My version of the 1-2punch, invoking the FCRA and FDCPA

[Jen23514]

but then to counter-argue:

 

If at any time a person who regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to one

or more CRAs determines that the information provided is not complete or accurate, the furnisher must provide

complete and accurate information to the CRA. In addition, the furnisher must notify all CRAs that received the

information of any corrections, and must thereafter report only the complete and accurate information. Section

623(a)(2)

[RacerX780]

True... but that's in line with how the process is supposed to work.

 

FoI reports information... .correctly or incorrectly.

 

Consumer sees the TL and believes the information is incorrect.

 

Per the FCRA, consumer is allowed to dispute the information with the CRA, who will start an investigation into the possible incorrect information.

 

If it's determined that the info is in fact wrong, the FoI needs to correct it.

 

 

 

Of course, the problem is with the CRA being in the middle and out of control of the consumer. Just because they are claiming something is being done doesn't mean it actually is.

 

 

-R

[Jen23514]

Of course, the problem is with the CRA being in the middle and out of control of the consumer. Just because they are claiming something is being done doesn't mean it actually is.

 

 

-R

 

of course a PR is supposed to correct that, but CRAs ignore it and you have no real way to enforce it.

 

(other than complain to FTC and file suit, but what damages do you have? )

[NeverQuietHere]

while this letter seems to work for many, including myself... I still am struggling with this:

 

The FCRA prohibits information furnishers from providing information to a consumer reporting agency

(“CRAâ€) that they know (or consciously avoid knowing) is inaccurate. However, the furnisher is not subject to

this general prohibition if it clearly and conspicuously specifies an address to which consumers may write to

notify the furnisher that certain information is inaccurate. Sections 623(a)(1)(A) and (a)(1)©

 

anyone want to help me tackle this?

 

I take this to mean that if the address is reported on the credit reports, they aren't liable for wrong info if you don't dispute it directly with the DF.

 

My problem with this is that CSC is NOT reporting addresses on their credit reports. We are expected to call CSC to get that information (even if there are 100 DF's on the report) I personally wonder if CSC isn't violating something and if they aren't doing this on purpose to inconvenience consumers....

 

Basically, I think that's saying that you can dispute with the CRA, but if you don't dispute directly with the DF if they cont to report inaccurate info, you can't take them to court and expect to win by saying, "I dispute with CRA and they didn't fix this." You have to dispute directly with DF if the reporting is still inaccurate.

 

The first part of it....I will use that CA I have a big problem with right now as an example.

 

They should have knowledge from their lawyer from the lawsuit they filed against us that the amt is wrong (what they are reporting and trying to collect) They have yet to change that on our reports. Oh wait, they did change it on ONE of DH's to another amt that is still so far off and we have no idea how they got that amt. So I think that they either KNOW this or they are "avoiding" knowing this. kwim?

[Guest Joseph C]

OK. Ive been reading this, paying as much attention as i can. I actually sat down, devoted some time, and looked at it. The first item i go after is this AFNI Paid collection. I have been -AGONIZING- over whether to send a DV to AFNI (the CA) First, -OR- Dispute with ALL 3 CRAs first... as WHICH will be PUNCH 1 of the 1-2 PUNCH... but i have heard it flipped BACK and FORTH alot.

 

I saw someone say putting everything in the Mail (Punch 1 and 2) at the same time, even USPS CM-RRR (The only way im doing anything,) is a Mistake.

 

If i start a Dispute with the CRAs... SHOULD i wait a set amount f time (how long) Before writing the CA to seek it Corrected (Removed) WITH Copies of the Hards (I can get my Hards this way)?

 

OR do i send it to the CA, (AFNI) First?

 

I was tempted to send the 3 CRAs this letter, but im concerned about leaving a loose end with the CA...

 

"Dear CRA:

 

On my credit report, you are listing the following tradeline as Paid with a $0 Balance:

 

AFNI Company

Acct # 234566

 

I do not recall ever Paying this account, and as it is Paid from March 1, 2004 I request that it be Removed.

 

Please send me an updated report when the investigation is completed, as per the FCRA and my Rights

 

Please also be advised that this letter is not only a formal dispute, but a request that you cease and desist any and all telephone collection I require compliance with the terms and conditions of this letter within 30 days, or a complete withdrawal, in writing, of any claim.

 

In the event of noncompliance, I reserve the right to file charges and/or complaints with appropriate County, State & Federal authorities the BBB and State Bar associations for violations of the FDCPA, FCRA, and Federal and State statutes on fraudulent extortion .

 

I also hereby reserve my right to take private civil action against you to recover damages."

 

Me"

 

.. is not sending ANYTHING to the CA -ASKING- for Trouble? Or should i wait 30 Days form my CRA Disputes, INCLUDING Experian, ill find an Address for them to send all 3 at the same time to remove AFNI?

 

Thank You for the Info, i appreciate it and did my part of the homework, and remain confused about the finer points of what TO DO and NOT to do... (YEs this is my First Dispute too)

[Jen23514]

JosephC, I'm not the person to help you Maybe with all these questions, a separate thread would be best. TYVM.

[NeverQuietHere]

ttt

[Roland99]

sorry this response is late, I'm not on as much as I used to be.

 

if the question hasn't been answered, I would:

 

1. dispute with CRAs first. See what the results are.

2. if it comes back verified, then 1-2punch them.

 

Bumping with this question:

 

What if in the 1-2 punch the CRA comes back with "previously investigated"?

 

Wouldn't it be better to just do a 1-2 punch from the outset?

[avs30]

so, I've been reading this thread and many others, and thinking of using the 1-2 punch. I have an old collections debt from LVNV, that I vaguely remember being contacted about, but not for a few years.

 

Does it still make sense to use this approach? (i.e. send to CRA and CA at the same time, and use both the FCRA and FDCPA in the DV letter? One of the CRA's is reporting this as open, so I think I have them on that violation at least.

 

Thx!

 

sorry this response is late, I'm not on as much as I used to be.

 

if the question hasn't been answered, I would:

 

1. dispute with CRAs first. See what the results are.

2. if it comes back verified, then 1-2punch them.

 

 

Bumping with a question on this. I don't really understand why the CRA dispute would come first? Isn't a CRA dispute the second part of the 1-2 punch? What would be the difference between the first dispute and the second dispute? Also, if you send direct to the CA the DV with FDCPA and FCRA based "demands" in it, wouldn't their non-compliance be helpful to have before sending a CRA dispute?

 

For some reason, this is all getting messed in my head. I like this approach - like the specificity as I do believe it's necessary in the event of court. I just don't understand the timing and the benefit of disputing with the CRA first. Unless it's just for ease of use type thing - like use the jack attack method first and whatever is left, go to town on the DV process?

 

 

[Jen23514]

ttt

[clambert1273]

this is one of the best threads ever... [/end] LOL still one of my favorites

[etg2013]

I have a question that may have been addressed previously...but...her it goes. I've been dealing with 3 different creditors: BOA, Discover, and Elan for about 3 years now.

 

BOA has sent me to 2 collection agencies. The 1st agency returned it back to BOA. The 2nd agency sued me and then dismissed when confronted with a forged affidavit and not providing materials requested by the court. The debt is now back with BOA.

 

Discover sent me to 2 collection agencies. The 1st agency sued me and dismissed before trial. They sent the debt back to Discover. A 2nd agency sent me the warmed over legal threat and did not validate the debt. I sued them in court and agreed to dismiss when they returned the debt back to Discover.

 

Elan has sent me to collection 2 times but they both sent the debt back with a few letters.

 

None of the collection agencies ever reported to my credit, only the original creditors.

 

At this point I would like to remove these debts from the credit bureaus. I have disputed the information with the credit bureas to no avail. 25 days ago I sent certified 623 letters to BOA, Discover, and Elan as an attorney at the FTC suggest I do. I'm guessing I will hear back nothing as usual.

 

What is the next step when dealing with the original creditors? I have certified copies of everything I have sent for several years.

[Jen23514]

this is one of the best threads ever... [/end] LOL still one of my favorites

:wave: