These are matters I have filed under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, listed by the error behind each one. Each is described as alleged in the complaint; clients are not named, and no outcome is stated or implied — results depend on the facts and law of each case. If one of these reads like your situation, that is the point of the page: I have handled it before, and the review of your report costs nothing.
Paid, settled or discharged — and still reporting
A mortgage discharged in bankruptcy, still reporting a balance nineteen years later
A homeowner’s mortgage was discharged in a 2007 Chapter 7 case. In 2026 the servicer was still reporting it as an active obligation with a balance and past-due status. She disputed it in writing with the discharge order and the prior servicers’ own acknowledgment letters attached; the account came back “verified” with minor edits. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a discharged debt still on your credit report.
An auto loan paid off through a refinance, reported as $15,000 past due
A consumer refinanced her car loan through a credit union; the original lender processed the payoff and sent a paid-in-full letter. All three bureaus kept reporting the account with a past-due status and a balance of about $15,600. She disputed with each bureau, attaching the payoff check and the letter; each answered within days that the account was verified, and none noted the dispute. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a paid-off account that keeps reporting.
A paid cable bill, reported three different ways by three bureaus
A consumer paid a Spectrum account in full and had the provider’s confirmation. The collector’s tradeline then read “settled for less than the full amount” at one bureau and “unpaid with a balance” at the other two. Disputes with the confirmation attached produced no correction; one bureau removed the item and reinserted it without notice. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b), with FDCPA counts against the collector.
More on this error: I.C. System on your credit report.
A payment plan honored every month, reported as if it did not exist
A consumer entered a payment agreement on a Bank of America account and paid on time every month from late 2024. The bureaus’ reporting never reflected the agreement or the payments, and one bureau did not mark the account as disputed after she disputed it twice with documentation. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Bank of America credit report errors.
A charged-off timeshare note reported as open, owed to the wrong company, at the wrong balance
Two co-obligors on a 2009 timeshare note held by Tempus Palms International found the account reported as owed to Diamond Resorts, as “open” although Diamond had already charged it off after about two years without payments, and at $10,883 when Diamond’s own July 2018 invoice showed $8,037.97. Both disputed with Experian and Diamond; both continued reporting. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a closed account on your credit report.
A car totaled and paid off by insurance, reported as an unpaid debt
After a total-loss accident the insurer paid the loan; the finance company’s tradeline said the borrowers had failed to pay. They disputed with all three bureaus and the reporting continued unchanged. Claims under §§ 1681n and 1681o.
More on this error: auto loan errors on your credit report.
A home-equity line paid by autopay every month since 2007, reported “charged off”
A borrower’s HELOC had been paid in full on the due date by automatic withdrawal since 2007; Bank of America’s own statements showed zero past due. All three bureaus carried it as “charged off.” He disputed with Equifax in October 2021 and with Trans Union and Experian in November 2021, and directly with the bank; the reporting was not corrected. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Bank of America credit report errors.
A mortgage repayment plan honored, and a past-due balance still reported
The borrower entered a repayment plan and kept paying; the servicer’s tradeline showed none of it — not the plan, not the payments — and kept a past-due amount. Disputes to the three bureaus changed nothing. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: mortgage servicer credit reporting errors.
Two settled debts still showing balances, and student-loan “late” marks during a deferment
Two accounts the consumer had settled with partial payments were still reported with balances and no settlement; his federal student loan showed missed payments for months when it was in deferment and nothing was due. He disputed each tradeline; each stayed. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: student loan credit report errors.
A $17,770 lease “debt” that had been paid — and settled in state court
A collector reported about $17,770 owed to a property manager on an apartment the consumer had leased in 2015. She had paid the lease in full; any claim had belonged to a different entity and had already been settled in New Jersey Superior Court; the figure used the wrong monthly rent and ignored a $1,950 deposit. She disputed with the collector; it kept reporting, and made about forty collection calls. Claims under §§ 1681s-2(b) and 1681b(a), with FDCPA counts.
More on this error: I.C. System on your credit report.
A returned phone and a canceled upgrade, billed and reported as a debt
The “debt” was for equipment the consumer had returned to Verizon and a service upgrade she had canceled; it was also older than the Act allows. Two bureaus and Verizon kept reporting it after her disputes, and a collector pursued it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b), with FDCPA counts.
More on this error: Verizon on your credit report.
An emergency-room bill the insurer should have paid, sent to collections over a billing code
The patient’s ER visit was covered by insurance; the provider miscoded the claim and never resubmitted it in time, and the unpaid balance went to a collector that reported it. The complaint’s point: the debt existed only because of the provider’s billing failure. Disputes to the collector did not remove it. Claims under § 1681s-2(b), with FDCPA counts.
More on this error: medical debt on your credit report.
A 2008 late payment on a satisfied auto loan, still on the report in 2020
Experian showed the consumer past due to an auto-finance company when the balance had been paid in full; any late payment would have been in August 2008, past the seven-year limit. Disputes did not remove it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: auto loan errors on your credit report.
A mortgage paid in full, reported as “in forbearance” with a balance
A Bucks County borrower paid her mortgage off. The servicer’s tradeline showed the loan as currently in forbearance with a remaining balance, and dropped her positive payment history. Disputes to both bureaus and the servicer did not correct it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a paid-off account that keeps reporting.
A mortgage closed in May 2018, reported late “to the present” on one bureau
A New York consumer paid off and closed her U.S. Bank mortgage in May 2018. Equifax kept reporting it past due with late payments running after the payoff. Trans Union and Experian corrected the same tradeline on dispute; each Equifax dispute came back “verified,” while U.S. Bank sent her paperwork saying its reporting was accurate. She could not get a new mortgage. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: U.S. Bank credit report errors.
Credit-union accounts paid through the collector, still carrying balances
A Utah consumer paid what she owed on her credit-union accounts through the collection agency handling them. All three bureaus kept reporting the accounts with balances “for thousands of dollars.” Disputes did not remove them. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a).
More on this error: a paid-off account that keeps reporting.
A discharged mortgage on a house he no longer owned, reported as his obligation
The borrower had discharged the mortgage debt in bankruptcy and signed the property over by quitclaim deed. PHH’s tradeline still reported him as obligated on it, and the bureaus verified it after his disputes. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a discharged debt still on your credit report.
A settled debt reported with a balance and no settlement
A Philadelphia consumer settled a Green Dot account with a partial payment. Equifax’s tradeline showed a balance, no settlement and no credit for the payment; dispute results left it as it was. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a paid-off account that keeps reporting.
A totaled car, paid off by the insurer and the borrower, reported open with a balance through six “verified” disputes
An Iowa borrower’s car was totaled in April 2025; the insurer paid $12,168.36, she paid the remaining $174.47 on July 3, and the lender wrote twice that the loan was paid in full. Equifax and Experian kept the account open with a balance. Trans Union corrected on dispute. Equifax verified twice in July, Experian four times in July — the last two with the lender’s own paid-in-full letter attached — before updating in late August. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a paid-off account that keeps reporting.
GAP insurance paid the last $1,226 — the loan was reported charged off at $4,237
A Philadelphia borrower’s Hyundai was totaled in 2018. The insurer’s market-value payment and a warranty refund left about $1,226, which the GAP policy paid. The finance company reported the loan charged off with roughly $4,237 owed; she had never been late before the accident. Disputes did not correct it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Hyundai Motor Finance credit report errors.
A $4,200 payoff arrangement, paid at $100 a month — none of it reported
The borrower reached an agreement to settle the balance for $4,200 in $100 monthly payments and made them. The tradeline showed a charge-off with the old balance, no payments and a stale last-payment date. Disputes did not correct it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a paid-off account that keeps reporting.
Two accounts in a bankruptcy, reported past due and charged off month after month — and a GAP-settled auto loan on top
Two credit-union accounts included in the consumer’s bankruptcy were reported with no bankruptcy notation, a $3,454 past-due balance, and a fresh “charge off” every month. Separately, after a total loss, insurance and GAP were to pay off her Capital One auto loan; Capital One said about $4,071 remained, she agreed to a payment plan and completed it, and the account was never marked settled as promised. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a discharged debt still on your credit report.
A refunded $5,000 boat deposit, reported as a balance with interest running
An Ohio consumer put a refundable $5,000 boat deposit on his Discover card in 2021, declined the boat on delivery in 2022, and the dealer refunded the full amount to the card. Discover kept reporting a $5,000 balance and charged interest on it at all three bureaus. Disputes to the bureaus and to Discover did not correct it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Discover credit report errors.
A debt buyer lost in court, dropped its appeal, and kept reporting the collection
PRA sued a Philadelphia consumer in Municipal Court in 2021 and lost; its appeal to the Court of Common Pleas was dismissed, reinstated, then discontinued by PRA itself. The collection account stayed on her reports through “numerous” disputes. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Portfolio Recovery Associates on your credit report.
Injury pay a federal agency had approved, reported by the employer as an unpaid overpayment
A former postal worker missed nine days after an on-the-job injury and was paid for them. The Department of Labor first denied continuation of pay, then reversed itself and granted it. The Postal Service treated the pay as an overpayment anyway and furnished two tradelines — about $1,198 in “overpaid” wages and about $289 in taxes on them — to Trans Union and Equifax, through extensive correspondence with several government offices. Claim under § 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: when a credit dispute is denied.
A secured card the bank had agreed to pay from her own savings, reported “charge off”
A Maryland consumer held a secured card at Los Alamos National Bank with a savings account behind it; she authorized the bank to take the payoff from those savings and the bank agreed, then did not, and reported the card charged off. She was never late. The account was not marked disputed after her disputes (or the notation was removed). Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: when a credit dispute is denied.
Monthly payments the servicer received and never posted
A Franklin County borrower paid every month and the servicer received the payments, but did not record them against his loan; where they went was never explained. The tradeline showed a derogatory payment history. Disputes did not correct it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: disputing a late payment on your credit report.
Medical collections that ignored her partial payments, and a deleted wireless collection that came back
A Delaware consumer’s reports carried about three Transworld medical collections that gave no credit for payments she had made; after numerous disputes two bureaus removed them and Equifax kept one. An AT&T account, deleted by all three bureaus after her disputes, was reinserted by the collectors without notice to her. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b), with an FDCPA count.
More on this error: Transworld Systems on your credit report.
Student loans transferred to a new servicer at $0, still reported open at $25,396
PHEAA wrote a Virginia borrower in August 2022 that all his loans were moving to MOHELA and would be reported at zero. It kept reporting some of them open with balances — two at $801 and $25,396. Trans Union refused his dispute on the ground that it had not come through “a properly authorized third party” and investigated nothing; a phone dispute got no answer. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a), 1681b and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: student loan credit report errors.
One account closed, a new one opened — and every purchase posted to both
Fingerhut told a Bucks County customer her old account would close in April 2022 and a new one would open. It never closed the old one for reporting purposes and billed each new purchase to both, so $621.01 she had paid in full on the new account showed as a $621.01 balance on the old. The three bureaus reported the “WebBank/Fingerhut” line three different ways — $1,112, $1,177 and “$1,1777” — each open, each $119 past due, with 30-day lates. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a), 1681b and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: WebBank credit report errors.
Paid on time — reported late
A payment made inside the 30-day window, reported 30 days late
An Oregon borrower’s September payment was due on the 16th. He paid by phone through Ally’s payment vendor on October 14 at 12:09 p.m. Pacific — before the same-day cutoff — so Ally had it before the thirtieth day. Ally reported him 30 days late for September; the bureaus verified it and Ally refused to correct. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: disputing a late payment on your credit report.
The dealer was slow to pay off the trade-in; the borrower got the late marks
A Hanover borrower traded his Cadillac to an Audi dealer in October 2024; the dealer signed a payoff authorization for the credit-union loan and then sat on it. The credit union reported the loan past due. The dealer’s general manager put the fault in writing. In February 2025 the borrower disputed with Trans Union and Equifax with that admission letter, the purchase agreement and the payoff authorization; both bureaus answered eight days later that the credit union had verified the account as accurate. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: disputing a late payment on your credit report.
Rent paid on time, with state assistance — reported 30 days late by a rent-reporting company
A New Jersey tenant was approved for the state’s eviction-prevention program, which sent the property manager about $255 a month for the first half of 2025; she paid the rest on time, including March. The rent-reporting furnisher marked March 30 days late. She disputed with Trans Union in May with her lease pricing, payment printouts, the program’s approval email, her emails with the property manager and a ledger; Trans Union wrote back eleven days later that the account was verified. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: disputing a late payment on your credit report.
Hardship-plan payments made on time, reported as late — after the lender admitted the error
A New Jersey borrower paid an Upgrade loan on schedule under several hardship plans, the last of them $1,091.21 a month toward an $11,572.30 balance. Upgrade reported the loan with late payments, a past-due balance and past-due status because it never applied the reduced terms. Upgrade told her it had misreported and would fix it, and did not; the bureaus forwarded her disputes and every defendant refused to correct. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Upgrade credit report errors.
A 2019 forbearance, reported as a year of late payments
A Wisconsin borrower had been granted an administrative forbearance in 2019; nothing was due. The servicer’s tradelines showed late payments for that period, and disputes did not remove them. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Aidvantage credit report errors.
Six loans in a borrower-defense forbearance to 2035, reported late all through 2025
A Tennessee borrower’s six loans from a since-closed for-profit college were placed in borrower-defense forbearance in November 2024, extended in writing to 2035. The servicer reported them late and derogatory for 2025. She disputed with all three bureaus between June and July 2025, the last round with the servicer’s own forbearance letters; each bureau answered “updated” in September without correcting a thing, and one added a consumer statement she had not asked for. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Central Research credit report errors.
A current account “charged off” the day the borrower filed Chapter 13 — while he kept paying
A New Jersey consumer filed a Chapter 13 petition in April 2019 that was later dismissed. His Synchrony retail account was current, and he kept paying at or above the minimum every month. Synchrony charged the account off automatically at the filing, marked later months 30 days late and left the post-petition payments out. Disputes did not correct it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Synchrony Bank credit report errors.
A payment agreement honored to the dollar, reported as months of delinquency at the old balance
A New York borrower agreed with LendingClub to reduce a $27,105.94 balance to $16,250 — $5,000 by July 2021, then about $662 a month to the end of 2022 — and kept to it. The tradeline reported late months when he had paid, the old monthly payment and balance, and a past-due amount. Disputes did not correct it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: LendingClub credit report errors.
Not yours — mixed files and strangers’ accounts
Ten disputes over several years to remove a stranger’s accounts
A consumer’s Trans Union file carried accounts belonging to other people — a Best Buy card, a Capital One card, a credit-union account among them — with their late payments. He disputed roughly ten times over several years; each time the information was verified as accurate, until it was finally corrected in September 2025. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a).
More on this error: a mixed credit file.
A $35,000 Georgia lease debt belonging to someone with a similar name
A Florida homeowner found a collection of about $35,300 for a Georgia apartment lease on all three reports. It belonged to another person with the same or a similar name. After his disputes the collector verified the account as his and the bureaus left it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b), with FDCPA counts.
More on this error: a collection that is not yours.
A twin sister’s credit card on the wrong twin’s report
A Capital One tradeline belonging to the consumer’s twin sister was reported on the consumer’s Experian file. He notified both the bureau and the bank more than once; the account stayed. Filed in Philadelphia in 2021 and, with local counsel, in Dallas in 2022. Claims under §§ 1681n and 1681o.
More on this error: Capital One credit report errors.
“Deleted,” the bureau said — and two of the three stayed
A consumer disputed three medical collections that were not hers. Trans Union’s dispute results said the items would be deleted; the revised report still carried two of them. Claim under § 1681i(a)(6)(B)(ii) — the report after a dispute must reflect the file as revised.
More on this error: when a credit dispute is denied.
Five medical collections that were not hers, resold to a mortgage lender
About five medical collections that did not belong to the consumer sat on her Equifax file. Credco, the mortgage reseller, compiled them into the report her lender pulled, and the mortgage was denied. Her disputes did not clear them. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a), 1681n and 1681o.
More on this error: Credco on your credit report.
A card opened and closed the next day, reported as “in collections”
A consumer opened a GBank card on January 31, 2026 and closed it the next day with a zero balance and no transactions. Experian reported it as a collection account. Four disputes between February and March, with the bank’s closing letter attached, each came back verified. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a).
More on this error: Experian credit report errors.
A $225 “amenity fee” for an apartment never leased
A consumer toured an apartment complex and applied, then never signed a lease or moved in. A collector reported a $225 amenity fee to all three bureaus. Three rounds of disputes with documentation produced no correction; one bureau said it had not received his file information. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b), with FDCPA counts.
More on this error: a collection that is not yours.
A tax lien that was not hers, and a collection with the wrong amount and the wrong drop-off date
A York County consumer’s three reports carried a tax lien belonging to someone else and a real-estate collection whose amount and “age-off” date were wrong. Disputes to all three bureaus did not remove them. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b), with FDCPA counts.
More on this error: a collection that is not yours.
A Verizon account that was not his, on all three reports
A Verizon tradeline belonging to someone else appeared on the consumer’s three reports. He disputed; the bureaus kept it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Verizon on your credit report.
Two collectors and a card issuer — all someone else’s — on one man’s file
The consumer’s file had been mixed with another person’s: collections from two agencies for debts he did not owe and a Credit One Bank account that was not his, with the collectors pursuing him for the debts. Claim under § 1681e(b), with FDCPA counts against the collectors.
More on this error: a mixed credit file.
A Nashville apartment debt for a man who had never lived in Tennessee — the second time his file was mixed
A Rhode Island consumer found a collection for an apartment in Nashville he had never lived in, in a state he had never lived in — another person with the same name. The bureaus had already removed mixed accounts from his file once before; they verified this one after his dispute anyway. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b), with FDCPA counts.
More on this error: National Credit Systems on your credit report.
A deleted account that came back, and disputes never flagged
A line of credit was reported with the wrong payment history and balance; a lease account, deleted after the consumer’s dispute, was then furnished again by the bank; neither account was marked disputed. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: when a credit dispute is denied.
A twin’s student loans, mortgage and car loan, merged into her brother’s Equifax file
An Alabama consumer’s twin sister shares most of his identifying information. Equifax merged her file into his — her student loans, bank loans, mortgage and auto loan — and two auto lenders turned him down citing the Equifax report. His disputes drew no results at all. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681b.
More on this error: a mixed credit file.
Nineteen of a stranger’s accounts, one similar Social Security number, and a freeze the bureau would not lift
A Chicago consumer’s Equifax file carried another woman’s name, addresses and about nineteen tradelines — a New American Funding mortgage among them — because the two Social Security numbers were similar, as a police detective worked out. A bank refused her a home-equity loan over the stranger’s mortgage. Numerous disputes drew no results; she froze the file, asked Equifax to lift the freeze, and got no answer. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681b.
More on this error: a mixed credit file.
A mortgage lender’s tri-merge report carried someone else’s name, Social Security number and cards — and the bureau said it had no file on him
A Philadelphia home buyer’s lender pulled a Xactus merged report. The Equifax segment belonged to someone else: three unfamiliar accounts, a different name, Social Security number, birth date and address history — while the Trans Union and Experian segments were his. Xactus resold it unreviewed. When he asked Equifax for his file, Equifax said it could not locate one. The lender would not fund until it was fixed and the purchase was lost. Claim under § 1681e(b).
More on this error: Xactus on your credit report.
A store card he once had — but not this one
A Maryland consumer had once held a Citi/Best Buy card, with a different number and a higher limit, which Citi closed for non-use. A different Best Buy card, with a balance and a mixed payment history, was reported as his; it belonged to someone else. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Citibank credit report errors.
A home-equity line “opened” when she was eleven, and two Sprint collections on a T-Mobile customer
A New York renter who has never owned a home found a SunTrust HELOC on her Equifax report, opened in 2006 when she was eleven, and two $730 Sprint collections on Trans Union and Experian; she has only ever had T-Mobile. Each bureau forwarded her dispute to the furnisher and each account came back verified. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a), 1681b and 1681s-2(b), with FDCPA counts.
More on this error: a collection that is not yours.
A father’s file, his same-name son’s car loan, and his wife’s loans
A Louisiana consumer whose son carries his name with “Jr.” found the son’s Capital One auto loan and several First Franklin loans opened by his son and wife on all three of his reports; his own car had been paid off for a decade and he had co-signed nothing. Equifax also released his report to First Franklin, apparently confusing him with his son. Disputes left the Capital One loan verified everywhere and the First Franklin loans verified at Experian; Trans Union removed them. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a), 1681b and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a mixed credit file.
A $10,671 charged-off Citi account he never opened
A Maryland consumer’s Trans Union and Experian reports showed a Citibank account far past due, charged off, with a $10,671 balance. He had never applied for or agreed to any Citi loan. Disputes came back verified; the complaint alleges the bureaus simply adopted Citi’s answer. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a), 1681b and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Citibank credit report errors.
A Virginia bankruptcy on a Texan who never filed one
Experian reported that a Tarrant County consumer had filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy in federal court in Virginia. She never had. Her dispute did not remove it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a).
More on this error: Experian credit report errors.
A university collection from someone else’s file
A Delaware County consumer’s Experian report carried a Widener University account in collection with Access Receivables. It was not his; his file had been mixed with another person’s, and the collector pursued him for it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a), with an FDCPA count.
More on this error: a collection that is not yours.
Solar-panel financing on a renter who owns no roof
A New Jersey renter found a derogatory Sunnova solar account on her Experian report. She had never signed a Sunnova contract, does not own a home and never had panels installed. Disputes to Experian and Sunnova did not remove it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a), 1681b and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a collection that is not yours.
A son’s medical collection on the father’s reports
A New Jersey consumer’s Trans Union and Experian reports carried a medical collection he never incurred, believed to be his son’s. Disputes to the bureaus and the collector left it in place. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b), with an FDCPA count.
More on this error: a collection that is not yours.
Thirteen auto-insurance claims belonging to a man with the same surname, on his C.L.U.E. report
A Philadelphia driver’s LexisNexis claims-history report listed about thirteen auto claims, insured parties and addresses that belonged to another man with his last name; the claims started at State Farm and were carried by three other insurers, each of which furnished them. LexisNexis’s credit-file product added five Equifax-sourced collections that were not his either. Numerous disputes to State Farm and LexisNexis, forwarded to all four insurers, corrected nothing; his premiums ran high for years. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: errors on your C.L.U.E. report.
A $40 apartment collection sent “in error” — verified twice by Equifax, and a mortgage approval cut by $100,000
An Illinois home buyer had paid a $2,648 early-termination fee, moved out owing nothing and got his deposit back. A $40 collection from the apartment’s collector appeared anyway; the property manager confirmed in writing it related to an insurance claim that had nothing to do with him and had gone to the collector by mistake. Trans Union and Experian deleted it on dispute. Equifax, given the same letter and ledgers twice, verified it twice. His mortgage pre-approval fell by about $100,000. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b), with an FDCPA count.
More on this error: National Credit Systems on your credit report.
A $3,588 Illinois utility bill on a lifelong New Jerseyan — deleted, then quietly reinserted
A Burlington County consumer who has never lived in Illinois found a $3,588 Commonwealth Edison collection on her Equifax report. A September 2021 dispute removed it; by November it was back with no reinsertion notice, and the November dispute ran past thirty days. It came off only after she called again in April 2022. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) (including 1681i(a)(5)(B)) and 1681s-2(b), with an FDCPA count.
More on this error: a collection that is not yours.
A Wells Fargo card she never signed for or used, reported delinquent
A Florida consumer’s reports carried a Wells Fargo credit card with a delinquent history and a balance. She never opened it and never used it. Disputes to two bureaus and to Wells Fargo did not remove it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: Wells Fargo credit report errors.
A collector’s own invoice named a different customer at a different address — it verified the debt as hers anyway
A Dallas consumer found a Transworld collection for a Texas electricity supplier she had never used. Transworld’s “final invoice” named a different, similarly named customer at an address in another Texas town, and the enrollment application matched none of her details. She disputed with all three bureaus with her license and a bill from her actual provider; Experian and Trans Union verified, Equifax never answered. Transworld’s own response was the invoice naming someone else. Claim under § 1681s-2(b), with an FDCPA count.
More on this error: Transworld Systems on your credit report.
Two sisters, one credit file — and a card application answered with the wrong sister’s report
Two New Jersey sisters with similar identifying information had their files mixed at all three bureaus: one sister’s student loan and Capital One card appeared under the other. When Capital One pulled the second sister’s report for a card application, it received the first sister’s and denied the application. An Equifax representative conceded on the phone that no separate file for the second sister existed. Disputes did not unmix them. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681b.
More on this error: a mixed credit file.
A $1,929 ambulance bill from a Pennsylvania accident, on a Virginian who had not been in the state in twenty years
A Virginia consumer’s reports carried an ambulance-company collection of about $1,929 for a Pennsylvania car accident she was never in. The same confusion led Trans Union and Experian to release her report to five creditors she had never dealt with. Disputes to the collector and both bureaus did not remove it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a), 1681b and 1681s-2(b), with an FDCPA count.
More on this error: a collection that is not yours.
Identity theft
Student loans opened by an ex-husband; the bureau blocked one and not the other
An ex-husband opened two student loans in the consumer’s name with forged signatures and false contact details. She disputed with the lender, filed an FTC identity-theft report and requested a block under § 1681c-2. Trans Union removed one loan and kept the other, saying it would investigate under § 1681i instead. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a), 1681c-2 and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: identity theft on your credit report.
Two cards opened in her name, still reported after dispute
A North Carolina consumer’s reports carried Discover and Barclays accounts with derogatory histories that had been opened fraudulently in her name. Disputes did not remove them. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a credit card opened in your name.
A brother’s fraud, a police report, both lenders’ letters — and a bureau that lifted the block for “material misrepresentation”
A Milwaukee mortgage applicant’s brother opened LendingClub and Comenity accounts in his name. He sent about ten disputes to each bureau — with an FTC report, a police report, letters from both lenders saying he was not responsible, and his brother’s written admission. Trans Union and Experian blocked both accounts; Equifax blocked one and refused the other. Experian then wrote that it was removing its block on the Comenity account because the block had been obtained by “material misrepresentation,” and that it would not investigate further, without saying what was missing. His mortgage was denied. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681c-2.
More on this error: identity theft on your credit report.
