Why Synchrony Bank “Verifies” Fraud (And How to Force a Section 605B Block)

You filed the police report. You submitted disputes to all three credit bureaus with documentation that would make a paralegal weep with joy. You called Synchrony’s fraud department so many times you have their hold music memorized. You kept a spreadsheet tracking every reference number, every representative’s name, every promise that “this will be resolved in 30 days.”

And then the letter came back: “We have verified this account as accurate.”

I’ve represented dozens of identity theft victims against Synchrony Bank, and I can tell you exactly why this keeps happening to you. It’s not because your documentation is weak. It’s not because you made a mistake. It’s because Synchrony’s dispute system is designed to say “verified” regardless of what you send them.

Let me show you what I mean.

The Biometric Lie

In Ott v. Synchrony Bank (M.D. Fla. Nov. 2024), Synchrony denied a fraud claim by telling the victim she had passed “biometric recognition authentication.” Translation: they claimed she took a selfie to verify her identity when the account was opened.

Here’s the problem. When investigators actually examined the photo on file, the person in the picture was a completely different race than the victim.

Synchrony’s “advanced security” verified a fraudster as the account holder despite the fact that a human being glancing at the two photos for half a second would have caught the discrepancy. That’s not a glitch. That’s an automated system rubber-stamping applications because stopping fraud costs more than writing it off.

When you dispute with Synchrony and they respond “verified,” this is often what that word actually means: a computer matched your name and Social Security number to the file, and nobody looked any further.

The Phantom Transfer Trick

I want to tell you about a tactic I see constantly, and it’s particularly insidious. A client disputes a fraudulent CareCredit account. Synchrony investigates, agrees to close the account. Victory, right?

Except three months later, the same debt shows up under a different account number.

In Whiting v. Care Credit (E.D. Mich. Dec. 2025), Synchrony closed a disputed fraudulent account but then unilaterally opened a new account under a “lost/stolen card replacement” protocol. They transferred the entire fraudulent balance to this new account number, which had no dispute flag attached to it.

The victim had to start over. New disputes. New 30-day waiting periods. New “verified as accurate” letters.

If you’ve successfully disputed a Synchrony account only to watch similar charges reappear months later, you’re not crazy. This is how they reset the clock on you.

They Destroyed the Evidence (and Verified the Debt Anyway)

Here’s a case that should make your blood boil.

In Anthony v. GE Capital Retail Bank (S.D.N.Y. 2017—GE Capital became Synchrony), the bank admitted in court that they could not produce the original application for the disputed account. Their own “record retention guidelines” meant the document had been destroyed.

They verified the debt to the credit bureaus anyway.

Think about what that means for your dispute. You’re sending police reports and FTC affidavits proving you didn’t open the account. They’re responding “verified.” And in at least one case, they’ve admitted under oath that they don’t even have the original application to prove anyone signed it.

Why Your Dispute Strategy Isn’t Working

If you’ve been fighting Synchrony for months, I need to tell you something that might sting: the approach you’re using is probably the reason you’re stuck.

I’ve reviewed the disputes of clients who came to me after six, eight, twelve months of getting nowhere. Almost all of them made the same mistakes. Not because they’re careless—quite the opposite. These are organized, meticulous people who researched credit repair online and followed the conventional advice.

The problem is that conventional advice sets you up to fail.

The Online Portal Trap

If you clicked “Not Mine” on Equifax’s website, you triggered an automated system called e-OSCAR that matches your name and SSN to the account and responds “verified” within seconds. You weren’t disputing to a person. You were disputing to a computer that doesn’t care about your police report.

The “Dispute” vs. “Block” Distinction

When you send a letter saying you “dispute” the account, the credit bureau treats it as a request to investigate. They send a form to Synchrony, Synchrony’s computer confirms the name matches, and you get your rejection letter.

But FCRA Section 605B doesn’t talk about disputes. It talks about blocking. When you provide an Identity Theft Report, the credit bureau is legally required to block the account from your report within four business days. Not investigate. Block.

If your dispute took 30 days, they handled it as a regular dispute, not a 605B block. That’s a legal violation, but only if you invoked the right statute in the right way.

The Procedural Traps That Kill Lawsuits

Some of you reading this are past the dispute stage. You’re ready to sue. But before you do, I need to warn you about the four ways Synchrony beats identity theft victims in court—and none of them involve proving the debt is legitimate.

• Trap #1: You didn’t notify the credit bureaus first.
  In Lewis v. Synchrony Bank (S.D.N.Y. 2025), the plaintiff sued Synchrony for mishandling a fraud claim. Case dismissed. The court held that under the FCRA, you cannot sue a furnisher like Synchrony unless you first disputed through a credit reporting agency. Complaining directly to the bank, no matter how many times, doesn’t count.
• Trap #2: You claimed total innocence when you weren’t.
  In Stephens v. Equifax (D.N.J. 2025), the plaintiff swore he never opened the account. But Synchrony produced recorded phone calls where he discussed specific charges and verified transactions. The moment you claim identity theft for an account you actually opened—even if someone else ran up the charges—you’ve destroyed your credibility.
• Trap #3: You sued for the wrong thing.
  In Rao v. Sleep Number (W.D. Pa. 2024), the plaintiff sued for “credit slander” and negligence under state law. Case dismissed. Federal law preempts state common law claims. You must sue under the FCRA or ECOA. A generic defamation lawsuit gets thrown out.
• Trap #4: You didn’t re-dispute after winning.
  In Simpson v. Portfolio Recovery (W.D. Va. 2025), the plaintiff won a state court case, but didn’t file a new dispute with the bureaus. When he sued for continued reporting, the court held he needed to give the bureaus notice of the new information before they could be liable.

Every one of these plaintiffs had legitimate grievances. Every one of them lost on a technicality.

What Synchrony Owes You

If you have a fraudulent Synchrony account on your credit report and they’ve refused to remove it despite your Identity Theft Report, they’ve violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

The FCRA provides for statutory damages of up to $1,000 per violation. But that’s often the smallest piece. Actual damages can include the higher interest rates you’ve paid, lost opportunities, and emotional distress. Synchrony has paid six-figure settlements in FCRA cases.

Here’s the part most people don’t know: under the FCRA’s fee-shifting provision, if you win, Synchrony pays your attorney’s fees. You don’t write me a check. They do.

The Method of Verification Demand

Before you sue, there’s one more move. When a credit bureau tells you the account was “verified,” you have the right under FCRA Section 611 to demand they disclose the method of verification. What exactly did Synchrony provide? What documents did the bureau review?

I’ve sent these letters dozens of times. Sometimes they admit the “investigation” consisted of nothing more than confirming the name and SSN matched. That’s evidence. That’s what wins cases.

The Path Forward: A 5-Step Protocol

If you’ve been stuck in the verification loop for months, here’s what needs to happen.

1. Stop using online portals. Every dispute from this point forward goes by Certified Mail with Return Receipt Requested (CMRRR). That green card is evidence.
2. Assemble a valid Identity Theft Report. Combine your FTC affidavit and police report. Send copies to all three bureaus with a letter that specifically cites FCRA Section 605B and demands they block the account within four business days.
3. Watch for “Phantom Transfers.” If you see a new account appear after disputing an old one (like in Whiting), dispute it immediately as “Unauthorized New Account Opened by Issuer.” Don’t let them reset the clock.
4. Demand the “Wet Ink.” In your dispute letter, specifically ask for the original signed application. In the Anthony case, Synchrony admitted they often destroy these. If they can’t produce it, they have no business verifying the debt.
5. Seek Counsel. If you’ve done all of this and the account is still there, you likely have an FCRA case. Synchrony settles valid claims because they know their dispute system is indefensible.