Jump to content

StantheMan

Are the credit bureau's manned?

Recommended Posts

Not that anyone would take advantage of it but are credit disputes being manually processed when mailed in?¬†ūüėČ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends,

If you mail it with a signature required at delivery it will be routed to a different department for "NON consumer" correspondence.

If the letter can be automatically scanned and "read" by the CRA computer system then it will be routed to an offshore CSR .

If it can NOT be scanned and "read" by their automated system it will then be read by a Stateside CSR. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scanners can read pretty much anything color, paper, penmanship, etc. When a letter triggers a manual entry, you are depending on a $11.20 an hour GED holder to "properly" enter your dispute using an interface that looks a lot like the same online system used by consumers. The functionality of the interface is the same. Meaning, there is nothing special with a hand-entered dispute by a CRA employee... in fact you might end up worse off than the scanners if the GED-keyboard jockey fat fingers your information.

 

The reason to use formal, customized-to-you-situation LETTERS via written disputes instead of online is not about the means by which the dispute is entered but to be able to hold a CRA's feet to the fire if your dispute is not handled properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are probably correct about the scanners, however the main reason for the system I developed for disputing has it's basic merit in making it more difficult to "code" the dispute. In addition, including a copy of the report counts as "documentation" and requires a higher level of investigation. Copying the dispute letter and the documentation into the system and making it difficult to automatically "code" the dispute generally prevents it from being outsourced by Eq and TU and is not time/cost effective for any of the CRAs.

Here is how it really works;

https://www.nclc.org/images/pdf/credit_reports/credit_reports_automated_injustice_report.pdf

 

Internet disputes involve even more automation, as there is usually no
involvement of the credit bureau’s personnel in the dispute process. The internet dispute
forms provide a list of on-line check-boxes to select as the basis for the dispute. The
check-box selected by the consumer is matched to one of the pick-list ACDV dispute
codes and automatically sent to the furnisher without any human intervention. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am unsure if there are any hard and fast answers to this question. The system is rigged against consumers no matter which way you send your disputes, IMO. Nevertheless, I sent in a round of disputes to all 4 credit bureaus today via certified mail.

 

In my experience, they usually are taking most of the 30 days to investigate and respond at TransUnion, Innovis, and definitely at Equifax. Experian is another matter, but that's because they do the least amount of "investigation" of any of these credit bureaus.

 

My thinking in sending disputes right now is that there may be a good chance of a deletion or a violation if the bureaus are short staffed or shut down. The creditors may also be facing a short staffing situation or may be closed entirely, which makes it much more unlikely that they can respond to a dispute. 

 

It's definitely a roll of the dice, but it's definitely worth the postage to me to give it a shot. I have been working on a few accounts over the past year. I have had the most success with TransUnion. Equifax doesn't know their head from their arse, Innovis has fewer data fields to dispute, and Experian will not budge one iota on just about anything I have disputed. Experian also likes to play games with their response letters, much more than any of the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RehabbingANDBlabbing said:

The creditors may also be facing a short staffing situation or may be closed entirely, which makes it much more unlikely that they can respond to a dispute. 

The creditors have the ability to automate their dispute responses from the credit reporting agencies without an actual person touching, reading, or seeing any submitted dispute.  I'm sure if they become short staffed in their e-oscar system they will simply update their auto-responders in compensation for the shortage of staff.