Accounts opened and charged while he was in custody — and dispute results that never came
A Massachusetts consumer was incarcerated from mid-2020 to early 2023 and could have opened or charged nothing. Two bureaus reported a Discover account with lates from fraudulent charges, a fraudulently opened Barclays account charged off, and, at Experian, a Chase account with fraudulent charges and an HSBC account he never opened. He disputed with documentation of his custody; Trans Union never sent results, and Experian sent one set, uncorrected, and never the other three. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: identity theft on your credit report.
Two fake New Jersey lease applications, a collector that said “why don’t you pay it anyway,” and a bureau that refused the block
A Georgia homeowner found collections for application and NSF fees on two New Jersey apartment applications submitted electronically in his name in 2023 — wrong email, phone, license number, address, employer and signature. Equifax reported three accounts, one of them twice. He sent the collector a validation request, filed a police report and a CFPB complaint, and disputed with Equifax and Trans Union with his license, Social Security card, mortgage statement, police report and a signature sample. Trans Union deleted. Equifax verified both, marked them “in progress,” and refused an identity-theft block in writing. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a), 1681c-2 and 1681s-2(b), with FDCPA counts.
More on this error: identity theft on your credit report.
Background and tenant screening — someone else’s record
Five evictions belonging to “Janet,” reported on “Janelle”
A housing applicant was denied on a screening report that listed about five eviction records. They belonged to a different person with a different first name at a property where the applicant had never lived. After her dispute the records were removed; the complaint’s point is that a cursory review would have kept them off in the first place. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a).
More on this error: someone else’s record on your background check.
A stranger’s criminal record, and a rideshare deactivation
A driver’s background check carried criminal information belonging to another person with similar identifiers. Lyft deactivated him. His dispute did not correct it and the report kept going out. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a).
More on this error: First Advantage background check errors.
A dismissed eviction case, someone else’s, reported as a judgment
A screening company put a New Jersey eviction case in a consumer’s file — a case that had been dismissed, and that belonged to a different person with a similar name — and reported it as a judgment. It blocked her mortgage. She disputed and demanded removal; the company kept furnishing it. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681b. The record’s source was LexisNexis, which had matched a 2020 filing against a different woman with the consumer’s first name and maiden surname — about $2,661 at an address she had left around 2005 — and passed it to the mortgage screener; a second case, N.D. Ga., 2023, against LexisNexis Risk Solutions, pleads a systemic failure in its court-record matching under § 1681e(b).
More on this error: dismissed charges on a background check.
A truck driver’s DAC report, and two employers that never showed it to her
A New Jersey driver was turned down by two carriers on a HireRight DAC report that carried inaccurate work history and a false derogatory record from a prior employer. Neither employer gave her a stand-alone disclosure, a copy of the report or the summary of rights before acting; one buried the authorization in twenty pages of forms, the other asked only “Do we have authorization to run your MVR?” Claims under §§ 1681b(b)(2) and 1681b(b)(3) and the New Jersey FCRA; both filed as class actions.
More on this error: HireRight background check errors.
A sealed, twelve-year-old Nevada record, reported through about six disputes
A Nevada job applicant’s background reports carried a criminal record that had been sealed by the Clark County court and was in any case more than seven years old. He disputed roughly six times; the record stayed, and two job offers were lost. The complaint’s point: a look at the public court record, or at the dates already in the company’s own file, would have kept it off. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a) and California’s ICRAA.
More on this error: Checkr background check errors.
An expunged record, still in the report a year later — “accurate as reported”
A Louisiana consumer’s criminal record was expunged in November 2021. A year later an Experian alert showed it was still going out to insurers and employers through LexisNexis. He disputed by phone and uploaded the expungement order; LexisNexis answered that the record was accurate, citing as its source its own consumer center. The complaint alleges LexisNexis does not obtain Louisiana expungement updates. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681b.
More on this error: an expunged record on a background check.
An eviction record deleted, reinserted without notice, and “investigated” a year before the dispute
A New Jersey rental applicant disputed inaccurate eviction court-record information in her tenant-screening reports in 2021 and it was removed. It came back without the five-day reinsertion notice and with no furnisher to name. Her 2023 dispute results said the investigation had been completed in November 2022 — nearly a year before she sent it. Claims under §§ 1681i and 1681e(b).
More on this error: TransUnion SmartMove tenant screening errors.
A father’s eviction on the son’s rental screening, and a Washington apartment lost
A Colorado consumer moving to Washington, D.C. for a new job was rejected by an apartment complex on a tenant-screening report, resold by RentGrow, that said he had been evicted. The eviction was his father’s — similar name, different birth date, Social Security number and legal name. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681b.
More on this error: RentGrow tenant screening errors.
A $13.36 check the store mis-keyed, coded as “insufficient funds” for years
A North Carolina shopper wrote a $13.36 check in November 2021. The store encoded the account number one digit off, so the bank returned it “unable to locate account” — twice — while the real account held ample funds. TeleCheck recorded it as an NSF return, tied the wrong account number to him, and for several years told merchants to decline his checks. Numerous disputes changed nothing. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a).
More on this error: TeleCheck errors.
Pulled without permission
Seven hard inquiries for asking a dealer about cars
A prospective buyer asked a dealership about vehicles, signed nothing and authorized nothing. The dealer caused about seven hard inquiries on his report. Asking for information is not a credit transaction and gives no permissible purpose. Claims under §§ 1681n and 1681o.
More on this error: an unauthorized credit inquiry.
Inquiries after the financing was already done
A buyer financed a vehicle on successive installment contracts with inconsistent finance charges; after the financing was supposedly final, the dealer caused further hard inquiries with no permissible purpose. FCRA claims under §§ 1681n and 1681o, with Truth in Lending and state-law counts.
More on this error: Ally Financial credit inquiries.
Approved, driven home, then “bring it back” — with multiple pulls and no adverse-action notice
Two co-signers were approved, took the car home, and were then told the financing was rejected and the car had to come back — after multiple credit inquiries and with no adverse-action notice. Claims under §§ 1681n and 1681o, with TILA, ECOA and state counts.
More on this error: an unauthorized credit inquiry.
A hard pull for walking into a phone store
A consumer visited a store to ask about plans, signed nothing and bought nothing, and found a hard inquiry on his report. Claims under § 1681n and the New Jersey Fair Credit Reporting Act.
More on this error: T-Mobile on your credit report.
A phone company’s hard inquiries on a man who had never been its customer
A Colorado consumer found a Verizon hard inquiry from September 2018; Verizon’s own letters first said an account had been opened in his name and then acknowledged he had not opened it. In November 2019 Verizon pulled his report again, and equipment he never ordered arrived. Verizon agreed to remove the inquiries and did not. Claim under § 1681b, filed as a class action.
More on this error: an unauthorized credit inquiry.
Marked deceased, and wrong about the person
Two USAA accounts marked “deceased,” no score, and a bureau that put the marker back
A California consumer’s two USAA tradelines carried a deceased indicator at Equifax and Experian, so neither could produce a score and lenders turned him down. Trans Union removed it as soon as he disputed. Equifax removed it, then reinserted it without notice. Experian removed it only on the second dispute, after the credit was lost. Claims under §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i(a).
More on this error: being reported as deceased.
An ex-husband’s accounts under a divorce decree, reported as hers — with the wrong name, phones and addresses
A New Jersey consumer’s reports carried Bank of America and SLS accounts as derogatory with no indication that a 2010 divorce decree had made her ex-husband responsible for them, and none were marked disputed. Trans Union also reported a wrong name, employer, phones and addresses; Equifax a wrong name; Experian phone numbers not hers. Equifax first refused to investigate for want of “legible” documents — the same documents the other bureaus accepted — then verified on re-dispute. Claims under §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a) and 1681s-2(b).
More on this error: a wrong name on your credit report.
What these cases have in common
Almost every one turns on the same two duties: a credit bureau or screening company must follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy (15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b)) and must reasonably reinvestigate what you dispute (§ 1681i); the lender, collector or servicer that supplied the information must investigate a forwarded dispute and correct what it cannot verify (§ 1681s-2(b)). A company that pulls your report without a permissible purpose answers under § 1681b. Willful violations carry statutory damages of $100 to $1,000 per violation and punitive damages; negligent ones carry your actual damages; both shift attorney’s fees to the defendant (§§ 1681n, 1681o). Every figure with its section number is on FCRA by the Numbers; the background-check rules are on Background Checks by the Numbers.
Admitted in Pennsylvania and New Jersey; available to appear pro hac vice in other federal courts. You pay nothing unless we win.
Sources: the complaints as filed in the United States District Courts for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the District of New Jersey, the Southern District of Ohio, the Northern District of Texas, the Northern District of Georgia, the Northern District of California, the District of Maryland and the District of Massachusetts (the public docket record via PACER/RECAP, and the firm’s own filed copies); 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681b, 1681c-2, 1681e(b), 1681i, 1681n, 1681o and 1681s-2(b).