Consumer complaint received 2025-11-13 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: TRANSUNION INTERMEDIATE HOLDINGS, INC.
State: SC

Complaint narrative:
This is my second CFPB complaint regarding TransUnions failure to comply with FCRA 605B after receiving a full identity theft packet, a prior CFPB complaint, and written responses from both TransUnion and XXXX XXXX. The remaining fraudulent account that TransUnion refuses to block is : XXXX  Account # : XXXX I previously submitted every required identity theft document, including : FTC Identity Theft Report # XXXX Government-issued ID Social Security card Utility bill Signed affidavit Written statement All supporting documentation Under FCRA 605B ( a ) ( 1 ), TransUnion was required to block fraudulent information within four business days once they received an FTC Identity Theft Report. Under 603 ( q ) ( 4 ), the FTC report alone is legally sufficient. Despite this, TransUnion ignored the 605B requirements, misclassified my filing as a 611 dispute, and illegally verified fraudulent information with furnishers instead of blocking it. 

TransUnion deleted some fraudulent items from my first complaint, proving they received and used my documents, but they unlawfully left the XXXX account. Selective deletion is evidence of willful noncompliance. 

The account XXXX is claiming belongs to me is fraudulent. It was opened using stolen information. My identity theft exposure is also documented due to both the XXXX Equifax breach and the XXXX TransUnion breach, placing TransUnion on heightened notice. 

I filed a complaint with the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, which opened XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX and forwarded my evidence to XXXX, confirming receipt. XXXX responded on XX/XX/XXXX, stating they decline to remove the debt and demanded a police report, which is illegal under FCRA 605B. A creditor can not require additional documentation beyond the FTC Identity Theft Report for a 605B block.

OneMains letter also proves : They received my identity theft documentation They acknowledged my fraud claim They still refused to remove the account They demanded a police report, which federal law does NOT require They verified a fraudulent debt after a 605B submission Their refusal, combined with TransUnions refusal, is a joint violation of : FCRA 605B failure to block fraudulent information FCRA 611 misclassification and improper reinvestigation FCRA 623 knowingly verifying fraudulent data UDAAP deceptive and abusive practices South Carolina Identity Theft Protection Act Vermont Department of Financial Regulation consumer protection standards The XXXX  account continues to appear on my TransUnion report even though : It was included in the FTC Identity Theft Report It was included in my affidavit It was included in my supporting documents TransUnion deleted all other fraudulent items from the same packet XXXX  and TransUnion both confirmed receipt of my documents The continued reporting of : XXXX  Account XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX Fraudulent inquiries Fraudulent address variations Fraudulent name variations is ongoing harm and ongoing identity theft reporting by TransUnion. 

This second complaint is required because TransUnion and XXXX are both refusing to comply with FCRA 605B after being given every legally required document and after state regulators in Vermont have become involved.

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