In California, if a creditor reports an account as disputed for say 6 months straight, isn't that a violation of CIVIL CODE SECTION 1785.25? Because it proves they didn't complete an ivestigation within 30 days. If they truly did report their findings within 30 days (that the debt is correct) then the disputed notation would have been removed. Either the debt is correct and was verified, or it is not and would be removed. Why would it still say "disputed-investigation in progress" for 6 months straight!? Looks like a violation to me! Anyone agree? This would probably apply to the FCRA somewhere too. CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTION 1785.25: (f) Upon receiving notice of a dispute noticed pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 1785.16 with regard to the completeness or accuracy of any information provided to a consumer credit reporting agency, the person that provided the information shall (1) complete an investigation with respect to the disputed information and report to the consumer credit reporting agency the results of that investigation before the end of the 30-business-day period beginning on the date the consumer credit reporting agency receives the notice of dispute from the consumer in accordance with subdivision (a) of Section 1785.16 and (2) review relevant information submitted to it.
It sure would: § 611. Procedure in case of disputed accuracy [15 U.S.C. § 1681i] (a) Reinvestigations of disputed information. (1) Reinvestigation required. (A) In general. If the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumer's file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly of such dispute, the agency shall reinvestigate free of charge and record the current status of the disputed information, or delete the item from the file in accordance with paragraph (5), before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the agency receives the notice of the dispute from the consumer.
Great ?. I have a CA right now that has "acct info disputed by consumr" on TU. They have had that on for 6 months since I started disputing with the CRA's. They have about 5 days left with an estoppel letter I sent. They have not responded at all. That will be another violation in my Intent to Sue letter. I think that may not be needed, because I sent a letter to the Att Gen, FTC, and the OC. I told the OC that they may be liable for the CA's actions. Charlie
