There are over 2112 complaints on file for LEXISNEXIS. Dated between 2019-12-02 and 2012-12-27.
2018-01-05
Wrentham, MA
Public record information inaccurate
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2018-01-05
Galena, OH
Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Complaint: I previously attempted to resolve the matter of a public record unlawfully reporting on my credit report. The courts nor the state no any government body, FURNISHES DATA to any of the 4 major credit bureaus.
That is due to a 3rd party who I DID NOT AUTHORIZE to pull any public record with my name to sell that information to any organization nor share it with any organization.
Anyone or Company who wishes to see a public record bearing my name needs to travel to the courthouse to view it in PERSON THEMSELVES if the matter is that important!!!
Furthermore I opted out of Lexis Nexis and suppressed my personal information from being shared on the web or sold for profit.
This is my last and final attempt and next I will file a lawsuit against XXXX.
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2018-01-05
Maumelle, AR
Information belongs to someone else
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-29
Carrollton, TX
Information that should be on the report is missing
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-29
Charleston, SC
You told them to stop contacting you, but they keep trying
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-29
Superstition Mtn, AZ
Investigation took more than 30 days
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-28
South Florida, FL
Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-26
Itasca, IL
Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Complaint: I have disputed public record items with LexisNexis. Their response was incomplete. I requested the method of verification and the procedure used to determine the accuracy of the items.
611. Procedure in case of disputed accuracy [ 15 U.S.C. 1681i ] paragraph ( 6 ) ( B ) ( iii ) a notice that, if requested by the consumer, a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information shall be provided to the consumer by the agency, including the business name and address of any furnisher of information contacted in connection with such information and the telephone number of such furnisher.
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-25
Oakbrook Ter, IL
Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Complaint: This now falls under section 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) [ 1681i ], under the title which includes Expedited Dispute Resolution. And in keeping with such title, LexisNexis has 3 days to comply, after which on XX/XX/2017, I will file a legal action to enforce LexisNexis ' liability in this matter. I am providing my phone number and email address to make it easier for LexisNexis to contact me in the 3 days provided ( XXXX ) XXXX, XXXX.
In an effort to clarify my position and the position of LexisNexis for the purposes of litigation, I submit the following : Through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and by mail, I have submitted numerous, well-documented challenges to LexisNexis concerning an item, Bankruptcy # XXXX, reported by them to the credit reporting agencies ( i.e. XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX ). XXXX has deleted the item and is not included in this complaint.
By their own admission, LexisNexis was unable to verify the item in question in the time allotted by the FCRA : 611. Procedure in case of disputed accuracy [ 15 U.S.C. 1681i ] ( a ) Reinvestigations of Disputed Information ( 1 ) Reinvestigation Required ( A ) In general. Subject to subsection ( f ), if the completeness or the accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumers file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly, or indirectly through a reseller, of such dispute, the agency shall, free of charge, conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate and record the current status of the disputed information, or delete the item from the file in accordance with paragraph ( 5 ), before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the agency receives the notice of the dispute from the consumer or reseller.
( B ) Extension of period to reinvestigate. Except as provided in subparagraph ( c ), the 30-day period described in subparagraph ( A ) may be extended for not more than 15 additional days if the consumer reporting agency receives information from the consumer during that 30-day period that is relevant to the reinvestigation.
( C ) Limitations on extension of the period to reinvestigate. Subparagraph ( B ) shall not apply to any reinvestigation in which, during the 30-day period described in subparagraph ( A ), the information that is the subject of the reinvestigation is found to be inaccurate or incomplete or the consumer reporting agency determines that the information can not be verified.
Yet in violation of the following regulation, specifically " Deadline '', LexisNexis continues to report the item as accurate : 623 - 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2 ( E ) if an item of information disputed by a consumer is found to be inaccurate or incomplete or can not be verified after any reinvestigation under paragraph ( 1 ), for purposes of reporting to a consumer reporting agency only, as appropriate, based on the results of the reinvestigation promptly ( i ) modify that item of information ; ( ii ) delete that item of information ; or ( iii ) permanently block the reporting of that item of information.
( 2 ) Deadline. A person shall complete all investigations, reviews, and reports required under paragraph ( 1 ) regarding information provided by the person to a consumer reporting agency, before the expiration of the period under section 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) [ 1681i ] within which the consumer reporting agency is required to complete actions required by that section regarding that information.
LexisNexis ' claim the item is correct is a moot point in light of the time given to them to investigate had expired. Their obligation was and is to " delete '' the item and submit the appropriate documents i.e. " electronic or paper XXXX '' to the Credit Reporting Agencies they report to. Instead, XXXX and XXXX have indicated that LexisNexis has " certified '' the accuracy of this item that LexisNexis had a clear obligation to delete.
FCRA regulations do not provide a " Do Over '' to LexisNexis. FCRA regulations under section 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) [ 1681i ] do provide the guidelines for the ( loosely used ) " certification '' claimed. In this case, LexisNexis fails the first paragraph of the guidelines.
The ongoing and documented failure of LexisNexis, XXXX, and XXXX to comply with the FCRA shows a willful and negligent way in their handling of my case. Please see the following : 617. Civil liability for negligent noncompliance [ 15 U.S.C. 1681o ] ( a ) In general. Any person who is negligent in failing to comply with any a requirement imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to the sum of ( 1 ) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure ; and ( 2 ) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorneys fees as determined by the court.
