How to proceed after furnishing proof of payment but creditor says validated late?

[Menta33]

I'm helping a friend with their credit report that includes an auto loan from Bank of America that shows a 30 day late from 2011 as well as a 30 day and 60 day from 2012. He has proof that he was not 30 days late in 2011 in the form of a cancelled check that he sent early for the month in question. He submitted a copy of the check in disputes about the 30 day late from 2011 to TransUnion and Equifax so far. After hearing back from TransUnion, he sent a 623 letter to BofA stating:

 

This letter hereby gives you notice that the above account, as it is being reported by Bank of

America on my credit reports, is disputed for lack of completeness and/or accuracy.

 

On August 25, 2014 I disputed this account on TransUnion where it incorrectly reports a 30-day

late on this account for Month 2011. In my dispute I provided proof that this was in error in the

form of my cancelled check #XXXX that clearly states that check was my Month 2011 payment in

the amount of $XXX.XX that I sent early (not late) in Prior Month 2011.

 

I was shocked to receive a response from TransUnion dated September 23, 2014 indicating that the

result of my reinvestigation. This Trans Union response did not correct the error, the 30-day late

from Month 2011, that remains in my TransUnion report as verified.

 

I now demand under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) Section 623 that you perform an

investigation since you are the data furnisher of this information. In this letter, I once again provide

proof that I was not late with that payment by way of my cancelled check.

 

If you are unable to perform a reasonable investigation or are unable to locate the necessary

documents to investigate my dispute then you are required by the FCRA to remove the negative

information from my credit reports, which can also include complete removal of the account

altogether.

 

If you are able to conduct a proper investigation of the records for this account and identify the

information being incorrectly reported, please update the information being reported on my credit

reports to reflect accurate information found during your investigation.

 

Additionally, I am also requesting that you send me a detailed explanation of the methods used and

a description of the records reviewed when you conduct your investigation; including, but not

limited to, sending a copy of that information to me so that I can conduct my own investigation into

the accuracy of your records and verify that a reasonable investigation was completed.

 

Please be advised that I am also commencing a Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CPFB)

complaint given that I supplied proof of the error, yet the error remains.

Their response was underwhelming and dated the same day their received my letter:

 

Your inquiry regarding the credit bureau reporting for the above

referenced account was received.

 

What you need to know

After reviewing the account information, we've validated that all information being

reported on the account is accurate. As a result, the reported information will not be

changed.

I also submitted a CPFB complaint:

 

I disputed an inaccurate item on my credit report from Bank of America account number XXXXX that incorrectly states a 30 day late payment in Month 2011. I provided a cancelled check, #XXXX which clearly shows it was for this very payment. Handwritten in two locations on this check are specific instructions that it was for the Month 2011 auto loan payment, for early payment in fact. Instead of removing the error, TransUnion merely deleted some history for the account but failed to remove the incorrect 30 day late payment of Month] 2011 which was the point of the dispute and which has been proven to be false with the evidence provided.

To which I received the response:

 

We have reviewed your complaint along with the information you previously provided regarding this issue. On 09-03-2014, Bank of America #XXXX was notified of your dispute. In response to the investigation, the disputed information was verified or updated accordingly and the results were forwarded to you for review. We were unable to accept the documents you provided with your complaint. The document you provided was unacceptable to update Bank of America # XXXX because the document did not explain what information should be updated. However, your letter and all documentation provided by you were sent to the creditor for review. In response to the investigation, Bank of America # XXXX verified the account information as accurately reported.

To which I responded:

 

I see in the response the following: "We were unable to accept the documents you provided with your complaint. The document you provided was unacceptable to update Bank of America # XXXX because the document did not explain what information should be updated."

The attachment "TransUnion Dispute 2014-08-25.pdf (1.11 MB)" includes on approximately page 2 a copy cancelled check proving that the payment was not late for Month 2011. Please submit this proof that they are in error, and that the false late payment attributed to me should be removed from all credit reports.

