurate reporting and confirming deletion of # XXXX and # XXXX, across all CRAs ; and Review and correct its internal complaint-classification practices that cause non-responsive fraud-template replies to legitimate FCRA disputes ( a potential UDAAP violation ). 


Synchronys mischaracterization, failure to investigate, and continued inaccurate reporting constitute willful non-compliance with FCRA 623 ( b ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX, warranting CFPB supervisory review and corrective enforcement.

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief