Consumer complaint received 2025-06-25 00:00:00
Product: Credit reporting or other personal consumer reports — Credit reporting
Issue: Incorrect information on your report — Account information incorrect
Company: CBC Companies, Inc.
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
CFPB Complaint Inaccurate and Unverified Reporting by XXXX and XXXX XXXX This is a continuation of your original CFPB complaint filed against the other three CRAs and reiterate the same issues : Innovis also failed to investigate or delete Reporting the same three XXXX accounts Same violations of FCRA 611, 607 ( b ), 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ), and 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) XXXX XXXX has confirmed in writing that they furnish information to Innovis regarding the three disputed accounts ending in XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX. Based on this, Innovis is actively publishing XXXX account data that XXXX itself can not verify or substantiate with documentation. 
I am submitting this complaint to ensure the same unlawful verified without validation pattern is not being repeated within Innovis. While I have not yet received a report copy from Innovis, I have a right under the FCRA to challenge information that I know is unverifiable and harmful. 
This is a formal complaint against all four nationwide credit reporting agencies ( CRAs ) XXXX XXXX XXXX, and Innovis for publishing and verifying inaccurate, unverified, and legally deficient information regarding three closed XXXX credit card accounts ( ending in XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ). 

On XX/XX/year>, I submitted written disputes to each CRA, identifying multiple violations under the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). The reported balances are inconsistent some even exceed credit limits and derogatory payment histories ( 30180 days late ) are included without any supporting documentation or actual payment records. None of the accounts were flagged as disputed, despite my formal challenges. 

These disputes were closed by the CRAs between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/year>, without providing any meaningful documentation or investigation records. 

In a written response, XXXX confirmed their reporting is accurate but admitted that they do not furnish full transaction histories, monthly statements, or payment records to the credit bureaus and they will not provide them to me either. They explained these items are not reportable. 

This exposes a critical legal and ethical failure : If XXXX does not provide the data, how can the bureaus verify it? 
If I can not access the data, how can I confirm or correct whats damaging my credit? 
And if no documentation exists, what exactly is being verified? 

The only logical outcome is for the bureaus to immediately delete these accounts. Otherwise, they are knowingly publishing inaccurate and unverified information in violation of federal law. 

All four CRAs closed my disputes without providing a single document. They marked the accounts as verified without any evidence, any billing history, or even a simple explanation only the claim that XXXX confirmed the information. At the same time, they failed to flag the accounts as disputed, violating FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ). 

Lets go further into specifics. Chases written response to my dispute shows balances that differ from the balances published by the credit bureaus. So who is right and who is wrong? XXXX answer : If your account information is reflected differently between the consumer reporting agencies, we suggest contacting the consumer reporting agencies for more details about how they display the information received. In other words, XXXX confirms the CRAs are at fault. 

But whether XXXX or the bureaus are responsible, the bottom line is the same : the information is inaccurate, unverified, and harmful. These tradelines must be deleted. 

This is not a minor procedural error it is a systemic conflict of interest. XXXX, a paying furnisher, provides incomplete, selective data. The bureaus financially incentivized to protect their paying clients accept this without scrutiny. As the consumer, I am not a client of the bureaus and therefore have no influence. My dispute is ignored, my credit suffers, and I am denied access to the information needed to defend myself. 

The CRAs refusal to investigate properly, provide documentation, or ensure accurate reporting violates multiple sections of federal law : FCRA 607 ( b ) : Failure to ensure maximum possible accuracy FCRA 611 ( a ) : Failure to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) : Continuing to report unverifiable information FCRA 623 ( a ) ( 3 ) : Failure to mark accounts as disputed Not only are the CRAs in violation of federal law they are now being exposed by the furnisher itself. Their mutual finger-pointing reveals that neither party can substantiate the accuracy of the reported data. As a result, they may be legally liable for the ongoing financial and psychological harm caused. 

These actions also violate New York General Business Law 380-j and 380-k, which require credit reporting agencies and furnishers to conduct proper reinvestigations, ensure data accuracy, and prohibit reporting of information they know to be inaccurate. As a New York resident, I am protected by these laws, and I am about to report this issue to the New York State Attorney Generals Office for further enforcement review. 

I urge the CFPB to : 1. Investigate how this unverified and inconsistent data was verified. 
2. Require the immediate and permanent deletion of the XXXX tradelines across all bureaus. 
3. Hold both the furnishers and CRAs accountable for knowingly violating my rights under the FCRA. 

The system has failed at every level the furnisher, the credit bureaus, and the reinvestigation process. I am no longer disputing. I am documenting, escalating, and demanding that my rights as a U.S. and New York consumer be respected. Failure to act may result in additional legal action and regulatory filings at both the state and federal level. 

Should this matter remain unresolved and these three unverified accounts are not deleted from my credit report, I reserve the right to escalate this case to the Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) and the U.S. Department of Justice ( DOJ ) for further investigation into systemic violations of federal consumer protection laws, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA ). 

Additionally, if this matter is not promptly addressed by deleting all these three unverified accounts from my credit report, I reserve the right to share my experience with public consumer advocacy platforms, including the XXXX XXXX XXXX  ( XXXX ), social media, and independent consumer forums. I am committed to raising awareness about how major financial institutions and credit bureaus handle disputes and the impact on ordinary consumers. This is not about defamation. Its about transparency, accountability, and protecting others from going through what Ive endured. 

I request that this matter be prioritized and documented in full. Please advise me of the results of this investigation in writing.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation