I've got a listing on my EXP credit report from a few years back that shows $0.00 for everything and has been in a 'consumer disputes' status for over 2 years. I sent the place validation letters and such back then as well, but they never responded..not one peep out of the place in all this time, just the 'consumer disputes' notation on my report. doesnt continued reporting of this without validation violate the law? I think I read somewhere that continued reporting constituted continued collection activity. Wondering if this applies even when they stick it in a disputed status? anyway, the reason I'm wondering about this now is that this same place just stuck another collection on my report recently..I'm going WhyChat's HIPAA route on it through the OC in question, hopefully that will keep me from having to deal with them on the newest one. BTW, EXP wont let me dispute the $0 disputed TL , they call it frivilous now when I try. I had disputed it back when I originally sent the validation letter and that is when they put it into a 'consumer disputes' state. Any route you think I could take?
Hi Mark, Great question; You do have ammo, but it's not what you're thinkin. I had been working on a paper I called "Perpetual Disputes". Maybe I'll be able to finish it before I retire to a nursing home. lol Q: Can a DF (Data Furnisher) avoid legal liability by, after the receipt of a dispute from the consumer, via 611(a)(2) [§ 1681i],, list the account as "disputed" with the CRA and then, DROP the issue. A: NO! FCRA requires that both a DF and a CRA "Maintain REASONABLE procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy". The word "reasonable" is the key. It's not defined in law however, because what is or isn't reasonable depends upon the specific circumstances. There are various standards of "reasonableness". So the next Q is; In this particular circumstance would a Judge or Jury think it's "reasonable" for the DF to what they have done? A: Obviously NO. Not under ANY standard of reasonableness. They are required to complete their investigation within the time frame articulated in FCRA 611(a)(1) [§ 1681i]. (In other words 30 days). § 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2] (b) Duties of furnishers of information upon notice of dispute. (2) Deadline. A person shall complete all investigations, reviews, and reports required under paragraph (1) regarding information provided by the person to a consumer reporting agency, before the expiration of the period under section 611(a)(1) [§ 1681i] within which the consumer reporting agency is required to complete actions required by that section regarding that information. Further, they MUST report back to the CRA the results of their investigation. (C) report the results of the investigation to the consumer reporting agency; Moreover, they MUST report same to ALL CRA's to which they reported in the first place. § (D) if the investigation finds that the information is incomplete or inaccurate, report those results to all other consumer reporting agencies to which the person furnished the information and that compile and maintain files on consumers on a nationwide basis. If it is discovered, during this investigation, that validation is not available the DF has 5 days to delete the item from the CRA's. For Release: August 24, 2000 California Debt Collection Agency Settles FTC Charges Of Fair Credit Reporting Act Violations: Where PCM learns during an investigation that account records no longer exist for a disputed debt, the company must delete the information from credit bureau files within five days. The best interpretation here is that 5 days AFTER the deadline for completion of the investigation, PLUS mail time, 5 more days. "Approx" 40 days MAX. Here's a "Federal Template for Maximum Possible Accuracy" that may help. hth .
would you mind helping me with a letter? i'm not trying to be lazy ..I just want to be sure I get this right after letting the ball drop for 2 years. did you get my email regarding the specifics? didnt want to paste it out for the world.] btw, you arent allowed to retire
Sure. But I just thought of somethin. 2 year SOL on FCRA cases. Let me think about this one. We'll figure somthin out.
well it hasnt been 2 years yet since they did it, I think they put it in a disputed state sometime in October 2002. ya, it is cutting it close, that is for sure.
You really don't need a fancy letter though Mark. What I posted is what you need. I'd just type it up neatly, and demand deletion, or you'll sue em. (if you're prepared to do that). I would also say something like; "I didn't forget. But I AM coming up on my SOL for an FCRA action. Rest assured I shall act before it expires".
ok will see what I can come up with. I don't know about suing someone..I'm not a quick thinker..i think a lawyer would eat me alive. I'd follow through with it, just hope I don't have to.
Then just don't tell em YOU'LL do it. "Rest assured this will be acted upon before the SOL expires". Also - Credit Reports: What Information Providers Need to Know No excuses for their ignorance.
dont know if that link you pasted would help much, looks like that time frame only applies to a dispute that i initiate with the CRA, and the CA is only obligated to reply to the CRA withing 30 days in that specific case, not to me. looks like all they have to do is keep reporting it, but say that its in dispute. or am I reading it wrong? im trying to type this letter out, but its becoming super-long. going to go to sleep and try it again tomorrow. i've got severe tired head trying to sort this all out thanks..if you have any more info, let me know.
just want to make sure of something. If I do send them an intent to sue, do I have a case? I mean, just based on the thing being in dispute for almost 2 years? It seems alot of places do this, must be for a reason right? more background: it started out with me offering to settle for deletion, while clearly maintaining that the debt wasnt mine. I have those letters and faxes that I sent (did both fax and certified letters with return reciept) After calling and speaking to a rep on the phone (as I never heard a peep out of them), where she tried to convince me to pay it and 'promised' it would be deleted, only to turn around and start calling me a 'deadbeat' after I told her I needed it in writing, I started the validation process, which was never answered. When I spoke to her on the phone I maintained that I do not acknowledge that the debt is mine, but I would pay it since it is a trivial amount only if my report was cleared. This is also why she was angry I believe. so, like I stated, I started the validation process. The TL was put into dispute during this period and has remained that way for almost 2 years. I can no longer dispute it with experian since this happened, they call it 'previously investigated' it shows a 0 balance, 0 high limit, and a disputed status. it only hurts me by virtue of the fact that it is a negative account (collection). Just so everyone knows..I don't know what this debt is for. the place that they claimed they are collecting for, I've never heard of. But I do know it is some sort of medical collection based on this CA and the name of the OC. Once they became defiant I decided it was dumb to pay a debt that I don't know anything about..there is a 50% chance that it isnt mine. Almost makes me think that this is why they didnt provide validation, they couldnt. but who knows. Also, this same company however, has just placed an additional negative notation on my CR, for a seperate account. I know what this notation is for, and I've sent the OC involved WhyChat's HIPAA stuff.
