Sample FCRA 623 Dispute Letter

[funkiehouse]

I just thought I would share my sample 623 dispute letter and my notes about completing this type of dispute. This info, along with other 623 letter samples, are all over CB and the internet, but doing research and compiling info is how I like to do my credit repair so I truly understand what I'm sending. I'm not claiming it's any better than any other sample letter for 623 disputes, but it's the version I came up with after my research. I have not yet used it and if you do, please come back here and let us know about your results. Feel free to make changes to it and if you do, please inform us on what you changed and how it worked for you. I do plan on using this when the time is right (not far from now) in my repair process. Please provide your comments and input as you like and please let us all know if you find any incorrect information. My letter is a little longer, which some people may disagree with, but I feel like it covered the areas I wanted to cover and thought were important.

 

Just remember that you can request what ever you want in your letter but that doesn't mean that they are required by law to provide it. As always, you should determine your SOL before sending any letter or dispute.

 

My letter:

 

****************************************

 

Information Furnisher Address (as reported on your credit report)

 

Your Address

 

Date

 

CMRR#: *********

 

Account Name & #: (as reported on your credit report)

 

Credit report #’s: Experian ****, Transunion ****, Equifax****

(listed on your CRA dispute results)

 

This letter is to inform you that the above referenced account being reporting by your company on my credit reports is hereby disputed for lack of completeness and/or accuracy.

 

I recently disputed this account with the credit reporting bureaus, and the information was reported as verified and accurate. I’m sure we both understand that most disputes are often conducted using software, such as e-Oscar, and that mistakes can be made during that process, and that the software can have limitations when it comes to completing a proper investigation of records.

 

I am disputing the following information directly with you, the furnisher of information, and I am requesting that you conduct an investigation as outlined in the FCRA Section 623:

 

(delete this and insert detailed info being disputed here…

Read “Requirements of the consumer in a FCRA 623 dispute” in the info provide after this letter. Writing “See Attached” is not advised unless you explain the problem and then write “see attached for further details.”)

 

If you’re unable to preform a reasonable investigation, or you’re unable to locate the necessary documents to investigate my dispute(s); 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.

 

If you were able to conduct a proper investigation of the records for this account, and have identified the information that was being incorrectly reported, please update that information on my credit reports to reflect the accurate information found during your investigation.

 

I am also requesting that you send me an explanation of the methods used, and a description of the records reviewed, when you conducted your investigation; including, but not limited to, sending a copy of that information to me so I can conduct my own investigation into the accuracy of your records and verify that a reasonable investigation was completed.

 

This letter was completed and mailed to you on my own accord, and all correspondence related to this dispute should be returned to me at the address listed above. This letter is an attempt to correct the false or misleading information you are reporting on my credit reports and to correct your records.

 

Sincerely,

 

Me

 

****************************************

 

How to start a FCRA 623 dispute:

 

You MUST file a CRA dispute with each reporting CRA FIRST and then wait for the results. This should be done by CMRR only and you should specifically request the results of your dispute in writing, by mail and request a copy of the TL notation as well. The CRA dispute should be done within 60 days or less (less than 30 is ideal, but neither timeline is required) of sending your 623 dispute so you can attach the results of the CRA dispute in your 623 dispute. I say this because you want a fresh credit report number that relates to the TL in your 623.

 

A FCRA 623 dispute can be sent to ANYONE reporting information on any of your credit reports. They are usually sent to an OC but you can send one to a CA.

 

 

Requirements of the consumer in a FCRA 623 dispute:

 

(i) identifies the specific information that is being disputed;

 

(ii) explains the basis for the dispute; and

 

(iii) includes all supporting documentation required by the furnisher to substantiate the basis of the dispute. (This should at least include a copy of the trade line from a hard copy report, with the incorrect information circled in red pen (ideally). A 623 letter alone can give the furnisher a reason to say that you didn’t meet the requirements listed above or make a determination that it is frivolous, even on the first attempt. If you have other supporting documentation, send a copy.)

 

 

What is the furnisher of information required to do when they receive a 623 dispute:

 

In general. After receiving notice pursuant to section 611(a)(2) [§ 1681i] of a dispute with regard to the completeness or accuracy of any information provided by a person to a consumer reporting agency, the person (furnisher of information) shall

(A) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information;

(B. review all relevant information provided by the consumer reporting agency pursuant to section 611(a)(2) [§ 1681i];

(C. report the results of the investigation to the consumer reporting agency;

(D) if the investigation finds that the information is incomplete or inaccurate, report those results to all other consumer reporting agencies to which the person furnished the information and that compile and maintain files on consumers on a nationwide basis; and

(E) if an item of information disputed by a consumer is found to be inaccurate or incomplete or cannot be verified after any reinvestigation under paragraph (1), for purposes of reporting to a consumer reporting agency only, as appropriate, based on the results of the reinvestigation promptly –

(i) modify that item of information;

(ii) delete that item of information; or

(iii) permanently block the reporting of that item of information.

 

 

Notes:

 

Section 623 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), enforceable under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions (FACT) Act; affords consumers the right to request that the furnisher of information conduct a reasonable investigation into the completeness and accuracy of the information being reported to the credit bureaus. Furnishers of information (especially OCs) are required under Section 312 of the FACT Act to establish and maintain guidelines on the accuracy and integrity of information furnished to credit bureaus, which means they should be able to conduct a proper investigation or records.

 

Failure to preform a reasonable investigation can constitute legal action under the FCRA, Section 616, for willful non-compliance. Case law establishing liability of reporting inaccurate information was established in Richardson v. Fleet and Nelson v. Chase Manhattan. Failure to conduct a reasonable investigation can also lead to complaints being filed with your state’s Attorney General, the Federal Trade Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

 

 

Related info:

 

http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/pdf-0091-fair-credit-reporting-act-611.pdf

 

https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/pdf-0092-notice-to-furnishers.pdf

 

http://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/fcra.pdf

 

http://www.business.ftc.gov/documents/bus33-consumer-reports-what-information-furnishers-need-know

 

https://www.backgroundprofiles.com/downloads/040709fcraappxg.pdf

Edited April 14, 2014 by funkiehouse

[moosetracks]

Thx

[Natalie1986]

Thank you funky house! Very helpful information

[funkiehouse]

If the Creditor Fails to Comply with the Law

If the original creditor fails to comply with your dispute, they are in violation of the FCRA, but you can't sue them unless you have disputed with the Credit Bureaus FIRST.

Disputing with the credit bureau FIRST is not something you can shortcut or forget. In order to place the liability of reporting accurately squarely on the shoulders of the creditor, you must have disputed the listing with the credit bureaus. This means you have either online, via the telephone or in writing, disputed a listing with the credit bureaus and then WAITED FOR THE RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION.

Here is the law which enforces the fact that you must dispute with the credit bureau first:

§ 623. © LIMITATION ON LIABILITY- Except as provided in section 621©(1)( , sections 616 and 617 do not apply to any violation of--

(1) subsection (a) of this section, including any regulations issued thereunder;

(2) subsection (e) of this section, except that nothing in this paragraph shall limit, expand, or otherwise affect liability under section 616 or 617, as applicable, for violations of subsection ( of this section;

Sections 616 and 617 of the FCRA talk about how much the fines are for violations of the FCRA (the willful and negligent non compliance), typically $1000.

What the above section of the FCRA § 623. (c. means is that if you dispute with the original creditors first, without having disputing through the credit bureaus, and they refuse to answer you, or provide you with proof, yes, they are in violation of the FCRA, but you as a private citizen cannot take them to court and sue them; only your state authorities (like your state attorney general) or federal authorities (like the FTC) can sue them.

However, if you have disputed the information with the credit bureaus FIRST, they are supposed to have talked to the original creditor, even though we know that doesn't happen, and the original creditor is supposed to have at that time conducted an investigation, under FCRA § 623 ( , under which you, as a private citizen CAN sue them. When you go to the original creditor under FCRA§ 623 (a)(8), you are just merely asking for the OC's proof that they must have (hear the sarcasm in my voice here) provided to the credit bureaus during the OC's thorough (there's that sarcasm again) investigation. If they have no proof of negative information, but the credit bureau says that the results of the investigation show the negative information is accurate, then you have the OC on an actionable, sue-able (by you) offense.

