Method of Verification questions

[gorillacredit]

I think that the "method of verification" needs to be discussed in more detail so we (and me) can get a better understanding of the process. So here are some questions I have, that I am sure others have as well.

First, what am I entitled to ask the bureau for? Do they have to send me the forms they used to verify the account through their worthless verification system? Do they have to send me the form as returned by the furnisher?

If I have requested documentation on the account because the original creditor or collection agency would not provide it to me and I provided proof of the request, do they have to send it? If they do not get it, does that constitute proof of their lack of investigation sufficiently enough to file suit?

Just what, at the minimum (all they will ever do) is their obligation to me in providing a method of verification?

I think that the majority of the time a simple call to the source as described in the outline on this site will not be enough. Most of the time they don't have any documentation anyway and will just say that it is what their system says and it is correct.

This could be a powerful tool and we owe it to the world to discuss its use thoroughly on this board. If enough people use it and push it to the limit maybe the bureaus will decide to actually investigate disputes.

Please post you questions and answers, as well as your experiences with the process.

Thanks to everyone.

[DocDon]

I'll save you some time.... don't bother.

None of the CRA's follow the MOV process in the FCRA. None. Not one. Ever.

[codename_fortyseven]

Doc, what do you think about that? Tower suggests that since there is no case law on the issue, few people ever sue and the ones that do are probably settled with a NDA.

I am willing to make some case law on this issue shortly. Care to help out or join in?

I have pursued this, and all they send you is a form letter saying "we strive for accuracy and investigate disputes regarding credit information, blah, blah, blah"

Nothing really.

[Recovering Attorney]

The law says : (iii) a notice that, if requested by the consumer, a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information shall be provided to the consumer by the agency, including the business name and address of any furnisher of information contacted in connection with such information and the telephone number of such furnisher, if reasonably available;

I agree with Doc. I have tried it, and never received an MOP from any CRA. Not worth suing over. I think it's one of those things where you go through the motions and tack it on to another violation and use it as leverage.

[Cranbyrre]

Do they have to send me the forms they used to verify the account through their worthless verification system? Do they have to send me the form as returned by the furnisher?

If I have requested documentation on the account because the original creditor or collection agency would not provide it to me and I provided proof of the request, do they have to send it? If they do not get it, does that constitute proof of their lack of investigation sufficiently enough to file suit?

Just what, at the minimum (all they will ever do) is their obligation to me in providing a method of verification?

I would like some opinions on this too, ie. what the law requires of them when we request a MOV. I already kno they dont comply. What i want to know is what they are SUPPOSE to do, what the exact violations are, what the fines would be if you went to court on it, etc.

[bobdole369]

Here is the letter (typed in it's entirety - my personal info changed or masked) that I received from Transunion.

bobdole369

123 Fake Street

Springfield, USA 12345

Thank you for contacting TransUnion. Our goal is to maintain complete and accurate information on consumer credit reports. We have provided the information below in response to your request.

Re: General Policy

TransUnion's procedure for investigating disputed information is to contact, by mail, electronic means or telephone, the source of information. Each source is advised of your dispute and is requested to verify the accuratcy and/or completeness of the information reported.

Once the verification responses are received, the disputed information is updated accordingly. Changes are reflected on the updated credit report that is sent to you at the conclusion of our investigation. If you have any questions regarding the results of the investigation, please contact the creditor(s) directly.

Re: Verification Documents not Available

We store information in our records as it is supplied to us by creditors. When information is disputed, we are required to investigate and record the current status of the information. We do not provide dispute verification responses received from creditors. If you need to obtain documentation or written verification concerning your account, then please contact your creditors directly.

If you have any additional questions or concerns, please contact TransUnion at the address shown below, or visit us on the web at www.transunion.com for general information. When contacting our office, please provide your current file number xxxxxxxxx.

This was in response to my letter to them:

Transunion Consumer Relations

P.O. Box 2000

Chester, PA 19022-2000

Bobdole369

123 Fake Street

Springfield USA

RE: File Number: xxxxxxxxxx

SUBJECT: Recent Reinvestigation of xxx acct# xxxx

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED:

Dear Transunion,

I am in receipt of your letter dated xx/xx/xx concerning the investigation results of the "xxxx" account as above. You state that the result of your investigation is "VERIFIED, NO CHANGE".

Your results were discouraging to say the least. You have allowed this gross inaccuracy to continue simply because you have "verified" the information. Unfortunately you have verified INCORRECT, INACCURATE, AND ERRONEOUS information with that company.

As per my rights under the FCRA, which I am certain you are familiar with:

I am hereby requesting a description of your reinvestigation procedure. Specifically I am asking that you provide me with a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the previously disputed account. I am asking HOW (specifically what method, and what information was used) you were able to verify that this account belongs to me. I am also asking WHAT information was verified.

I am also hereby requesting the business name, address, and telephone number of all individuals with whom you verified said information. With WHOM did you speak in order to verify that this account belongs to me?

I assume you already understand that you must respond to me within 15 days of having received this request. I expect to see correspondence with this information via US Mail that complies with the FCRA description contained within 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(7) and 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a)(6)((iii).

Sincerely,

bobdole369

[bobdole369]

The biggest beef that I have is that they seem to not care that I specifically asked for the business name, address, and telephone number used to verify this info.

As Recovering Attorney points out, the law states:

(iii) a notice that, if requested by the consumer, a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information shall be provided to the consumer by the agency, including the business name and address of any furnisher of information contacted in connection with such information and the telephone number of such furnisher, if reasonably available;

Now does the "if reasonably available" clause refer to just the telephone number (as the natural language of the clause would indicate) or the entire identity of the verifier? I would certainly think that even just copying and pasting the address fields from the reported tradeline would be sufficient to comply with the law, however they failed to do so in this case.

Also, does this allow them to simply provide a general description of the procedure? Or what I think the intent of the legislation is: To provide a description of the procedure USED IN MY CASE?

Unfortunately I do not believe that I can use this violation, as the original dispute the PR (or MOV request) was made on is a "not mine" dispute. The TL could in theory be mine. I have a feeling when I get back my second "verified" and I PR THAT one, they will either ignore, or send this same info again, which would be nice

[nusteem]

If they do not respond again in 15 days, aren't they supposed to delete the trade lines?? Then how do we follow up and get them to remove them, if they don't? Sue?

[get A·non·y·mous]

Gorilla,

In refernce to MOV and dealing with OCs you previously wrote this.

Have you had any luck at all then with this approach? Do people really get OC tradelines deleted?!

The Method

After this experience, I did a little more investigation on the credit bureau's methods of investigation and someone pointed me to the Bennett testimony. Based on my own experience and what I learned, I came up with the following procedure which seems to be working for people:

Challenge the listing in the normal way.

If verified, with a copy of the investigation result in hand, call the CRA at the toll-free number listed at the top of the report. (If not, you're done, you lucky dog!)

Give the report reference number and ask for method of verification per FCRA Section 611(a)(7) .

They will have never called the OC (original creditor), but will have relied on a third party database to verify, which they may or may not admit to you. If they can't cite solid evidence like "we called the OC and they verified", ask for OC's phone number.

Call OC and ask for the records.

If the OC doesn't have them (they will typically tell you that the collection agency has them and they don't keep them), get the person's name and direct line. If they do have them, demand a copy under the new FACTA act.

If you are sent records, review them and see how good they are. If they are not conclusive, take the next step.

If the OC has no records

Call the CRA back and tell them the OC has no records.

Inform the CRA that they need to open another dispute. The new information for the disput is the name and number of the person to whom you have just called at the OC.

If they refuse, inform them you will sue for willful non-compliance under section FCRA § 616.

If they still refuse, send the information via certified letter along with an intent to sue letter. If not, they will give you a new confirmation number (write it down! and the date!). This acts as a new investigation, and the CRA has 30 days to get back to you.

If you have written records proving the OC can't back up the negative listing(s) they are reporting on your credit report

send them registered mail to the CRA along with an intent to sue letter if the account is not removed.