NY AG reaches agreement with CRA's on disputed items

[ICANHASMUNY?]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/10/business/big-credit-reporting-agencies-to-overhaul-error-fixing-process.html?_r=0

 

 

 

 

The nation’s giant credit reporting agencies — which keep records on more than 200 million individuals and influence their ability to obtain credit — have agreed to overhaul their approach to fixing errors and their treatment of medical debts on consumers’ reports.

 

Eric T. Schneiderman, the New York State attorney general, announced Monday that his office had reached a sweeping settlement with the agencies, affecting consumers nationwide, which was prompted by an investigation that began in 2012.

 

 

Even though consumers are entitled to dispute any inaccurate information in their credit reports, the entire process has been criticized by consumer advocates for years: The bureaus often outsource thousands of disputes daily to workers overseas who generally are told to translate the problem into a two- or three-digit code that is fed into a computer; the code and any documentation are sent to the credito

 

If the creditor verifies the information, no further investigation takes place.

 

Now, those automatic rejections will no longer be tolerated. And specially trained employees will have to review all supporting documentation submitted by consumers involving mixed credit files — in which a consumers’ file is blended with another person’s report — fraud or identity theft.

 

Requiring the credit bureaus to wait 180 days to list any delinquent medical debt on credit reports is another victory for consumers. Given the complex way in which medical bills are charged and paid, it is not uncommon for delays in payment to tarnish credit reports, often without consumers’ knowledge

[Bannister]

Here's the full agreement: http://www.capitalnewyork.com/sites/default/files/Agreement%20for%20execution%20v2.pdf

[Bannister]

I read all 45 pages and I'm kinda bummed the NYS attorney General did not address Experian's blatant misinterpretation of the NYS 5 year exclusion rule....seems like a missed opportunity.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Bannister

[ICANHASMUNY?]

yeah, well... it's well settled law that the federal FCRA preempts any state law on credit reporting

 

it's been decided in federal appeals court - it would take an act of congress to overturn it.

[GR8WhiTE]

I wonder when this goes into effect.

 

So, if you have a medical bill that your insurance covered but the doctor is still saying you owe his/her office $100 (and you don't pay), that unpaid $100 wont go on your file?

[ICANHASMUNY?]

I wonder when this goes into effect.

 

So, if you have a medical bill that your insurance covered but the doctor is still saying you owe his/her office $100 (and you don't pay), that unpaid $100 wont go on your file?

 

not for 180 days. - 6 months

 

and if it is subsequently paid by insurance, it's removed from your report as a collection

[GR8WhiTE]

 

I wonder when this goes into effect.

 

So, if you have a medical bill that your insurance covered but the doctor is still saying you owe his/her office $100 (and you don't pay), that unpaid $100 wont go on your file?

 

not for 180 days. - 6 months

 

and if it is subsequently paid by insurance, it's removed from your report as a collection

 

The reason I bring it up is because my father currently has (2) Medical Collections. His insurance paid both of those. When he got invoiced by both of those doctors offices for an additional $100 each, he refused to pay it (because he doesn't care about his credit anyway). In a situation like this, will they be removed from his file? I'll be honest, outside of those his credit is pretty decent.

[ICANHASMUNY?]

You should start a new thread on that . if it was overbilling and the doctor is in network with set rates, file a complaint with the insurance about the doctor overcharging / balance billing.

[GR8WhiTE]

You should start a new thread on that . if it was overbilling and the doctor is in network with set rates, file a complaint with the insurance about the doctor overcharging / balance billing.

I'll try to look into that. These things have been on his credit for a year already.

[Bannister]

Crap they took the document down. I'm glad I read it last night. Medical changes and tickets/ fines reporting doesn't start for 18months as I recall.

[ICANHASMUNY?]

Crap they took the document down. I'm glad I read it last night. Medical changes and tickets/ fines reporting doesn't start for 18months as I recall.

 

here's the bulk of it - I'm sure someone will post it again and we can grab the direct link; next time download the PDF and we can post it in the Laws, laws, laws forum

 

- it's a public settlement by a government agency, it should be in the public domain.

 

http://www.ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-announces-groundbreaking-consumer-protection-settlement-three-national

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/credit-reporting-giants-agree-to-overhaul-1425873884

[kimbachelle]

ICAN, I grabbed the pdf on my phone last night. If I can help, just let me know what to do with it!

[ICANHASMUNY?]

ICAN, I grabbed the pdf on my phone last night. If I can help, just let me know what to do with it!

 

email it to Admin@Creditboards.com

[ICANHASMUNY?]

Article

 

Big 3 clean up act, but credit agencies won't win any love

 

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/consumer/Credit-agencies-partly-clean-up-act.html

[GR8WhiTE]

Article

 

Big 3 clean up act, but credit agencies won't win any love

 

 

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/consumer/Credit-agencies-partly-clean-up-act.html

This is great because i am sick and tired of dealing with all the "verified" results. When does all of this go into effect ICAN?

[ICANHASMUNY?]

breeze has it now, will post the exact settlement here.

 

 

Agreement for execution v2.pdf

[ICANHASMUNY?]

 

Article

 

Big 3 clean up act, but credit agencies won't win any love

 

 

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/consumer/Credit-agencies-partly-clean-up-act.html

This is great because i am sick and tired of dealing with all the "verified" results. When does all of this go into effect ICAN?

 

 

“Effective Date” shall mean the date on which this Agreement is signed and fully executed by all parties hereto.

 

which was when the agreement was announce a few days ago - this is all to be completed within 3 years + 90 days.

 

1. Phase 1: The CRAs shall complete the tasks in Phase 1 within six (6) months of the Effective Date.

 

Phase 1 Initiatives

Section III.A.2 (announce retirement of Metro 1 data reporting format).

Section III.A.4.b (inform furnishers of date of birth reporting requirement for newly

opened accounts).

Section III.B.1.a–b (eliminate conditions for accepting disputes).

Section III.B.4.b (evaluate consumer dispute analytics).

Section III.B.6.b (analyze data on consumer disputes available through e-OSCAR).

Section III.B.7.a (implement procedures to identify and process disputes for escalated

handling).

Section III.B.8.a (Supporting Dispute Documentation review by CRAs).

Section III.C.2 (Promoting AnnualCreditReport.com on CRAs’ landing webpages)

Section III.D (develop and begin rollout of the PSA Campaign).

Section III.E.1–3 (National Credit Reporting Working Group on furnisher monitoring).

 

2. Phase 2: The CRAs shall complete the tasks in Phase 2 within eighteen (18) months of the Effective Date.

 

Section III.A.1.a–d (various Collection Furnisher initiatives).

Section III.A.3.b. (instruct Collection Furnishers on the use of the Metro 2 comment codes for “paid by insurance” and “being paid by insurance”).

Section III.A.5.a (Illegal Lender identification initiative).

Section III.B.3.a (various initiatives relating to the sharing of, obligations upon receipt of, and reporting of Disputed Deceased Indicators).

Section III.B.3.b (various initiatives relating to the sharing of, obligations upon receipt of, and education to consumers regarding Death Notices and other information relating to deceased consumers).

Section III.B.3.c.iii (develop guidelines and procedures for communicating with consumers about mixed files and create educational content about mixed files generally).

Section III.B.5 (provide consumer right to request one additional free annual credit report disclosure during the twelve-month period following a change to the consumer’s file).

Section III.B.6.a (update terms of use agreed to by furnishers using e-OSCAR, as well as the ACDV and AUD certifications made by furnishers through e-OSCAR).

Section III.B.7.d (update CRAs’ websites and AnnualCreditReport.com with educational material regarding disputes that qualify for escalated handling).

Section III.C.1.a (initiatives relating to enhancing the consumer experience on AnnualCreditReport.com).

Section III.C.1.b (various initiatives relating to enhancing CRAs’ websites and AnnualCreditReport.com with educational material for consumers regarding the dispute process).

Section III.E.4.b (Working Group review of CRAs’ policies and procedures pertaining todata accuracy and furnishers in order to identify potential best practices).

 

3. Phase 3: The CRAs shall complete the tasks in Phase 3 by the Completion Date.

 

Phase 3 Initiatives

Section III.A.1.e (additional Collection Furnisher initiatives).

Section III.A.2 (migrate to Metro 2 data reporting format for all furnishers; no longer

accept Metro 1 data reporting format).

Section III.A.3.a, 3.c (medical debt collection initiatives relating to preventing the

reporting of and potential suppression of certain medical debt data).

Section III.A.4.a (prohibit furnishers from reporting authorized users without a date of

birth for new accounts).

Section III.A.5.b (additional Illegal Lender initiative).

Section III.A.6–7 (establish new standards regarding indicative information and public records).

Section III.B.2 (initiative relating to Repeat Disputes).

Section III.B.3.c–c.ii (various initiatives relating to mixed files).

Section III.B.4.a (provide standardized notices following reinvestigation of dispute).

Section III.E.4.a (develop and review reports and metrics analyzing key furnisher data).

Section III.E.5.a–b (implement policies relating to furnisher monitoring).

 

[mizliz1011]

I read all 45 pages and I'm kinda bummed the NYS attorney General did not address Experian's blatant misinterpretation of the NYS 5 year exclusion rule....seems like a missed opportunity.

I agree... tried to get everyone here from NY to write letters but had little response. Thank you for mentioning this.

[ICANHASMUNY?]

yeah, well... it's well settled law that the federal FCRA preempts any state law on credit reporting

 

it's been decided in federal appeals court - it would take an act of congress to overturn it.

 

 

 

I read all 45 pages and I'm kinda bummed the NYS attorney General did not address Experian's blatant misinterpretation of the NYS 5 year exclusion rule....seems like a missed opportunity.

I agree... tried to get everyone here from NY to write letters but had little response. Thank you for mentioning this.

 

 

Writing the AG won't do any good - he can't preempt federal law with state laws on the FCRA.

 

He can, and has gone after the CRA's for not complying with FCRA , which is what he's done here.

 

All the terms in the settlement accurately reflect the FCRA - he's taken the CRA's to task with complying to the letter and intent of the FCRA,

 

the CRA's have been skating around it for years,

[tmcgill]

. . . 'Writing the AG won't do any good - he can't preempt federal law with state laws on the FCRA.'

 

For the record, the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution says that federal law rules whenever there is a conflict between state and federal legislation.

[Bannister]

For the record, there is no conflict between the FCRA and NY's 5 year exclusion rule.

 

The FCRA says derogs can remain UP TO 7 years, not must remain 7 years. NY says paid collections and charge offs and judgments MUST be removed in 5 years.

[ICANHASMUNY?]

For the record, there is no conflict between the FCRA and NY's 5 year exclusion rule.

 

The FCRA says derogs can remain UP TO 7 years, not must remain 7 years. NY says paid collections and charge offs and judgments MUST be removed in 5 years.

 

? which section is that states " up to" ?

 

it states,

 

§ 605. Requirements relating to information contained in consumer reports [15 U.S.C. §1681c]

 

(a) Information excluded from consumer reports.

 

Except as authorized under subsection ( of this section, no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information:

 

(1) Cases under title 11 [united States Code] or under the Bankruptcy Act that, from the date of entry of the order for relief or the date of adjudication, as the case may be, antedate the report by more than 10 years.

 

The reporting periods have been lengthened for certain adverse information pertaining to U.S. Government insured or guaranteed student loans, or pertaining to national direct student loans. See sections 430A(f) and

463©(3) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, 20 U.S.C. 1080a(f) and 20 U.S.C. 1087cc©(3), respectively. This provision, added in September 1996, should read “paragraphs (4) and (5)....” Prior Section 605(a)(6)

was amended and re-designated as Section 605(a)(5) in November 1998. The current Section 605(a)(6), added in December 2003 and now containing no reference to any 7-year period, is obviously inapplicable.

 

(2) Civil suits, civil judgments, and records of arrest that from date of entry, antedate the report by more than seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period.

(3) Paid tax liens which, from date of payment, antedate the report by more than seven years.

(4) Accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss which antedate the report by more than seven years.

(5) Any other adverse item of information, other than records of convictions of crimes which antedates the report by more than seven years.

 

 

 

antedate [v. an-ti-deyt, an-ti-deyt; n. an-ti-deyt]

1. to be of older date than; precede in time: "The Peruvian empire antedates the Mexican empire."

2. predate (def 1).

3. to assign to an earlier date: "to antedate a historical event"

[shadowj]

Will this human interaction make it harder to get bad items deleted? Any thoughts on this?

[ICANHASMUNY?]

I'm really not sure.

 

this isn't changing the FCRA , it's just reinforcing it, making the CRA's stay to the letter and intent of the law.

 

I suppose that the disputes will get harder if you don't have supporting documentation to prove the furnisher wrong.

 

mind you , this is all going to take place over the next few years, 3 years 9 months - so if you have stuff to dispute and it's beyond the SOL for legal action,

 

I suggest everyone start hopping to it.

[tmcgill]

FYI: Just wanted to clarify federal vs. state law.

 

I think the medical debt reporting is a change . . . What do you think about it?

Edited March 16, 2015 by tmcgill