Consumer complaint received 2026-06-01 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — Medical debt
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Experian Information Solutions Inc.
State: WV

Complaint narrative:
I. BACKGROUND AND MATERIAL CHRONOLOGY This submission serves as a formal dispute regarding a medical collection tradeline currently published by Experian under XXXX XXXX ( Account Number XXXX ) for the balance of {$1500.00}. The consumer has engaged in a continuous, multi-stage dispute process with the data furnisher, the original creditor, and the credit reporting bureaus to address persistent data integrity errors on this file. Direct confirmation from the billing office of the original medical provider, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, verifies that the clinical Date of Service ( DOS ) for this encounter was XX/XX/XXXX. However, XXXX credit database currently reflects an account opening or assignment date of XX/XX/XXXX. Allowing a timeline metrics discrepancy where a collection assignment date is shifted more than a year past the actual creation of the debt constitutes data corruption and artificial account reaging, which misrepresents the true delinquency timeline under 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ). II. CHRONOLOGY OF PRIOR DISPUTES AND CORRESPONDENCE : The consumer has systematically pursued verification and legal validation through all appropriate administrative channels : Direct Furnisher Validation Demands : On XX/XX/XXXX, a formal Notice of Statutory Non-Compliance and Joint Debt Validation Demand was served via Certified Mail to XXXX XXXX, CEO of XXXX XXXX XXXX. This demand requested physical, itemized line-by-line billing records confirming medical codes and complete chain of financial title. Furnisher Procedural Obstruction : In previous direct correspondence, XXXX XXXX XXXX acknowledged the dispute but refused to perform the mandatory investigation unless the consumer provided physical copies of a government-issued photo ID. Despite telling the consumer they lacked sufficient verification data to investigate, the agency simultaneously certified the account as " verified '' to XXXX via automated electronic systems. Authentication of Consumer Identity : Any administrative rejection of this dispute based on " identity concerns '' or " unauthorized filing '' is factually refuted. The consumer has directly authenticated their identity through secure credential validation by logging directly into the XXXX consumer portal to review this item, and by logging into the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ( CFPB ) secure database to upload these documents. Furthermore, the attached collection letters were sent by XXXX XXXX XXXX directly to the consumer 's home address, proving that the furnisher already has complete operational verification of the consumer 's identity. III. DATA BREACH ORIGIN AND COMPLIANCE VIOLATIONS : The underlying financial record originates from a clinical network database that was heavily compromised in a widely publicized corporate data breach. Because the data structure was scraped from an unverified leak, it contains corrupted fields. Furthermore, on-the-record documentation reveals significant regulatory compliance failures regarding the handling of this file : Documented HIPAA Security Breach : XXXX XXXX XXXX Compliance Officer XXXX XXXX admitted in writing ( via CFPB Case Response # XXXX ) that the agency sent " debt validation '' by transmitting Protected Health Information ( PHI ) across unsecure, unencrypted standard text messages ( SMS ). This constitutes an open transmission safety violation under the HIPAA Security Rule ( 45 CFR 164.312 ) and involves the electronic broadcast of a minor child 's medical history without verified guardianship authorization protocols. Active Regulatory Oversight Actions : Due to these unresolved privacy and financial reporting failures, formal complaints detailing the unencrypted transmission of PHI, deceptive reporting, and account reaging have been officially logged and are currently pending review with : The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights ( OCR ) for federal health privacy violations. The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) for data integrity and deceptive trade practices. The West Virginia Attorney General 's Consumer Protection Division for state credit and protection act compliance. The Original Creditor 's Compliance Department regarding upstream data chain-of-custody protocols.

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