I hope your disputes work well in your favor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the key to a successful dispute is to make it difficult for the CRAs to "code" the disputes. PLUS,in order for the disputes to be transmitted to outsourced CSRs the "letter" must be COMPLETELY scannable. I appreciate "Hegomony"'s comment however IMO the more difficult the process to input the data the better the chance for an automatic deletion. PLUS, when FACTA was first enacted the CRAs obtained a "waiver" of the time period for replying for communication from a "non-consumer" such as a CRO or a lawyer. They have an agreement that ALL mail that must be signed for is arbitrarily classified as NOT coming from a consumer and therefore is not subject to the consumer time limit for response. This is why I suggest mailing via priority mail with a tracking # and NO signature required. I have not as yet,  seen a Court case deny the proof of mailing of any documents without a signature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange. I was not arguing. I was merely trying to answer the OP's question based on knowledge as someone who has toured a major CRA's facilities and know people who oversea that part of its operations. I did not say not to try to circumvent the process, in fact I believe I said "The reason to use formal, customized-to-you-situation LETTERS via written disputes instead of online is not about the means by which the dispute is entered but to be able to hold a CRA's feet to the fire if your dispute is not handled properly." Go ahead, report this post too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hegemony:   I haven't been aware of anyone reporting any of your posts.  Why Chat was not disrespecting your post nor your advice.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/24/2020 at 10:00 AM, Why Chat said:

IMO, the key to a successful dispute is to make it difficult for the CRAs to "code" the disputes. PLUS,in order for the disputes to be transmitted to outsourced CSRs the "letter" must be COMPLETELY scannable. I appreciate "Hegomony"'s comment however IMO the more difficult the process to input the data the better the chance for an automatic deletion. PLUS, when FACTA was first enacted the CRAs obtained a "waiver" of the time period for replying for communication from a "non-consumer" such as a CRO or a lawyer. They have an agreement that ALL mail that must be signed for is arbitrarily classified as NOT coming from a consumer and therefore is not subject to the consumer time limit for response. This is why I suggest mailing via priority mail with a tracking # and NO signature required. I have not as yet,  seen a Court case deny the proof of mailing of any documents without a signature.

 

 

Whychat,

 

Wouldn't it be possible to force a manual review by making the document "unscannable" many scanners and computer programs have safeguards to prevent currency from being scanned. Implementing similar images throughout the document could render the document "unscannable" eliminating the automated system all together. Jut put the constellation image in the background of the document and it should render the scanner inoperable.

 

Just a thought for all of you.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am of the opinion ( until proved wrong) that the CRAs never upgraded their computer systems to the same level as the USPO. The PO address scanners can "read" blue on blue but to the best of my knowledge although the CRA scanners can DUPLICATE "blue on blue" and transmit the scan, their "reading" programs (unlike the PO) cannot enter the results into their system. It would be pointless to prevent scanning and transmission of the disputes completely as that would prevent ANY way of the dispute being handled. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, cdc515 said:

Wouldn't it be possible to force a manual review by making the document "unscannable" many scanners and computer programs have safeguards to prevent currency from being scanned. Implementing similar images throughout the document could render the document "unscannable" eliminating the automated system all together. Jut put the constellation image in the background of the document and it should render the scanner inoperable.

 

Just a thought for all of you.

 

1) there are STILL plenty of scanners in use that will scan currency.  I know this because I have one that I still use on a regular basis.  And, one of the reasons I have kept it is PRECISELY cause it WILL scan currency- I keep copies of all manner of payments made by clients and we still have some that believe in payment by cash. 

 

2) Never engage in the playing of games that will have the potential of leaving you explaining to the court WHY you were playing games.  Judges tend to frown upon such activities...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry my real life experience is not believable. Of course I am only speaking of one CRA (the DEVIL) so I suppose TU, EQ, and IDS might still be in the dark ages. The four e-oscar entities have invested 100's of millions in cost-saving, labor-reducing technology. And again, getting a GED-educated $11.20 an hour w/out benefits employee to "hand enter" your dispute into the same interface as ill-advised online disputes may result in a fat-fingered unintended consequence.

Edited by hegemony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.





  • Today's Birthdays

    No users celebrating today.
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      178,430
    • Most Online
      2,046

    Newest Member
    emcibucuresti
    Joined

About Us

Since 2003, creditboards.com has helped thousands of people repair their credit, force abusive collection agents to follow the law, ensure proper reporting by credit reporting agencies, and provided financial education to help avoid the pitfalls that can lead to negative tradelines.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines