QUOTE
just asking for clarification...
radi8 - you said in your first post on this thread (please take note of what i bolded)
QUOTE
*You do NOT have legal right to validation under the FDCPA when dealing with an original creditor. They may supply validation at their option, but are not required to do so. However, you do have the right under the FCRA to dispute directly with an original creditor any information reported that you feel is incorrect. This can be found in section 623. Once they have received your dispute, they must investigate the reported info and, they must also report the acct as disputed with the cra's.
Validation is strictly a FDCPA concept and it's a specific section in the FDCPA -- however, validation is evidence of debt.
It is required under the FDCPA which is only applicable to 3rd party collectors or they must cease collection.
Under the FCRA, section 623, you do have the right to request verification from creditors -- they must investigate but don't have to respond directly to you. They have to communicate that the information is disputed to the CRA, the CRA is then required to note that the information is disputed in all subsequent reports, but it falls under 623(a) of the FCRA which a consumer cannot sue to enforce -- the information must be inaccurate.
QUOTE
If you demand validation from a creditor who is already listing a derogatory tradeline on your credit report, they are required to note that account as "disputed by consumer" ( or similar language). They may NOT place a new listing, or verify a current listing with the CRA until they have provided you with validation.
That is specific to validation under the FDCPA.
QUOTE
in reading in another thread
http://www.creditboards.com/viewtop...&highlight=fcba lkh says this...(see again what i have bolded)
QUOTE
No. Nothing in the FCRA says they need to supply you with anything or even respond to you.
If you notify an oc that you dispute an acct listing, they must report that the account is disputed by the consumer. Here is the section of the FCRA that applies.
so in essense, if i am understanding this correctly - the OC does not HAVE to verify with you, BUT if they DON'T verify with you then the account MUST remain IN DISPUTE (to which then you could write the cra and tell them that the data furnisher isn't giving you any verification of the debt so it MUST be removed)
am i understanding this correctly?
kitti
You could tell the CRA that you have requested verification from the OC and they won't provide it, it doesn't mean they have to delete it though.
This thread will help you understand requesting verification from OC's versus validation from CA's:
http://www.creditboards.com/viewtop...der=asc&start=0The biggest difference is under the FDCPA validation must be provided or collection must cease.
Under the FCRA, once disputed (whether you request verification or not) an investigation must be completed and the information must be updated or removed -- a consumer has a cause of action to sue to enforce section 623(

, the information must be inaccurate though and the OC never has to respond to you at all if they don't chose to.
So both of those seemingly contradictory statements are correct, it's just the wording that is throwing you off. Validation/verification are frequently used interchangeably, but they are 2 different things under 2 different laws.
Sassy
EDITED to add these threads on the difference between validation/ verification:
Verification and Validation explanation:
http://www.creditboards.com/viewtop...tion+validation http://www.creditboards.com/viewtop...t=sassy+concise