elyse449 Posted June 2, 2004 Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 Gosh, now I'm worried--I disputed 4 items with Experian and I'm worried they're going to try to say they're "frivolous." LOL--what's their opinion of "frivolous" does anyone know? Is it just whoever happens to get a hair up their nose or what? Are there guidelines to what constitutes a "fair" dispute? I checked the status of my disputes and it says they're "pending." We'll see I guess. Any thoughts?Elyse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anti-something Posted June 2, 2004 Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 CRA definition of 'frivolous': any dispute that may actually raise your FICO. i think all you can do for now is wait. how did you check the status? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elyse449 Posted June 2, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 2, 2004 Mmm...yes, how dare us lowly of the lows want to raise our FICOs much less correct outdated or inaccurate information on our CR's! On the plus side, I'm thinking my disputes may NOT raise my score, but they'll show correct/accurate info that way when I do finally get up the nerve to apply for one the CC's mentioned as being ok (on cc board) I may have a better chance and get a better deal! (I try to look on the bright side as much as I can--it's too easy to be negative, lol!)The way I checked my status was I went to the front page www.experian.com and I clicked on the link to check status which is on the left hand side of that first page. Thanks for the information and for answering my post! Elyse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wdspeedbump Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 i think once you have disputed a tradeline, and it comes back verified...then redisputing without a significant change in your dispute is considered "frivolous" jmho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elyse449 Posted June 3, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 I think that's a possibility to. Perhaps what they're looking at is WHAT a person disputes to.Thanks for the insight.Elyse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tropicaljo Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Hey folks. TU did the "frivolous" thing on one of my DH's disputed tradelines. We disputed the same incorrect information twice. When we got the results of the first dispute, which showed "information verified", I immediately ripped off a reply saying "whaddya mean, verified, all of the information for that TL is incorrect!" Then the second reply came back "previously verified... now considered frivolous...refuse to reinvestigate without documentation from the creditor." I learned that when you get a reply that isn't what you expected, wait about a month before you send your second letter. Mainly, it gives you a chance to get over being pissed and you can compose a calm but firm letter. Plus, IMHO, if you redispute too soon, then it seems to just irratate the dragons. Also, if a TL has more than one aspect that is incorrect (status+dola+amount), if you only dispute one aspect at a time, when you have to redispute, you can use a different reason for dispute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 I think you are right, Trop. Patience is a virtue here. As is taking little bites. I find the dispute form at privacyguard to be useful because it practically forces you to dispute one item at a time. I also think TU is quick to see an advantage in the new FCRA obligations for OC's. Since you can dispute directly with the creditor now, TU can clean off it's desk and buy time by sending you to the source. Another thrick we have to learn to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anti-something Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Another thrick we have to learn to deal with.i'm not up on speaking legalese, do i make the 'th' into a 'p' sound? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocPC Posted June 3, 2004 Report Share Posted June 3, 2004 Another thrick we have to learn to deal with.i'm not up on speaking legalese, do i make the 'th' into a 'p' sound? ROFLMAO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doublebuchi Posted June 5, 2004 Report Share Posted June 5, 2004 "I also think TU is quick to see an advantage in the new FCRA obligations for OC's. Since you can dispute directly with the creditor now, TU can clean off it's desk and buy time by sending you to the source. Another thrick we have to learn to deal with."I'm not familiar with disputing direct with the OC. Is this something new? Also, does this apply to medical bills and disputing with the Dr. direct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted June 6, 2004 Report Share Posted June 6, 2004 Yes, this is new with teh amendments to teh FCRA act. I put in a thread in Credit Repair titled " FACTA vs. FCRA" Take a look for it.You can always dispute medical bills the same way. They generally don't appear on the Big 3 reports, but using the same techniques will help you look good! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zerwas Posted June 14, 2004 Report Share Posted June 14, 2004 Could someone please post a link for "FACTA vs. FCRA". I was not able to find it. Interested in finding some more info on disputing with the OC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts