A credit score tells you the model’s output, not the cause. The useful audit is the underlying report: identity fields, open and closed accounts, current balances, credit limits, payment history/DPD, account status and enquiries.
Use this reading order
| Section | Ask | Red flag |
|---|---|---|
| Identity | Do name, PAN and DOB match? | Another person’s data or major mismatch |
| Accounts | Do I recognise every facility? | Unknown or duplicate loan/card |
| Balance/limit | Is the reported amount plausible? | Closed loan still showing material balance |
| DPD/payment history | Were payments actually late? | Late mark despite on-time evidence |
| Status | Open/closed/settled/written-off correct? | “Settled” when fully closed |
| Enquiries | Did I authorise these applications? | Unknown enquiry or many unintended submissions |
DPD is a timeline, not a moral label
Read the month-by-month payment history for the specific account. A single incorrect late mark should be disputed with transaction evidence; a genuine late payment should not be “disputed” merely because it lowers the score.
Account status can matter after the balance reaches zero
Check that a repaid facility is reported with the correct closure status and zero balance where appropriate. “Settled” can mean something different from fully repaid/closed and may affect how future lenders interpret the account.
Enquiries need context
An enquiry is not automatically harmful or fraudulent, but an enquiry you do not recognise deserves investigation. Aggregators can generate lender contacts depending on consent and flow, so trace the application source before assuming identity theft.
Dispute facts, not the score itself
Use the official CIBIL dispute process for CIBIL data and the corresponding processes at CRIF High Mark, Experian or Equifax where the error appears. Ask the lender/data furnisher to correct its source reporting too.
Credit reporting was reported to move to a weekly RBI-directed cycle from 1 April 2026, but a dispute still depends on investigation and data-furnisher confirmation. Faster routine reporting does not guarantee an instant correction.
Decision rule: finish with a list of factual errors, supporting evidence and dispute references. “My score is low” is not an actionable audit finding.