I got a letter stating experian deleted a collection from NCO yet verified the four that came off on equifax. Yet equifax verified the NCO account. How is that possible? Is there a way I can get them deleted from each other by using the old well they did it why didn't you?
no. If they called you and said that Equifax was reporting a negative account that Experian isn't and they wanted to add it to their files, would you want them to do it?
You do not have to be so rude! I was asking because I do not understand how one can validate but another cannot! I will stick with the other site.
Hi slstafford, Did you submit a letter requesting the investigation procedures from each of the CRA's? The FCRA states that you may request a description of how the CRA's verified the information. There is a sample letter for this which you can find a link to in the FAQ's. You may also want to do a search on this subject..I've seen some really good posts on this.
(D) Automated reinvestigation system. Any consumer reporting agency that compiles and maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis shall implement an automated system through which furnishers of information to that consumer reporting agency may report the results of a reinvestigation that finds incomplete or inaccurate information in a consumer's file to other such consumer reporting agencies. Never mind words sputtered in rant. Like I said sorry. Really. Posted above is why I am asking this question. This is right in the FCRA. So why is that a NO! Yes I have done the search but still I could not find a definitive answer to why they do not have to abide by the section posted above.
Re: Re: Please someone must know this!!! I think the key phrase to be plucked from above is "furnishers of information". From what I read, its not the CRAs that are obligated to comply with the reporting, they are just obligated to provide the reporting "system". Its the "furnishers of information" (e.g. OCs & CAs) that must make the request to delete or update the inaccurate information. Too bad. It would be great to have a system like that. It has been a long standing complaint among consumers.
Re: Re: Please someone must know this!!! I think the real clicher to your theory might be if the last line stated "all other such consumer reporting agencies" rather than just "other". ?? I don't really know but this is one good question that I hope gets some feedback
Re: Re: Please someone must know this!!! Well, SLStafford, I tend to think of it this way. If they traded information so that all reported the same thing then what happens if the information was totally false? Everybody would be reporting false information, wouldn't they? Since so much of the information is supposed to be false now, if they did that it would mostly be false wouldn't it?
Re: Re: Please someone must know this!!! I understand your thinking, but it says "may". It doesn't say "shall" or "required to". Gib
Re: Re: Please someone must know this!!! Well Now ... It's about bloody time someone started posting some law around here. Ryder is about as close to being right on as anybody. Here's my interpretation: § 611 (D), applies to the CRA's but it's for the benefit of the furnishers and consumer. § 611. Procedure in case of disputed accuracy [15 U.S.C. § 1681i] D) Automated reinvestigation system. Any consumer reporting agency that compiles and maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis shall implement an automated system ... It is a requirement for each CRA to implement an automated system. ... through which furnishers of information to that consumer reporting agency may report the results of a reinvestigation that finds incomplete or inaccurate information in a consumer's file to other such consumer reporting agencies. This is a lot easier to figure out what they mean when we look at the rest of what applies to the furnisher and what it has to say about his responsibilities. § 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2] (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. So the DF is required to update ALL CRA's to which they reported info. in the first place. Having an automated system is merely to fascilitate this requirement. The mechanism for doing this btw, is CDIAonline. http://www.cdiaonline.com To answer Staffords question. Sure, if things go well with your dispute and your item is removed, then you'd love to have them communicate with each other. But what if it doesn't go well. At least now you have a chance at cleaning up 1 or 2 of your reports, if not all 3, and then using only creditors that pull from the clean report(s). (which is basically Bills' thesis) Until you get done. I have 3 perfect reports with one exception. EQ. has deleted one perfect TL, paid/never late, 10 years old, and currently open. I've sent copies of my other CR's and copies of statements from the OC. They are still refusing. I'll be suing in Federal District Court, (in demand of a jury trial) for refusing to consider evidence supplied by the consumer, (me). Wish me luck.
Re: Re: Please someone must know this!!! Ok Butch and all. Ryder's comment so eloquently points out exactly what I have said for far longer than most have been on this board. Back almost 2 years ago now. And I Inaccurate or otherwise it is to the furnisher of the information to whom almost all attention must be devoted to have the maximum impact on the outcome. That has always been the foundation upon which I have built that which I have built. Nothing more, nothing less.
Re: Re: Please someone must know this!!! Thank you for clearing it up. I understand now. You guys are great. I know that I sounded horrible yesterday and again my apologies. So I guess I keep plugging away at it. At this point being my first round of disputes I guess I did well. My husband has a Gateway Credit Union on his report and I sent a validation letter to them. I still haven't heard anything and I do have the green card to prove this and that they received it. They verified it with the CRA. How long do I wait for the next step to see if they validate to me?
