So I just filed a CFPB complaint against Experian, Equifax and Transunion... any other options?

[sparrowsav]

 

So I've posted about this some months back I think, but I finally got something in writing (below) from the credit union. It's something that is completely erroneous on my credit report, the credit union has said they don't have anything about it on their side, and that if it was disputed by me, they would not be able to, nor attempt to verify it with the CRAs, and that it would be removed that way.

 

I have disputed this error with the credit bureaus for well over a year now, in writing (by mail), and they all 3 stated that it came back as verified. I sent letters and even phoned, asking for the method of verification, none would provide anything to me. I've sent at least 2 written disputes in the mail to each of the bureaus, and even told them point blank what the bank is saying, that they have nothing and wont try to keep it up. No luck.

I got this email from the credit union in question. They 1) sent an electronic request for the negative error to be removed from my file to each CRA, it was not, and 2) they said they haven't had any contact from the CRAs about any dispute needing verification.
I've submitted all of that and my proof to a complaint to the CFPB against all 3 bureaus.

Any other options I might have? I'm really bothered by this. This false smudge on my report has affected my credit standing for a long time.

 

 

 

[legaleagle2012]

https://www.newyorkcreditlawyers.com/how-much-money-is-at-stake-in-fcra-credit-report-lawsuits

[hegemony]

8 hours ago, sparrowsav said:

 

So I've posted about this some months back I think, but I finally got something in writing (below) from the credit union. It's something that is completely erroneous on my credit report, the credit union has said they don't have anything about it on their side, and that if it was disputed by me, they would not be able to, nor attempt to verify it with the CRAs, and that it would be removed that way.

 

I have disputed this error with the credit bureaus for well over a year now, in writing (by mail), and they all 3 stated that it came back as verified. I sent letters and even phoned, asking for the method of verification, none would provide anything to me. I've sent at least 2 written disputes in the mail to each of the bureaus, and even told them point blank what the bank is saying, that they have nothing and wont try to keep it up. No luck.

I got this email from the credit union in question. They 1) sent an electronic request for the negative error to be removed from my file to each CRA, it was not, and 2) they said they haven't had any contact from the CRAs about any dispute needing verification.
I've submitted all of that and my proof to a complaint to the CFPB against all 3 bureaus.

Any other options I might have? I'm really bothered by this. This false smudge on my report has affected my credit standing for a long time.

 

 

 

why redact the CU name? What is reporting incorrectly?

[shifter]

Generic posts beget generic responses. If you want useful help, you need to provide specifics. 

[hdporter]

So, here's where I get stuck a bit on this ...

 

You have an inaccuracy reported to your credit report under a credit union tradeline.  The credit union agrees that this is inaccurate.  Why would a CRA dispute be your first recourse for a correction?

 

Ultimately, the credit union is the reporter and responsible for what the CRA's display in response to their reporting.  The credit union is the primary party through whom the correction should be sought.

 

Yes, under the FCRA, the tradeline can be disputed by each individual CRA back to the credit union (rather inefficient).  The problem is, if at the end of the day the inaccuracy persists, the credit union is still the primary party on the hook. 

 

The red flag that you're dealing with a credit union that is absolutely clueless (at least in this instance) is the following:

 

11 hours ago, sparrowsav said:

It's something that is completely erroneous on my credit report, the credit union has said they don't have anything about it on their side, and that if it was disputed by me, they would not be able to, nor attempt to verify it with the CRAs, and that it would be removed that way.

 

What a load of crack! 

 

A CRA dispute transacts as follows:  You advise the CRA that there's an inaccuracy.  The CRA forwards a copy of the entire tradeline content and asks the reporter to confirm or correct, as appropriate.  WHAT THE HELL is the CU asserting that "tjhey would not be able to, nor attempt to verify with the CRA's"?? 

 

The credit union can view your tradeline content at any time.  If there's inaccurate content, ask the why the hell they haven't corrected it!  (And their statement that they can only edit the last 24 months is total crack.)

 

(As an aside, technically the CU is correct:  If they fail to respond, a CRA must remove the disputed info.  However, that means you have to dispute with each CRA and that the error-prone CRA dispute system must work properly in each case.  I reject that the CU is not in the position to correct the tradeline with each CRA from their side, ensuring a prompt and accurate resolution.)

