Jump to content

OC's *required* to report tradelines?


Victory
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've been taking the "goodwill" approach with three old negative TLs on my reports. They are all paid (settled) charge-offs.

Granted, they will all fall off next year, but I figured, why the heck not.

Originally, I sent letters to the customer service addresses. Yeah, didn't do much good.

I've taken some lead from these forums, and even emailed some high-ranking folks at WAMU and Cap1. I got the expected calls from the executive service teams, claiming they couldn't remove the TLs since they are obligated to report "accurate" financial information.

Anyone know what law this is? Is this based on LAW, or just based on principal, internal policies of the companies, or some unstated rule among the banks?

THANKS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone that tells you that they have to report by law is full of crap.

per:

FCRA 623 (a) (7) (E) USE OF NOTICE WITHOUT SUBMITTING NEGATIVE INFORMATION- No provision of this paragraph shall be construed as requiring a financial institution ...to furnish negative information about the customer to a consumer reporting agency.

of course like EarthAngel says,,,(modified)

IF a creditor/CA does report any info, than the TL must be COMPLETE & ACCURATE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks!

I'm new to this, but I imagine the CEOs and COOs of some companies are probably sick of getting emails and have given their "executive service" teams carte blanche to drop that line to fend off good will requests.

For larger OCs, this tactic may have already been overused.

REGARDLESS! I plow forth in my efforts. Persistence is key. Well, at least annoyance is key :)

I'm sending revised letters and will continue to do so every few weeks.

Also, I'm requesting copies of my payment history from each company individually. I imagine that if they either can't provide it, or if I find inaccuracies with what is reported, I have some more ammunition.

I'll keep ya posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next time one of those Customer Service monkeys tells you about that 'law', ask them what law that is, exactly.

Cuz, there is no law on the books anywhere which requires or compels credit reporting. The FCRA is THE LAW relating to credit. We know it's not in there.

What Data Furnishers DO have is a contract with the CRA's to provide information. So, they misconstrue violating their contract with breaking the law. Of course, It's not the same thing at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I correct to say that a Data Furnisher (DF) actually *pays* the CRA's when they report info? I think I got this from another post about Verizon not reporting extremely delinquent accounts due to the costs.

(Is DF already an acronymn on here? If not, it should be! Let's keep the confusion going!)

If that's the case, I imagine the DF sets up a contract with the CRA. The CRA gets a guaranteed feed of transactions and the DF gets a reduced rate.

Do I have that right? It's good to know how these things work.

Implications? It would explain why it's virtually impossible to get a paid chargeoff removed. Contracts are the heart of business.

Still, I believe I can annoy my way around a contract!! Let the ANNOYING begin!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.