Validation Vs Dispute

"What can I do about inaccurate or incomplete information?"

-DISPUTE with the reporting agency as required by law- FCRA 611 / 623 (b)

"Under the new law, both the CRA and the information provider have responsibilities for correcting inaccurate or incomplete information in your report. "

-There is nothing "new" about this part of the law. FCRA 623 (b) established furnisher liability before 2004.

"To protect all your rights under this law, contact both the CRA and the information provider."

-No, this is NOT required to "protect your rights". Your rights ARE NOT WAIVABLE.

"tell the creditor or other information provider in writing that you dispute an item."

-THIS DOES NOTHING EXCEPT REQUIRE THEM TO REPORT THE ACCOUNT AS DISPUTED IF THEY REPORT AFTER RECEIPT OF THE DISPUTE. (UNLESS YOUR STATE LAW APPLIES)

-This is an area of GREAT CONFUSION. If you read FCRA 623 you will see, at first, section (a) requires ALL furnishers of information to report "accurate info" etc blah blah.

-BUT READING (c), you will see section (a) IS NOT ACTIONABLE BY THE CONSUMER, ONLY SECTION (b) IS! And section (b) ONLY applies after a dispute is sent TO THE REPORTING AGENCY.

 

I kinda posted this backwards but o well.....

I have noticed a HUGE focus on VALIDATION as a "strong" way to "repair" a consumer's credit.

However, the validation right is "weak" and limited, 30 days to be exact.

The dispute process, THROUGH the reporting agency, requires much more of the reporting agency AND THE FURNISHER of information.

All these "reasonable investigation" case cites are regadring the FCRA NOT the FDCPA.

Johnson v. MBNA Am. Bank, NA, No. 03-1235 , UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT , December 4, 2003, Argued, February 11, 2004, Decided

Most cases from the FDCPA involve harrassment, abusive behavior etc, or LACK OF EFFECTIVE VALIDATION NOTICES, NOT the actual validation provided BY a collection agency.

Look into FCRA 611- this establishes the dispute process

FCRA 623 establishes the responsibility of furnishers of information. SECTION (b) is actionable by the consumer NOT (a).

 

"the CRA sends a letter to the consumer after an investigation has been completed that if you further dispute the information contained in your rreport to contact the furnisher directly."

-This is a way for the reporting agency to "fool" the consumer into thinking the furnisher is responsible for the investigation. THEY ARE NOT. The reporting agency is primarily responsible.

"you do this and request verification of the acct, this is what i was referring to under the new facta laws it requires the furnisher to provide proof to the consumer in relation to the debt."

-This is NOT CORRECT.

-A consumer can only request validation/verification during the 30 days following the INITIAL COMMUNICATION FROM THE DEBT COLLECTOR IN WHICH THE DEBT COLLECTOR PROVIDED THE CONSUMER WITH THE "NOTICE OF VALIDATION RIGHTS."

-If the consumer sends a request for validation/verification BEFORE or AFTER the validation period, the collection agency IS ONLY REQUIRED TO REPORT THE DEBT AS DISPUTED TO THE REPORTING AGENCY IF THEY CONTINUE TO REPORT THE DEBT.

"if the furnisher does not provide proof to verify the debt to the consumer they can not continue to report it this is considered unverifable inaccurate information under the FCRA."

-This is also NOT CORRECT.

-They do not need to send the consumer ANYTHING if the validation/verification is sent OUTSIDE the validation period.

-The furnisher of information is NOT REQUIRED TO REPORT ACCURATE INFO AFTER IT RECEIVES A VALIDATION/VERIFICATION DIRECTLY FROM A CONSUMER.

-A consumer CANNOT DO ANYTHING (as for as court etc) IF THEY DID NOT SEND A DISPUTE TO THE REPORTING AGENCY, AND INSTEAD SENT IT DIRECTLY TO THE COLLECTION AGENCY.- READ FCRA/FACTA 623 (b)

-The changes in the FCRA/FACTA DID NOT EFFECT THIS SECTION.

"I understand your point on flagging the acct under dispute, but furnishers have a duty under the FCRA to only supply accurate verifable information"

-True. BUT IF THE CONSUMER DOES NOT INITIATE AN INVESTIGTAION THROUGH THE REPORTING AGENCY, THERE IS NO CONSUMER RECOURSE AVAILABLE.

"so if the accct can not be verified by the consumer I understand that a consumer has a right to requrest that the CRA delete this acct or can bring a suit for damages for willfull non-compliance against the furnisher."

-This is a HUGE MISCONCEPTION.

