Complaint Review: Experian - Allen Texas

Background:

Experian with knowledge reported falsely and inaccurately data on credit file referencing SSN xxx-xx-xxxx. Included is detailed correspondence initiated to attempt to correct this practice outside of legal channels. Experian has knowingly not complied with the Fair Credit Reporting Act in this case, as evidenced.

This referenced correspondence also details facts of the case and resulting physiological, physical and monetary damages. Experian merged data based on name. I contacted all creditors listed. It has been confirmed they reported a totally different Social Security number to ALL Credit bureaus (Experian is the only agency choosing to report false information), however with the same name as Lori King (Mrs. Perkins maiden name). Attachment 3 is letters from four of the six debtors confirming the inaccuracy being reported by Experian (other confirmations are being sent US Mail and will be provided upon receipt.

Experian themselves and six of the seven creditors (that had false information on the report) confirmed the information was being reported falsely and the reported bad credit information actually belonged to a person with a different social security number. Logically, obviously, and admittedly, Experian knew that the information was false, and the bad credit was a different Social Security Number and not my wife's, yet knowingly referenced the information to SSN xxx-xx-xxxx anyway.

Experian confirmed that they chose to merge based on last name, thereby insuring and knowingly violating the intent of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, section 602 B. As importantly, subsequent to this (as confirmed in the attached e-mail), Experian stated they had updated the data in the file referencing xxx-xx-xxxx (attachment 1). This is a false statement of the facts as attachment 2 (a credit report pulled immediately after the receipt attachment 1 from Experian) clearly indicates Experian only updated the information (in essence confirming the information), which still clearly references SSN xxx-xx-xxxx, and is still false information that they are obviously aware of.

Experian has provided no service and knowing disservice to omitted and omitted, and has as evidenced; known the information is not accurate and false, yet made a corporate policy decision to report this information falsely in direct violation of responsible credit reporting practices. The causation of the entire sad episode is the policy and choice of Experian to knowingly report false data to an incorrect file based not on a unique Social Security number and (as directed by the fair credit reporting act Section 602 (b)) not adhering to reasonable policy as stated in section 602 B.

Results:

Monetary loss of 27,900 (current value of money). Stress, lost productivity and wages, loss of personal reputation and physical problems related to stress. Mrs. DOE is pregnant and the resulting stress has caused undue stress that has affected her pregnancy. Mr. DOE has incurred extremely high blood pressure reading and the physical damage is as yet undetermined. Again, the causation is based not on error, but rather on known facts being reported falsely, based on a policy adopted by Experian in violation of the intent of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Copy of correspondence

Ms. Myrick,

Since you seem unable or unwilling to investigate the legitimate problems your constituents pay you for (again), I have taken it upon myself to provide some research into the practice I have written you about previously. To refresh your memory my wife and I have to pay a higher rate on a mortgage based on information provided by Experian Credit reporting. Experian merged my wife's report based on name and included negative credit information inaccurately and knowingly. This cost us at least $27,900 and has undoubtedly cost other consumers collectively in the millions of dollars. If that is not enough to get the attention of the Federal Trade Commission, then I ask what my tax dollars are paying for. I have attached several e-mails regarding this subject for your perusal. I have taken it on myself to do your research regarding statutes. The intent in the Fair Credit reporting Act is very clear. Section 602 (b) is the most clear cut common sense approach to the intent of the law that I have seen in a governmental document. I have included it below.

(b) Reasonable procedures. It is the purpose of this title to require that consumer reporting agencies adopt reasonable procedures for meeting the needs of commerce for consumer credit, personnel, insurance, and other information in a manner which is fair and equitable to the consumer, with regard to the confidentiality, accuracy, relevancy, and proper utilization of such information in accordance with the requirements of this title.

In no way is the policy of merging credit files based on name, a reasonable procedure. As I have stated clearly before, the last name of DOE is more common than my wife's favorite color underwear being fuchsia, and is in no manner an effective, accurate or corporately responsible way of insuring the accuracy of a credit file. This clearly violates the intent of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Taking each statement separately; the confidentiality of the report was compromised when Experian shared with me the other' Mrs. Doe's Social Security number.

The other' Ms. Doe should be very grateful I am not a thief, because due to Experian's practices I could have stole her identity. Based on Experian's policy I believe the accuracy has been covered enough. As for relevancy, I ask how relevant is the other' Ms. Doe's data to my wife? As for proper utilization, data correlation is only as relevant as the accuracy of the data collected; that is a cardinal rule of statistical data utilization.

This all comes to one basic question.

How is knowingly reporting false information about an individual based on name reasonable in the slightest sense of the word reasonable? The word 'reasonable' can be debated as much as the word is. If the word reasonable is debated in this instance, then I guess we know your definition of "Is". I have taken the liberty to include Webster's version, and rely on the common sense. I ask you are costing a constituent $30,000 based on an arbitrary last name reasonable?

Reason'a'ble Pronunciation: rz'n''b'l

a. 1. Having the faculty of reason; endued with reason; rational; as, a reasonable being.

2. Governed by reason; being under the influence of reason; thinking, speaking or acting rationally, or according to the dictates of reason; agreeable to reason; just; rational; as, the measure must satisfy all reasonable men.

By indubitable certainty, I mean that which doth not admit of any reasonable cause of doubting.

- Bp. Wilkins.

Men have no right to what is not reasonable.

- Burke.

3. Not excessive or immoderate; within due limits; proper; as, a reasonable demand, amount, price.

Let . . . all things be thought upon

That may, with reasonable swiftness, add

More feathers to our wings

I ask you further based on section 603 (d) below. What relevancy does another person's (who happens to have the same last name) credit have on my wife's ability to repay a loan based on her own credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living? The answer is the obvious...NONE.

d) Consumer report.

(1) In general. The term "consumer report" means any written, oral, or other communication of any information by a consumer reporting agency bearing on a consumer's credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which is used or expected to be used or collected in whole or in part for the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing the consumer's eligibility.

Further to this end take section 603 (g) (below) and use a little common sense. The word consumer refers to the party requesting on their behalf and referenced in the report. How is someone with a different SSN and credit history relevant to a record on SSN xxx-xx-xxxx?

Also how is Experian admitting their error, yet refusing to provide documentation of the error within the intent of the Fair Credit Reporting Act?

I plan on filing suit against Experian, however this goes way beyond my personal damages. My wife is pregnant with our first child and this has caused undue stress on all of us due to a policy of laziness by Experian. What is the health of a child worth? Does libelous information upset you? Does embarrassment based on falsities upset you?

Further how many consumers are unknowingly paying a higher rate due to inaccurate data in their file, because Experian has a policy of merging data based on favorite Ice Cream, color underwear, favorite city or a last name? The answer is conservativelyMILLIONS OF DOLLARS! This policy must be changed and deemed illegal or Consumer Credit agencies do not need to provide a service (consistent with the lack of service in this instance), and can simply put information wherever they feel like. How is your credit file and how much is your spouse and child's health worth? Am I angry.....yes, and I will continue to write e-mails, pursue in court, and do everything in my power until someone steps up and recognizes this practice as unethical, not in good faith and a complete disservice to consumers that the Fair Credit Reporting Act is designed to protect.

Best Regards,

Additional e-mails regarding this subject

*******Ms. Myrick, will you please finally do your job and represent some of your constituents interests. Or is this another in the long list of issues that you feel unworthy of a response?

FTC,

Thank you for your prompt response. However I do not think that you understood or possibly I did not communicate very well my issues with the credit bureaus. First, I was not denied credit. My issues are not with any legitimate mistakes of the credit bureaus, however all consumers should be at issue with the policy of 'merging' credit files based on names and not

social security numbers or at least going through the periphery illusion of providing a service and identifying the correct debtor.

The last name Doe is as common as Peanut butter flavor being someone's favorite Ice Cream...why not merge data based on favorite Ice Cream? This is what happened to my wife and the difference in the interest rate quote due to an Experian report (which contained data that was inaccurate due to their policy of "merging" data based on name). Legitimate mistakes are correctable, however a stated "policy" such as this must be dealt with or our governmental regulators are at best inept and at worst corrupt. Do the credit bureaus have a lobby in Washington, or did I just answer my own questions? There must be thousands of unaware consumers paying a higher rate due to this practice/"policy". This cost me personally around $30,000 over the course of the loan, plus future value of money, embarrassment, time and stress.

Credit bureaus are REQUIRED (Legally) to report based on Social Security number and should PROMPTLY reply in writing and correct the error/action if they recognize their error. The Fair Credit Reporting Act is designed to insure a degree of responsibility and reasonable thinking. (Experian refuses to acknowledge in writing, leaving me paying the higher rate, despite admitting their policy is such and admitting that this is a common 'mistake'). How would the federal government feel if I did not pay my share of tax's because due to a "policy" of mine that thought you wanted money from a different John Doe...I would end up in jail, yet the credit bureaus end up with higher stock prices...and my government is allowing credit bureaus to take MILLIONS

of dollars right out of consumers pockets based on the same principals.

Please try to understand this situation and contact me directly if I can communicate any clearer. I have attached my communications below and would appreciate a further review.

Also Experian advertises on their website that the complaint contact e-mail is Experians. I have received a response from the supposed Experian e-mail address, clearly stating that Experian's advertising on their website is misleading, and the respondent does not represent Experian. After as many class actions suits as they have been involved in they should get the

idea,,,,however obviously they do not.

Regards,

cc:

Clark Howard; teamclark;

Action 9 News

Past e-mails

Dear Sir,

I recently was quoted a much higher rate based on information provided by Experian credit information. I was told by Experian that my wife's report had been 'merged' with someone else's report. The reason they stated that they 'merged' this report was because the creditors sometimes do not report all information. So Experian took it upon themselves to not do research or find out who the credit information really belongs to, but rather they assigned it to my wife because someone had the same last name (thereby not providing a service to anyone, but rather a disservice to me the consumer)and in turn cost me thousands of dollars. Many people in this world share the same last name, hair color and favorite Ice Cream...maybe Experian

should assign the bad credit information based on shoe size? To top everything off, Experian REFUSED to send me any documentation that the misinformation was to be removed. Their arrogance is definitely motivating. The person that refused was on Team name TNT, and identified herself as Nancy, stating that "this is company policy". Their 'policy' is costing

consumers at the very least Millions of dollars a year and me particularly at least $27,900 in hard money today and who knows how much in interest earned and future value of money.

This may have cost individuals BILLIONS in higher interest rates and denied many others credit altogether. I am adamant about having the practice and policy of routinely, knowingly, and arrogantly reporting misinformation challenged and will pursue this as thoroughly as I have pursued anything in my life. I will not accept the response or policy of..."well it does not happen all that often but it does happen more than you realize"..... this coupled with my knowing your interest in revenue this seems like a highly likely class action lawsuit. Please respond to this e-mail with your thoughts. I have attached a copy of my e-mail to Experian Credit Reporting.Please include me at the top of this list for any potential class action

suit. If I can initiate one, count me in!!!

Thanks in advance,

I was recently quoted a much higher rate for a construction loan based on credit information provided by Experian. Equifax and TransUnion had information correct. I contacted seven creditors (not mine) that had negative information on a report provided by you, and found that in each and every case the Social Security number did not match mine. My question is how and why is their inaccurate information on my report that does not pertain

to my Social Security number? Also each creditor stated they reported by the social security number that references the actual debtor (not my SSN). If you have an account with a different SSN...why in the world would you assign it to mine? Who within Experian is going to pay the thousands of dollars

that your company cost me?

How is the name of ... you pick ... did someone else's information appear on a report that specifically references my SSN? And AGAIN....HOW WILL YOU BE PAYING FOR THE EXTRA COST"S TO ME? Is your report referenced by something other than a completely unique Social Security number such as hair color,

race, gender or weight? Or is your company just guessing...or simply that inept or possibly encourages this misinformation through a policy of laziness? I cannot fathom that given the criticality of your business that you would make a mistake of this magnitude without having a policy of guesswork or 'don't even check...just assign it to someone close'. Or possibly you just do not care until it cost you money or someone challenges

you legally.

I have disputed all information and want it confirmed and

corrected....NOW!!!!!

I anticipate and in fact demand an answer as to why your report was this inaccurate and suggest your legal counsel reply. You can send the check and correspondence to omitted in the amount of $27,800... give or take a few pennies!

Regards,

The Doe family

cc:Mark Corallo, Department of Justice Public Affairs

FTC, via on line complaint form

Ray

NC, North Carolina
U.S.A.

Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on Experian