The problem is, as you articulated, they are required by law to provide credit reporting information about you to you. They have no incentive to do this because they make their money by collecting and selling data about us. They have every reason to use this reporting requirement to collect more information about you. They have every reason to conflate credit freeze with credit hold , and confuse consumers in order t…
This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how credit reporting works.
When "identity theft" occurs, it's important to realize that the credit reporting firms are not involved. That is solely due to failures, at the institutions that actually grant credit, to verify the identity of the person they are interacting with.
The flow goes: a fraudster uses harvested data to impersonate someone to a credit grantor, such as a credit card company. The credit grantor, accepting this identity at face value, asks the credit reporting agency (CRA) about the credit rating of the impersonated entity. The CRA says "Joe Victim has a relatively low risk of fraud". So the identity theft has already occurred before the CRA is even consulted.
Later on, when the fraudster fails to pay as agreed, the credit grantor incorrectly reports to the CRA that the fraud was caused by Joe Victim. Again, the CRA is just relying on the data provided to them by their clients.