Consumer complaint received 2025-07-21 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Improper use of your report — Reporting company used your report improperly
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
b"XXXX XXXX \nXXXX XXXX XXXX \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n Date: XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXXn XXXX XXXX\n SSN: XXXX\n DOB: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n\n EXPERIAN \nXXXX XXXX XXXX \nXXXX, XXXX XXXX\n\n Please disassociate any and all purported personal identifier information attributed to my consumer credit report related to your organization that is not exactly aligned with the\n incontestable personal identifying information I have indicated within this consumer complaint notification. This includes ANY and ALL names, addresses, date(s) of birth,\n social security numbers, employer(s), occupation(s), phone number(s), email address(es), associated borrowers, and or elsewise supposed information contrasting in ANY\n manner that of which is fully and precisely same as is included by me herein!\n My 18-digit Personal Tracking Number is: \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n Subject: Please investigate completely and thoroughly each and every aspect of any item I have contested your supposed reporting privilege(s) to and have here within\n challenged any and all involved parties of any derogatoriness accused against me to demonstrate incontestable evidence of the applicably certifiable compliant reporting\n practices, procedures, and processed of which must be of a maximum possible fairness, reasonableness, truth, accuracy, completeness, timeliness, proven cogency and\n relevance, and verifiability and is without data integrity injuring report deviations that are infractions of mandates, mentioned here or not!\n To the Appropriate Authority:\n I am writing to contest information appearing on my consumer credit report that appears to violate multiple provisions of federal consumer protection laws. This dispute\n requires your immediate attention and thorough investigation. Your response must address all aspects of this challenge to ensure full compliance with the FCRA.\n The duty of care owed by data furnishers involves not only accuracy but also a commitment to continual review and correction of consumer data. Can you prove full\n compliance with all strict regulatory mandates, justifying that you have lawfully obtained, retained, or reinstated the privilege to issue derogatory reports against me?\n The unjustifiably upheld negative charge(s) purported below must be addressed as extensively audited, validated beyond doubt, and determined to be aligned with statutory\n obligations as formally stated by the furnishing entity upon first disclosure upholding defamatory accounts involving me , so please eradicate from reporting the misclassified\n disclosures\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   comprising   Base/XXXX XXXXAccount Number (PCAN) as shown by  TransUnion \n(T)  conveyed to be  XXXX\n The unsupported adverse notation(s) Listed beneath are deemed essential to be lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably conforming to\n required standards as initially reported by the responsible data contributor attaching harmful insinuations to me , so retract from consumer files the improperly categorized\n XXXX   associating   XXXX XXXXAccount Number (PCAN) as affirmed by  TransUnion \n(T),EXperian and E\n Quifax  presented to be  XXXX\n The questionable denunciation(s) herein asserted are obligated for completion as analyzed, verified through independent assessment, deemed legally sound, and upheld as\n conforming to reporting regulations as submitted in its unchanged form referencing disadvantageous assumptions against me so block from reporting the unverified assertions\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   attaching   XXXX XXXX Primary Consumer Account Number (*PCAN) precisely as reported by  TransUnion \n(T),EXperian and E\n Quifax  proposed to be  XXXX\n The inaccurately framed condemning assessment(s) Depicted underneath must be resolved as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise\n demonstrated certifiably compliant as entered at the time of submission by the reporting entity spotlighting accusatory content related to me so halt its inclusion in reports the\n underneath-referenced\n XXXX XXXX    revealing   Consumer Account Number as processed by  TransUnion \n(T),EXperian and E\n