To: EXPERIAN RE: IRS TAX LIEN This letter is in response to your March X, 2008 form letter. The dispute was initially sent on January XX, 2008 with a February XX, 2008 response. The relevant documents, NFTL and Certificate of Release, with the relevant dates were enclosed in a second dispute letter dated February XX, 2008 as directed by Experianâ??s response. Experianâ??s March X, 2008 letter was duplicate the first response despite NFTL documents. It is a form letter non-specific to the dispute making the response vague to the consumer for the following reasons: 1) Asks consumer for additional relevant information to reinvestigate. 2) It lists reporting periods for negative information. The two issues in Experianâ??s response form letter puzzles the consumer between the disputed item requiring additional documentation and/or item being reported correctly within allowed reporting time period. Is it the consumerâ??s burden to provide the documentation as Experian is requiring? Why didnâ??t Experian retain relevant dates when information was obtained? Is it not Experianâ??s responsibility to make an effort to keep accurate files? Regards, BlazerGuy
The above letter relied on the faulty assumption that the reporting period ran from the "date of assessment". CRAs tax lien reporting period based on "Date of Payment". NFTL does not list "Date of Payment". Initially, CRAs use filing date by county recorder while tax debt is unpaid. (Stamped on the NFTL) Secondly, CRAs use "date of release" (paid or extingished) and run reporting period for seven years. (NFTL - Column e) Question: CRAs have no knowledge of "Date of Payment" as required by statute. Is it legal to rely on NFTL filing date with county recorder?
