31 State AG's force the CRA's to Change thier ways.

[ICANHASMUNY?]

In addition to Ohio and Nevada, states included in the settlement are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin.

 

The multi-state settlement comes nearly three months after New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced a similar agreement with the same CRAs.

 

 

http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Media/News-Releases/May-2015/Attorney-General-DeWine-Announces-Major-National-S

 

 

Higher standards for data furnishers:

 

• The credit reporting agencies must maintain information about problem data furnishers and provide a list of those furnishers to the states upon request.
• The credit reporting agencies and data furnishers must use a better, more detailed system to share data

.
Limits to direct-to-consumer marketing:

 

• The credit reporting agencies cannot market credit monitoring services to a consumer during a dispute phone call until the dispute portion of the call has ended.
• The credit reporting agencies must tell consumers that purchasing a product is not a requirement for disputing information on their credits reports.

 

Added protections for consumers who dispute credit reporting information:

 

• The credit reporting agencies must implement an escalated process for handling complicated disputes, such as those involving identity theft, fraud, or mixed files (in which one consumer’s information is mixed with another’s).
• Each credit reporting agency must notify the other agencies if it finds a mixed file.
• The credit reporting agencies must send a consumer’s supporting documents to the data furnisher. (The credit reporting agencies implemented this change after the attorneys general initiated their investigation and raised the concern that the pertinent complaint documents were not being sent to the furnishers.)
• Consumers may obtain one additional free credit report in a 12-month period if they dispute information on their credit report and a change is made as a result of the dispute.

 

Limits to certain information that can be added to a consumer’s credit report:

 

• The credit reporting agencies are generally prohibited from adding information about fines and tickets to credit reports.
• The credit reporting agencies cannot place medical debt on a credit report until 180 days after the account is reported to the credit reporting agency, which gives consumers time to work out issues with their insurance companies.
• The credit reporting agencies must require debt collectors to provide the original creditor’s name and information about the debt before the debt information can be added to a credit report.

 

Additional consumer education:

• The credit reporting agencies must tell consumers how they can further dispute the outcome of an investigation into a dispute, such as by filing a complaint with other agencies.
• Each credit reporting agency must provide a link to its online dispute website on the website www.annualcreditreport.com, and the credit reporting agency’s dispute website must be free of ads and any marketing offers.

 

The changes required under the settlement will be implemented in three phases to allow the credit reporting agencies to update their IT systems and procedures with data furnishers. All changes must be completed by three years and 90 days following the settlement’s effective date.

[ICANHASMUNY?]

full text

 

http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/News-Releases/Consumer-Protection/2015-05-20-CRAs-AVC.aspx

[NoPresetSnarkLimit]

$6 million settlement spread across 31 states to admit no responsibility for any violations. Bet that sounded like an awesome deal to EQ, EX, TU.

Thinking revenue in the billions at least per each agency, sweetheart deal.

[TampaDude]

In addition to Ohio and Nevada, states included in the settlement are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin.

 

The multi-state settlement comes nearly three months after New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced a similar agreement with the same CRAs.

 

 

http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Media/News-Releases/May-2015/Attorney-General-DeWine-Announces-Major-National-S

 

 

Higher standards for data furnishers:

 

• The credit reporting agencies must maintain information about problem data furnishers and provide a list of those furnishers to the states upon request.

• The credit reporting agencies and data furnishers must use a better, more detailed system to share data

.

Limits to direct-to-consumer marketing:

 

• The credit reporting agencies cannot market credit monitoring services to a consumer during a dispute phone call until the dispute portion of the call has ended.

• The credit reporting agencies must tell consumers that purchasing a product is not a requirement for disputing information on their credits reports.

 

Added protections for consumers who dispute credit reporting information:

 

• The credit reporting agencies must implement an escalated process for handling complicated disputes, such as those involving identity theft, fraud, or mixed files (in which one consumer’s information is mixed with another’s).

• Each credit reporting agency must notify the other agencies if it finds a mixed file.

• The credit reporting agencies must send a consumer’s supporting documents to the data furnisher. (The credit reporting agencies implemented this change after the attorneys general initiated their investigation and raised the concern that the pertinent complaint documents were not being sent to the furnishers.)

• Consumers may obtain one additional free credit report in a 12-month period if they dispute information on their credit report and a change is made as a result of the dispute.

 

Limits to certain information that can be added to a consumer’s credit report:

 

• The credit reporting agencies are generally prohibited from adding information about fines and tickets to credit reports.

• The credit reporting agencies cannot place medical debt on a credit report until 180 days after the account is reported to the credit reporting agency, which gives consumers time to work out issues with their insurance companies.

• The credit reporting agencies must require debt collectors to provide the original creditor’s name and information about the debt before the debt information can be added to a credit report.

 

Additional consumer education:

• The credit reporting agencies must tell consumers how they can further dispute the outcome of an investigation into a dispute, such as by filing a complaint with other agencies.

• Each credit reporting agency must provide a link to its online dispute website on the website www.annualcreditreport.com, and the credit reporting agency’s dispute website must be free of ads and any marketing offers.

 

The changes required under the settlement will be implemented in three phases to allow the credit reporting agencies to update their IT systems and procedures with data furnishers. All changes must be completed by three years and 90 days following the settlement’s effective date.

 

Good stuff!

[ICANHASMUNY?]

yeah, all the stuff they should be doing in the first place.....

[Guest]

What about the States not partaking in this settlement?

[ICANHASMUNY?]

I doubt the CRA's are going to have different procedures for different states.

 

that's why the CRA's pushed the FCRA to be exempt from state law credit reporting

 

the AG's have them on state business laws for unfair and deceptive practices

[Second Chances]

In addition to Ohio and Nevada, states included in the settlement are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin.

 

The multi-state settlement comes nearly three months after New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced a similar agreement with the same CRAs.

 

 

http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Media/News-Releases/May-2015/Attorney-General-DeWine-Announces-Major-National-S

 

 

Higher standards for data furnishers:

 

• The credit reporting agencies must maintain information about problem data furnishers and provide a list of those furnishers to the states upon request.

• The credit reporting agencies and data furnishers must use a better, more detailed system to share data

.

Limits to direct-to-consumer marketing:

 

• The credit reporting agencies cannot market credit monitoring services to a consumer during a dispute phone call until the dispute portion of the call has ended.

• The credit reporting agencies must tell consumers that purchasing a product is not a requirement for disputing information on their credits reports.

 

Added protections for consumers who dispute credit reporting information:

 

• The credit reporting agencies must implement an escalated process for handling complicated disputes, such as those involving identity theft, fraud, or mixed files (in which one consumer’s information is mixed with another’s).

• Each credit reporting agency must notify the other agencies if it finds a mixed file.

• The credit reporting agencies must send a consumer’s supporting documents to the data furnisher. (The credit reporting agencies implemented this change after the attorneys general initiated their investigation and raised the concern that the pertinent complaint documents were not being sent to the furnishers.)

• Consumers may obtain one additional free credit report in a 12-month period if they dispute information on their credit report and a change is made as a result of the dispute.

 

Limits to certain information that can be added to a consumer’s credit report:

 

• The credit reporting agencies are generally prohibited from adding information about fines and tickets to credit reports.

• The credit reporting agencies cannot place medical debt on a credit report until 180 days after the account is reported to the credit reporting agency, which gives consumers time to work out issues with their insurance companies.

• The credit reporting agencies must require debt collectors to provide the original creditor’s name and information about the debt before the debt information can be added to a credit report.

 

Additional consumer education:

• The credit reporting agencies must tell consumers how they can further dispute the outcome of an investigation into a dispute, such as by filing a complaint with other agencies.

• Each credit reporting agency must provide a link to its online dispute website on the website www.annualcreditreport.com, and the credit reporting agency’s dispute website must be free of ads and any marketing offers.

 

The changes required under the settlement will be implemented in three phases to allow the credit reporting agencies to update their IT systems and procedures with data furnishers. All changes must be completed by three years and 90 days following the settlement’s effective date.

 

Does this have any retro effect? Both of my paid CAs are medical ones that definitely appeared before the 180 day period, while I was still arguing with the insurance company.

 

Also, TU, EX, and EQ have pitched their credit monitoring services to me while I was dealing with my id theft issues, before we finished with the actual reason I called.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Second Chances

[TampaDude]

yeah, all the stuff they should be doing in the first place.....

 

Yup...but at least they're actually doing it now.

[ICANHASMUNY?]

 

yeah, all the stuff they should be doing in the first place.....

 

Yup...but at least they're actually doing it now.

 

 

Not really, they have 3 years to implement.

[ICANHASMUNY?]

 

In addition to Ohio and Nevada, states included in the settlement are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin.

 

The multi-state settlement comes nearly three months after New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced a similar agreement with the same CRAs.

 

 

http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Media/News-Releases/May-2015/Attorney-General-DeWine-Announces-Major-National-S

 

 

Higher standards for data furnishers:

 

• The credit reporting agencies must maintain information about problem data furnishers and provide a list of those furnishers to the states upon request.

• The credit reporting agencies and data furnishers must use a better, more detailed system to share data

.

Limits to direct-to-consumer marketing:

 

• The credit reporting agencies cannot market credit monitoring services to a consumer during a dispute phone call until the dispute portion of the call has ended.

• The credit reporting agencies must tell consumers that purchasing a product is not a requirement for disputing information on their credits reports.

 

Added protections for consumers who dispute credit reporting information:

 

• The credit reporting agencies must implement an escalated process for handling complicated disputes, such as those involving identity theft, fraud, or mixed files (in which one consumer’s information is mixed with another’s).

• Each credit reporting agency must notify the other agencies if it finds a mixed file.

• The credit reporting agencies must send a consumer’s supporting documents to the data furnisher. (The credit reporting agencies implemented this change after the attorneys general initiated their investigation and raised the concern that the pertinent complaint documents were not being sent to the furnishers.)

• Consumers may obtain one additional free credit report in a 12-month period if they dispute information on their credit report and a change is made as a result of the dispute.

 

Limits to certain information that can be added to a consumer’s credit report:

 

• The credit reporting agencies are generally prohibited from adding information about fines and tickets to credit reports.

• The credit reporting agencies cannot place medical debt on a credit report until 180 days after the account is reported to the credit reporting agency, which gives consumers time to work out issues with their insurance companies.

• The credit reporting agencies must require debt collectors to provide the original creditor’s name and information about the debt before the debt information can be added to a credit report.

 

Additional consumer education:

• The credit reporting agencies must tell consumers how they can further dispute the outcome of an investigation into a dispute, such as by filing a complaint with other agencies.

• Each credit reporting agency must provide a link to its online dispute website on the website www.annualcreditreport.com, and the credit reporting agency’s dispute website must be free of ads and any marketing offers.

 

The changes required under the settlement will be implemented in three phases to allow the credit reporting agencies to update their IT systems and procedures with data furnishers. All changes must be completed by three years and 90 days following the settlement’s effective date.

 

Does this have any retro effect? Both of my paid CAs are medical ones that definitely appeared before the 180 day period, while I was still arguing with the insurance company.

 

Also, TU, EX, and EQ have pitched their credit monitoring services to me while I was dealing with my id theft issues, before we finished with the actual reason I called.

 

Probably not, but you can file a complaint with the CFPB - I'm sure this type of complaint to the State AG's and the CFPB is what's driving the change.

 

just argue that there was an insurance dispute, no fault of yours that started the issue, and that you would like these deleted

[Guest]

Has Experian found a way to obfuscate implementation yet?

[ICANHASMUNY?]

https://www.credittime2000.com/system/news_attachments/attachments/1/original/Collection_and_Debt_Purchasers_Furnisher_Data_Reporting_and_Process_Requirement_Changes.pdf?1463070371

 

 

https://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2016/creditletter.pdf