CFPB Complaint

[Anonymous]

The following is the complaint I filed with CFPB against Department of Education, Experian, Equifax, and Transunion.  Please let me know if you think any action to my advantage will be taken.  I included copies of my credit report that show the DOFD listed on the original account and reflects that a later date is listed for collection accounts.  This seems pretty cut and dry to me.  What do you all think I can expect? 

In June of 2011 I became delinquent on my consolidated student loan. In September of 2011 this information was reported to credit reporting agencies.  For example my Transunion report shows “Maximum Delinquency of 90 days in 08/2011”.  My Equifax reports shows this same account updated with the following information on September 1, 2011.  Date of first delinquency: June 1, 2011.  I do not dispute the above information.  Given this accurate information, these accounts should be excluded from my credit reports in May of 2018.  Experian does not report this original account.

This account was transferred for collection within the Department of Education. The collection account is being reported to Experian, Equifax, and Transunion.  The date of first delinquency being reported on the collection account is April 1, 2012.

This practice of re-aging is a very serious violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies (a) Duty of Furnishers of Information to Provide Accurate Information (5) Duty to Provide Notice of Delinquency of Accounts (B) Rule of construction.  For purposes of this paragraph only, and provided the consumer does not dispute the information, a person that furnishes information on a delinquent account that has been placed for collection, charged for profit or loss, or subjected to any similar action, complies with this paragraph, if – (i) the person reports the same date of delinquency as that provided by the creditor to which the account was owed at the time which the commencement of the delinquency occurred, if the creditor previously reported that date of delinquency to a consumer reporting agency

I disputed the date of first delinquency information provided in the collection account with Experian, Equifax, and Transunion. The Department of Education verified the information as accurate. 

I called the Department of Education on 3/19/2018 after receiving results of disputes.  I spoke to a representative explaining that the account was first reported as delinquent on June 1, 2011 therefore it was inaccurate for DOE to now report date of first delinquency as April 1, 2012.  The representative explained to me that April 1, 2012 is when the account was transferred to them and that is why they were using that date.  I explained that it didn’t matter when they received the account that the date of first delinquency had already been established.  The representative refused to make any changes saying “I’m not an attorney”.

[RobertEG]

Pursuing the accuracy of the reported DOFD is appropriate, but what is not addressed in the post is that provisions of the Higher Education Act remove the FCRA exclusion requirments for certain types of federal student loans.

Thus, while debt collectors are still required to report the DOFD to the CRAs, that reporting may only be academic as to any exclusion of the collection.

[Anonymous]

I am in the same situation and I haven't been able to find anything in this community or anywhere else with any clear or helpful answers or advice. It's extremely frustrating. Sorry you are going through this, too. You are maybe the first person I've been able to find that has the exact same issue.

I have an FFEL Student Loan that is now with Navient and I am trying to goodwill/dispute directly with them because the CRA disputes did not work. They received my letter on 3/6/2018. I am waiting impatiently on a response.

My original loan was with Citibank and my DofD was 1/11. It was transferred to Sallie Mae/Navient in 2013 when they re-aged it. It reports 11 months of 120+ lates and default in 2014. I rehabbed it with Navient in 2015 and have been paying it on time for 18 months. The account reports twice on all three CR, one as open/current, the other as closed/$0 balance/serious delinquency. This is the last negative on my CR from that gross period of unemployment/ underemployment we all experienced in 2008-9. I just get so piXXed off that all these banks that did this got a bail out and a free pass, but it's 9 years later and I can't get this one last thing removed and move on with my life and my credit.

Please keep me up to date on your situation and I will do the same.

[Anonymous]

wrote:

Pursuing the accuracy of the reported DOFD is appropriate, but what is not addressed in the post is that provisions of the Higher Education Act remove the FCRA exclusion requirments for certain types of federal student loans.

Thus, while debt collectors are still required to report the DOFD to the CRAs, that reporting may only be academic as to any exclusion of the collection.

---

My Transunion and Experian reports both list dates for removal of account from credit reports.  Equifax doesn't list a date for exclusion for any collection accounts.  From the research I have done this provision does not apply in my situation.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymouswrote:

I am in the same situation and I haven't been able to find anything in this community or anywhere else with any clear or helpful answers or advice. It's extremely frustrating. Sorry you are going through this, too. You are maybe the first person I've been able to find that has the exact same issue.

I have an FFEL Student Loan that is now with Navient and I am trying to goodwill/dispute directly with them because the CRA disputes did not work. They received my letter on 3/6/2018. I am waiting impatiently on a response.

My original loan was with Citibank and my DofD was 1/11. It was transferred to Sallie Mae/Navient in 2013 when they re-aged it. It reports 11 months of 120+ lates and default in 2014. I rehabbed it with Navient in 2015 and have been paying it on time for 18 months. The account reports twice on all three CR, one as open/current, the other as closed/$0 balance/serious delinquency. This is the last negative on my CR from that gross period of unemployment/ underemployment we all experienced in 2008-9. I just get so piXXed off that all these banks that did this got a bail out and a free pass, but it's 9 years later and I can't get this one last thing removed and move on with my life and my credit.

Please keep me up to date on your situation and I will do the same.

---

I'll make sure and update this post when I receive results from my complaint.  Good luck to you!

[Anonymous]

I’m in a little bit of shock typing this update! I filed the CFPB complaints and all responses basically said they would investigate. Imagine my surprise when the accounts started being deleted one by one. The original account is currently the only one reporting (to transunion only) and it is listed as estimated to be removed next month. That account is accurate. My Transunion score increased 35 points and Experian 50 points! No update yet on how the deleted accounts affected Equifax score.

[niecy357]

Where do you find the date for deletion on your credit report?

[RobertEG]

I am speculating that your student loan may not be of a type for which the Higher Education Act provides an exemption from the credit report exclusion provisions of the FCRA.

Regardless, until you have an express statement from either the Dept of Ed or the CFPB that explains the basis for any deletion, it remains unclear as to whether they (the CRA) excluded based on the credit report exclusion provision, or whether DOE decided to actually report deletion.  One excludes, the other deletes.

As for the assertion in the complaint letter that any reporting of a DOFD by the original creditor is factual evidence of the true DOFD, and thus reporting of any other date is clearly improper re-aging, is not a proper statement of the law.

FCRA 623(a)(5) provides a three-step process that can be used by a party reporting a DOFD, and if followed, avoids any issue of not taking proper steps to attempt to obtain the DOFD.  A DOFD reported under that process does not establish the actual factual accuracy of the DOFD, it only establishes a preliminary date that is subject to rebuttal if further facts are presented or known.

For example, if a party is aware of a prior reporting of the DOFD by the original creditor, the first step of the process permits them to report that date to the CRA, and they will be considered in compliance with their reporting requirement.  However, it does not necessarily establish the factual accuracy of that date, or permit the reporting of another date if the furnisher has additional facts to support that later date.

For example, they may have contacted the creditor directly, and the creditor informed them that they have determined the prior reporting was not accurate, and the creditor then provided them with the now accurate date (step 2 of the DOFD determiantion process).

Presenting a formal complaint that alleges they have made an improper reporting of the DOFD was premature, as they may have had basis for reporting that date.  The proper process is to first provide the furnisher with the opportunity to investigate the asserted inaccuacy and explain or correct by filing a dispute with the CRA before making an allegation of intentional misreporting.

If that had been done, evaluation of their reporting would have occured before making the blanket assumption of an FCRA violation before the CFPB.

[Anonymous]

Congratulations, that's great news!

I just got my generated-by-robot-form-letter from Navient saying blah, blah, it's all accurate and we will not stop reporting this account. I have to decide what step to take next. Your results gives me some encouragement that I have another avenue to file a complaint.

[Anonymous]

---

@RobertEGwrote:

I am speculating that your student loan may not be of a type for which the Higher Education Act provides an exemption from the credit report exclusion provisions of the FCRA.

Regardless, until you have an express statement from either the Dept of Ed or the CFPB that explains the basis for any deletion, it remains unclear as to whether they (the CRA) excluded based on the credit report exclusion provision, or whether DOE decided to actually report deletion.  One excludes, the other deletes.

The type of loan was not a Perkin's loan. I'm assuming it was excluded rather than deleted. 

---

@RobertEG

 As for the assertion in the complaint letter that any reporting of a DOFD by the original creditor is factual evidence of the true DOFD, and thus reporting of any other date is clearly improper re-aging, is not a proper statement of the law.

FCRA 623(a)(5) provides a three-step process that can be used by a party reporting a DOFD, and if followed, avoids any issue of not taking proper steps to attempt to obtain the DOFD.  A DOFD reported under that process does not establish the actual factual accuracy of the DOFD, it only establishes a preliminary date that is subject to rebuttal if further facts are presented or known.

For example, if a party is aware of a prior reporting of the DOFD by the original creditor, the first step of the process permits them to report that date to the CRA, and they will be considered in compliance with their reporting requirement.  However, it does not necessarily establish the factual accuracy of that date, or permit the reporting of another date if the furnisher has additional facts to support that later date.

For example, they may have contacted the creditor directly, and the creditor informed them that they have determined the prior reporting was not accurate, and the creditor then provided them with the now accurate date (step 2 of the DOFD determiantion process). 

---

I know the date I lost employment that led to me becoming delinquent.  I did become delinquent in June of 2011, as was originally reported. When I first began rebuilding my credit this account was on Transunion and Equifax three times. Each time with a different DOFD. If they followed the process you outlined above that would not have been possible. 

---

@RobertEG

Presenting a formal complaint that alleges they have made an improper reporting of the DOFD was premature, as they may have had basis for reporting that date.  The proper process is to first provide the furnisher with the opportunity to investigate the asserted inaccuacy and explain or correct by filing a dispute with the CRA before making an allegation of intentional misreporting.

If that had been done, evaluation of their reporting would have occured before making the blanket assumption of an FCRA violation before the CFPB.

---

I did dispute with CRA prior to filing a complaint with CFPB, as I outlined in my original post. The response to that dispute was 1 account deleted from Transunion and Equifax. All other information was verified by furnisher as accurate, even though the 2 remaining accounts contradicted each other. In my view they were either intentionally re-aging or did not care enough to provide accurate information.

I'm hoping that you are simply attempting to educate. However, it is coming across as nitpicking. I feel like the responses you are providing will prohibit someone else from asking questions or seeking help. Your tone seems rather judgmental. How about congratulations for getting this inaccurate information deleted or excluded from your credit reports!
 

---

---