Recommended Posts

I am writing this as a guide to how I cleaned negatives from my credit report. I also hope to correct some misconceptions about the validation process. I will post examples of my letters soon. It all starts with a credit report. You need to obtain a copy of your credit report from all 3 agencies. A 3 in 1 report doesn’t cut it. There is much more detail to be found in the individual reports. Go ahead and spend the $30 or so. It is worth it. Save copies of the reports, you will need them.

First, dispute all of the negative TL’s on your report. I got 4-5 deletions that way. This was effective on about 20% of my accounts. This will take 30 days or so. You can dispute over the phone, because I don’t feel like suing the CRA is the best way to go. If you aren’t going to sue them, you don’t need the documentation. IT may work for others, but I have had better luck with the CA’s and OC’s.

Next, after the initial investigations are complete, DV all of the remaining ones. Now, you can take your time and eliminate them in manageable groups. However many you have the time and money for, whether it is 3 or 10 at a time. The way to do this is simple. Sometimes a company attempts to dodge DV’s by refusing to sign for them. When the letter is returned to you, save it to use as evidence later, and then resend it by FEDEX with delivery confirmation. More expensive, to be sure, but most companies will sign for FEDEX without a second thought. When the green cards come back, immediately request reinvestigation from the CRA. This does one of three things:

1 They don’t validate, and they don’t reply to the CRA. Deletion. You win.

2 They don’t validate, they verify with CRA. Violation. Proceed to next step.

3 They validate accurately, either with or without verifying to the CRA. Very rare. Only happened once so far for me. They just don’t keep good enough records. You negotiate pay for delete in this case.

There is no time limit for the CA to reply to your letter. They can simply do nothing, and are not in violation. That is why requesting reinvestigation through the CRA is important. It forces the CA to violate by re-reporting an invalid tradeline or allow deletion. Get more copies of at least one report that has been re-reported and save it. You will need it later. I use the equifax service, so I can pull it once a day if needed.

Next step. You need to prove the violations are intentional to really get them. So, you repeat the above steps using a repeat DV letter. Once they have verified with the CRA twice and have not validated, you have repeat violations. This is enough to get them. The above steps got rid of about 40% of my total negatives. With the 20% who didn’t verify with the CRA, you are most of the way there.

Now you need to tally the violations. You can sue for violations of FDCPA and state law. I used the Florida version of the FDCPA. This was especially useful, because while the FDCPA allows $1000 in damages, the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act allows another $1,000 and whatever punitive damages allowed by the court. Look into your state’s laws for details.

Once you count the violations, send them a fax telling them you are suing them and give statute numbers, unless they agree to delete. This may shake out a few more deletions. Maybe another 5-10%

Now, the hard part. I have sued 6 CA’s and OC’s and only one went to trial so far. The one that did go to trial was for a friend. She got scared and dropped the case, rather than fight. All 5 of the remaining cases negotiated a settlement prior to trial for my expenses and a deletion. The 5 settlements totaled about $1000 to my pocket, which just about covered my expenses. I could have pushed it and asked for more, or gone to court and tried for more, but my goal was clear credit, not making money. Besides, any lawyer will tell you court is a crap shoot.

If you can get a deletion, take it. Don't get greedy.

Next post (later) will detail how the filing game works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DV letter for CA:


Your address


CA Address


This letter is being sent to you in response to (a letter I recently received/an entry in my credit file). Be advised that this is not a refusal to pay, but a notice sent pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15USC1692g(B) that your claim is disputed and validation is requested.

In accordance with the above statute(s), I am asking that you prove that you have the correct debtor, the correct balance and that you are legally authorized to collect this debt, by providing documentation establishing the following:

• Name and address of Original Creditor

• Name, address and account number on file for alleged debtor

• Amount of alleged debt

• Date that this alleged debt became payable

• Date that the account originally became delinquent

• Verifiable proof that I have a contractual obligation to pay your firm.

• Any agreement that bears my signature, wherein I agreed to pay the creditor.

• A copy of all statements while this account was open.

• Any documents that grant your organization the authority to collect this alleged debt.

If your offices are able to provide the proper documentation as requested, I will require at least 30 days to investigate this information. According to the law, you must cease all collection activity on this account until the above information is sent to me. All correspondence shall be in writing. At no time shall you call me at my place of employment. Also be advised that, should you call me at any other location, all telephone calls will be recorded.

I wish to thank you in advance for any assistance you can provide in this matter.


Link to post
Share on other sites
When the green cards come back, immediately request reinvestigation from the CRA.

What about the CRA saying a reinvestigation is frivolous, since you just disputed? What reason did you give the 2nd time you dispute with the CRA? Wouldn't it just be faster and easier to skip disputing with the CRA first, and go straight to Dving? Just trying to understand a bit about this, since you've been through it.


Anisah in NJ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Disputing first makes your job easier by eliminating some of the easy deletes. Since I do all of my disputes by phone, I have never been denied. I have a theory that sending disputes to the CRA by CMRRR makes the CRA think you are coming after THEM and ticks them off, so they are less likely to help you.

While that may or may not be the case, I have not had a single "frivolous" letter. I am not saying my way is the only way, but my way worked in my case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is good stuff. Congrats on your deleats. I notiiced that you used this with OC, what method did you use with them, since they don't have to respond to a DV. I've got a CO that's only being reported by the OC, but been assigned to a CA. I DV the CA, but not sure what to do now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OC's don't have to respond to a DV, but they ARE required by the FCRA to report accurate and complete information to your CR. Also, Florida's version of the FDCPA applies to OC's as well. Check your own state laws.

Leave the CRA alone, under this plan, they are your partner in helping you get rid of the TL's. Call the CRA, play dumb, BE NICE. Tell them the tradeline is wrong. When they ask why, tell them you don't remember doing business with them. Tell tham you have written the company and they won't respond to you. Tell them you need help, the reps will help you file the dispute. Don't get abusive or pushy with the CRA and you will find that they will help you out.

Look, you have to understand that the CRA is not the problem here. All they do is maintain and compile information provided by others. The CA and OC are the ones providing erroneous information and are the weak links here. LEAVE THE CRA ALONE AND TRIP UP THE CA OR OC. This will also save you a lot of work, as now you can concentrate on one thing at a time.

Good Luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Responding to bump this.

If it is just a few lates, goodwill them.

If the account is closed, it doesn't matter. The furnisher is still required to furnish "complete and accurate" information.

They almost always forget to mark the TL in dispute.

As far as how to word your letters, I have found it to be almost an art form. Sometimes it is better to sound like a lawyer, sometimes better to play dumb. The point is to get the OC or CA to give you the evidence you need to go to court. What you are doing here is building evidence for a court case. The better you document the case and the more violations you get, the easier it is to clear your credit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That can work with OC's for goodwill issues like removing lates, but there is a trap there for accounts currently late or delinquent. If you talk to a CA or an OC on an account that is currently delinquent, you risk resetting the SOL by promising to pay (in some states) or making some other error that can hurt you. Especially CA's. They work hard to get you to screw up on the phone. Also remember, if it isn't in writing, it never happened. They are good at making promises they have no intention on keeping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would like to start by saying i just started my road to clean credit on may,13.2005 and my scores are as follows eq 543.....ex..530....tu..536.. :shock: ive disputed all negs not mine to start :oops: btw checking ur report daily will bump off inqs :?: btw great forum!!!!!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is great info - thanks! But I'm still confused on how to DV the OC. If they don't have to respond then how does them not responding to me but continuing to verify to the CRA help me? Seems like since they aren't required to respond to me they can do what they want and I don't have them on any violations. I've managed to get all my CA accounts off the CRA, but now have two OC's that I don't know how to handle. Are you saying to DV the OC's and when they don't respond send that proof to the CRA asking for the deletion? Help I'm confused!

Thanks, Cyndi

EX 556 10/04 - 621 3/05 - 642 5/05

TU 525 10/04 - 610 3/05 - 621 5/05

EQ 572 10/04 - 619 3/05 - 573 5/05

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a great topic! I will be sure to add this to my bag of tools as I begin the long road to repairing my credit after almost six months of unemployment.

Can we make this a "sticky?" There is some awesome information in this topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Divemedic made a VERY key and helpful hint. Disputing via phone, try that first. If you "play dumb", maybe you are a little stresssed, "pulling your hair out" over this, "losing sleep over this", type of a tone, "please help me, im at my wits end with this and totally frustrated"..If you get a nice young person on the phone that you hit it off with on a human to human, american citizen to american citizen kind of way. In time, you should see stuff being deleted. I got on good terms with this one girl, she literally told me "dont worry abotu that one if i were you"..sure enough..DELETED. granted it was 10 years old or so, but still. remember CRA's DO have the ability to hit that magic delete button, if you are a good salesperson (like I am) you can expedite that process. good luck...damn, now i gave away all my secrets!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes...A lot of others here think the phone is not a good idea, and I agree in some cases, but you can also have great success if it is in your best interest. There is a invisbile power when you can make someone feel compassionate about your situation and try and help..Of course some times you have to give a little...Check this post out, it may give you a little confidence. :D






Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remember that my suggestion applies to calling CRA's. It does NOT apply to calling a CA. I never call them, until I have all I need to sue and I am ready to file. Then I make an ITS call to the owner or manager. Calling a CA does little good and can cause much harm.

The reason is that they will seldom delete, and can sometimes trick you into violations of your own. If they screw up on the phone, you have no proof (unless you are in a one party state-which I am not), so I keep all communication with them in writing.

There is nothing in the law to require the CA to honor a limited C&D, so what I do is include a statement in my DV that states all calls to my home are recorded and that calls to my employment are prohibited.. That does 3 things. 1 All but the dumbest CA's will stop calling me at work. 2- All but the dumbest CA's will stop calling my house. This has the effect of a limited C&D. 3- The dumbest CA's call me at work and cat home. I get violations for the work calls and they say stupid things on my recorded home line. Since I am in a two party state, and I have notified them by certified mail that they are being recorded, the recordings are now admissible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One more thing, and it worked especially well for me as en effective crowbar...

per the new FACTA laws, the OCs are REQUIRED to notify you in writing if they place new negative information on your credit report . This is active as of 7/2004. The notice CAN be on your billing statement, but MUST not be in fine print and must also be worded in one of three ways. These guidelines were set by the Federal Reserve

Model Notice B-1

We may report information about your account to credit bureaus. Late payments, missed

payments, or other defaults on your account may be reflected in your credit report.

Model Notice B-2

We have told a credit bureau about a late payment, missed payment or other

your account. This information may be reflected in your credit report.


a. Although use of the model notices is not required, a financial institution that is

subject to section 623(a)(7) of the FCRA shall be deemed to be in compliance with the

notice requirement in section 623(a)(7) of the FCRA if the institution properly uses the

model notices in this appendix (as applicable).

b. A financial institution may use Model Notice B-1 if the institution provides the

notice prior to furnishing negative information to a nationwide consumer reporting


c. A financial institution may use Model Notice B-2 if the institution provides the

notice after furnishing negative information to a nationwide consumer reporting agency.

d. Financial institutions may make certain changes to the language or format of

the model notices without losing the safe harbor from liability provided by the model

notices. The changes to the model notices may not be so extensive as to affect the

substance, clarity, or meaningful sequence of the language in the model notices.

Financial institutions making such extensive revisions will lose the safe harbor from

liability that this appendix provides. Acceptable changes include, for example,

1. Rearranging the order of the references to “late payment(s),” or “missed


2. Pluralizing the terms “credit bureau,” “credit report,” and “account”

3. Specifying the particular type of account on which information may be

furnished, such as “credit card account”

4. Rearranging in Model Notice B-1 the phrases” information about your

account” and “to credit bureaus” such that it would read “We may report to

credit bureaus information about your account.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
Disputing first makes your job easier by eliminating some of the easy deletes. Since I do all of my disputes by phone, I have never been denied. I have a theory that sending disputes to the CRA by CMRRR makes the CRA think you are coming after THEM and ticks them off, so they are less likely to help you.

While that may or may not be the case, I have not had a single "frivolous" letter. I am not saying my way is the only way, but my way worked in my case.

This is a revelation to me. I've never heard of someone disputing by phone. What reasons do you give? Do you have a list of reasons you could give here to the newbies? Why would the CRAs get defensive? They are used to dealing with disputes daily. We've always heard we must dispute by CMRRR. Please say more. :shock:


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this is old but I couldn't help it..

american citizen to american citizen kind of way.

Now what about Transunion - Their call center is in INDIA.

And what efficient little worker bees, always reading scripts and doing exactly what they are told, no budging no emotion...

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.