-A consumer CANNOT "verify" an account. ONLY A REPORTING AGENCY CAN DO THIS THROUGH A REASONABLE INVESTIGTATION.

-A consumer has the right to REQUEST ANYTHING. Problem is there is no recourse available to the consumer if their request is not granted.

-A consumer CANNOT bring a suit against a collection agency or other furnisher of information for failure to comlpy with FCRA/FACTA 623 (a).

-CAREFULLY read FCRA/FACTA 623.

-You will see under section (c), "limitations of liability" that section (a) IS ONLY ENFORCEABLE BY STATE OF FEDERAL GOVT.

 

"lets say I dispute an OC tradline with the CRA ..
CRA comes back with verfied.. can I then dispute directly with the OC??"

-Yes you can. HOWEVER, there is NOTHING they need to do (unless you state law applies). ONLY A DEBT COLLECTOR MUST REPORT THE ACCOUNT AS DISPUTED.

"If I send such a dispute and they do not verify. could I then ask the CRA to delete it?? If so is there a certain timeframe here??"

-You can ask anything

-BUT, THERE IS NOTHING THE reporting agency has to do under the law.

"Let me give you my sitaution..
Natinal Credit Corp apparently has provided financing a couple years ago for a Fitness USA
This debt isnt incredibly large.. around $500 I think.
I disputed this debt with the CRA it came back verified.. Is there any other steps I can take??
I do know this has to be inacurate on at least one report. eq has it open ex closed tu open..
In each instance it is listed as charged off however.."

-If there are inaccuracies in the reporting, YOU NEED TO BE VERY SPECIFIC in the dispute. IF they then verify obviously inaccurate info, then you have recourse against the furnisher of info AND the reporting agency.- check out FCRA/FACTA 623 (b)

"There is a creditor also listed on my reports I know not to be the OC.. However I believe it may have been transfered to this compan.y it does not appear to be a CA. what can be done if anything in this instance??"

-Whats wrong with the listing?

-Also, the Fitness USA account. IS THIS A GYM membership??

-There are state laws which allow a consumer to "get out" of a gym membership under certain conditions.

 

Re: Re: Validation Vs Dispute

"I have NCO on my CR as well, and for Fitness USA (Do you live in MI by chance?) anyway, I disputed with all 3, TU deleted, other 2 haven't responded yet (and I"m counting the days). I'm guessing my next step from here would be to sent NCO a letter for "VERFICATION" of the debt, I.E. the SIGNED contract that shows that they have the "right" to collect for the account? Sound right to anyone eles? "

-VALIDATION/VERIFICATION is only available to a consumer during the 30 days immediately following the INITIAL COMMUNICATION FROM THE DEBT COLLECTOR.

-A collection agency DOES NOT NEED A "SIGNED CONTRACT" to be able to collect a debt.

 

Re: Re: Validation Vs Dispute

"I went ahead and sent the verfication. my question was do they have to respond and if so whats the timeframe if any. "

-Not if you are outside the 30 day validation/verification period. (unless your state law requires it)

"I guess my next step is to demand they delete it beacause of inacurate reporting??? maybe that should have been the first step.."

-What if they dont?

"I am down to 3 derog tradlines.. trying to get them delted is proving to be much more difficult then the others have been."

-FOCUS on whats wrong with the listings.

 

ok...a coupe things.....

3rd party "re-sellers" which privacy guard and 100's of others are, are NOW COVERED under the FCRA.

This means DISPUTES TO INFO CONTAINED ON THESE REPORTS HAS TO GO THROUGH THE RESELLER.

I have created a few scenerios about this. And to save time, GET THE REPORTS FROM THE "big 3" INSTEAD

If you think about it, if you disputed an account which was listed on PG, equifax, for example, can say, "AINT MY REPORT"

just a comment

-Check with your states civil code etc for "health club memberships" there is usually laws allowing consumers to get out of a gym membership for certain conditions.

-If you meet the conditions, then you are not liable for the account, therefore you can dispute it as not yours BECAUSE of the conditions.

 

Re: Re: Validation Vs Dispute

One would think that if it bears the name of the "big 3", then they should not be concidered resellers, but I honestly dont know

www.transunion.com leads you to "true credit"

but www.tuscores.com , which is a link from the first page, leads you to a transunion credit report

SCAMS SCAMS SCAMS lol

 

Re: Re: Re: Validation Vs Dispute

"the CRA sends a letter to the consumer after an investigation has been completed that if you further dispute the information contained in your rreport to contact the furnisher directly."*******************
quote hiding90
-This is a way for the reporting agency to "fool" the consumer into thinking the furnisher is responsible for the investigationThe reporting agency is primarily responsible.

