Consumer complaint received 2025-12-27 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: GA

Complaint narrative:
Formal Complaint FCRA Violations and Continued Noncompliance ( Prior CFPB References Included ) To Whom It May Concern, I am submitting this complaint to report continued violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) by a consumer reporting agency and its data furnisher ( s ) concerning the handling of a disputed tradeline on my credit report. ( Equifax, Experian, Transunion ) This complaint follows prior CFPB submissions regarding the same or substantially similar conduct, referenced as : CFPB Complaint No. XXXX CFPB Complaint No. XXXX CFPB Complaint No. XXXX Despite prior notice and opportunity to cure, the violations remain unresolved. 
After formally disputing the accuracy and completeness of the account, I timely requested the Method of Verification ( MOV ) pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ). The consumer reporting agency failed to provide the required Method of Verification, including the procedures used to verify the information and the identity of the furnisher relied upon.

Notwithstanding this failure, the agency altered the tradeline by marking it closed, while continuing to report the account rather than deleting it. This action constitutes an acknowledgment that the original reporting was inaccurate or unverifiable, yet the agency failed to comply with its statutory duty to delete the item.

Under 15 U.S.C. 1681i ( a ) ( 5 ) ( A ), any information that can not be verified must be deleted, not modified or recharacterized. Courts have consistently held that cosmetic or status changes do not satisfy the FCRAs deletion mandate. See Dennis v. BEH-1, LLC, 520 F.3d 1066 ( 9th Cir. 2008 ). Further, failure to disclose the Method of Verifi
cation demonstrates the absence of a reasonable reinvestigation, as required by Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 115 F.3d 220 ( 3d Cir. 1997 ).

The continued reporting of this tradeline after notice of dispute, and after prior CFPB complaints, without lawful verification, also constitutes a violation of 15 U.S.C. 1681e ( b ) and may rise to willful noncompliance under 15 U.S.C. 1681n, as recognized in Saunders v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., 526 F.3d 142 ( 4th Cir. 2008 ).

I respectfully request that the CFPB : 1. Require the immediate deletion of the unverifiable tradeline ; 2. Investigate the consumer reporting agencys reinvestigation procedures and repeated failure to provide MOV ; 3. Address the pattern of noncompliance evidenced by multiple unresolved CFPB complaints ; 4. Ensure corrective action to prevent ongoing violations of the FCRA.

Supporting documentation, including dispute correspondence, proof of non-response to the MOV request, and prior CFPB complaint records, is attached. 


Thank you for your attention to this matter. 
Respectfully, XXXX 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 explanation