Ok, I'm starting on my hubbys reports now, and he has unpaid collections (mine was easy as it was all old and paid) I sent out a couple of validation letters last week, should get the green cards today. Now, I know I have to check his report, to see if it's been placed in dispute. Also, I need to dispute at the CRA's to see if they verify during the validation process. I have a couple of ???'s. 1. We only really have access to Experian. They show when Items are in dispute. Is there any CRA that is better at this than another? 2. what is the time frame that I should give them before I check to see if they placed them in dispute? 3. How long should I wait before I dispute them w/ the CRA's? I'm really nervous about the whole process, because I really do not want to go to court! I just want to pay for deletion!! In about 30 days I'll send either the estoppel, or the 2nd validation letter, if they have not responded favorabley!! TIA!!
I would start disputing with the cra's as soon as you get the green cards back. They (ca) are not supposed to verify until they have provided validation. In my book that counts as continued collection activity. If they do you have them on a violation. Also, I would begin to check about that same time to see if the account is listed in dispute. After 30 days if the account is still not showing in dispute this is another violation. Make sure you print out a copy of your report 30 days later that proves they did not place in dispute next to the account. Then I would draft an estoppel/intent to sue letter, if they did not respond to validation, if they did respons to validation but was partial I would send the validation #2/intent to sue using the violations as leverage for a deletion. Hope this helps.
Ok, one more question. When it shows in dispute, well..I'm a little confused by this. I've already disputed them w/ the CRA's, so experian keeps the "item disputed by consumer" on there the whole time. If I dispute again, how can I tell the difference between showing as in dispute from me, or in dispute because the CA put it in dispute? Does that make any sense?
