（来源：千龙网） "逾期超过1万元也可申诉修复""单笔收费2000-3000元不等""可通过向银行或在征信系统申诉修复征 信"。网络平台上，不少中介打着征信修复的旗号揽客，抛出"橄榄枝"。 实际上，去年底央行就为小额逾期人群开辟了一条官方的"信用修复通道"。央行发布《关于实施一次性 信用修复政策的通知》，明确2026年1月1日起，个人信用修复政策实施，单笔金额不超过10000元人民 币的个人逾期信息在规定时间内还完将不在征信系统予以展示。 然而，阳光政策之下，一些打着"征信修复"旗号的中介，依然活跃在灰色地带。新京报记者调查发现， 当符合条件的小额逾期记录有了合规解决路径，大额逾期群体的焦虑却被中介盯上，衍生出一批宣称 能"申诉洗白"大额逾期的灰色服务，看似能解燃眉之急的"捷径"背后，藏着层层陷阱。 "借款人必须树立'信用修复无捷径'的观念，任何收费删除真实记录的承诺都是骗局。"针对此类现象， 苏商银行特约研究员武泽伟提醒道，对于不符合新政条件的大额逾期借款人，合规的信用重建只有一条 路径即全额还清欠款，并在之后保持长期、连续的诚信履约记录。他进一步解释，根据《征信业管理条 例》，从欠款还清之日起，该逾期记录 ...

Core Viewpoint - The implementation of personal credit repair policies in 2026 has created opportunities for overdue borrowers, but it has also attracted underground "credit repair" schemes that exploit vulnerable individuals [3][5]. Group 1: Policy Implementation and Exploitation - The personal credit repair policy allows for the removal of overdue records from 2020 to 2025 for amounts not exceeding 10,000 yuan if settled by March 2026 [5]. - Some intermediaries claim to "break through the 10,000 yuan limit" and offer complete credit repair, misleading borrowers and charging high fees [5][7]. - These intermediaries often use deceptive practices, such as fabricating documents and inducing borrowers to communicate with banks using specific scripts [7][9]. Group 2: Business Models of Intermediaries - Different intermediaries employ various business models, with some providing remote support and communication strategies to enhance borrower-bank interactions [8]. - Some intermediaries offer "one-stop services" that include debt consolidation and subsequent loan facilitation, claiming to negotiate better terms with banks [10][12]. - The fees charged by these intermediaries range from 2% to 10% of the total debt, with some charging based on the number of overdue records [15][16]. Group 3: Legal and Regulatory Concerns - The methods used by intermediaries to delete overdue records are often non-compliant and unlikely to succeed, as the credit repair process is fundamentally about correcting errors, not erasing valid records [9][19]. - Many intermediaries engage in fraudulent activities, such as instructing clients to submit false claims or documents, which can lead to legal repercussions [19][20]. - Contracts with these intermediaries often contain vague terms and high penalties for breach, making it difficult for clients to seek recourse [15][16]. Group 4: Recommendations for Addressing the Issue - Experts suggest a multi-faceted approach to combat these underground operations, including enhanced monitoring, public education on legitimate credit repair processes, and stricter regulations on social media platforms to prevent the spread of misinformation [22].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the emergence of illegal and fraudulent practices surrounding credit repair services, particularly in response to the new personal credit repair policy set to take effect in 2026, which has led to the exploitation of vulnerable borrowers by unscrupulous intermediaries [1][2][8]. Group 1: Credit Repair Policy and Its Exploitation - The personal credit repair policy will be implemented on January 1, 2026, allowing borrowers with overdue records from 2020 to 2025 to clear their credit if the overdue amount is under 10,000 yuan and settled by March 31, 2026 [2]. - Many borrowers are unable to meet the policy's criteria, leading to the rise of intermediaries claiming they can "break through the 10,000 yuan limit" and fully repair credit [2][4]. - These intermediaries often charge high fees ranging from 2% to 10% of the debt amount, using deceptive practices to lure borrowers into costly services [1][12]. Group 2: Methods and Operations of Intermediaries - Intermediaries employ various tactics, including exaggerating the policy's applicability, forging documents, and creating a sense of urgency among borrowers [2][4]. - They typically offer services such as "debt consolidation" and "credit repair," often misleading clients about the legality and effectiveness of their methods [6][7]. - Some intermediaries provide "one-stop services," claiming to assist clients in negotiating with banks to remove overdue records, despite these practices being non-compliant with regulations [6][7]. Group 3: Legal and Ethical Concerns - The practices of these intermediaries not only involve potential fraud but also pose risks of personal information leakage and legal repercussions for borrowers [1][8]. - The article emphasizes that credit records cannot be arbitrarily deleted, and the process of disputing credit information is strictly regulated [5][16]. - Many contracts from intermediaries contain vague terms and high penalties for breach, making it difficult for clients to seek recourse [11][13]. Group 4: Recommendations for Addressing the Issue - Experts suggest a multi-faceted approach to combat these gray and black market practices, including better public education on legitimate credit repair processes and stricter regulation of intermediaries [18]. - Financial institutions are encouraged to enhance internal controls and streamline legitimate dispute processes to reduce borrower costs [18]. - Social media platforms should improve content moderation to prevent the spread of misleading advertisements related to credit repair services [18].