AEUC Credit Intelligence

Complaint & Evidence Builder

Turn a verified credit case into regulator-ready draft language and a clean evidence package while keeping facts, legal theories, and unsupported assumptions separate.

Escalation & Evidence

Build the complaint from verified facts — not assumptions.

Choose an existing case, enter only the facts you personally verified, and AEUC prepares regulator-ready drafts, an evidence pack, and a case summary. Nothing is submitted automatically.

CaseVerified facts — one fact per lineResolution requestedI confirm I have already used the applicable dispute process for the issue I plan to escalate. CFPB rules require a consumer to first dispute inaccurate/incomplete information directly with a credit reporting company before filing a complaint against that CRA; the complaint should not be used to skip that step.

CFPB complaint draft

Subject: Credit reporting accuracy complaint

Complaint:
I am reporting a credit-reporting issue concerning the company. I believe specific information being furnished or reported may be inaccurate or incomplete. I am asking for review based on the facts and documents attached, not simply because information differs among bureaus.

Verified facts:
- [Add only facts you personally verified from reports, responses, statements, or other evidence.]

Prior dispute status:
I have not yet confirmed completion of the applicable dispute process. AEUC should not submit this complaint as a substitute for a required credit-report dispute.

Legal basis to review:
- FCRA §611 / 15 U.S.C. §1681i when the dispute is with a consumer reporting agency.
- FCRA §607(b) / 15 U.S.C. §1681e(b) regarding reasonable procedures for maximum possible accuracy by a consumer reporting agency.
- FCRA §623(a)(1), §623(a)(8), §623(b), and Regulation V §1022.43 as applicable to the furnisher and the path by which the dispute was received.

Requested resolution:
Correct any information shown by the investigation to be inaccurate or incomplete, and provide the written investigation results.

Attachments:
- Relevant report pages showing the disputed fields
- Prior dispute letter(s) and delivery/status proof
- Company or bureau response(s)
- Supporting account records or other evidence
- AEUC comparison/evidence summary, if used

Illinois Attorney General complaint draft

Subject: Credit reporting accuracy complaint

Complaint:
I am asking the Illinois Attorney General's Consumer Fraud Bureau to review a consumer credit-reporting matter involving the company. The statements below are limited to facts I have verified.

Verified facts:
- [Add only facts you personally verified from reports, responses, statements, or other evidence.]

I am concerned that the information may be inaccurate or incomplete and that the dispute/investigation process may not have corrected the specific fields identified in my supporting documents. I am not asking the Attorney General to treat a bureau difference, missing bureau presence, or missing signed contract by itself as proof of a violation.

Potentially relevant federal law:
- FCRA §611 / 15 U.S.C. §1681i
- FCRA §607(b) / 15 U.S.C. §1681e(b)
- FCRA §623(a)(1), §623(a)(8), and §623(b), depending on the recipient and dispute path
- Regulation V §1022.43 for qualifying direct disputes to a furnisher
- FDCPA §807 only if the entity is acting as a debt collector and the facts support that law's application

Requested relief:
Correct any information shown by the investigation to be inaccurate or incomplete, and provide the written investigation results.

Supporting documents:
- Copies of relevant credit-report pages
- Dispute correspondence and responses
- Account statements/records relied upon
- AEUC evidence summary

I understand the Illinois Attorney General is not my private attorney and that the complaint may be forwarded to the business for response.

AEUC evidence pack

AEUC EVIDENCE PACK
Case: [Creditor]

1. REPORT EVIDENCE
- Relevant pages from Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion
- Screenshots of the exact fields being disputed
- Cross-bureau comparison showing the field-by-field difference

2. USER-VERIFIED FACTS
- [Add only facts you personally verified from reports, responses, statements, or other evidence.]

3. DISPUTE HISTORY
- Bureau dispute letter(s)
- Furnisher direct dispute, if applicable
- Certified mail / electronic submission proof
- Investigation result(s) and response dates

4. ACCOUNT EVIDENCE
- Statements, payment history, agreements, settlement records, or other records actually available
- DOFD evidence if DOFD is specifically disputed
- Ownership/assignment records only when ownership is genuinely at issue

5. LEGAL REFERENCES
- FCRA §611 — 15 U.S.C. §1681i — CRA reinvestigation of disputed accuracy/completeness
- FCRA §607(b) — 15 U.S.C. §1681e(b) — CRA reasonable procedures for maximum possible accuracy
- FCRA §623(a)(1) — 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(a)(1) — furnisher duty not to furnish information it knows or has reasonable cause to believe is inaccurate
- FCRA §623(a)(8) — 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(a)(8) — qualifying direct-dispute duties, implemented by Regulation V
- Regulation V §1022.43 — 12 C.F.R. §1022.43 — reasonable investigation of qualifying direct disputes; identifying-info disputes have exceptions
- FCRA §623(b) — 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b) — furnisher duties after notice of dispute from a CRA
- FDCPA §807 — 15 U.S.C. §1692e — false, deceptive, or misleading representations by a debt collector, when the FDCPA applies

6. GUARDRAILS
- A difference among bureaus is a review flag, not automatic proof of illegality.
- Not appearing on all three bureaus is not by itself an FCRA violation.
- A missing original signed contract does not automatically require deletion.
- Use FDCPA provisions only when the target qualifies as a debt collector and the facts fit the section.
- Do not state that information is identity theft, unauthorized, or false unless the consumer confirms that fact.

AEUC case summary

AEUC CASE SUMMARY
Creditor/Furnisher: [Creditor]
Account: [Account]
Strategy: [Strategy]
Case status: [Status]
Sent date: [Not recorded]
Due date: [Not recorded]

Verified issue facts:
- [Add only facts you personally verified from reports, responses, statements, or other evidence.]

Requested resolution:
Correct any information shown by the investigation to be inaccurate or incomplete, and provide the written investigation results.

Evidence count recorded in case: 0

AEUC legal posture:
This case summary separates verified facts from legal conclusions. The correct dispute path and law depend on who is reporting the information, whether the dispute is directed to a CRA or furnisher, whether the furnisher received CRA notice, and whether any debt-collection law applies.

Legal references used by this builder

FCRA §611 · 15 U.S.C. §1681i

CRA reinvestigation of disputed accuracy/completeness

FCRA §607(b) · 15 U.S.C. §1681e(b)

CRA reasonable procedures for maximum possible accuracy

FCRA §623(a)(1) · 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(a)(1)

furnisher duty not to furnish information it knows or has reasonable cause to believe is inaccurate

FCRA §623(a)(8) · 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(a)(8)

qualifying direct-dispute duties, implemented by Regulation V

Regulation V §1022.43 · 12 C.F.R. §1022.43

reasonable investigation of qualifying direct disputes; identifying-info disputes have exceptions

FCRA §623(b) · 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b)

furnisher duties after notice of dispute from a CRA

FDCPA §807 · 15 U.S.C. §1692e

false, deceptive, or misleading representations by a debt collector, when the FDCPA applies

Legal & Accuracy Scan Evidence Vault Cases & Letters