Consumer complaint received 2025-06-13 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: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
I am submitting this formal complaint to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) against Experian for continued and willful reporting of inaccurate, misleading, and unverifiable information on my consumer credit file. 

The account in question is from Dept. of ED/XXXX, partial account number XXXX, originally opened in XX/XX/XXXX and currently in deferred status with payments not scheduled to begin until XX/XX/XXXX. 

Despite multiple disputes, Experian continues to report false delinquencies and refuses to delete or correct this information. 

Experian is reporting that I was 90 days late in XXXX XXXX 120 days late in XX/XX/XXXX, and 150 days late in XX/XX/XXXX. This is factually and legally inaccurate. The account is clearly marked as deferred. The monthly payment is listed as {$0.00}. No payments were contractually due during this time. Yet Experian falsely reports escalating delinquencies for a period when no default was even possible. This contradicts their obligation under FCRA 1681e ( b ) to maintain maximum possible accuracy. 

Furthermore, this directly violates Metro 2 standards which require sequential 30-day and 60-day late payments to precede any 90-day late report. Experian reports XX/XX/XXXX as 90 days late, yet XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXX/XX/XXXX are all marked as current. There is no 30-day or 60-day delinquency prior to XXXX. This is structurally and procedurally impossible under Metro 2 logic. The report contradicts itself and fails to follow proper field relationships as required in the Metro 2 Credit Reporting Resource Guide ( CRRG ), including Account Status, Payment History Profile, and Date of First Delinquency. 

This also violates FCRA 1681i ( a ), which mandates that Experian conduct a reasonable reinvestigation when a consumer disputes an item. Despite my prior dispute and the presence of the statement ITEM IN DISPUTE BY CONSUMER, Experian has not provided any documentation from the original creditor to verify these lates. They did not delete the unverifiable data, nor did they pause derogatory reporting during the dispute process. This indicates that no meaningful reinvestigation occurred. 

The credit report also shows a balance update as recent as XX/XX/XXXXXXXX yet the last account status update was XX/XX/XXXX. That inconsistency violates FCRA 1681c ( a ), which prohibits the reporting of stale and incomplete data. If the data has not been verified or updated accurately since XXXX, it should not be continuously reported as active in XXXXXXXX 

Moreover, the account status clearly states that payments are deferred until XX/XX/XXXX. Yet, Experian is still reporting the account as if it were in active repayment in XXXX. This false representation creates confusion, implies default where none exists, and misleads current and future creditors about my creditworthiness. 

The failure to handle this dispute properly is a violation of FCRA 1681i ( c ), which requires furnishers and consumer reporting agencies to clearly flag and properly treat disputed items. Although there is a dispute notation, Experian has not suppressed or adjusted the derogatory history and has not used the proper Metro 2 compliance condition codes to reflect the account as under dispute during reinvestigation.

Each of these violations entitles me to remedies under 15 U.S. Code 1681n for willful noncompliance and 15 U.S. Code 1681o for negligent noncompliance, including up to {$1000.00} per violation. These errors are harmful and damaging. They distort my credit profile and create the false appearance of delinquency on a student loan that was not in repayment. I have suffered credit denials and reputational harm due to Experians negligence. 

Attached is a screenshot of my Experian report dated XX/XX/XXXX XXXX showing the reported late payments, the deferred account status, the XXXX XXXX monthly payment, and the absence of prior late payment history leading up to XX/XX/XXXX. This proves that the reported 90-day late is not only unverifiable, but also mathematically and procedurally impossible under Metro 2 rules.

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