Additionally, I have made multiple requests to XXXX and XXXX for the name etc of the entity " certifying '' the item in question. To be specific I asked for the " Method of Verification '' to no avail. XXXX and XXXX have given no information on the provider of this information to this date.
Conclusion : This now falls under section 611 ( a ) ( 1 ) [ 1681i ], under the title which includes Expedited Dispute Resolution. And in keeping with such title, LexisNexis has 3 days to comply, after which on XX/XX/2017, I will file a legal action to enforce LexisNexis ', XXXX 's, and XXXX 's liability in this matter. I am providing my phone number and email address to make it easier for LexisNexis to contact me in the 3 days provided ( XXXX ) XXXX, XXXX
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-19
Jersey City, NJ
Information belongs to someone else
Complaint: Reporting false information that I have 9 points on my licenses
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-16
Foothill Ranch, CA
Information belongs to someone else
Complaint: Lexis Nexis is reporting XXXX items on my report that do not belong to me and is causing me to be charged for items that are not mine.
They are the following accidents that are not from me. Please ask them to remove immediately and refund me the difference in premiums paid. We run third-party reports to validate your quote and found a few things that updated what you entered. These affected discount ( s ) on your quote.
View the Updates Your driving information has changed.
The information you entered during your quote does not match the information we found on your driving report ( s ) : XXXX XXXX Accident - At Fault on XX/XX/XXXX Listed on XXXX Comprehensive Claim {$1000.00} or less on XX/XX/XXXX Listed on XXXX Accident - At Fault on XX/XX/XXXX Listed on XXXX
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-12
Cheverly, MD
Their investigation did not fix an error on your report
Complaint: In regards to the XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX auto loan ( now judgement ) with a balance of {$15000.00}. I have tried and tried again to contact this company to settle the account balance. They filed a judgement against me on XX/XX/XXXX. Both myself and my mortgage representative have called to settle the account. Each time that we call, they say the person that handles the settlements is not in the office and they would have to call me back. They have never called myself nor my mortgage rep back. They are not allowing me a US Veteran the opportunity to rectify this account! My dispute with XXXX and XXXX resulted in them removing the original account from my credit. It is still with XXXX on my report. Also, XXXX XXXX a third party is now reporting the debt to my credit report as now per law the credit bureaus can not report the information to my credit report. This account alone is keeping me a US Veteran from obtaining my family a new home to live in.
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-11
Las Vegas, NV
Told you not to respond to a lawsuit they filed against you
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-08
Apple Valley, CA
Reporting company used your report improperly
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-08
Chicago, IL
Public record information inaccurate
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-08
Nashville, TN
Problem getting your free annual credit report
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-08
Decatur, GA
Public record information inaccurate
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-05
New Market, AL
Investigation took more than 30 days
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-04
Galena, OH
Information belongs to someone else
Complaint: XXXX XXXX case which is stated to be closed. However, I have not had any resolution with Lexis nexis. I have requested Lexis Nexis to correct my report. Currently my data is combined with another individual. I am XXXX XXXX XXXX from XXXX Ohio, XXXX XX/XX/XXXX SS ending XXXX. My report is combined with XXXX XXXX XXXX of Oklahoma. completely separate SS #. This is the third request. I do not feel that it is that difficult to have this corrected. Lexis nexis sent a letter XX/XX/XXXX stating could take up to 60 days and it is now past that period. This matter is NOT CLOSED and NOT COMPLETED to my satisfaction.
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-12-03
Lewiston, NY
Investigation took more than 30 days
Complaint: I submitted a " request for full file disclosure '' by mail using the form provided by LexisNexis over 80 days ago during the first week of XX/XX/XXXX. Including a copy of my current drivers licence ( NYS ) and a current copy of my current bank statement ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). I received no response from LexisNexis.
On XX/XX/XXXX I submitted a second request including the same information and required documentation to verify my identity and address. Again receiving no response until today when I received a letter dated XX/XX/XXXX. Which states " You recently requested your full file disclosure '' and " because we have not received enough information to authenticate your identity, we are unable to fulfill your request. ". Included was another of the same form previously used to submit my request.
I believe these extreme delays and the response of LexisNexis is inappropriate and a violation.
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-11-30
Decatur, GA
Public record information inaccurate
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-11-30
Decatur, GA
Public record information inaccurate
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-11-29
Arden, DE
Account information incorrect
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-11-28
Lenexa, KS
Account information incorrect
Company Response: Closed with explanation
2017-11-28
CA
Reporting company used your report improperly
Complaint: On XXXX XXXX, 2017 I went in person to the XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) branch to add my engagement ring onto my existing renters insurance policy. I had been told previously over the phone to bring the ring for pictures as well as a recent appraisal. Once I was seated with a representative she asked her manager to take the photos and collect my information. I was moved to another cubicle with the manager and she explained that I would receive a bill in the mail pro-rated for the rest of the 2017 year. A week later I received a letter from XXXX that was a Fair Credit Reporting Act Notice ( auto ) that stated I was being denied auto insurance based on a consumer report from XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. I never discussed auto insurance with XXXX, nor do I have any interest in obtaining a quote from them. I never gave consent for them to pull my consumer report in any way. I have contacted XXXX and spoken with several representatives and managers and no one has an answer for me in regards to why this was pulled or how I dispute it.
Company Response: Closed with explanation