I know many of us have talked about TU (in particular, maybe!) deletes entire accounts at the drop of a hat. I have a 10 yr old trade line - I dispute never late, company doesnt respond so TU deletes the entire account. EQ and EQ have changed the info to what I request - as long as the creditor agrees or doesnt reposnd. When I mentioned to a TU rep - I got "That is what the law says to do - delete whole thing." Are they just driving us crazy for no reason or does law indeed either tell them delete whole thing when disputed accuracy cant be resolved or at least give them the otion to delete the whol thing rather than modify the part of the tradeline in dispute? FROM FCRA -- § 611. Procedure in case of disputed accuracy [15 U.S.C. § 1681i] ... (5) Treatment of inaccurate or unverifiable information. (A) In general. If, after any reinvestigation under paragraph (1) of any information disputed by a consumer, an item of the information is found to be inaccurate or incomplete or cannot be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete that item of information from the consumer's file or modify that item of information, as appropriate, based on the results of the reinvestigation. It seems they are supposed to delete the item of the information (which i take to mean the 30 day late - not the whole darn tradeline.) Any comments? Thanks T
That's what happened to my Discover account with EQ and TU. They deleted it. EX didn't but updated it to never late. I kind of want to have everything organized so I'm thinking about disputing it not mine some other time Kind of doesn't match the rest of reports! I just think that in my case it helped me but seems like in your case not really as you probably had a good tradeline just with ONE 30 day late. I think If you still have the account opened they will keep reporting it again but if it is closed ... then I don't know.
I talked to TU about this law. They said the particular portion which you quoted is open to interpretation and that it is their policy to delete the entire tradeline when a creditor fails to respond.
(A) In general. If, after any reinvestigation under paragraph (1) of any information disputed by a consumer, an item of the information is found to be inaccurate or incomplete or cannot be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete that item of information from the consumer's file or modify that item of information, as appropriate, based on the results of the reinvestigation. The way I read it is: item= the late mark you disputed information= the (whole)account/tradeline ....So, plugging in the above terms into the FCRA 611 (A) section: If, after any reinvestigation under paragraph (1) of any "account" disputed by a consumer, a "late" (payment) of the "account" is found to be inaccurate or incomplete or cannot be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete that "late" (payment) of(from the) "account" from the consumer's file or modify that "late" (payment) of(from) the "account", as appropriate, based on the results of the reinvestigation. Now I realize that may be a little confusing to read, but it makes sense. Honest
thanks tmitchell - I could see how TU would choose to translate it like that. Who specifically did you get that info from tho - a 1st line rep, a supervisor, compliance, ceo, etc? It definitely is confusing. And it does appear to give the option of deleting (like TU) or modifying (like EX). BUT I read it as the deleting or modifying refers to the item [like a 30-day late] of the information [like the trade line.] A) In general. If, after any reinvestigation under paragraph (1) of any information disputed by a consumer, an item of the information is found to be inaccurate or incomplete or cannot be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete that item of information from the consumer's file or modify that item of information, as appropriate, based on the results of the reinvestigation. To me the word 'item' used in the above paragraph is a subset of the larger 'information' Maybe I'm missing something here or misreading something. Please somebody jump in with any comments. Obviously even if I was "right," it sure wouldn't affect TU! But maybe I could try to get an FTC opinion letter published on it - if anybody had an inside track on how to do that - fire away. -------------- P.S. - from the Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law: item ['i-tem] 1: a distinct part in an enumeration, account, or series --- Thanks, T
the 1st line rep kept telling me that the law required them to delete the entire tradeline. I then got a supervisor on the phone and pressed harder. I finally trapped her and she conceded that it is TU's policy (their interpretation of the law) to delete the entire tradeline. It was that conversation that led to them accusing me of being an attorney. Days later, online access to my report was blocked for almost a month.
Ouch! Thanks for the info. My 1st line rep said the same thing - "the law requires..." I didnt want to push it til I looked into it. On a related note - do you know if anybody has brought this up with the FTC - by phone or lettter?
I would have had them provide WRITTEN PROOF that I was an ATTORNEY!!! The same way I would have them PROVE that I am using a CREDIT REPAIR AGENCY!!!
I just looked over the FTC for an opinion letter and was unable to locate one. Only thing else I found in the FCRA was this: § 607. Compliance procedures [15 U.S.C. § 1681e] (b) Accuracy of report. Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. I know it's not much. However, the way I see it, how can a CRA "follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates" when it (the CRA) admits to deleting (what now should be) a positive tradeline [because the consumer disputes one item i.e. (a late pay) and the OC never responds?] Basically, if the account is gone, your report is no longer accurate. The consumer is not disputing the account (itself), merely a piece of the puzzle (so to speak), and TU takes it upon itself to terminate the puzzle rather the the piece thats incorrect.
I spoke to Harold at the FTC this morning. He agreed with my position! Obviously the law gives leeway to the CRA to report or delete the disputed info if it is unverified. BUT - if I am disputing just one part of the puzzle (i.e. a 30 day late) - it should be that item that is deleted or modifed at the whim of the CRA, NOT the entire account. Deleting or modifying the entire account only makes sense when the entire account is being disputed and comes back unverifiable. I guess I'll call TU later on. Harold also told me I could submit an online FTC complaint in hopes of getting a opinion letter or at least an answer in writing. I'll let you know what happens. Tom
