“In all, this issue caused Respondent to inaccurately furnish information regarding more than 28,000 Retail Card accounts for years.”

💡 TD Bank knew for over two years that it was destroying the credit of tens of thousands of customers but took no action to fix it.

“Respondent’s use of the charge-off date as the DOFD made a delinquency on a consumer’s account look as though it had occurred more recently than it had, in fact, occurred. It could result in the delinquent information staying on the consumer’s report longer than it should.”

💡 The bank deliberately used a calculation method that made old debts look fresh, extending the damage beyond the legal seven-year limit.

“From September 2018 to March 2019, Respondent redirected resources away from Retail Card dispute investigations altogether in order to prioritize a separate regulatory matter. As a result, Direct Dispute investigations were not conducted for seven months.”

💡 TD Bank made a calculated business decision to ignore federal law and stop helping consumers fix credit report errors for more than half a year.

“For over 22,000 Indirect Disputes, not only did Respondent fail to conduct reasonable investigations within the prescribed time period, Respondent failed to perform any investigation at all.”

💡 The bank received formal dispute notices from credit bureaus on behalf of over 22,000 consumers and simply ignored them completely.

“By making the decision to divert resources away from dispute investigations, Respondent took away the consumer’s ability to protect themselves against inaccurate information on their credit report.”

💡 The CFPB formally found that TD Bank abused its power by cutting off consumers’ only legal avenue to fix errors the bank itself created.

“Because consumers were unable to anticipate Respondent’s failure to investigate disputes or to select another provider to furnish information about their credit cards, Respondent was able to take unreasonable advantage of consumers’ inability to protect their interest in accurate credit reporting.”

💡 Consumers were trapped: they had already chosen TD Bank and had no power to force the bank to follow the law or to hire someone else to fix their credit reports.

“In June 2017, an internal compliance monitoring report for Retail Card found that neither Respondent nor the vendor maintained any written procedures for the credit reporting processes the vendor was to follow.”

💡 TD Bank’s own internal audit found the bank had no documented process for credit reporting, virtually guaranteeing errors and violations.

“The report also found that Respondent had no internal controls in place to validate the accuracy of the data sent to CRAs by the vendor.”

💡 The bank had no system to check whether the credit information it was reporting about consumers was even accurate.

“During this time, Respondent’s furnishing for the ‘TD Cares’ program suffered from three separate errors that affected hundreds of accounts: First, beginning in at least March 2020, Respondent incorrectly furnished U.S. Bankcard accounts that were current when they entered the accommodations program as delinquent and did not correct the errors until February 12, 2021.”

💡 Customers who sought help during the pandemic through the bank’s own relief program were punished with damaged credit for nearly a year.

“In numerous instances, Respondent failed to update its furnishing to CRAs after Respondent determined that a credit card account had been opened due to confirmed fraud.”

💡 Even after TD Bank confirmed accounts were fraudulent, it continued to report them as if the victims were responsible, destroying innocent people’s credit.

“No later than January 2022, Respondent identified a large number of deposit account openings that were either confirmed or suspected to be fraudulent. By April 2023, Respondent determined that it was still furnishing account information, including derogatory information indicating that some of the fraudulent accounts were overdrawn, for hundreds of thousands of the accounts that Respondent had confirmed or suspected to be fraudulent.”

💡 TD Bank continued to furnish negative information about hundreds of thousands of accounts it knew were fraudulent for over a year and a half.

“Until 2020, Respondent used an outside vendor for all dispute resolution relating to the U.S. Bankcard credit card portfolio. During that time, Respondent both failed to ensure that the vendor retained records for longer than one year, and failed itself to maintain any copies of the data that was furnished.”

💡 TD Bank made it impossible to verify the accuracy of credit information it furnished because it destroyed or failed to keep the underlying records.

“Beginning in at least 2017, when Retail Card accountholders contacted Respondent to report a fraudulently opened account, Respondent’s internal procedures directed its representatives to send consumers a form that contained the return mailing address used for billing error disputes under Regulation Z, rather than the address specified for submission of Direct Disputes concerning credit reporting under the FCRA.”

💡 The bank’s own procedures sent fraud victims to the wrong department, ensuring their credit disputes would not be resolved within the legal time frame.

“Respondent identified these two issues by August 2018 and did not update furnishing to accurately report the DOFDs on the affected accounts until at least July 2019.”

💡 A pattern repeats throughout this case: TD Bank discovers a problem harming thousands of consumers and then waits months or years to fix it.

“A payment of $150 cannot possibly undo the damage of being denied a mortgage, paying thousands in extra interest on a car loan, or the stress of fighting a bureaucracy that refuses to listen.”

💡 The redress payment is a token amount that bears no relationship to the actual financial and emotional harm TD Bank caused.