Those of you that have tried to dispute a public records item (bankruptcy, judegment, tax lien, etc.) on your credit reports are likely all too familiar with the third-party data furnisher, LexisNexis. Some of you may have been denied a bank account, or some type of insurance due to information reported by LexisNexis.
The purpose of this post is to provide information as to what LexisNexis is, the type of information they gather and sell, and how to handle inaccurate or outdated information included on your consumer Full File Disclosure.
About LexisNexis
LexisNexis is a third-party data furnisher that gathers as much public information on individuals as possible. Much of the data is obtained from various public record sources, as well as credit and insurance companies, and is used to provide risk analysis to entities such as insurance agencies, credit reporting bureaus, employers, and banks.
Information included in a consumer Full File Disclosure
Consumer files contain items such as real estate transaction and ownership data, lien, judgment, and bankruptcy records, professional license information, and historical addresses. This information is then used to create consumer reports about you. A LexisNexis consumer Full File Disclosure includes the following reports:
(1) C.L.U.E. Report for Auto: Summarizes auto insurance loss history provided by participating insurance companies. It is used to assess applications and renewals of auto insurance underwriting.
(2) C.L.U.E. Report for Property: Summarizes property insurance loss history provided by participating insurance companies. It is used to assess applications and renewals of property insurance udnerwriting.
(3) Current Carrier Reports: Summarizes historical home and auto coverage infromation provided by participating insurance companies. It is used to assess current insurance coverage as well as identity gaps in prior underwriting.
(4) InsurView: Provides attributes using public record data. It is used for insurance underwriting and insurance prescreening.
(5) Traffic Violation Search: Provides search results from public records. It is used to asses applications and renewals of insurance underwriting.
(6) Bankos Report: Provides search results from national court records regarding bankruptices, tax liens, judegments. It is used to monitor developments that could affect a current account relationship.
(7) Benefits Assessment Report: Provides search results from public records, including property and personal information. It is used by public assistance agencies to evaluate applications for government benefits.
(8) Collections Descisioning Report: Provides search results from public records. It is used to determine a consumer's ability to pay an oustanding debt.
(9) Life Public Records Disclosure Report: Provides search results from public records. It is used for underwriting life insurance.
(10) RiskView Report: Provides search results from public records. It is used by lenders to evaluate an applicant's ability and willingess to repay a debt.
Obtaining a copy of your Full File Disclosure
Pursuant to Section 609 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, you have a right to obtain a copy of your Full File Disclosure once every 12 months. You may request a copy be mailed to you by filling out and mailing a request form or simply calling them at 1 888 497 8920 and speaking with a representative - throughout my experience they have all been knowledgeable and polite.
Placing a security freeze on your Full File Disclosure
Security freezes are available, but the right of an individual to place a freeze on their report depends on the laws within their state. Some states allow individuals to freeze at will, for no reason, and for free; others only allow an individual to freeze if a threat of identity theft or fraud exists. If applicable, you may request a security freeze by phone. A pin number required to unfreeze your reports will be mailed within 7-10 days of your request.
Opting-Out of LexisNexis
You can opt out of some of Lexis/Nexis products, with limitations. All consumers can opt out of the Lexis/Nexis Marketing database. Per their website:
"Individuals may request to opt-out of having personal information about themselves made available through certain LexisNexis products and services, in accordance with legal requirements or if permitted by LexisNexis policy. Such requests are referred to as "Information Suppressions."
LexisNexis permits individuals to have certain personal information about themselves suppressed from LexisNexis public records that are available to the general public over the Internet."
The opt-out policy only applies to personal information that is available through LexisNexis-owned databases. Please note opting-out of LexisNexis databases will not prevent other companies or public record agencies from collecting or disseminating your personal information.
For more information: https://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/privacy/for-consumers/opt-out-of-lexisnexis.page?
To opt out online: https://optout.lexisnexis.com/
Big, Basic Difference Between Opt-Out and Security Freeze
As explained by the representative:
"Opt-Out only suppresses UNVERIFIED public records. Security Freeze suppresses VERIFIED public records."
Disputing items on your Full File Disclosure
Once you obtain and review your consumer file, you may dispute any items that are inaccurate or outdated. They provide an email address that you may use to submit any questions or concerns you may have about the information included in your file; you may also use this email for disputing information. Alternatively, you may mail your disputes to the address provided. Be sure to include your full name, as well as the Consumer Number and Case Number provided on the top of your Full File Disclosure. Y0u do not need to include your SSN in your dispute if you include your consumer and case numbers.
My Experience
So, I ordered my file in January, by phone, and received it within approx. 8 or 9 days. My file is 202 pages long and all sorts of historical information is included - including every email address I've ever used (dating all the way back to my AOL days - scary) - the majority of which was accurate. There were two addresses that did not belong as I had never lived there, but was associated to one due to a bill that was in my name for a family member and the other because it was a work address - I am assuming my holding of a corporate credit card somehow linked the corporate address to me. I was not at all concerned by these two addresses so I did not bother disputing them.
My concern was a paid & released Georgia State Tax Lien. The tax lien is why I ordered my filed in the first place because I have been fighting to remove the item from my credit reports forever (well, 4 months but forever seems more appropriate) but it kept coming back as verified, with LexisNexis as the source. I finally managed to have the lien removed from TU (EX removed on their own), but EQ has been a stubborn beast. So, I figured my last shot was to get the lien off of LexisNexis and, if successful, dispute with EQ again.
Two civil lawsuits also appeared on my disclosure file and that was a bit of a surpise. Both were filed by Midland Funding (I know many of you have had the pleasure) for a collections debt for Verizon. I remembered receiving a summons in the mail a couple of years ago - at which time I immediately called Midland and paid the debt to avoid having a judgment filed. But there were two civil cases noted in my file disclosure, for the same debt, filed on the same day but in two different counties. I searched for each case docket number using the public court records database for my state and found that one had been withdrawn and archived and the other had been dismissed by the court. It seems that the one that had been withdrawn was filed in a county that I lived in for a short amount of time; once they realized I had moved, they refiled a new claim in the county of my current residence. Once payment was received, the claim was dismissed. Great.
The tax lien is a long story, filled with Equifax lies, which I will detail in a later post - but bottom line, it has been paid and released by the state (GA does not do withdrawls). Once released, the lien no longer appears under an individual's name when searching the county tax / public records. I also received a statement of tax clearance from the state. LexisNexis, however, had no updated information of the lien, so their reporting was inaccurate as it still showed the lien as unpaid and active.
I saved (PDF) the results from searching the court dockets for the two civil cases and gathered my evidence of the non-existent tax lien and wrote a dispute letter to LexisNexis, which I sent via email on 1/27/2018. I simply asked that (1) the withdrawn civil suit be deleted; (2) the dismissed civil suit be either updated to reflect 'dismissed' or deleted; and (3) that the tax lien be deleted due to the absence of records. Once the dispute is sent via email, an email from LexisNexis with a link to check the status of the dispute, or to add additional information to your dispute, will be received.
The dispute status updated to "Solved" on 2/2/2018, so that was really quick - however, the resolution was not noted and I did not receive any further information in the following weeks. On 2/19/2018, I emailed them asking if I would receive the dispute resolution by mail, or if they could email the resolution to me. On 2/22/2018, they responded advising the resolution had been mailed on 2/21/2018. It seems you have to followup with them - I don't know if the resolution would have been mailed had I not followed up. Anyway - I received the resolution today (2/27). They deleted all three disputed items(!) and provided an updated Full File Disclosure. That was super easy - my entire LexisNexis file is clean.
Now, Equifax cannot claim they verified my tax lien with LexisNexis, so I just mailed them a new dispute and included copies of all sections of my disclosure that lists liens & judegments. Will update when I have the results. Fingers Xrossed.
My suggestion to everyone - whether you are just beginning your rebuild, far into your rebuild, have always had great credit, or no credit - get copies of your Full File Disclosures asap and review them. These reports affect various aspects of consumer life and it's important to make sure the information provided is accurate. Request and review them every year. The reports are fairly easy to read as they are simlar to hard-copy credit reports.
Side Note: I placed a Security Freeze on my file and Opted-Out of LexisNexis because the amount of information available was just creepy. The affect this will have on regular consumer activity remains to be seen. Will update on this point, if necessary.
Thanks for reading, I know this post was long but hope some of you found it helpful.
March 7, 2018 Update:
Success! EQ has deleted the tax lien from my report.
Thank you for including that reference, Robert.
Disputing based on NCAP (assuming this is the settlement to which you are referring) was a no-go for me. They didn't care that the original lien was missing an SSN and the address was partially excluded. I attempted to dispute on this basis several times.
Q: Am I mistaken, or was that Jenkins case brought against Equifax because they violated FCRA by providing consumer credit disclosures that did not identify its public records vendor(s) as the “source” of public record information? Because Equifax has claimed LexisNexis as the source in my case, several times, so I was under the impression that this civil action did not apply to my situation. Is there something I am missing? Or are you simply saying this case was the primary matter which spawned the NCAP settlement?
@RobertEGwrote:Others may also wish to review the recent civil action brought against EQ regarding the identification of vendors such as Lexis-Nexis and their verification of accuracy of public record information. That case, James Jenkins et al v. Equifax, U.S. Distict Court, E.D., VA, forms the basis for the new CRA policy regarding removal of certain public record information that lacks sufficient identifying information.
While the case is currently under implementation of a settlement agreement, and thus not likely to mature to final judgment, the briefs by the parties provide a good summary or the asserted problems arising from the use of public record vendors by the CRAs.
Thank you for the clarification!
@RobertEGwrote:The civil complaint in the Jenkins et al v. Equifax case included requests from several consumers for the identification, under FCRA 609(a)(2), of the source of certain public record information that was being included by EQ in their credit reports.
EQ uses various vendors to obtain public record information. Lexis-Nexis is the most prominent, and is specifically named in the Jenkins complaint. However the CRA did not, in responding to the consumer request for the name of the source of their public record information, name Lexis-Nexis as the source. Rather, they named the court itself from which their vendor obtained the records.
The complaint asserts that failure to name the specific vendor did not comply with the requirment under FCRA 609(a)(2) to provide the name of the source, and deprived the consumer of the ability to evaluate how the information was obtained.
The Jenkins case has not reached verdict. The proposed settlement agreement, of which removing information from consumer credit reports that does not include certain indentifying information from the public record, has been approved by the court and submitted to the class action litigants, and also has been incorportated into the CRA publication of their National Consumer Assistance Plan, and is not an admission by EQ of any violation of the FCRA.
Awesome, thanks, @pizza1! Glad you found it useful. 😊
