I think I understand the concept of disputing during "CHOD" but can someone speficy exactly what or when CHOD takes place? Pardon the "Newbieness"
Chod stands for Creditnet Holiday Onslaught of Disputes (I think) and it takes place during December. Everyone disputes in December in the hopes of getting deletions when credit bureaus are understaffed for the holidays. Luke
Don't get your hopes up too high with chod. Last years kinda sucked, mass blowoffs and few deletions if I remember correctly... Chod is more or less a deal where you hope to luck out and get deletions when all else has failed.
That's what I found out this year too. I help put in over 300 chod disputes this year starting just after November 20 so they hit there day after Thanksgiving and quit sending in disputes December 10th. They were worded lots of different ways too. Not just form letters being cranked out wholesale. Most of the letters carried 3 disputes while some carried less than that. I aimed all of the disputes at accounts that contained obvious errors and none of them were the "not mine" type of garbage so commonly used. So they were valid disputes, not the "frivolous" kind at all. All of them contained the full identification of the individuals disputing following the formats to be found at http://www.creditwrench.com/ides.html and http://www.creditwrench.com/hphcp.html so that the credit bureaus could not come back and claim they needed more information in the way of identification. After all of that we got a total of about 6 or 7 deletions and the rest we are either still waiting on the results which will obviously never come now or we got back some inane non-answer. I did not want to take a chance that the credit bureaus would come back and claim that people were using some credit repair company either so I made them all write their letters by hand on whatever stationary and mail them from their home addresses. Good thing I told the people that it was just an experiment trying to see how good the idea of chod was. I warned them all not to be upset if the idea didn't work which it obviously didn't. And I didn't tell them where I got the idea either except off of the internet. I explained to all the people that the idea was simply to attempt to take advantage of the holiday rush to hope to get some deletions. Most of those people started with credit scores ranging from the low 400's to the high 500's and now have no derogatories or maybe one or two they are still fighting with and are working to build new positive credit. Many have already qualified for their home loans and some are already homeowners.
I've noticed reports of deletions started picking up around the end of february and the first of march... If I knew how I'd start up a database similar to the "who pulls what" ones floating around out there so that ppl can determine the best times of the year to send in disputes.
Re: Re: Chod Sure sounds like a good idea. I'd sure like to learn how to get results out of doing disputes. Just seems awfully strange that lots of folks do get good results and lots more don't. Since there are probably almost an unlimitied number of variations of possible dispute methods and there don't seem to be any real correlation between the letters and the results. We do need to do something to improve the results for all. Whatever it takes.
Re: Re: Chod 6 or 7 deletions out of 300 disputes?! Wow Bill, I have disputed a total of about 15 tradelines and gotten 9 deletions. I wonder what is different? There has to be a reason for the dismal return. In any event all the failures to investigate are automatic violations.
Re: Re: Chod There does seem to be a consensus as to what works and what does not work. The first and second rounds seem to be the most effective. In addition the CRA's will accept many more disputes per letter and not deem it frivolous. After those two rounds I think the CSR's know that the person sending the disputes is trying to do credit repair and don't actually investigate. They look at their computers and say, "yep- verified". Like my last dispute, I sent it off on April 9th. I had the results in my hand on April 17th. Do you think they investigated? I sure as heck don't. When I started my credit repair journey I had 5 negative accounts out of 7 total. I've only gotten one deletion from a dispute only. The other 3 I had removed by working a combination of CRA disputes and threatening the OC's. So I can see where your coming from when you say not to spend too much time messing with the CRA's. Bottom line is CRA's don't care what is reported as long as it is negative and the furnisher of information says its correct. Once the CRA has verified once or even twice it is time to move on and attack the furninsher of information.
Re: Re: Re: Chod The very last derog I had, I disputed several times with the cra. They wouldn't delete it. I sent at least 4 letters to the oc. Never got a response. Finally on the 8th dispute with the cra it was deleted. It has never come back. As to why you only got 1 deletion out of 5 could be a number of reasons, the most likely of which is that they were fairly new. The newer a reported item is, the more difficult it will be to remove. I had 47 items removed from my 3 reports during my clean up. 2 were the result of letters to oc's, 5 were the result of my lawsuit and the rest were disputed off. Disputing negatives with the cra's does work. Just read the tons of posts here detailing it.