Source: http://www.creditinf...lcreditor.shtml

Another article to read:

http://www.scribd.co...-Items-o#scribd

[funkiehouse]

If a FOI doesn't answer your letter within 30 days, and/or doesn't investigate, you as an individual can sue underFCRA 616 for will non-compliance for a FOI who continues to report negative information without investigating if that information is correct; AND after a properly executed request for an investigation was made and verified disputes came back from the CRA(s). You cannot sue them for violating FCRA 623, only a federal regulatory agency can.

This method was intended be used if you believe, or you can prove, that info being reported is incorrect; but in the same way that big corporations use laws into their favor, so can we as consumers. FOIs are responsible for having verifiable documentation (paper and/or electronic) about any information that they report, for the entire time they report it. If they can't prove what they are reporting is correct, then they shouldn't be reporting it. People do have success with this method because some FOIs don't keep records, or don't have the capacity to keep them, for very long periods of time. That amount of time can vary greatly among creditors. For example, Capitol One and Wells Fargo seems to keep records forever. The chance that a FOI doesn't have, or can't locate records after a merger due to having different types of storage technologies, can greatly improve your chances of a positive outcome when sending a 623. That's not what law makers had in mind when giving us this ability to dispute directly, but it can work in your favor. Also being 2 1/2 - 3 years or more past the DOMD (CO) can improve your chances of a positive outcome due to purging of information by a FOI.

So, if anyone attempts to send a 623 letter and the FOI doesn't respond, be prepared to file a CFPB complaint and be prepared to sue in Federal court as an individual underFCRA 616. If you are not willing to follow through on this, just sending a letter in hopes of getting information removed is a crap shoot, although it does happen. If you start this process, you should be willing to see it through.

If you send a 623 and the company determines its frivolous and you feel that you have provided more information than what was given in your original CRA(s) disputes (such as including documentation or a copy of your credit report outlining the incorrect information) then file a CFPB complaint, BUT understand that this does not give you enough to sue under FCRA 616. When you send your initial CRA disputes, you only want to provide a basic reason (such as "this is incorrect") for the dispute to the CRA about eachitem you plan to dispute in a 623 letter so you can then provide greater detail about what you are disputing in your 623 letter (and how you feel it should be reported), which will greatly help your chances of not getting a frivolous response. Not providing more detailed information about your dispute in a 623, over the initial CRA dispute, is the main reason FOIs send frivolous letters. It's their way of getting around conducting investigations. Your CFPB complaint needs to be very detailed and point out the additional information provided in your 623 that wasn't provided in the initial CRA dispute, AND you should include a copy of the letter and CMRR card. Filing a CFPB at this point also doesn't mean that the CFPB will sue or take any action, but at least you can get a complaint filed and tell the CFPB your side of the story, which may help you, but may also help improve the law in the future when it comes to frivolous responses from FOIs. Pointing out that you provided the detailed information needed in a CFPB may get the FOI to act or at the very least make them explain themselves to the CFPB.

A 623 can also get information that was previously removed added back to your TL or add information that was not previously reported. If you have had partial success on getting some information removed from a TL, you need to make the decision on whether or not taking the risk of sending a 623 is worth it to you. A 623 response may also serve as a notice of reinsertion because you requested an investigation, but I don't have anything at this point that verifies that.

[stonewallz]

Thank you very much for the information.. I've got this post bookmarked

[CreditRepairDiva]

This is GREAT info. Funkihouse, do you know what the average cost is to file a suite would be?

[tmcgill]

We've covered this in a lot of other threads. There is no right of private legal action if a creditor does not respond to a 623 letter. There is, however, regulatory oversight through the CFPB. This is why the 623 letter has been so controversial, and some credit and legal experts have said it has no teeth.

 

What is the Purpose of an Original Creditor Dispute (623 letter)?

It is an extra step in the legal dispute process to show the Original Creditor's negligence and violation under FACTA.

The objective is a regulatory complaint that helps to get the information removed or corrected.

 

1. You are creating a paper trail that legally proves you notified an OC about a reporting error.

2. It provides documentation if you have to file a regulatory complaint. It confirms the OC was notified, but has not re-investigated or corrected the error.

3. Original creditors do not have verify information, but FACTA requires them to ensure everything they report is fully accurate.

4. Also, if you notify an OC of a reporting error, they are legally required to "investigate" what they reported, and take appropriate action to correct errors. They are required to respond within 30 days.

Edited April 23, 2016 by tmcgill