Consumer complaint received 2023-11-17 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: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: MI

Complaint narrative:
XXXX, transunion, and XXXX you have been given more then enough information proving the breached of contract between XXXX XXXX XXXX and my husband and I. We will be sueing each of you in small claims court for the max in Michigan XXXX for the extensive damage you have caused our family as my husband is being denied use of his credit because of the banks fraud! 

this is the legal documents being submitted in the court. this has become ridiculous and your threes complete ignorance on laws and basically not giving a XXXX that the banks has not only stollen from us but are reporting on stollen money? you can explain your selves to the judge when im done with the bank. 

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- To date XXXX and XXXX XXXX have made and exorbitant number of attempts to come to a reasonable resolution to the breach contract with XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, the denial of use of the XXXX XXXX XXXX vehicle service contract. The continued denial of use of the vehicle service contract purchased on XXXX XXXX in the amount of XXXX, carrying a XXXX percent interest rate has caused significant Economic, monetary, and psychological including the denial of social pleasure and enjoyment. 
The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in questions was financed through XXXX XXXX XXXX in the amount of XXXX, after a {$5000.00} cash payment was given to the auto dealer. Both the vehicle and service contract were financed through XXXX XXXX XXXX. From the beginning ot the loan agreement arise began to arise. XXXX contacted the bank regarding the charges added to the loan for the service XXXX. XXXX XXXX had guaranteed the cost of the Vehicle Service Contract was included in the {$11000.00} price tag of the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. They was no assistance or investigations made, even after we explained that the dealership signed most of our loan documents per the XXXX foot covid rules and most of the transaction took place in the car itself not the building. After being denied an adjustment on the loan account, they then attempted to use the service contract and it was nearly impossible to find a mechanic who would honor the warranty as they were know not to pay. 
The vehicle was diagnosed with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXs in XX/XX/XXXX and has not been driven since. From the month of XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX XXXX and XXXX have made payments to XXXX XXXX XXXX in the amount of XXXX, even though they have been denied the use of the vehicle and vehicle service contract. These payments include XXXX time processing fees in the amount of $ XXXX {$9.00} per transaction. 
XXXX owns a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXy called XXXX in the XXXX XXXX. She Makes XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX from her home and sells them locally. The continued denial of use of her XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX has forced her to pay excessively higher grocery fees, delivery fees, tips, and inflated prices on nearly all orders she takes. She can not drive her vehicle to the store to purchase items for herself, family, or business. Most items must be ordered and delivered on demand per custom orders or the simple need for milk or XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. The loss of revenue for her business has been exorbitant as well as the money taken from the children in order to pay someone else to deliver daily necessities. From XX/XX/XXXX to date XXXX has spent XXXX on delivery services for food, diapers, formula, and other daily necessities as her vehicle remains disassembled at XXXX XXXX XXXX waiting a payment in the amount of XXXX the current balance, as well as XXXX which was only an estimate given and giving the rise in the cost of living it is likely the estimate and rates have changed in XXXX years. 
The Following information will outline in detail the repeated attempts the XXXX have made to rectify the situation, as well as additional damages that have incurred and other supporting information pertinent to the complaint. 
There have been multiple wrongful and unjust claim denials for covered vehicle service contract repairs made by both XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX in regard to XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. which include misrepresentations, lack of industry knowledge, and simply coming up with any excuse to deny the claim even if breaking the law ( Exhibit XXXX ). XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX have worked together to intentionally and wrongfully deny both XXXX and XXXX XXXX claims. Which in turn has resulted in both a denial of use of their vehicle, as well as the agreed upon service contract, damage to both XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX, denial of new loans, and continued financial hardships. 
In XXXX of XXXX the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX showed signs of electrical failure and it was quickly taken to an auto repair shop for diagnostics. The truck was there for about XXXX week, as most shops are extremely busy, and it was Diagnosed with XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  and they needed to be replaced. XXXX XXXX of XXXX XXXX, Michigan, where this original diagnostic was performed was unable to that extensive repair work and XXXX and XXXX XXXX and to seek another XXXX shop to repair the engine. This was the first attempt to deny the claim. It was nearly impossible for the plaintiffs to find a repair shop to both honor the claim and have the capability to do the needed repair work. Which has been noted by other consumers ( Exhibit XXXX XXXX  ). XXXX and XXXX XXXX both contacted XXXX XXXX care in hope at finding a repair shop and they stated to call the Car dealership for a list. After calling the car dealership for assistance, the car dealership then told the XXXX they could not help them to call the Bank for assistance. After calling the Bank, XXXX XXXX XXXX stated to call the warranty company for a list or assistance and the vicious circle began. It took nearly 6 months for the plaintiff to find a repair shop capable of doing the engine repair work and that would take the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, though these were hesitant. 
XX/XX/XXXX the XXXX XXXX was towed to XXXX XXXX XXXX for another diagnostics as they sated they were capable to do the repair work initially diagnosed. 
From the month of XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX all waited for XXXX XXXX XXXX to show up to ensure the engine in fact needed XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX the work could be completed. This turned into the second attempt to deny the repair work. They tried to let the warranty run out. XXXX XXXX XXXX simply did not show up to inspect the vehicle after repeated phone calls. XXXX XXXX XXXX stated the timeframe had passed to use the warranty and unfortunately the claim would be denied. The owner of XXXX XXXX himself contacted the warranty company again and stated the truck had been in his shop for XXXX months waiting for there service provider to arrive to inspect it. 
After getting no resolution through complaints made directly to XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX both XXXX and XXXX XXXX both started filing complaints with government agencies and regulatory departments including The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Department of Insurance and Financial Services, the Federal Trade Commission, and XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( Exhibits XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) The responses help no reasonable resolution to the claim denials and most letters included false statements and misrepresentations of the claim at hand. 
In the month of XXXX of XX/XX/XXXX an appointment was finally scheduled, and XXXX XXXX XXXX inspected the trucks engine and the claim was approved. later that very same day, XXXX XXXX XXXX called XXXX XXXX XXXX and changed the approved claim to Denied. After the truck was dismantled and work had began. XXXX XXXX XXXX claim department stated the reason for claim denial is because there were modifications made to the vehicle, specifically a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and they would in fact not cover the claim. There is not a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX nor was there ever a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX installed on this truck. ( Exhibit XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) XXXX XXXX XXXX continued to misrepresent the part only until the part manufacturers themselves wrote a letter to the attorney generals office to help clarify the situation ( exhibit XXXX, XXXX ). A XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in fact was never installed on this Vehicle. ( Exhibit XXXX XXXX, XXXX ) On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX sent XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX a detailed demand letter in hopes to find a reasonable resolution to the claims denial outside of the united states legal system. There was no response to the complaint. 
On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX again sent a demand letter to both XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX in hopes to come to a reasonable resolution to the continued denial of the vehicle and service contract purchased through XXXX XXXX XXXX. There was no response to the complaint. 
On XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX legal department responded to requests for assistance with our service contract and stated that we put XXXX miles on the vehicle, and it had been nearly a year so they could be no assistance. ( Exhibit XXXX  ) This was the next attempt to deny the claim. Where not only XXXX XXXX XXXX, but XXXX XXXX XXXX also stated the truck had nearly XXXX miles on it and nearly a year had passed. ( Exhibit XXXX XXXX ) The service contract purchased provided coverage for XXXX miles or up to XXXX year which ever came first. ( Exhibit XXXX ) On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote a letter stating they could not assist with our claim as the care dealership that sold the vehicle denies making modification to the vehicle. Mad XXXX XXXX will testify no modifications were made to the truck giving absolutely no reason for the continued claim denial. 
On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX again responded to requested information from the XXXX with a letter including false statements and misrepresentations stating the claim was properly denied and they did a proper investigation. Even after they were given ample documents and information from XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX pertaining the claim denial and the part at hand not being a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. ( Exhibit XXXX ) On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote a letter to the XXXX, while addressing the plaintiffs that They were unable to investigate your concerns regarding your statements, You voluntarily entered into a valid contract ( exhibit XXXX ) even though they eventually refunded said service contract a refund that was not asked for as a full refund for both the truck and service contract were requested from XXXX XXXX XXXX. 
XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX would not address XXXX and XXXX XXXX concerns pertaining to the credit reporting of a service contract they were denied the use of as well as the vehicle that was to be covered. XXXX XXXX did, however, fully addressed their concerns and how the contract states the plaintiffs must put full covered on a vehicle to protect it from loss when it is inoperable and in storage at Mad diesel XXXX. XXXX in the XXXX department stated in letter to the CFPB that XXXX XXXX again were denying a refund and they could be no assistance. ( Exhibit XXXX  ) In addition, the XXXX again have been denied a loan payoff or access to the loan balance and these issues have not been addressed to date. Exhibit XXXX ) On XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX simply disregarded all complaints and statements made and submitted there responses to the XXXX and CFPB. ( Exhibit XXXX ) XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX XXXX on the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote a letter to the Michigan Attorney Generals office not only naming the plaintiff incorrectly, they again misrepresented an XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ( exhibits XXXX, XXXX ) they also disregarded all consumers laws the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX had addressed in previous letters ( exhibit XXXX  ). 
XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX  again was facing fines from the XXXX  and they made a courtesy refund to the loan account held by XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) and XXXX XXXX in the amount of {$2900.00}. This courtesy refund included a courtesy refund of the XXXX XXXX XXXX in the amount of {$2400.00}, as well as {$480.00} towards denied repair costs. The letter states they refunded the denied repair costs. ( Exhibit XXXX ) Before the account was credited as a courtesy XXXX XXXX responded to the XXXX and stated that was not reasonable rectification the breach of contract, as the truck would not have been purchased without the agreed upon warranty. Plaintiffs have again been denied a loan payoff or access to the loan balance and these issues have not been addressed to date. 
XX/XX/XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX wrote a letter to the attorney generals office again, misrepresenting a part installed on the XXXX truck and used it as the reason the claim had continued to be denied. XXXX XXXX XXXX specifically stated a standard air filter replacement was a cold air intake modification. ( exhibit XXXX, XXXX ) This puts into question if the staff sent to inspect these vehicles and in charge of claims are in fact properly certified to provide these inspections. The Michigan State Attorney Generals office forwarded all correspondence to XXXX and XXXX XXXX VIA USPS and email as XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX has refused to supply them with any direct information other then the claim was denied for modifications over the telephone. 
After XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX department and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  wrote several letter to the attorney generals office, XXXX then stated the part was in fact not a XXXX XXXX XXXX as they had claimed and misrepresented for over 18 months, they now had a new reason to deny the claim. XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX both stated that a standard Air filter replacement is a part modification. ( Exhibit XXXX, XXXX ) This is the next claim denial used calling a standard air filter replacement a modification a modification, not to mention consumer protection laws require XXXX XXXX XXXX to provide proof that a part installed on the vehicle was the sole reason the vehicle requires repair work and that was not done. In fact, XXXX XXXX XXXX has supplied ample proof as well as listed consumers laws broken by both XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX and there is no justifiable reason for denying the claim. 
Dozens of complaints have been filed with government agencies and all recommendations were to seek legal action as XXXX XXXX XXXX has breached the contract with XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX denying them the use of their vehicle and service contract while XXXX XXXX XXXX continues to wrongfully and unjustly deny the numerous claims, complaints and attempts at coming to a reasonable resolution. 
The last and Final attempt to deny claim, as of today is that the truck over heated and its unlikely the claim would be covered. Letters were submitted by XXXX XXXX XXXX to the Department of insurance and Financial Services, the XXXX then forwarded the letters the XXXX and XXXX as the bank to date will not supply any documents they have requested. ( Exhibit 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 non-monetary relief