Consumer complaint received 2025-08-07 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account status incorrect
Company: EQUIFAX, INC.
State: IL

Complaint narrative:
Rebuttal to XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. ( Response Dated XX/XX/year> ) Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Complaint # XXXX Submitted by : [ Your Full Legal Name ] I hereby submit this formal rebuttal to the response filed by XXXX XXXX Bank XXXX XXXX ( hereafter XXXX ) dated XX/XX/year>, concerning the continued reporting of XXXX charged-off credit card accounts ( ending in XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ) on my XXXX, Equifax, and XXXX  credit reports. 

Chases response is legally and factually insufficient. The company fails to rebut the core issue raised : that XXXX is unlawfully re-aging derogatory tradelines by furnishing updated status dates and last payment dates in XXXX and XX/XX/year>, years after the accounts were paid and closed. 

I. Violation of FCRA 605 ( c ) : Improper Re-Aging of Charge-Off Accounts Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) 605 ( c ), the seven-year reporting period for a charged-off account begins from the Date of First Delinquency ( DOFD ), not from the date of last activity, payment, or data update. Chases practice of furnishing new last payment and status updated dates for these paid, charged-off accounts constitutes unlawful re-aging, which artificially extends the derogatory impact on my credit file beyond the statutory period. 

This practice is expressly prohibited by the Consumer Data Industry Associations XXXX XXXX Reporting Standards, which require furnishers to report the original DOFD and not alter account dates post-charge-off unless a bona fide consumer payment or contractual obligation occursneither of which is applicable here. 

XXXX. Violation of FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) : Failure to Conduct a Reasonable Investigation Upon receipt of my dispute, Chase had an affirmative duty under FCRA 1681s-2 ( b ) to conduct a reasonable investigation and correct or delete any inaccurate or incomplete information. Instead, XXXX confirmed the accuracy of data that is patently misleading : listing last payment dates in 2025 when these accounts were closed and paid years earlier. 

Chases refusal to correct or delete the tradelines after notification reflects either a willful disregard of their statutory duties or gross negligence, both of which trigger potential civil liability under FCRA 1681n and 1681o.

III. Violation of FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) : Furnishing and Retaining Inaccurate Information By supplying materially false payment and update dates, XXXX has furnished data that is not only factually inaccurate but misleading to lenders and insurers. It falsely suggests recent charge-off activity or delinquency, damaging my credit profile and directly resulting in credit denials, higher interest rates, and reputational harm. The credit bureaus retention of these tradelinesdespite supporting evidence and dispute documentationviolates their independent obligations under FCRA 1681e ( b ) and 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ). 

This complaint is primarily against XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX, as the furnisher of the disputed tradeline data. However, XXXX, Equifax, and XXXX  are also named because they continue to report the inaccurate XXXX tradelines, despite receiving prior disputes and supporting documentation. Their refusal to remove or correct the accounts violates FCRA 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) and 1681e ( b ).

Company response to consumer: Closed with non-monetary relief