 

Bottom line, the CRA's are not at the root cause here.  (Although, if you can provide clean evidence of the inaccuracy, you can extensively engage the CRA's to remove the information without the CU involvement .... but that's both laborious and unnecessary.)

 

It seems like you need to reach up the management tree of the CU and get someone's attention who grasps that there's something wrong.  And, when you speak to them (no more emails until you have someone on the hook who is responsive), tell them that you're prepared to seek out appropriate legal remedies if this can't be resolved in short order.

Edited August 31, 2022 by hdporter

[centex]

The Dear Member salutation says this did not come from an Officer but rather some low-level pencil pusher. 

 

What did an Officer of the CU tell you when you went in to speak with them? 

[legaleagle2012]

Does your credit union agreement have private arbitration? I bet they wouldn't like to spend 4-5K to resolve something this simple.

[sparrowsav]

4 hours ago, legaleagle2012 said:

Does your credit union agreement have private arbitration? I bet they wouldn't like to spend 4-5K to resolve something this simple.

I don't have any of the documents from this place, and I've asked for them but I get told the same answer, that they can't access anything older than 2 years and it's purged from their system (which I think is a lazy and probably dishonest answer, but that's what they've been saying, I've tried speaking to as high in management/authority as there is). I can't find any generic version of their auto loan agreements when searching online yet.
.

  

On 8/31/2022 at 7:32 AM, hegemony said:

why redact the CU name? What is reporting incorrectly?

I only redacted some of it on the offchance that it progressed to litigation or arbitration and if any of the 'other side' stumbled across my post when lurking, Seeing me asking for advice might make it look like I don't know what I'm doing and strengthen the other side to push back more, that's the only thing I was potentially trying to minimize.

I have nothing to hide, I just do a good bit of lurking here and have seen when people sometimes post specifics and occasionally the 'other side' in litigation or arbitration fights back more (usually a CA though).

I don't mind sharing it all. It's an old car loan that I had co-signed on, it's paid off but has some "late payments" noted on it, the load was paid in full some years ago but it still is having a negative effect on my report. The different CRAs have it notated differently, some say 30 days late and some say 60 days late, but it shouldn't be there at all, and I do have proof to the contrary regarding timely payment.
Here, I'll post the non-redacted screenshot, you can even have my name and email and the credit union's.

 

  

21 hours ago, centex said:

The Dear Member salutation says this did not come from an Officer but rather some low-level pencil pusher. 

 

What did an Officer of the CU tell you when you went in to speak with them? 

This is a credit union located about 1,000 miles away from me, I have spoken on the phone to them plenty of times though. They have said the same thing on the phone that they say in writing. I've asked for the management of their loan division when calling, and/or the person in charge of reporting that type of thing to the CRAs.

Edited September 1, 2022 by sparrowsav

[centex]

49 minutes ago, sparrowsav said:

This is a credit union located about 1,000 miles away from me, I have spoken on the phone to them plenty of times though. They have said the same thing on the phone that they say in writing. I've asked for the management of their loan division when calling, and/or the person in charge of reporting that type of thing to the CRAs.

You are not, from appearances, speaking with a decision maker.  You got shoved to whoever was at their desk.  FFS, they didn't even SIGN the letter.  That tells you there was no personal attention given to your issue.  And the lack of personal attention ALL BUT ASSURES nobody in a real decision-making capacity reviewed the issue... 

 

Your due diligence in reviewing ALL available documents should have given you the name of a lending officer.  CU and banks have filing requirements with regulators.  Contact information is fairly easy to find from those. 

[hegemony]

it might be a matter of getting to the right person.

 

but let me ask, was it ever late? being a co-signer doesn't absolve you of the payment responsibility.

[legaleagle2012]

If you have absolute proof that shows timely payments, maybe it's time to get this in front of a judge.

[sparrowsav]

Thank you everyone for your feedback, I really am grateful for it.
Two of the three CRAs have responded to my complaint with the CFPB.
 

Equifax responded with the exact same response they've given to my disputes with that tradeline; saying they have investigated it and it came back as verified (word for word what they say when you dispute something with them). CFPB automatically closed the complaint after the response was received.

 

Experian responded saying they need my verification to proceed, whatever that means. And the CFPB automatically closed that complaint too.

 

It just says, "We reviewed the complaint you submitted and sent it to the company for a response. The company has let us know that it needs authorization from you to proceed. The CFPB determined that we are not able to take further action on this complaint".

 

So do the CRAs have it down how to game the CFPB system too now, and just paste whatever body of text as a response that will result in complaints automatically being closed? This is really disheartening. I dont think even one organic set of words was generated at all between CFPB and the two CRAs that responded to my complaint so far.

[hdporter]

58 minutes ago, sparrowsav said:

So do the CRAs have it down how to game the CFPB system too now, and just paste whatever body of text as a response that will result in complaints automatically being closed? This is really disheartening. I dont think even one organic set of words was generated at all between CFPB and the two CRAs that responded to my complaint so far.

 

No, the system pretty much worked as it is supposed to.  (And, for that reason, a CFPB complaint should never have been considered an avenue for remedy.)

 

If you want this resolved, have the CU explicitly write a letter informing "anyone concerned" that the reporting of the account in question is to be deleted as inaccurate.  The letter should be crystal clear (without undue clutter).  Ensure that the author of the letter provides contact information in the event of any questions.

 

When you receive the letter, prepare a written dispute to each of the CRA's, attaching a copy of the letter, highlighting the specific text that indicates the account is to be removed. 

 

Copy the CU contact on your letters to the CU's, to confirm that you've entered a new dispute.

 

I can't guarantee that this will be any more effective that what you've attempted to date.  However, it has a stronger shot at receiving greater consideration.

 

A key concern here is that your CU contact claims they've never been contacted to affirm or correct the tradeline.  Simply put, there's something screwy here (and I'm inclined to absolve the CRA's because the odds that all 3 would fall down on the job seems a little slim ... though within the stretch of reason).  The casts suspicion on the CU to the extent that there's some type of redundancy in the CRA relations area and someone else is fielding the inquiries.

 

I

 

 

[legaleagle2012]

How does this come back verified from the C.U. if they don't have any records?

[sparrowsav]

1 hour ago, legaleagle2012 said:

How does this come back verified from the C.U. if they don't have any records?

That's the exact point I've been trying to make. I have tried to get any more specifics from the CRAs and the CU way earlier, and they wont acknowledge or respond to my mailed in letters asking for more information and explaining why. I've tried phoning too, and no luck at all. It's extremely frustrating.

[centex]

3 hours ago, sparrowsav said:

That's the exact point I've been trying to make. I have tried to get any more specifics from the CRAs and the CU way earlier, and they wont acknowledge or respond to my mailed in letters asking for more information and explaining why. I've tried phoning too, and no luck at all. It's extremely frustrating.

Phoning does NOTHING to preserve rights in a situation like this unless you get hold of a named person in a position to do something.  And your letters are clearly not getting there as evidenced by the generic tripe you received from the CU.  If they cannot do anything to give a proper salutation, you got the equivalent of a phone drone.  

 

You HAVE to be reaching out to NAMED EXECUTIVES.  So far, it does not appear you have done that even after it was suggested in this thread. 

 

It also does not appear you ever answered the question as to whether the account was EVER late...

[hegemony]

52 minutes ago, centex said:

 

It also does not appear you ever answered the question as to whether the account was EVER late...

 

^^^ BINGO^^^

 

if you're a cosigner and the loan went late guess what? You're on the hook as much as the other co-signer. It sounds to me the CU is simply reporting late payments as per their policy.

 

Now if you have evidence it was never late and the CU is improperly reporting late payments (and has does so for years) now you have something actionable especially if you can so damages.

 

 

[hegemony]

In a prior post you state "So there is a negative mark on all three of my reports with the respective bureaus (pertaining to an auto loan from 2017, the auto loan is 100% not mine). "

 

but here you state it was a loan you co-signed for. Can you clarify?

[hegemony]

18 hours ago, hegemony said:

In a prior post you state "So there is a negative mark on all three of my reports with the respective bureaus (pertaining to an auto loan from 2017, the auto loan is 100% not mine). "

 

but here you state it was a loan you co-signed for. Can you clarify?

crickets?