Quifax  determined to be  XXXX\n The still-challenged accusatory classification(s) asserted herein must be executed as exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict\n adherence to legal reporting provisions as preserved in its initial entry spotlighting accusatory content related to me , so wipe from accessible reports the now-documented\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   narrating   hard inquiry date (DOI) as filed by  EXperian  designated to be  XXXX\n The unsound unfavorable categorization(s) displayed herein are obligated to be comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with established\n guidelines as kept in its original reporting status emphasizing unfavorable assessments of me , so revoke its appearance in public records the below-indicated\n XXXX XXXX   manifesting   date of inquiry as relayed by  EXperian  recorded to be  XXXX\n The unconvincing accusatory comment(s) Clarified below are mandated to be comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with established\n guidelines as maintained as first stated by the data provider broadcasting unsupportive assessments of me so extract from all repositories the unjustifiably stated\n XXXX XXXX   consisting of   inquiry date as communicated by  EXperian  maintained to be  XXXX\n The doubtful unfavorable classification(s) Set forth underneath require implementation as properly reviewed, reinforced through supplementary verification, and assured as\n meeting the highest data integrity principles as verified from the initial source documentation revisiting discrediting circumstances affecting me so eliminate from credit filing the\n distorted statements\n XXXX XXXX   that has   Inquiry Date (DOI) as referenced by  TransUnion \n(T)  denoted to be XXXX\n The misinterpreted unfavorable charge(s) Further detailed beneath need to be considered critically evaluated, systematically reconfirmed, and affirmed as meeting rigorous\n compliance standards as attested in its first official report projecting negative portrayals of me so retract from all listed entries the improperly documented\n XXXX XXXX   enlisting   HARD Inquiry Date (DOI) as illustrated by  TransUnion \n(T)  defined to be  XXXX\n The lacking-verification injurious claim(s) Stated further down are critical to be rigorously inspected, accuracy substantiated, and reported with full adherence to governing\n mandates as officially transmitted in its first iteration publicizing unfavorable opinions concerning me , so block the now-displayed\n XXXX XXXX   amplifying   date of hard inquiry as noted by  TransUnion \n(T)  indicated to be  XXXX\n The unverified derogatory assertion(s) herein purported must be performed as Reinvestigated or investigated, validly proven verifiable, and demonstrative of certifiably\n compliant reporting adequacy(ies) as detailed in the original submission maintaining harmful implications against me , so nullify its presence in reporting systems the\n unfounded portrayals\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   integrating   HARD Inquiry Date as delivered by  TransUnion \n(T)  asserted to be  XXXX\n The lacking-authentication defamatory declaration(s) described below must be fulfilled as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstrated\n certifiably compliant as originally issued by the reporting party generating pessimistic conclusions about me so suppress the disclosure of the flawed narratives\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   signifying   Date of HARD Inquiry (DOI) as described by  EXperian  to be  XXXX\n The debated yet reported harmful remark(s) Located below demand evaluation as lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably conforming to\n required standards as extracted exactly from the first documented entry reinforcing detrimental judgments about me so remove from reporting the unduly emphasized\n XXXX   with   date of inquiry (DOI) as conveyed by  EQuifax  described to be  XXXX\n The unproven disparaging commentary Positioned beneath are in accordance to be analyzed, verified through independent assessment, deemed legally sound, and upheld as\n conforming to reporting regulations by the condemning data furnisher at time purported exactly as reported circulating disparaging perspectives regarding me , so delete the\n next-detailed\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   articulating   Date of Inquiry (DOI) precisely as reported by  EXperian  referenced to be  XXXX\n Page 1 of \nThe suspect adverse