Re: Re: Re: Chod No, I didn't mis-type. I'm guessing on this but I'm willing to bet that something less than 20 were ever answered one way or another. I must admit that some of those folks may very well have received more frivolous or non-answers, knew what they were and just didn't bother to tell me about it. But if there had been any more actual deletions there isn't any possible way that I would not have known about it.
Re: Re: Re: Chod I wish I knew what the difference may have been. I suppose there may be quite a few different possible answers but one that strikes me is that they got so snowballed with disputes they just answered some and shoved the rest off never to be bothered with again. That seems to me to be the most logical answer never mind whether it is right or wrong.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Chod In that case, you go to the courthouse and fill out the paperwork. Then they pay attention to you.
Re: Re: Re: Chod The derogatory information associated with each of my derogatory TL's was all under two years old with DOLA being less than a year old on each with the exception of the one TL that was deleted using CRA disputes and it was going on 4 years old. So far had two of the TL's upadated to paid-never late, the TL with the 4yo DOLA was deleted completly along with the medical CA and I have enough to start litigation on my last negative TL. I consider myself fortunate to be this ahead of the game considering those new accounts stick like glue!!!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Chod The results are in... ---bbauer's way: 7 deletions out of 300 attempts ---Pnwman's's way: 9 deletions out of 15 attempts And Pnwman is the WINNER! Uh, waiter, I'll have what he's having. (Bill, you know I'm just poking at ya.) Doc P.S. Actually both of these claimed results seem to be a few standard deviations away from the usual 10-20%!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Chod While I full well realize that what I am going to say is hardly an average of what anybody might have happen to them by any stretch of the imagination, you spent at least $35.00 to get that deletion. Let's say for the purpose of conversation that somebody had to do that for say 5 deletions out of however many derogatories. That's $175.00. And you had to file at least one law suit which cost you something as well. Don't know how much but let's say it was $20. Now you have $200 into getting your credit reports cleaned up. Unless I miss my guess you have been at it for at least 2 years or more. You have had to put untold hours of your time into research and study. So even figuring that your "untold hours" were worht a buck each, now how much have you got invested in cleaning up your credit? I'll bet you couldn't even hazard a guess and neither can I. But it sure makes "liars" out of those who claim anybody can do it for free, don't it? As always, there aren't any free lunches. In contrast, each of those 300 people paid me $400 to do exactly what I do for half that on the internet and most all of them now have their credit clean enough that they can meet the demands of lenders with flying colors even though they may still have bankruptcies on their credit reports and they may not have spotless records they are clean enough to get home mortgages. And they all got it done in 4 months time more or less. In the process, I had to teach 7 of them how to get void judgments vacated and out of those 7 there were 2 of them whose garnishment assetts hearings were already in progess and they actually had to go to the hearings and set up and agree to payment plans so that they had time to go file their motions to vacate summary judgment and get them heard and ruled on. One of them never even knew he had a judgment nor that he was supposed to have gone to asset hearings until the sheriff came out to haul him off to jail for a contempt of court hearing. They had been serving his 16 year old sister instead of him and at the wrong house. The only way he kept from getting hauled off to jail was because the sister finally told the truth which was that it was she they had been serving instead of him and that she never told her brother because she didn't think it was important so she just forgot about it. To make matters worse, her name is Gerri and his name is Gerald. (LOL) Gerri & Jerry. So when the Sheriff found that out he made Jerry promise he would go get the mess straightened out. That's when he came to me. I wish I could have seen the "deer-in-the-headlights" look on that attorney's face when he got the notice that his garnishment was no good and any money he had illegally extracted would have to be paid back. When it comes to disputes with the credit bureaus you are almost certain to be right on that. Obviously that is true too. But it sure isn't for free like lots of folks would have the newbies all believe. Just like anything else, it does take time which does cost money one way or another else one's time is absolutely, totally and completely worthless and postage and certified letters and gasoline for trips to the post office are all somehow magically free.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Chod Wrong Doc. Most of those 300 people put in 3 disputes per envelope. I'd say more like 800 actual listings disputed all told. Beyond any shadow of a doubt. (LOL) Awww Doc, we all know you just couldn't resist. (LOL) Make that 40-50% claimed by some nationally published statistics.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Chod I think 10-20% is way too low. Even dixidriftr got 20% with his less than a year old tradelines. My guesstimate is more like 30-60% for tradelines of at least 1-2 years or older. But 7 or 8 out of 800?! Something is obviously way off there.
