Would it be considered willful noncompliance if a CRA refused to delete an item that the creditor asked to be deleted? Here is the short version of this story... There were 2 accounts on my EQ report that were not mine. I disputed, they verifed 3 times. I went to the creditor, they agreed--the accounts should be deleted. They sent UDF's. I sent a letter and redisputed. EQ re-verified. The accounts stayed on my report. I got a letter from the creditor, on letterhead, that said "delete these accounts forever." The creditor sent them the original, I faxed a copy. They still didn't delete. Four months and a 2 inch stack of correspondence later, they deleted. Why did they delete? Because I called to see if they had received the letter and if the accounts were off. They said they never got it, 4 months of this crap had passed, and I had an absolute meltdown with the rep on the phone. She sent me to a supervisor who deleted it while I was on the phone. Finally, the 2 accounts were off my report. My score went up 60 points. Two weeks ago the same 2 accounts were reinserted. I am not going to jack around with them on this anymore. I am going to file my lawsuit tomorrow. My violations will be: #1 - reinsertion without 5 day notification #2 - Willful noncompliance with the FCRA - Is this situation worthy of this? #3 - Inaccuracy of reported items - Sec 623 Is this a stretch here? Let me know if I am overstepping my boundaries on this one. Thanks! Lisa
Sounds good to me. #1 Is a no-brainer, just show copies of the report before and after the item was reinserted. #2 Yes, I do believe it is willful noncompliance, I'm sure you have all of those eariler "updates" where EQ refused to delete (i.e., they verified) even when you had the UDF from the OC themselves in your hands. Hopefully you also have all the fax confirmation sheet as well showing that the fax was successful in getting through as well. You can easily show a judge how they violated the FCRA several times through that 4 month time frame, and now they are doing it again. It has to be willful-noncompliance because they already knew (know) that this account is supposed to be deleted. #3 Section 623 of the FCRA is for the responsibility of furnishers of information to the CRA's. So, it really would not help, unless you're naming the CA as a defedant as well.
Actually, you don't have to decide willful or negligent nc. lookup Lizardking's template and you'll see a wonderfully crafted lawsuit. what you do is you put every violation under willful and every violation under negligent. let the judge sort it out. You actually get atty fees etc off negligent, I believe (I've had a long day so my brain is fried)... anyway, just list it all under both and go from there. Also ask for injunctive relief (the court makes them correct or remove the actual entries also) so they can't reinsert. If you want to email me... feel free to do so privately. also, have actual damages. This is not negotiable. Apply for local credit with the strictest bank and get denied. You have to have damages, somebody else has to see the errors other than you (see def: file)... it's not your copy... and you want local credit so you can subpeona them if necessary.
Sounds like I should cool my heels, do some more legwork/homework before I file this. I will check out Lizardking's suit. I remember his post now, and you are right marie, that was a beautifully crafted piece of work! Thanks for the help, everyone!