depiction(s) Delimited below are imperative to be thoroughly examined, reassessed, conclusively validated, and unmistakably established as compliant\n as filed at the moment of declaration by the alleging party portraying me in a critical light so expunge from documented records the defectively described\n XXXX    unfolding   Date of HARD Inquiry as included by  EQuifax  marked to be  XXXX\n The baseless negative accusation(s)\n As Documented Below\n are expected to undergo extensively audited, validated beyond doubt, and determined to be aligned with statutory obligations as shown in compliance with the initial filing\n standards forwarding negative allegations about me , so expunge from report history the described herein\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   listing   Date of Inquiry as acknowledged by  EXperian  outlined to be  XXXX\n The weakly founded critical accusation(s) As captured below are deemed essential to be verified, subjected to enhanced scrutiny, and justified through independent\n confirmation procedures as attested in its first official report attributing unfavorable qualities to me so cease the distribution of the inaccurately referenced\n XXXX    encapsulating   inquiry date (DOI) as declared by  TransUnion \n(T)  To Be  XXXX\n The refutable detrimental charge(s) Following this statement are required to be exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict adherence\n to legal reporting provisions as referenced in its primary filing replicating defaming suppositions against me , so cease the reporting of the falsely implied\n XXXX XXXX  giving   HARD Inquiry Date (DOI) as forwarded by  TransUnion \n(T)  formulated to be  XXXX\n The unresolved harmful report(s) purported herein are intended to be revalidated under scrutiny, found unerring in its correctness, and maintained within lawful reporting\n frameworks as submitted in its unchanged form underscoring demeaning representations of me so delete the compromised entries\n XXXX XXXX    describing   hard inquiry date (DOI) as shared by  TransUnion \n(T)  declared to be  XXXX\n The undetermined damaging declaration(s) Presented further down are essential to be subjected to extensive review, revalidation, authenticated as accurate, and shown to\n meet all compliance criteria as presented in its primary submission by the originating reporter sustaining adverse opinions related to me so delete from reporting the\n miscommunicated details\n XXXX    exhibiting   Inquiry Date (DOI) as portrayed by  EQuifax  projected to be  XXXX\n The still-contested defaming statement(s) Specified further down should be handled as assessed for factual legitimacy, methodically authenticated, and upheld as verifiably\n accurate as provided in its first official record demonstrating unfavorable biases toward me , so delete from reporting the presently outlined\n XXXX XXXX   incorporating   HARD Inquiry Date as expressed by  TransUnion \n(T)  expressed to be  XXXX\n The insufficiently evidenced harmful indictment(s) herein indicated must be performed as extensively audited, validated beyond doubt, and determined to be aligned with\n statutory obligations as originally documented by its author describing unfavorable insinuations directed at me so block the reporting of the incorrectly logged\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   possessing   Date of HARD Inquiry as specified by  EXperian  proposed to be  XXXX\n The potentially inaccurate condemning entry(s) below asserted are obligated for completion as lawfully evaluated, precision verified, and substantiated as indisputably\n conforming to required standards as entered at the time of submission by the reporting entity exposing purported deficiencies associated with me so block the immediately\n listed\n XXXX XXXX XXXX I   featuring   date of hard inquiry as detailed by  EXperian  conveyed to be  XXXX\n The alleged but unverified critical statement(s) Highlighted downwards must be fulfilled as analyzed, verified through independent assessment, deemed legally sound, and\n upheld as conforming to reporting regulations by the condemning data furnisher at time purported exactly as reported embedding misleading impressions about me so please\n eradicate from reporting the mistakenly communicated\n XXXX XXXX XXXX   including   Inquiry Date as reported by  TransUnion \n(T)  asserted to be  XXXX\n The indefensibly alleged injurious portrayal(s) Laid out beneath must be complied with as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstrated\n certifiably compliant as incorporated in its unaltered credit profile recounting unfavorable incidents linked to me , so extract from displayed credit details the misguided\n descriptions\n ONEMAIN   incorporating   Date of Inquiry (DOI) as represented by  E\n Quifax  maintained to be  XXXX\n The wrongly suggested harmful commentary asserted below must receive attention as exhaustively examined, fortified through secondary validation, and kept within strict\n adherence to legal reporting provisions as stated upon initial documentation conveying defamatory perspectives about me , so block from reporting the undermentioned\n XXXX    accentuating   date of hard inquiry (DOI) as verified by  E\n Quifax  denoted to be XXXX\n The unverifiable adverse pronouncement(s) Displayed further down are critical to be comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with\n established guidelines as compiled by the reporting entity without alterations formalizing derogatory notions concerning me so revoke its documentation entirely the successive\n data\n XXXX    producing   date of inquiry (DOI) as disclosed by  EQuifax  indicated to be  XXXX\n The under-supported defamatory representation(s) indicated below must be executed as comprehensively reassessed, integrity confirmed, and retained in compliance with\n established guidelines as displayed in the original credit reporting record reinforcing disapproving labels directed at me , so block the soon-mentioned\n XXXX    rendering   date of inquiry exactly as reported by  TransUnion \n(T)  expressed to be  XXXX\n The unjustifiably upheld negative charge(s) below reported are in accordance to be properly reviewed, reinforced through supplementary verification, and assured as meeting\n the highest data integrity principles as disclosed by the reporting entity in its unaltered wording highlighting unfavorable details regarding me so remove from reporting the\n inconsistently stated\n XXXX    amplifying   inquiry date as presented by  TransUnion \n(T)  proposed to be  XXXX\n The lacking-substantiation harmful portrayal(s) Summarized beneath require implementation as critically evaluated, systematically reconfirmed, and affirmed as meeting\n rigorous compliance standards as affirmed in its first transmission by the data furnisher developing injurious descriptions concerning me so block the reporting of the fabricated\n entries\n XXXX    structured with   Date of HARD Inquiry (DOI) as provided by  TransUnion \n(T)  referenced to be  XXXX\n The indefensible negative assertion(s) As itemized below should be processed as rigorously inspected, accuracy substantiated, and reported with full adherence to governing\n mandates as reflected in the initial report exactly as declared suggesting negativity versus me so block the falsely attributed\n XXXX XXXX    plus   hard inquiry date as documented by  TransUnion \n(T)  defined to be  XXXX\n The inaccurately framed condemning assessment(s) Discussed further down are subject to be Reinvestigated or investigated, validly proven verifiable, and demonstrative of\n certifiably compliant reporting adequacy(ies) as extracted exactly from the first documented entry featuring pejorative classifications of me , so delete the further-listed\n XXXX XXXX   describing   hard inquiry date (DOI) as characterized by  TransUnion \n(T)  outlined to be  XXXX\n The not-confirmed negative labeling(s) Labeled beneath demand attention as investigated, reinvestigated, proven verified valid, and or elsewise demonstrated certifiably\n compliant as kept in its original reporting status asserting damaging conclusions against me , so nullify its presence in reporting systems the forthcoming\n XXXX XXXX   supplying   date of inquiry as asserted by  TransUnion \n(T)  presented to be XXXX\n The FCRA, Metro 2 standards, and applicable state and federal statutes mandate the absolute accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and verifiability of all reported credit data.\n This requires precise reporting of all essential data, the absence of duplicate or conflicting entries across bureaus, and the prompt correction or removal of any inaccurate,\n unverifiable, or legally obsolete information. Failure to meet these legal and industry obligations carries significant consequences. The following section provides specific\n Page 2 of 9\nevidence of each disputed item's deficiencies, clearly outlining data errors and including supporting documentation that demonstrates their direct and negative impact on my\n creditworthiness and legal rights, necessitating immediate and comprehensive correction.\n The Symbol Keys used in this Letters images \nare \nas follows :\n rT = \nTransunion             rX = \nExperian             rQ = \n1\n 2\n Equifax\n rNT = Non-TEE CRA(s)\n D = Data Furnishing Reporter #1 (or Creditor listed in a PRE = Public Records Event )\n D = Data Furnishing Reporter #2 (The Original Creditor if a Coff, a Coll, and or a Coff /Coll)\n  = Likely RROR(s) are detected related to this Data Field Point\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Factual Actual Undeniably Disputable RROR(s) (FAUD)\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Discrepancy RROR(s) of Non-Compliant Inconsistency(ies) (DNCI)\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Metro 2 Code Exactness RROR(s) (M2CE)\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Metro 2 Code Description exactness RROR(s) (M2CD)\n  = value reported is detected to likely have Pretermitted RROR(s) by possible Willful Omission (PWO)\n PRE = Public Records Event\n PII = Personal Identifier Information\n COFF = Charge-off(s)\n COLL = Collection(s)\n COFF/COLL = Charge-off(s)/Collection(s)\n DrgL = Derogatory Lates\n DlqL = Delinquency Late(s)\n INQ = Inquiry(ies)\n UON = Unknown or Other Negativity\n CCI = Creditor Contact Information\n As previously indicated within this written consumer complaint the following items of misinformation must be removed from reporting, modified to an appropriate reporting\n status, proven applicably true correct complete timely fair and reasonable as asserted when asserted by whom asserts it, else potential unlawful reporting violations injurious\n to me likely exist.\n DELETE Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  that presents a skewed picture  Account Current Balance:  as being  --  on my   T\n reported,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  the Base/21  Accounts Current Balance (ACBal)s value is\n In addition  Consumer Account Number:  is non-compliantly  inexplicably inaccurately assumed  as being  XXXX   upon my   T\n credit report.    \nAs dis\nAs misleadingly disreported,  the allegation\n stands in nonconformity of reporting competence because  the BASE/7 Primary Consumer Account Number (PCAN) appears deficient: (a) its purported value lacks\n uniqueness, (b) includes my SSN in part or full, (c) falls outside the 5-32 alphanumeric character range allowed reported, (d) fails to use exactly four (4) redacted and or\n truncated characters, and/or (e) is inconsistently reported across agencies. Such deviations from the CDIAs CRRG-outlined Metro 2 Standards jeopardize data integrity and\n fail to meet federal mandates for fair, reasonable, accurate, complete, timely, truthful, valid, and verifiable reporting by furnishers (creditors, collectors, debt buyers, etc.) and\n CRAs ( TransUnion, Experian, Equifax, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  etc. as applies). THEREFORE, I DEMAND its\n IMMEDIATE and COMPLETE DELETION ;\n Plus  Portfolio Type Code:  is lacking compliance   deceitfully asserted  to being   --  in my   T\n As dis-stated,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting\n competence since  the BSCF-8 Portfolio Type Codes value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value\n as should be per 2023  CRRG mandates.;\n In addition  Account Type Code:  is non-compliantly  inaccurately reported  to be  --  on my   T\n As stated,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  the\n Portfolio Type Codes value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value as should be per 2023 CRRG\n mandates.;\n Additionally  Account Terms Duration:  is without compliance  UNSTATED  as  --   within my   T\n As mis-stated,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting\n competence because  it is neither certified for Metro 2 compliance nor adequacy under the FCRA regulations.-T\n COFF\n TransUnion\n *Data Reporter Name \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX\n *Portfolio Type Code:--\n *Account Current Balance:--\n Experian--\n Equifax------\n *Account Terms Duration:-- --------\n Delete right now  XXXX XXXX  that misleads  High Credit/ Original Loan Amount:  with being  $XXXX   upon my   Transunion\n   within my   Experian\n credit report,  and as well as  to being  $XXXX   to inside my   Equifax\n credit report,  to be  --\n credit report too.  As mal-accused,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of\n reporting competence since  the Base/12 High Credit Original Loan Amount (HCOLA)s value is-TXQ\n COFF\n Page 3 of 9\n DLQL -TXQ   \n DLQL -TXQ   \nTransUnion Experian Equifax\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX\n *Portfolio Type Code: Credit Card Credit Card Credit Card\n *High Credit/ Original Loan Amount: $XXXX-- $XXXX\n Account Rating: Paid Paid Derogatory\n *ECOA Code: Paid Paid Derogatory\n Delete Right NOW  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   that reports incorrectly  Account Current Balance:  as being  --  on my   Transunion   credit report,  with\n being  --  upon my   Experian   credit report,  and as well as  to be  --  within my   Equifax   credit report too.  As dis-purported,  the claim is in deviation of reporting\n adequacy(ies) because  the Base/21 Accounts Current Balance (ACBal)s value is\n In addition  Consumer Account Number:  is non-compliantly  wrongly purported  as being  XXXX  inside my   Transunion       erroneously alleged  to being\n  XXXX  upon my   Experian         XXXX  in my   Equifax     As misleadingly misreported,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of reporting competence\n because  the Primary Consumer Account Numbers purported value is NOT EACH of being (i) with UNIQUENESS, (ii) NON-INCLUSIVE of SSN values, (iii) with AT LEAST 5\n but NO MORE than 32 alphanumeric characters, (iv) of EXACTLY four (4) Redacted and or Truncated characters, (v) consistently reported across all reporting agencies, and\n or (vi) is elsewise unproven to not be in deviation from that of required reporting adequacy(ies) per the CDIAs own authored and self-governed CRRG-outlined and defined\n Metro 2 Standards for certifiably Compliant reporting ( of which ANY DEVIATION from these standards jeopardizes the INTEGRITY of the data ) that satisfies the federal\n mandates for FAIR & REASONABLE reporting practices, procedures and processes that best assures any and all claims are in fact of a maximum possible accuracy,\n completeness, timeliness, truthfulness, validity and verifiability, hence my DEMAND to delete HERE and NOW! ;\n Plus  Portfolio Type Code:  is lacking compliance   inaccurately reported  to be  Flexible spending credit card  on my   Transunion       INACCURATELY\n reported  as  Credit Card  within my   Experian         Flexible spending credit card  inside my   Equifax     As alleged,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of\n reporting competence since  the BSCF-8 Portfolio Type Codes value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or\n Revolving value as should be per 2023 CRRG mandates.;\n In addition  Account Type Code:  is non-compliantly  misreported  as being  Flexible spending credit card  upon my   Transunion       misrepresenting of facts  to being   Credit\n Card  in my   Experian         Flexible spending credit card  on my   Equifax     As dis-accused,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  the Base/8\n Portfolio Type Code (PTC)s value is NOT the required C, I, M, O, R, Line of Credit, Installment, Mortgage, Open, or Revolving value as should be per 2023\n CRRG mandates.;\n TransUnion Experian Equifax\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXXn *Date of Account Information: XXXX XXXX XXXX\n *Portfolio Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\n *Account Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\n *Account Current Balance:------\n Date of Account Current Balance: XXXX XXXX XXXX\n Delete Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX   that is flawed in its reporting  Date Last Verified(DLV):  to being  XXXX  to inside my   Transunion   credit report,  as\n being  --  on my   Experian   credit report,  and as well as  with being  --  upon my   Equifax   credit report too.  As mis-reported,  the allegation stands in nonconformity of\n reporting competence because  \nthe Date Last Verified (DLV) is not EACH of being (i) displayed as MMDDYYYY or MM/DD/YYYY or MM-DD-YYYY such that the 8 numeral characters are in fact properly and\n accurately representive of a Metro 2 compliant format , (ii) displayed exactly same as that of the mandatorily always reported Header/8 Last Updated Activity Date (LUAD)\n value, (iii) is NOT precisely aligned with latest purported DOACBal (aka Date of Base/21 Account Current Balance) value (if any) , (iv) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest\n reported DOASC (aka Date of Account Status Code) , (v) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest reported DOPRC (aka Date of Payment Rating Code) , (vi) is NOT exactly\n aligned with the latest verified reporting of the OCOA (aka Base/23 Original Charge-off Amount) , (vii) is NOT exactly aligned with the latest reported DOAI (aka Date of\n Account Information) , and/or (viii) elsewise is NOT displayed in full compliance with mandated maximum appropriateness!\n Additionally  Creditor Type:  is without compliance    to be  Bank Credit Cards  within my   Transunion         as  Bank Credit Cards     Experian         All Banks      Equifax\n    As mal-stated,  the mis-claim stands in nonconformity of reporting competence since  it can not be verified as Metro 2 compliant or proven acceptable under FCRA\n requirements either.\n TransUnion Experian Equifax\n *Data Reporter Name XXXX XXXX XXXX\n *Consumer Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX\n *Portfolio Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\n *Account Type Code: Flexible spending credit card Credit Card Flexible spending credit card\n *High Credit/ Original Loan Amount: $XXXX $XXXX--\n Creditor Type: Bank Credit Cards Bank Credit Cards All Banks \n Date Last Verified(DLV): XXXX----\n Page 4 of 9\n INQ -D1X\n INQ -D1X\n INQ -D1X\n INQ -D1T\n INQ -D1T\n INQ -D1T\n INQ -D1T\n INQ -D1X\n INQ -D1Q\n DELETE Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  that gives unproven or false information  Date of Inquiry  to be  XXXX  within my   XXXX   credit report.    As\n mal-purported,  the claim is in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  it can not be verified as Metro 2 compliant or proven acceptable under FCRA requirements either.\n Inquiries\n  \nDR Name *HRCF12  \nDR Address\n XXXXHRCF13 \nDR Contact No.\n XXXXHRCF14 \nDR Identification No.\n XXXXBSCF5 \nDate of Inquiry\n ^NTCU^ \nPermissible Purpose\n ^NTCU^ \nDR Industry Type\n ^NTCU^ \nCredit Bureau\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Auto Financing Experian\n Delete right now  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that contains errors  Date of Inquiry  to being  XXXX  to inside my   XXXX    credit report.    As purported,  the allegation stands\n in nonconformity of reporting competence because  it does NOT meet Metro 2 certification or FCRA requirements.\n Inquiries\n  \nDR Name *HRCF12 \nDR Address\n *HRCF13 \nDR Contact No.\n *HRCF14 \nDR Identification No.\n *BSCF5 \nDate of Inquiry\n ^NTCU^ \nPermissible Purpose\n ^NTCU^ \nDR Industry Type\n ^NTCU^ \nCredit Bureau\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Bank Credit Cards Experian\n Delete Right NOW  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that misreports  Date of Inquiry  as being  XXXX  on my   XXXX    credit report.    As dis-alleged,  the mis-claim stands in\n nonconformity of reporting competence since  it lacks Metro 2 certification and FCRA competence.\n Inquiries\n  \nDR Name *HRCF12 \nDR Address\n *HRCF13 \nDR Contact No.\n *HRCF14 \nDR Identification No.\n *BSCF5 \nDate of Inquiry\n ^NTCU^ \nPermissible Purpose\n ^NTCU^ \nDR Industry Type\n ^NTCU^ \nCredit Bureau\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   Bank Credit Cards Experian\n Delete Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX  that is incorrect  Date of Inquiry  with being  XXXX  upon my   XXXX   credit report.    As deceptively misreported,  the claim is\n in deviation of reporting adequacy(ies) because  it lacks the necessary Metro 2 compliance certifiability and any evidence of even being FCRA abiding.\n Inquiries\n  \nDR Name *HRCF12 \nDR Address\n *HRCF13 \nDR Contact No.\n *HRCF14 \nDR Identification No.\n *BSCF5 \nDate of Inquiry\n ^NTCU^ \nPermissible Purpose\n ^NTCU^ \nDR Industry Type\n ^NTCU^ \nCredit Bureau\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  Bank Credit Cards TransUnion\n DELETE Right Now  XXXX XXXX XXXX   that distorts the facts  Date of Inquiry  to be  XXXX  within my XXXX   credit report.    As mal-alleged,  the allegation stands\n in nonconformity of reporting competence because  it fails to be certifiably Metro 2 compliant nor FCRA adequate.\n Inquiries\n  \nDR Name *HRCF12 \nDR Address\n *HRCF13 \nDR Contact No.\n *HRCF14 \nDR Identification No.\n *BSCF5 \nDate of Inquiry\n ^NTCU^ \nPermissible Purpose\n ^NTCU^ \nDR Industry Type\n ^NTCU^ \nCredit Bureau\n XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX \nXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX   Bank Credit Cards TransUnion\n Delete right now  XXXX"

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 explanation