Consumer complaint received 2025-10-27 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Other personal consumer report
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Information belongs to someone else
Company: LEXISNEXIS
State: WA

Complaint narrative:
Subject : Escalated Complaint LexisNexis Obstruction of FCRA Rights/ False Driving Record Consumer Number : XXXX Case Numbers : XXXX and XXXX Dear Consumer Protection Bureau, I am filing an escalated complaint against LexisNexis Risk Solutions , XXXX for persistent obstruction of my rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ) and for mishandling a dispute over a false driving-violation record. 

Background LexisNexis and XXXX XXXX have reported that I was XXXX XXXX XXXX for a windshield violation ( violation code XXXX ) allegedly occurring XX/XX/XXXX with a XXXX  on XX/XX/XXXX. 

This record is demonstrably false. 
Both the Washington Department of Licensing ( DOL  ) and California Department of Motor Vehicles ( DMV ) have certified that I have no tickets, violations, or XXXX  of any kind. 
I was residing abroad in XXXX during those dates and did not own or operate a vehicle. 

My dispute history On XX/XX/XXXX, LexisNexis acknowledged my dispute under Consumer Number XXXX, Case Numbers XXXX and XXXX. 

I provided full and sufficient verification, including : A copy of my drivers license ; Certified WA DOL and CA DMV abstracts ; A recent bank statement confirming my current address. 

These documents satisfy the reasonable identification standard under FCRA 610 ( a ) ( 1 ). 

Despite this, LexisNexis sent multiple form letters stating it could not authenticate my identity and refused to process my dispute. Each time, they demanded new documentation and claimed the reinvestigation could not begin. 

Ongoing obstruction and bad faith LexisNexis has developed a pattern of stalling, deflecting, and resetting the statutory 30-day reinvestigation clock.

Supervisors promise to call back and never do. 

Each request for new verification restarts the process, effectively suspending consumers rights indefinitely. 

Numerous other consumers report the same experience some fighting for months or years to have clearly false data removed. 

This is a systematic abuse of the FCRAs dispute process and appears designed to exhaust consumers into giving up rather than complying with the law. 

Why this conduct is unlawful Under FCRA 609 and 611, LexisNexis must disclose all information in a consumers file and conduct a reinvestigation within 30 days of receiving a dispute.

Under 610 ( a ) ( 1 ), LexisNexis may request reasonable identification, but I have already provided more than sufficient documentation to locate and verify my file. 

Continuing to demand new personal documents after that point is unreasonable and obstructive, and interferes with my federally protected rights. 

A genuine traffic citation is a public record ; it does not require a Social Security number or private financial documents for verification. 

Requested action I ask that the Bureau and state regulators : Order LexisNexis to immediately complete the reinvestigation of my case and delete the fictitious windshield violation XXXX. 

Investigate LexisNexiss practice of endlessly delaying disputes through repetitive identity-verification demands. 

Require LexisNexis to provide XXXX XXXX and all other data users with notice of correction and deletion. 

Review whether LexisNexiss dispute-handling process violates FCRA 609611 and constitutes willful noncompliance under 616617. 

Attachments LexisNexis letters ( dated XX/XX/XXXX ) Certified Washington and California DMV driving-record abstracts Copy of drivers license ( redacted ) Bank statement ( proof of address ) This behavior has gone beyond simple inaccuracy ; it is deliberate obstruction and systematic avoidance of federal obligations. 
I request formal investigation and confirmation that these materials have been logged to my CFPB file. 

Sincerely, XXXX XXXX

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation