Consumer complaint received 2025-05-21 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: LEXISNEXIS
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
XX/XX/XXXX XX/XX/XXXX : Report frozen, updated report requested, address verification submitted XX/XX/XXXX : Unable to process request letter issued by LexisNexis citing missing verification XX/XX/XXXX : Formal notice sent by certified mail demanding removal of bankruptcy entries ( no response ) XX/XX/XXXX : Phone inquiry made ; demand for verification, current bank statement submitted XX/XX/XXXX : Updated report made available XX/XX/XXXX : Formal Objection Notice mailed ( certified ) XX/XX/XXXX : Notice received by LexisNexis XX/XX/XXXX : Unable to process request letter received XX/XX/XXXX : Email follow-up sent ; LexisNexis response XXXX refer to XX/XX/XXXX letter XX/XX/XXXX : Another Unable to process letter received XX/XX/XXXX : Phone inquiry made ; demand for verification, current bank statement submitted XX/XX/XXXX : Another Unable to process letter received again XX/XX/XXXX : Phone inquiry made ; XX/XX/XXXX notice was not found due to verification issues ; dispute was denied ; told to resubmit with verification. 
XX/XX/XXXX : CFPB complaint submitted XX/XX/XXXX : LexisNexis responded, removed 2 listings LexisNexis relied on XXXX  dataknown to be non-XXXX  compliant, and admitted to acting only after federal complaint submission. These actions reflect a disregard for federal dispute procedures and fair data handling responsibilities. 

Further, after full compliance and verified submissions, LexisNexis repeatedly issued unable to process request letters in XX/XX/XXXX, yet, during a recorded call on XX/XX/XXXX at XXXX XXXX, an agent admitted they never received or processed my dispute and outright denied it without basis. This clear contradiction flagrantly violates 15 U.S.C. 1681i and XXXX reporting rules, exposing deliberate obstruction, bad faith, and a willful breach of federal dispute procedures. 

Background of Dispute History Over the course of several months, I have made repeated, good faith efforts to resolve inaccurate reporting of bankruptcy records in my consumer reports. These efforts include : Multiple written disputes issued directly to LexisNexis, clearly identifying inaccuracies and outlining violations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), XXXX  reporting standards, and related statutes ; Submission of valid proof of identity and address verification including full current bank statements per their stated requirements ; Repeated responses from LexisNexis stating they were " unable to process my request '' despite having the required documents on file. 

Dispute Authorization & Recent Activity In good faith, I authorized a final dispute over the phone after LexisNexis had denied my prior written requests, citing a supposed lack of address verification. Upon authorizing the phone dispute, I again verified my identity via their website using a valid bank statement. 

Despite this, LexisNexis again returned an unable to process request notification continuing their pattern of obstruction, delay, and noncompliance. These tactics appear calculated to frustrate consumer rights and avoid lawful correction of their records. 

Response Analysis & XXXX  Violations LexisNexis, in their response to the CFPB, admitted that : They receive data from the nationwide consumer reporting agencies ( NCRAs ) ; They use public records from XXXX, which is not designed for direct credit reporting nor required to meet XXXX compliance ; They waited until AFTER a complaint was submitted to the CFPB to review the matter indicating that my previous direct notices were disregarded. 

Furthermore, while LexisNexis claims to only resell data from the NCRAs, the NCRAs themselves have stated that they source public bankruptcy information FROM LexisNexis a circular deflection which undermines accountability and regulatory transparency. 

Violation of Consumer Data National Accuracy Standards ( CDNA ) and XXXX  Guidelines LexisNexis has admitted to sourcing bankruptcy data from PACER, an electronic public access system designed for court records but not intended to serve as a verified or XXXX-compliant data source for consumer reporting. This practice directly violates the Consumer Data National Accuracy ( CDNA ) standards, which require that all consumer reporting agencies furnish information that is complete, accurate, and properly verified. XXXX  guidelines explicitly mandate that public record data must be validated and substantiated to ensure reliability and accuracy.

By relying on PACER data without independent verification, LexisNexis fails to meet these essential accuracy requirements. Furthermore, their refusal to properly process verified dispute requests and their delayed or obstructive investigation practices breach XXXX dispute handling protocols and the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). Such actions undermine consumer rights and regulatory compliance, warranting immediate corrective action and enforcement.

15 U.S. Code 1681e ( b ) Compliance procedures " Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. '' This is the controlling statute under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) that mandates LexisNexis ( as a CRA and reseller ) to maintain procedures ensuring maximum possible accuracy. Their reliance on XXXX  which does not provide consumer dispute protocols, lacks Metro 2 formatting, and is not designed for compliance with FCRA is a clear breach of this duty.

XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX  Reporting Format Guidelines The XXXX XXXX  Format was developed by the Consumer Data Industry Association ( XXXX  ) to standardize credit reporting across all furnishers and CRAs. It includes specific compliance requirements such as : Proper coding for bankruptcies ( e.g., Discharged, Dismissed, Filed ) Accurate timestamps and court identifiers Verification protocols before updates or adverse reporting

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation