Consumer complaint received 2024-11-27 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account status incorrect
Company: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
In the matter at hand, Consumer ( " Complainant '' ) contends that XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( " XXXX '' ) and the credit reporting agencies have engaged in the inaccurate and misleading reporting of a XXXX late payment for the month of XX/XX/year>, despite the existence of a payment extension agreement granted by XXXX on XXXX XX/XX/year>. The Complainant asserts that the extension brought the account current, eliminating the need for a payment in XXXX, and thus no late payment should have been reported. 
Complainant further avers that this incorrect reporting has resulted in a significant and adverse impact on their credit score, misleading potential creditors into believing that the Complainant failed to meet financial obligations. Complainant raises this issue under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), specifically citing 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ), 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2, and 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), which collectively require accurate and complete reporting of consumer information by both credit reporting agencies and furnishers of information.

In support of this contention, Complainant draws upon the legal standards established in Twumasi-Ankrah v. XXXX XXXX XXXX, Hammoud v. XXXX, and Chaitoff v. XXXX, emphasizing that the misleading nature of the report has occurred to such an extent and in such a way that it could be expected to adversely affect credit decisions, in violation of the FCRA. On XXXX XX/XX/year>, Complainant was granted a payment extension by XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( " XXXX '' ) to address missed payments. This extension adjusted the accounts due date to XX/XX/year>, effectively bringing the account current for both XXXX and XX/XX/year>. Complainant understood that no payments were required for XX/XX/year> as a result of this extension. 
On XXXX XX/XX/year>, an early payment was made on Complainants behalf ahead of the upcoming due date of XXXX XX/XX/year>. Despite these actions and compliance with the extension terms, XXXX erroneously reported a XXXX late payment for XX/XX/year>, which was communicated to the credit reporting agencies. 
Complainants TransUnion credit report dated XXXX XX/XX/year> shows a XXXX late payment rating for XX/XX/year>, but with no corresponding data to substantiate the rating ( see XXXX XXXX XXXX. ) For example, balance, past due, amount paid, and scheduled payment fields are all blank for XX/XX/year>. In contrast the months XXXX and XX/XX/year>, contain corresponding entries that agree with the payment rating specified for those months : OK. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) reporting of a XXXX late payment for XX/XX/year> is both inaccurate and misleading, violating the standards set by the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ), as articulated in Twumasi-Ankrah v. XXXX XXXX XXXX , Hammoud vXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and Chaitoff v. XXXX. The payment extension agreement that was granted and the early payment made on XXXX XX/XX/year> demonstrate XXXX 's compliance with the agreed-upon terms. XXXX further emphasizes the joint responsibility of both furnishers and credit reporting agencies to ensure accuracy and non-misleading information, making the continued misreporting by XXXX and the credit reporting agencies a clear violation of these legal standards.

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 non-monetary relief