Anonymous Posted July 9, 2003 Report Share Posted July 9, 2003 I know this question must of been asked before, but I cant seem to find it so, here is hoping someone can answer this......When one CRA deletes an account and the other 2 are still listing the same account can we use this deletion from the first cra as some kind of leverage for the other 2 to delete? Thanks for answering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C Whitney Posted July 9, 2003 Report Share Posted July 9, 2003 That hasn't worked for me.. I have two accounts on EX that have been deleted from TU and EQ. I wrote to EX and enclosed a copy of tri-merged CR showing the items not listed with other two CRAs. EX sent me a letter "verified, item remains" on both. ~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 Maybe someone else has had better luck. I can't seem to get any where with EX! :irked: :irked: :irked: :irked: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymous Posted July 9, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2003 Thanks for answering... I thought that would be too easy. oh well I guess I just got to keep fighting it, Oh here's another question though, when I send a dispute and they come back and say.. "verified it remains" when can I dispute that same account again without them saying, "already verified" and not even investigating, I thought I read somewhere every 30 days that we can dispute the same item if it doesnt get deleted, is this true and does it work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymous Posted July 9, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2003 No that is a strict policy of theirs not to accept credit report results from other CRAs as proof to remove, they must do their own verification.You can dispute again immediately; but pick a different reason, like incorrect balance, incorrect status; incorrect last activity date...But I think the best way is to split the disputes; like say you have 10 total, 1st 30 days send 5 then the next 30 days send the other 5. This way you can rotate the disputes putting more time in between (so they are not quick to send you them letters saying they won't re-investigate the matter). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts