Where is it in the FCRA that says that a CA “DOES NOT” Have to report anything at all? TYTY
Mar 212011
I was reading this book on credit (circa 1993) and it mentioned that we have the right to insert missing data into our credit file. This is not suggesting adding a comment to a TL, but adding what sounds like a new TL to a CR for credit items that don’t appear on the report. Items such as credit at a local department store, credit from another CRA, etc.
Â
It mentions this is a right under the FCRA. However, I cannot find the section in the FCRA that pertains to this right. I realize this is an old document and that it could be outdated. Can anyone confirm this? Has anyone done this?
Â
Thanks,
JD12
Mar 132011
Following is the summary of a procedure that is widely and strongly recommended on another credit forum. It is touted there as a very effective means to tie debt collectors in a legal knot, and force CA removal or violations in cases where the debt collector has reported to your CR.
It is called the “1-2 Punch.â€Â Debt validation in combination with a dispute to the CRA.
Â
It works like this:
1. The consumer first sends a DV letter to the debt collector. This letter is sent to invoke the “cease collection of the debt† provisions of FDCPA 809(b).
2. Immediately after that, the consumer is advised to send a dispute to the CRA under FCRA 611(a), with some unspecified allegation of inaccurate credit reporting.
Â
This so-called 1-2 punch is supposed to tie the debt collector in knots.
It is predicated upon the assumption that, once the consumer sends a DV letter, the debt collector is then prevented from responding to the CRA in the parallel dispute process within the 30-day period set forth in FCRA 611(a) and 623(b).
The supposed dilemma for the debt collector is asserted to be:
If they respond to the CRA dispute, they are in violation of FDCPA 809(b).
If they don’t respond to the CRA dispute within 30-days, they must delete their CA reporting.
That is it.
Â
I have questioned this process in their forum, opining that response to a legal FCRA requirement that they investigate and report back to the CRA on the dispute is not a “collection of the debt†activity, but rather a required action on their part under the FCRA. The response I get from those in their forum is  “it works for us, so if you don’t like the process, just don’t use it!
Â
Has anyone heard of, or used, such a process? I reiterate that those on that forum are adamant about this process, and feel that it is legally supported.
I am disputing information with a credit card company. When I send my dispute do I have to send proof of ID? Do I have to sign the letter? Does anyone know exactly what I must send with the letter to have it verified correctly?
Â
What exactly can I require them to send me as proof that I own the account under the FCRA?
Â
This is an account listed on my report that I had no knowledge of, so I don’t have any documents to send to them..
Â
Thanks.
Dec 152010
Here’s an interesting situation:
- Business CC C/O – OC started reporting TR on personal CR based on a personal guaranty that it may/may not have had listed on the original CC agreement/application.
- Fast forward, OC SOLD C/O account to CA which continues to report TL on personal CR.
Has anyone ever tried to challenge this under FCRA, etc?
Received a response letter today from a CA (CBCS) regarding the DV I sent them. Here was their response. Mind you I sent the exact account name, account number and amount I pulled from CRA. I’m curious to know if they are stalling, or if they are up to something else.Â
Â
Client Name: AT&T Southwest
Client Acct #: 123456789
Our Acct #:Â 12-345647654
Acct Balance: 758.90
Â
We received your dispute regarding the informaiton we furnished about the above referenced account to the consumer reporting agencies, pursuant to 15 USC 1681s-2 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Please be advised we have reviewed your dispute and find the dispute does not have enough specific information or facs which would allow us to conduct and investigation. Because your dispute does not have enough specific information to form the basis for an investigation, we are unable to investigate the dispute pursuant to 15 USC 1681s-2(a)(8)(F)(i) of the FCRA.
Â
In order that we may conduct a complete investigation regarding your dispute, please send a written dispute that addresses the specific information being disputed and supply any documentation to support the reason for your dispute. We have noted your request to be provided validation documentation and have submitted a request to the original creditor to supply the requested documentation for your review.
Â
However, we acknowledge your dispute and hav requested that the consumer reporting agencies report the account as disputed. Consumer reporting agencies may take up to (30) days or longer to update credit reports.
Â
Our address for consumer disputes that relate to the information we have are furnished ot the consumer reporting agencies about your account is: P.O. Box 164089, Dept. 03, Columbus, OH 43216-4089Â
A little info on the subject.
DBF used to live in Missouri, the woman he dated then opened 2 credit cards in his name both of which he knew about and used. She was the one making the payments on them but when they broke up she stopped. One he paid in full before it went to collections and the other he didn’t know about until recently.
Â
The account he didn’t know that wasn’t being paid was bought by Midland.
In Sept he was served a summons at the OLD address in Missouri and was accepted by someone that ID themselves as his step daughter, they waited almost a full month before telling him about it.
Â
I through the grapevine found an attorney in that area to have the case dismissed for free. It was dimissed without prejudice which means they wil eventually come after him here where he lives now.
Â
They were rep’ed by Kramer & Frank, I sent K&F a letter asking for all records of the account and they sent him back statements from the time the account was opened to the time it was closed. He NEVER got anything from K&F or Midland proving they purchased this debt and had a legal right to collect on it.
Â
The summons stated the account could be paid and the check be made out to K&F not Midland.
Â
Midland is all over his reports as a factoring company and has gone so far as removing ALL information about the account on EX but the trade line is still there just blank.
Â
I have contacted a few FCRA/FDCPA attornies here in La but I can’t get any of them to respond to me.
Â
Time is ticking here and I have a feeling the bomb is about to go off again.
I am trying to head them off at the pass before they file suit again.
Â
What can I do on my own to stump these people into leaving him alone and not filing suit, this IS within SOL and LA does allow borrowing of statutes either way here or there it is still within SOL.
Â
Â
Oct 292010
I sent Wells Fargo Auto Finance a gw letter, about a month ago, I recieved a letter yesterday stating that the FCRA requires them to report accurately, whether favorable or unfavorable to their valued customers. I read on the forum that Wells Fargo is stickler, and I do have some lates back in 2007 when I went through a hard preganancy, but havent been late since then and the car will be paid off in less than a year, I was thinking about offering a to pay off in full exchange for deletion of some lates, think this is a good idea?
Sep 182010
Changes in the FCRA Sec. 623 went into effect, as of 7/1/2010. Just wondering if anyone has a link that has information on the changes.
Â
Im wanting to get a better understanding of what, if any, kind of information the OC must provide when you request they conduct 623 investigation. Are they able to simply respond with the results of their investigation, or are they required to respond with actual documentation supporting the result of their investiagtion.
Â
If you are disputing lates, what should the consumer expect to receive from an OC?
Â
Â
Thanks!
Related Blogs
- Related Blogs on Questions About The 623 Dispute Method……
Sep 162010
I’ve gotten to the point where you send the OC the followup letter and send the letters to the CRAs. I got back a letter from EX (the only CRA I needed to mail) that they won’t re-investigate unless I give them a reason. I checked up on my cashier’s check, and it was cashed on 7/19 – the CA is still reporting as unpaid. I expected this round of letters to at least get it updated to “paid”.
Â
The next step is to send the courtesy letter before filing a complaint. Having gotten no change from that letter with a different OC, I am wondering what options I should consider at this point. Ideally, would love this TL deleted. I really need it updated to “paid” at least. My thoughts so far are:
Â
- Isn’t there a new DV thing for the OC (yes, the CA is reporting, not the OC) Would this do me any good?
- Is this an occasion where I should consider sending a letter to the CA and/or the OC telling them they are in violation of the FCRA for reporting me as having an unpaid debt? It’s been almost 2 months.
- I guess I could write back to EX and say that it’s paid (send a copy of the receipt for the cashier’s check?)
Â
Which of these is most likely to 1) get this deleted, and which is most likely to get it updated to at least “paid” ASAP?
Related Blogs
- Related Blogs on Medical Collection – HIPAA process question