Consumer complaint received 2025-11-14 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: World Acceptance Corporation
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
This statement describes in full detail what happened concerning the derogatory account reported by World Finance ( WORLD FIN XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX on my credit report. The purpose of this narrative is to explain the discovery of the account, the inaccuracies and inconsistencies in its reporting, the failure of the credit bureaus and World Finance to validate the information, the violations of federal consumer protection laws, and the resulting harm caused by this unverified, damaging tradeline. 

The account in question appears as a Collection/Chargeoff, marked as closed on XX/XX/year>, with a past-due balance of {$2200.00}, and is reported as derogatory on all three major credit bureaus. No proper documentation has been provided by the furnisher, and no lawful verification has been produced by the credit bureaus despite multiple disputes. As a result, this account has caused credit damage, financial strain, and ongoing harm that can not be allowed to continue without proper validation. 

1. XXXX of the WORLD FIN Account on My Credit Reports During a complete review of my credit reports, I discovered that World Finance was reporting an account identified as WORLD FIN XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX reflecting a derogatory status. This was alarming because : I had no recollection of entering into a contract with World Finance for the reported amount. 

I had not received any validation, statements, or notices from World Finance prior to its appearance on my credit file. 

The account appeared suddenly, without prior correspondence. 

All three bureaus listed the account as Collection/Chargeoff, yet none provided documentation. 

The accounts appearance and status immediately raised questions about its legitimacy and accuracy. 

2. Information Reported by WORLD FIN Appears Inaccurate, Incomplete, and Unverified Upon examining the details of the World Finance tradeline, several issues became apparent : A. No Original Signed Contract Has Ever Been Provided World Finance has never provided : A contract with my signature A loan application A promissory note Identity verification documents Disclosure forms required by law Without these documents, it is impossible to validate the account. 

B. No Payment History or Account-Level Documentation A furnisher must be able to produce : Itemized monthly statements A full ledger of payments, charges, interest, and fees A breakdown of the alleged balance None has been provided. Without this, the reported balance of {$2200.00} remains unsubstantiated. 

C. Possible Incorrect Dates and Re-Aging The closed date of XX/XX/year> conflicts with other reporting data. Some bureaus list inconsistent delinquency dates. Re-aging occurs when a furnisher updates the delinquency date to extend the reporting period beyond the legal seven-year limit. This is illegal and violates FCRA 605 ( c ).

D. Inconsistent Reporting Between Bureaus Some bureaus report : Different last payment dates Different past-due amounts Different delinquency indicators Different data fields This contradicts FCRA 607 ( b ), which requires maximum possible accuracy.

3. No Validation Was Ever Provided by World Finance After noticing the account, I immediately exercised my right to question and dispute it. I requested : The original signed agreement Complete account statements Ownership/assignment records Date and data source used to verify the debt Method of verification Disclosure of whether e-OSCAR was used World Finance did not provide : A contract A billing statement A ledger Any evidence the account belongs to me Any proof World Finance owns the debt Their failure to provide validation violates : FCRA 623 ( b ) furnisher must investigate and report accurate results FDCPA 809 ( b ) collector must validate the debt before continuing collection Reporting to a credit bureau is a form of collection activitycourts have repeatedly recognized this.

4. Multiple Disputes Were Filed With All Three Credit Bureaus I disputed the WORLD FIN account with : XXXX XXXX XXXX  Each dispute included specific questions : What method of verification was used?

What legal documentation was provided by World Finance?

What date and data source were used? 

Was verification done manually or electronically?

If electronically, where is the documentation of data transfer?

What law allows continued reporting without original paperwork?

The disputes were sent certified mail, with tracking and receipts maintained.

5. The Credit Bureaus Failed to Conduct a Proper Investigation Each bureau sent back a generic statement : The account has been verified.

However : No method of verification was provided.

No documents were provided.

No investigation notes were provided.

No explanation of the reinvestigation procedure was supplied.

There is no evidence that any bureau contacted World Finance for documents.

Verification likely occurred via e-OSCAR, which uses 23 digit codes, not documents.

This violates : FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) obligation to reinvestigate FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) obligation to provide method of verification CFPB guidance automated e-OSCAR verifications do not satisfy reinvestigation requirements A verified response without documentation is meaningless.

6. World Finance Failed to Report the Account as Disputed After receiving notice of my dispute, World Finance was required to : Update all credit bureaus Mark the tradeline as disputed by consumer This is required under : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) FCRA 623 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( D ) World Finance failed to add the dispute notation, which misleads lenders into believing the data is accurate and uncontested.

This harms my credit reputation.

7. Harm and Damages Caused by the WORLD FIN Reporting The continued reporting of this unverified, inaccurate derogatory account has caused significant negative effects, including : A. Reduction in Credit Score The WORLD FIN chargeoff lowered my FICO score and caused lenders to classify me as a higher-risk applicant.

B. Denials of Credit Applications Because of this tradeline : Credit card applications were denied Auto financing offers became unfavorable Personal loan approvals became difficult C. Higher Interest Rates Some lenders offered interest rates dramatically higher due to the perceived chargeoff.

D. Emotional and Financial XXXX  Repeated disputes, uncertainty, and financial consequences caused XXXX, frustration, and hardship. 

E. Lost Time and Resources I incurred expenses for : Certified mail Printing Document tracking Credit monitoring All these harms are directly tied to the improper reporting of an unverified account.

8. Violations of Federal Law by Both the Furnisher and the Bureaus A. Violations by World Finance ( Furnisher ) World Finance violated : FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) reporting information without accuracy FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) failure to mark the account as disputed FCRA 623 ( b ) failure to investigate when notified FDCPA 809 ( b ) no validation but continued collection activity B. Violations by the Credit Bureaus All three bureaus violated : FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) failure to reinvestigate FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 6 ) failure to provide method of verification FCRA 607 ( b ) failure to assure maximum possible accuracy FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ) continued reporting despite lack of verification These failures demonstrate systemic noncompliance.

9. Why This Account Can not Remain on My Credit Report Under FCRA 611 ( a ) ( 5 ), information that can not be verified must be deleted. The World Finance account can not legally remain because : No contract has been provided No statements have been provided No validation has been provided Ownership has not been proven Dates and data are inconsistent The account was not marked disputed Verification appears automated, not documented Therefore, the WORLD FIN XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  tradeline is legally unverifiable. 

10. Summary of What Happened With WORLD FIN To summarize the situation : A derogatory WORLD FIN account appeared on my credit reports.

The account shows a chargeoff with a past due balance of {$2200.00}, closed on XX/XX/year>. 

I disputed the account with all three bureaus. 

I requested validation and documentation.

No documentation was provided by World Finance.

The bureaus did not conduct reasonable reinvestigations.

The account was not marked as disputed.

The information being reported is inconsistent and inaccurate.

The account remains without validation.

This violates FCRA and FDCPA requirements.

I have experienced financial and emotional harm as a result.

The account can not legally remain without verification.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation