Re-disputing an odd CA with after EXP Previously Investigated

[mrspock08]

I could use a bit of advice from some of the more experienced members here. I'm in the process of trying to remove a CA on my EXP report. TU & EQ have removed it without any difficulty, as it seems the CA isn't responding to the disputes at all. However, as usual, Experian is claiming it was Previously Investigated and refusing to do anything with it. According to EXP I disputed it in early 2012, which I probably did, but don't remember.

 

So, fast forward to now. I disputed a couple of items on my EXP report in late Feb, and received the PI letter on March 28th. I've received the results of my other disputes (all removed) and verified that as of today this TL hasn't been removed or changed/updated at all. I've read through the PI threads, and I'm getting ready to send out a new dispute per one of them, with the plan of both hoping the new dispute gets them to actually reinvestigate (so the TL can get removed when the CA ignores the request) as well as building evidence for a CFPB complaint or court if I end up having to go that route.

 

However, I'd like some advice on what reasons to use for redisputing this TL, because the way it's reporting seems very odd to me. I've pasted the listing below (w/ personal info removed), but in short it's showing just the CA name & date, with no data at all. No account type, status, balances, nothing. Normally I'd do a jack attack and dispute the incorrect dates, balances, account type, status, credit limit, etc but since this just has NA for everything I wasn't sure if that's still the way to go, or if there might be some better approach for this.

 

Thanks in advance for anyone who offers thoughts!

 

TROJAN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Address:

4410 CERRITOS AVE

LOS ALAMITOS, CA 90720

(714) 220-6716

Account Number: *************

Original Creditor: DR. MICHAEL **********

Address Identification Number: ***************

Status: NO STATUS.

Status Details: This item w as updated from our processing of your dispute in Feb 2012.

Date Opened:

03/2010

Reported Since:

04/2010

Date of Status:

04/2010

Last Reported:

NA

Type:

NA

Terms:

1 Months

Monthly Payment:

NA

Responsibility:

Individual

Credit Limit/Original Amount:

NA

High Balance:

NA

Recent Balance:

NA

Recent Payment:

NA

[ICANHASMUNY?]

sounds like a medical billing ; have you read WhyChat's Hippa procedure on medical collection reporting?