Consumer complaint received 2025-11-21 00:00:00
Product: Debt collection — I do not know
Issue: Attempts to collect debt not owed — Debt is not yours
Company: Servicer under contract with Federal Student Aid
State: MO

Complaint narrative:
I am filing this complaint because of significant issues involving a student loan account being reported under the furnisher name USDEPTOFED. This account appears on my credit report with derogatory, inconsistent, and unverifiable information that has caused considerable harm to my credit standing, financial stability, and emotional well-being. Despite my attempts to dispute this account through the credit bureaus, and despite filing an FTC Identity Theft Report, I have not been provided with sufficient documentation or validation from the U.S. Department of Education or the credit bureaus to support the legitimacy of the information being reported. The failure to verify or correct this account has prompted me to seek assistance from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The account reported under USDEPTOFED contains several inconsistencies that make me seriously question its accuracy. The balance, status, payment history, and dates associated with this account do not match my understanding of my student loan obligations nor any documentation in my possession. The reporting appears incomplete, internally inconsistent, and misaligned with student-loan servicing standards required by the U.S. Department of Education XXXX The information associated with this account is not only damaging but appears to lack the basic elements of reliability that the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires from furnishers and credit bureaus. 

My concerns regarding this USDEPTOFED account began when I noticed that it appeared only on one credit bureau report while being entirely absent on the other two. This is the first sign that something is wrong. When an account is legitimate and fully validated, especially federal student-loan accounts managed by the Department of Education , the reporting is typically uniform across all three major bureaus. The fact that this USDEPTOFED account appears inconsistently across bureaus suggests that the information may not have been transmitted properly or may not be valid at all. It is unclear why this account was furnished to only one bureau, and this discrepancy raises concerns that the information was either furnished in error or never fully verified before reporting. 

Additionally, the dates associated with the alleged last payment and the accounts update history do not match what I remember or believe to be accurate. A last payment is reported, yet the amount does not align with what would be expected for a loan of this type. There is also no documentation provided to confirm whether that payment was sent, received, processed, or recorded correctly. When an account lists a last payment date but lacks corresponding payment information, that is a strong indication of reporting errors. This lack of clarity and detail further undermines the credibility of the information furnished under USDEPTOFED.

When I disputed this account with the credit bureaus, I specifically requested documentation from the U.S. Department of Education showing the original details of the loan, including the promissory note, disbursement records, repayment history, and any communication showing delinquency or default. I also asked for servicing transfer records, because federal student loans often move between servicers and can become confused or misreported during those transfers. Unfortunately, the credit bureaus did not provide any of the documentation I requested. Instead, I received generic responses stating that the account had been verified, without any explanation of how the verification was conducted or what documents were used to confirm the accuracy of the information. 

This lack of transparency violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which requires credit bureaus to perform a reasonable reinvestigation of disputed information. A reasonable reinvestigation requires the furnisher in this case, the U.S. Department of Education or its contracted student-loan servicer to provide documentation that supports the accuracy of the account. Simply relying on automated systems such as e-Oscar does not fulfill this obligation. The fact that no documentation was provided to me, despite my explicit request, indicates that the reinvestigation was neither reasonable nor adequate and that the information may not be verifiable.

Student-loan servicing adds another layer of complexity to this situation. Federal student loans often transition between multiple servicers throughout their lifespan. Each time a loan is transferred, detailed transfer records must accompany it, including the complete payment history, account balance, and delinquency information. If any of these records were not transferred properly, or if the information was corrupted or incomplete during the process, inaccurate or incomplete data may be reported to the credit bureaus. Without access to the original documents or servicing records, I can not determine whether this USDEPTOFED account contains errors resulting from servicing transfers or whether the account is even valid.

Another important factor is the FTC Identity Theft Report that I filed. I submitted this report because other items on my credit report appeared suspicious or unfamiliar, and I wanted to ensure that any potential fraud or identity misuse could be addressed. Under the law, once a consumer provides an identity-theft report, furnishers must block fraudulent or unverifiable information unless they can prove the account is legitimate. The presence of the USDEPTOFED account on only one bureau, combined with the lack of documentation and inconsistencies across reporting fields, raises the possibility that the account may have been affected by identity misuse or misattributed data. Yet, despite my FTC report, the account remained on my credit file without adequate investigation or documentation.

As a result of this inaccurate or unverifiable reporting, my credit score has been negatively impacted. The presence of a derogatory or questionable account can lead to higher interest rates, credit denials, and difficulty securing essential financial services. This harm is unfair and unnecessary when the furnisher can not provide proper documentation. The emotional toll of being held responsible for an account that may not even be mine has been significant as well. The lack of transparency and cooperation from the credit bureaus and furnisher has left me feeling frustrated, stressed, and unsupported.

When I disputed the USDEPTOFED entry with the credit bureaus, I took all the steps required of me as a consumer. I provided detailed explanations, pointed out inconsistencies, and requested verification. I followed all the proper dispute procedures. However, the bureaus failed to give me the information I requested. A generic verified response is not acceptable when a consumer challenges the accuracy of an account and requests supporting evidence. The bureaus did not explain how they verified the information, did not provide the documentation used to justify the derogatory reporting, and did not address the discrepancies I raised. This is not only unhelpful but a violation of federal law.

The lack of documentation from the U.S. Department of Education is just as concerning. If the Department of Education, or its servicing contractors, can not provide original loan documentation, payment histories, transfer records, or delinquency notices, then the furnisher does not have the legal right to continue reporting the account to consumer credit bureaus. Federal student-loan servicers are required to maintain complete and accurate records. If those records are missing, incomplete, or inconsistent, then reporting the account harms the consumer without legal justification.

Given all these issues, the most logical and fair conclusion is that the USDEPTOFED account is either inaccurate, incomplete, unverifiable, or misattributed. Therefore, I am seeking CFPB assistance to compel the U.S. Department of Education and the credit bureaus to fully investigate the account, provide the required documentation, and remove or correct the information if it can not be verified.

I am requesting that the CFPB ensure the following : The U.S. Department of Education provides complete copies of all original documents associated with the account, including promissory notes, disbursement records, repayment histories, delinquency notices, and any communications regarding the loans history.

The Department of Education provides all servicing-transfer records, including assignment files, transfer certification documents, and any data files used to transmit account information between servicers.

The credit bureaus provide a detailed explanation of the method of verification used during the dispute process, including what documents were reviewed and how the furnisher validated the information.

Any unverifiable, inconsistent, incomplete, or inaccurate information furnished under USDEPTOFED is removed from my credit file.

Any information affected by identity theft or unconfirmed identity is permanently blocked, as required by law after the filing of an FTC report.

My credit reports are updated and corrected immediately and that updated versions are sent to all creditors or companies that accessed my reports in the last six months.

The bureaus and furnishers take steps to prevent the reinsertion of unverifiable data, including providing written notice and certification if reinsertion is attempted.

Without proper documentation, the negative reporting associated with USDEPTOFED should not remain on my credit report. A fair and lawful credit reporting system depends on accuracy, transparency, and accountability. At this point, none of those standards have been met. I am not asking for special treatment ; I am asking for compliance with federal law. I am asking for fairness, accuracy, and verification. I am asking for the opportunity to have a credit report that reflects correct and legally substantiated information.

Company response to consumer: Untimely response