The Method After this experience, I did a little more investigation on the credit bureau's methods of investigation and someone pointed me to the Bennett testimony. Based on my own experience and what I learned, I came up with the following procedure which seems to be working for people: 1. Challenge the listing in the normal way. 2. If verified, with a copy of the investigation result in hand, call the CRA at the toll-free number listed at the top of the report. (If not, you're done, you lucky dog!) 3. Give the report reference number and ask for method of verification per FCRA Section 611(a)(7) . 4. They will have never called the OC (original creditor), but will have relied on a third party database to verify, which they may or may not admit to you. If they can't cite solid evidence like "we called the OC and they verified", ask for OC's phone number. 5. Call OC and ask for the records. 6. If the OC doesn't have them (they will typically tell you that the collection agency has them and they don't keep them), get the person's name and direct line. If they do have them, demand a copy under the new FACTA act. 7. If you are sent records, review them and see how good they are. If they are not conclusive, take the next step. 8. If the OC has no records * Call the CRA back and tell them the OC has no records. * Inform the CRA that they need to open another dispute. The new information for the disput is the name and number of the person to whom you have just called at the OC. * If they refuse, inform them you will sue for willful non-compliance under section FCRA � 616. * If they still refuse, send the information via certified letter along with an intent to sue letter. If not, they will give you a new confirmation number (write it down! and the date!). This acts as a new investigation, and the CRA has 30 days to get back to you. 9. If you have written records proving the OC can't back up the negative listing(s) they are reporting on your credit report * send them registered mail to the CRA along with an intent to sue letter if the account is not removed.
The OC may say they don't have the records, but usually they have them filed archivally, but can't or will not bother to find them. Things like original signed applications may be shredded after a number of years, clouding the issue of whether a name on an account is jointly liable, or just an authorized user. Old debts are often bought with no records, in electronic form, and the purchasing CA may have to pay to obtain records from the OC for proper validation. Hence the current mess of misidentified debtors, paid debts being re-collected, threats substituted for validation, etc.
