By the process known as "Credit Deletion" so I read, that if a CRA deletes bad TL on one report then one has recourse to issue letter to OC demanding OC to delete reporting from other CRA's still reporting. So here's my DH's example: TU showing four baddies although previously disputed (by Lexington), not commenting "verified" so i thought a handwritten (by me this time) dispute letter to delete. Then the more I read, the more I thought. It seems MAYBE I should be sending letter to OC instead! Asking them to delete off of TU & EQ as the TL could not be verified with EX so therefore according to the before mentioned process they, by law need to notify CRA that particular account needs to be deleted. WWUD???
In a dispute thru the CRA, or even directly with the DF, if the DF determines that their reporting is erroneous, they must send corrections both to the CRA whose report your were disputing, and any other CRAs they are reporting the erroneous data on. If their correction is to remove, then they must remove from all CRAs. I am not aware of a requirement that a CRA that removes a TL for non-response from the DF, or even due to a correction sent by the DF, has any obligation to forward that to the other CRAs. Their main requirement to notify other CRAs is when you put a fraud alert on your reports.
I can attest to the fact mentioned by Ontrack. They don't pass information on to other CRA's. These are each separate entities. Only in Identity theft do CRA's communicate information between each other.
What was the information given that caused TU to delete the trade line or not be able to verify it? Perhaps that same information disputed through the other to CRA's would get you the TL deletion you are looking for?