****************************************** fun4u2- no they are both liable the furnisher and the CRA
******************************************

-YES. ONLY IF THE DISPUTE WAS SENT TO THE REPORTING AGENCY ONLY!

"
-A consumer can only request validation/verification during the 30 days following the INITIAL COMMUNICATION FROM THE DEBT COLLECTOR IN WHICH THE DEBT COLLECTOR PROVIDED THE CONSUMER WITH THE "NOTICE OF VALIDATION RIGHTS."

Not true, there is no time barred on this the CA lists this and fools the consumer that they waive their rights to a dispute after this point however the Federal law states that consumers can dispute inaccurate data that is on their reports directly with the furnisher."

-NO, NO IT DOES NOT. YOU ARE NOT READING THE WHOLE SECTION OF 623!

"I have done this! I have personally sent a CA a dispute requesting validation after the 30 days more like 2 yrs and claimed I first saw it on my report."

-Nothing says you cant do that. THEY JUST DONT HAVE TO RESPOND!

"they still need to provide proof to the consumer that the debt is accurate"

-NO, NO THEY DO NOT. THE ONLY NEED TO CONDUCT A REASONABLE INVESTIGATION AND REPORT BACK TO THE REPORTING AGENCY, NOT THE CONSUMER!

"otherwise they could be held liable for continued collection and possibly reporting inaccurate unverifable info""

-NO, ONLY IF THEY GOT A DISPUTE FROM THE REPORTING AGENCY AS OUTLINED IN 611!


"senerio the CA may no longer have the acct to collect even though they still list the TL on your report "

-THEY CAN LIST THE ACCOUNT FOREVER! They just cant report it as "active". THE 7 YEAR REPORTING PERIOD ONLY APPLIES TO REPORTING AGENCIES.


******************************************
hiding90
-If the consumer sends a request for validation/verification BEFORE or AFTER the validation period, the collection agency IS ONLY REQUIRED TO REPORT THE DEBT AS DISPUTED TO THE REPORTING AGENCY IF THEY CONTINUE TO REPORT THE DEBT.
******************************************

"also debateable"

-NO, NOT debateable! READ THE LAW. Also read my validation link below.

"if the Tl is on the report the furnisher must flag it as disputed upon recieving written notification from the consumer that the acct is disputed"

-YES, this is correct ONLY OF THE FURNISHER IS A DEBT COLLECTOR! UNLESS YOUR STATE LAW REQUIRES THIS.

-THE FDCPA ONLY APPLIES TO DEBT COLLECTORS. READ IT!


"however a consumer has a right to ask for validation from the furnisher at any time after an investigation is completed from the CRA to prove what is being reported is in fact correct."

-TRUE. A consumer can also request the furnisher kiss their ass. BUT, THERE IS NO CONSUMER RECOURSE AVAILABLE IF THEY DO NOT REPLY OR COMPLY.

"if the furnisher can not provide verification of the acct they can no longer report it under the FCRA as it would inaccurate , unverifable info."

-YES. BUT ONLY IF THEY ARE NOTIFIED OF A DISPUTE FROM THE REPORTING AGENCY AS OUTLINES IN 611. READ IT!

"I have been able to get accts deleted from my reports for this very reason. based on my personal experience. ! "

-YES, YES YOU CAN. BUT IT IS NOT BECAUSE OF THE FEDERAL LAWS!


"hiding90
-This is also NOT CORRECT.

-They do not need to send the consumer ANYTHING if the validation/verification is sent OUTSIDE the validation period."


fun4u2 -Wrong the debt is not barred from this under the FDCPA.

-HAVE YOU ACTUALLY READ FDCPA 809???


****************************************
hiding 90 -The furnisher of information is NOT REQUIRED TO REPORT ACCURATE INFO AFTER IT RECEIVES A VALIDATION/VERIFICATION DIRECTLY FROM A CONSUMER.
*****************************************

"fun4u2 what are you talking about here?? yes they are always liable to report accurate info otherwise disputes wouldnt exist. and laws wouldnt exist holding CRA and furnishers liable"

-NO. You are not understanding the law. Look at FCRA 623 for once!

-The "law" you are talking about IS FCRA 623!

-You are way off on your info. You need to actually read and research the info your are attempting to convey.

-Additionally, if this is from your attorney, YOU ARE UP FOR A VERY VERY HARD AND EMBARASSING SUIT.

 

Re: Re: Re: Validation Vs Dispute

You attorney may also benefit from my postings.

If your attorney is advising you that you can file suit under FCRA 623 (a), HE IS DEAD WRONG !