TomoCredit, a San Francisco-based fintech startup, is embroiled in a series of controversies, the latest being a trademark infringement lawsuit filed by Prism Data, a New York analytics company. Prism alleges that TomoCredit infringed on its trademarked “CashScore” product, which assesses creditworthiness based on cash flow analysis. The lawsuit contends that TomoCredit began using the term “CashScore” only after Prism’s trademark was granted in August 2023, despite TomoCredit’s claims of prior usage. Prism further accuses TomoCredit of fabricating evidence to support its claim, alleging that the startup altered its own blog posts to retroactively include the term “CashScore.” This legal battle adds another layer of complexity to TomoCredit’s already troubled situation.
Beyond the trademark dispute, TomoCredit faces mounting consumer complaints and challenges concerning its credit-building service, TomoBoost. Hundreds of consumers have reported difficulties canceling their TomoBoost subscriptions, a problem that TomoCredit addressed by finally adding an online cancellation option in October 2024. Furthermore, all three major credit bureaus – Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax – terminated their data-sharing partnerships with TomoCredit. This move significantly undermines TomoBoost’s purported ability to improve credit scores, as the service relies on reporting to these bureaus. Adding to the intrigue, TomoCredit’s CEO, Kristy Kim, dismissed Forbes’ reporting on these issues as “inaccurate” but declined to provide further clarification or answer specific questions.
The timeline of TomoCredit’s website changes reveals a company seemingly reacting to the mounting pressures and attempting to adjust its messaging. Initially, TomoCredit prominently displayed the credit bureaus’ logos on its website and emphasized its ability to raise credit scores through reporting to these agencies. Following the termination of its relationships with the bureaus, TomoCredit removed their logos and altered its website language. Phrases like “Raise your credit score” and references to the bureaus were gradually replaced with more cautious wording such as “Monitor your credit score” and general references to “credit building tools.” This shift in messaging suggests an attempt to downplay the impact of the severed ties with the credit bureaus while still attempting to attract customers.
However, despite the modifications to its general website content, TomoCredit’s TomoBoost pricing page continues to promote features that seem directly contradicted by the severed relationships with the credit bureaus. The page still advertises features like “Up to 30,000 credit line,” an “instant credit boost,” and “all major bureau support.” This discrepancy raises serious questions about the transparency and efficacy of the TomoBoost service. It is unclear how TomoCredit can deliver on these promises without access to the credit bureaus, making the continued operation and promotion of TomoBoost perplexing and potentially misleading to consumers.
The juxtaposition of TomoCredit’s evolving website narrative and the continued promotion of TomoBoost’s features, particularly “all major bureau support,” reveals a concerning disconnect. While the general website content has been adjusted to reflect the severed relationships with the credit bureaus, the TomoBoost pricing page persists in advertising features reliant on these very relationships. This inconsistency raises questions about the veracity of the claims made on the pricing page and the potential for misleading consumers. It is unclear how TomoCredit can legitimately offer services that depend on credit bureau reporting when those reporting avenues are no longer available.
The continuing operation of TomoBoost, despite the acknowledged termination of data-sharing agreements with the major credit bureaus, raises ethical and legal questions. Accepting new customers and charging fees for a service that arguably can no longer deliver its core functionality—credit score improvement through bureau reporting—appears problematic. This practice raises concerns about consumer protection and the potential for deceptive marketing. The apparent contradiction between TomoCredit’s public statements and the continued operation of TomoBoost warrants further investigation to ensure consumer interests are protected and that the company is operating within legal and ethical boundaries.