I'm planning to send a second letter to BofA that basically says how could you conduct an investigation in a single day and what possible grounds do you have to say you are reporting correctly when I supplied proof that I made my Month 2011 payment? Additionally I will include Equifax in the letter this time since I've heard back from Equifax now.

 

Any suggestions?

[funkiehouse]

Who did you file the CFPB complaint on, BOA?

 

If its a reporting issue you may also need to send separate CFPBs about the CRAs.

[Menta33]

Who did you file the CFPB complaint on, BOA?

 

If its a reporting issue you may also need to send separate CFPBs about the CRAs.

I filled one complaint against both BofA and CRA (TransUnion). Will now file additional complaints specifically about the CRAs (TU and EQ so far). Doing first dispute with Innovis and Experian now too.

[funkiehouse]

Not that this is any excuse for them, but always remember in 623s to not only list whats wrong but also tell them how it should be reported. Spell it out for them like you would a child.

 

"The 30 day late that is being reported for this account on Month 2011 is incorrect. I have attached a copy of the check that was used to pay for Month 2011's payment so you can review it as a part of your investigation. The check was dated Month 00, 2011 and was accepted by BOA on Month 00, 2011 as payment for this account, which had a scheduled due date of Month 00, 2011. After your investigation and review of the documents I provided, please correct the reporting on all of my consumer files to show that Month 2011 was an on time payment."

Edited December 18, 2014 by funkiehouse

[Mike2006]

OP, just a thought,

 

I have had issues in the past with early auto payments. As it seems, some creditors will apply payments made outside of their normal billing cycle toward the principle balance only and not count the payment toward the next payment due. I have had to call on many of occasions to have the creditor apply my mid cycle payments toward the monthly payment that was due or the monthly payment would be considered late.

 

I understand that there was indications made on the check that the payment was for the following monthly payment. However, as was in my case, the creditor explained that the payment receiving process was automated and the computer only reads the payment portion of the check.

 

I know this doesn't help your situation, but it might be why BofA thinks the payment was late even though they received the check.

[funkiehouse]

OP, just a thought,

 

I have had issues in the past with early auto payments. As it seems, some creditors will apply payments made outside of their normal billing cycle toward the principle balance only and not count the payment toward the next payment due. I have had to call on many of occasions to have the creditor apply my mid cycle payments toward the monthly payment that was due or the monthly payment would be considered late.

 

I understand that there was indications made on the check that the payment was for the following monthly payment. However, as was in my case, the creditor explained that the payment receiving process was automated and the computer only reads the payment portion of the check.

 

I know this doesn't help your situation, but it might be why BofA thinks the payment was late even though they received the check.

 

I agree that this can happen but it's an internal issue and shouldn't go against you if you clearly write what its for on the check. Someone has to open the envelope and see what's in it. This shouldn't be allowed as an excuse for incorrect reporting.

[Mike2006]

 

OP, just a thought,

 

I have had issues in the past with early auto payments. As it seems, some creditors will apply payments made outside of their normal billing cycle toward the principle balance only and not count the payment toward the next payment due. I have had to call on many of occasions to have the creditor apply my mid cycle payments toward the monthly payment that was due or the monthly payment would be considered late.

 

I understand that there was indications made on the check that the payment was for the following monthly payment. However, as was in my case, the creditor explained that the payment receiving process was automated and the computer only reads the payment portion of the check.

 

I know this doesn't help your situation, but it might be why BofA thinks the payment was late even though they received the check.

 

I agree that this can happen but it's an internal issue and shouldn't go against you if you clearly write what its for on the check. Someone has to open the envelope and see what's in it. This shouldn't be allowed as an excuse for incorrect reporting.

 

[mk_378]

Request a payment history printout from BOA. If it shows the check being applied as extra principal the month before, explain that that is not what was supposed to happen and they shouldn't count it as being late the next month.

 

But I'm not sure it's worth fighting one old 30 day when there are worse lates (more recent and more days, and accurate) still on the account.

[Menta33]

But I'm not sure it's worth fighting one old 30 day when there are worse lates (more recent and more days, and accurate) still on the account.

Fighting the old one in the hopes we might get deletion of whole account.