Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by Shantel, Jun 5, 2001.
What's my next step?
Barclaycard Ring™ Mastercard®
No annual fee, No balance transfer fees, No foreign transaction fees, Low interest!
CREDIT CARD WITH NO ANNUAL FEEBarclaycard Ring™ Mastercard®
Credit One Unsecured Visa®for Rebuilding Credit
Credit card for people with bad credit to rebuild credit!
BAD CREDIT CREDIT CARDCredit One Bank® Rebuild Credit
First Access VISA® Credit Card
Access to credit even with bad or limited credit! Reports to 3 major credit bureaus and accepted wherever you see the Visa® sign. Get application response in 60 seconds.
CREDIT CARD FOR BAD CREDITFirst Access VISA®
primor® Secured VisaClassic Card
Credit lines available up to $5,000! Reports to three national credit bureaus; perfect card for reestablishing credit. Guaranteed approval*!
SECURED CARD FOR REBUILDING CREDITprimor Secured Visa Classic
Credit One Bank® Unsecured Visa® with Cash Back Rewards
Get cash back on every purchase. Unsecured credit card with monthly monitoring for credit line increases. Improve your credit history with responsible use.
CASH BACK UNSECURED VISACredit One Bank
It is illegal. The date shown is to be the date of delinquency not the date it was verified. I would contact the credit bureau and ask them to change the date to the date the account first became delinquent (1999). If they don't change it I would seriously consider threatening legal action against them. You have a pretty good case against them and Privista (if Privista was the one who verified the account as 3/2001). Best of luck.
Privista isn't the creditor, nor are the the CRA. Hence, this person has no beef or legal recourse against Privista (as you suggested). They are simply a credit monitoring service.
As for the issue itself, make sure that you're not reading the report incorrectly. Contact the CRA and ask what the Original Delinquency Date is on record, and when it will be remove. I know that some reports list a 'verified date', but that's not the ODD nor the date used for removal. It simply tells the consumer that a dispute happened, and that the information was verified by the (listed) creditor on that specific date.
You're right I didn't know Privista was a credit monitoring service (although Shantel does state this). I assumed they were the creditor. See what happens when you don't read carefully? Thanks for pointing out my boo-boo. She would have no recourse against Privista, but if the date of delinquency was changed and she proved this and Equifax will not change it does she have a case against Equifax?
I'm going to have to contact them because when I applied for a loan with my credit union, the loan officer said "You have a collection account from 3/2001"...I said, "No I don't, it's actually from 98 (not 99) and I'm currently disputing it". He went ahead and approved the loan for the amount I requested, but I was like, "Dag, this is really showing up as 2001". So I'll definately be contacting Equifax. Although Junum got this off and charged me, so it's their responsibility to work on it again, but that date is killing me.
And you're right, Privista is in no way responsible for this.
Depends on your definition of "she proved this". If she has sufficient documentation and she provided it to the CREDITOR who, in turn, did NOT authorize the change to her credit history, then she would have a case against the creditor.
If she 'proved it' to Equifax (which essentially generates a dispute back to the creditor for verification), and the creditor replied with a 'go ahead and fix it' response, but Experian did NOT fix it, then she would have a case against Experian.
If she 'proved it' to Experian (started a dispute), and the creditor responded to the dispute with "No, her information is incorrect, this trade line IS being reported correctly", then her legal recourse is, again, with the creditor and not Equifax. Equifax is legally bound to report ACCURATE information, but if the CREDITOR responds to a dispute by verifying the information as accurate, then Equifax is not legally bound to remove/change the information JUST BECAUSE they have some paperwork stating differently. OTOH, most of the time the CRA will remove/change IF they believe your proof is overwhelming correct and accurate. But that doesn't stop the creditor from re-reporting the account/trade line (but that's a whole DIFFERENT issue -- re-reporting data that was deleted) and a whole DIFFERENT set of rules that the CRA and creditor are SUPPOSED to live by.
Millennium Credit Building Strategies
Home of the Ultimate Creditor/CRA List