623/611 dispute method

[Downto0]

I've been reading this site's article about the dispute methods of the FCRA:

Disputing With Original Creditor - 623 Method, Request Investigation, Remove Negative Information

I'd recommend that anyone interested in disputing a listing on their cr read it because there are a lot of angles covered. I've gone around and around on the 623/611 dispute method but I still don't quite get why the article states that you must do a 611 dispute before doing a 623 dispute.

The part I do get is that the 623 method does not give the consumer the private right to sue if the data furnisher does not respond correctly, or at all. The consumer has to complain to the FTC and they have to sue. Violations of the 611 dispute method, on the other hand, do allow a private right of action for the consumer.

The confusing part for me is where the article states that you must first dispute using the 611 method before disputing under 623. Then, the article later states that you should, while disputing under 611, tell the CRA about the unresolved dispute you already had with the data furnisher. If you already disputed with the data furnisher then you disputed with the data furnisher using the 623 method.

What am I missing here?

I don't see any point in using the 623 method in the first place if one cannot sue. There is little reason for the data furnisher to respond because they know that many consumers are not going to complain to the FTC and if the FTC does not get many complaints then they are not going to sue either.

Why not stay with the 611 method? If the data furnisher verifies to the CRA information which you can prove is false then you can sue.

[legaleagle]

I looked at a few of these, the courts are divided as to just what private right of action the consumer really has. Most decisions said that the consumer can sue for something like slander or related torts, using the underlying reporting violation as supporting evidence. I think that must be what the 611 thing is. Enforcement of the strict federal statute is reserved for the FTC.

[Downto0]

I used to think there wasn't much private action but the 623 section is about the only section which does not allow private action. The reason there is not private action here is because Congress thought consumers would be filing suit on every little discrepancy in their cr's. They thought it would be better if the FTC sorted through the mess and file suit on the egregious violations.

611, however, does allow a private right of action. The article said as much. My question is, why even bother filing a 623 dispute when there is no private right of action and the data furnishers commonly don't even respond because they know the consumer can't sue?

Beyond that, most consumer won't file complaints with the FTC either because they get nothing for their time. So, the data furnishers pretty much get a free ride on the 623 method.

Why should anyone bother with the 623 method? I've done the 611 method and the CRA's will respond. They will contact the data furnisher for verification. If the data furnisher does not verify then the item is deleted. If the data furnisher does verify then the CRA will send you notice that the item was verified. If you have documentation that the item is not correct then you can sue both the CRA and the data furnisher because they ignored your documentation and allowed false inaccurate information on your cr.

I disputed with a df and waited the 30 days. They did not respond. I could send a complaint to the FTC and they could file suit but I would not get anything for my time and effort. Instead, I'm going to use the 611 method and send the same documentation I sent to the df. Here, if the df does not respond, the derogatory items will be deleted. If they do respond and verify then I can sue the df for providing false inaccurate information to the CRA's. They reported to 3 CRA's so I can sue for at least 3 violations. If the CRA's ignore my documentation and verify because the df said, "Yep it's legitimate", then I can sue them too.

Why would anyone bother with the 623 method?

[Downto0]

Has anyone done a 623 dispute and a 611 dispute?

I've done both and I don't see any reason for a 623 dispute because there is no real incentive for the df to respond. The CRA's, on the other hand, do respond because they can be sued by the consumer if they don't. They have to contact the df and verify the disputed items. If the df doesn't respond then the items have to be deleted.

Can't get that kind of mileage out of a 623 dispute. Do I have it right or am I missing something?

[Downto0]

Okay, I found in the FCRA itself where a consumer must dispute through section 611 in order to have a private right of action of section 623(:

( Duties of Furnishers of Information upon Notice of Dispute

(1) In general. After receiving notice pursuant to section 611(a)(2) [§ 1681i] of a dispute with regard to the completeness or accuracy of any information provided by a person to a consumer reporting agency, the person shall

(A) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information;

( review all relevant information provided by the consumer reporting agency pursuant to section 611(a)(2) [§ 1681i];

© report the results of the investigation to the consumer reporting agency;

(D) if the investigation finds that the information is incomplete or inaccurate,

report those results to all other consumer reporting agencies to which the

person furnished the information and that compile and maintain files on

consumers on a nationwide basis; and

(E) if an item of information disputed by a consumer is found to be inaccurate

or incomplete or cannot be verified after any reinvestigation under

paragraph (1), for purposes of reporting to a consumer reporting agency

only, as appropriate, based on the results of the reinvestigation promptly–

(i) modify that item of information;

(ii) delete that item of information; or

(iii) permanently block the reporting of that item of information.

(2) Deadline. A person shall complete all investigations, reviews, and reports required under paragraph (1) regarding information provided by the person to a consumer reporting agency, before the expiration of the period under section 611(a)(1) [§ 1681i] within which the consumer reporting agency is required to complete actions required by that section regarding that information.

© Limitation on liability. Except as provided in section 621©(1)(, sections 616 and 617 do not apply to any violation of--

(1) subsection (a) of this section, including any regulations issued thereunder;

(2) subsection (e) of this section, except that nothing in this paragraph shall limit, expand, or otherwise affect liability under section 616 or 617, as applicable, for violations of subsection ( of this section; or

(3) subsection (e) of section 615.

So, a consumer does not have to file a 623 dispute to invoke their private right to sue...just a 611 dispute. From what I can read, I still don't see any reason to file a 623 dispute because there is no incentive for the df to respond.

As I said earlier, Congress did not want multitudes of consumers filing lawsuits for every little thing they thought was wrong on their cr's. 611 brings in a third party (the CRA's) to look at every little thing the consumers complain about to sort through the mess and throw out the frivolous complaints and send the legitimate complaints on to the df's.

Unless I, or anyone else, come up with something different, I'm going with the 611 method as the 623 method has no bite.

[xavi72]

I am in the beginning stages of helping out my father as he recently got a call about a collection that he does not own. I also read that same article about the 623 method and I was under the impression that we have to file with the CRA first to see if they can verify anything and only until then, if they can not verify the information then the item must be deleted.

I will admit that I haven't read much on the 611 dispute method but will get as much information about it and report back. Two heads are always better than 1!!

[bikeluver43]

From what I read in that article, you can sue under the 623 method as long as you file a dispute of a trade line with the CRA first- wait the 30 days, and ask for the MOV. After all of that, you can use the 623 and if nothing turns up you can sue.

Maybe I'm reading that incorrectly?

Can you describe the 611 method out and how to go about using it (possibly a link?)

[Downto0]

I'm aware of the 611 method as I've used it but only because another poster recommended that I do use it...so I did. I got a response right away from the CRA but they used form letters.

It's not difficult. You just address your dispute to the CRA and specifiy what you are disputing and why. Send all documentation that you have, if any. You're done.

The article I posted about the 623 method is the best I've read thus far. There may be more articles but after reading this one I'm convinced that the 611 method is the way to go.

There is one more advantage to the 611 method I hadn't mentioned yet. You can dispute inquiries whereas with the 623 method you cannot. The best part about filing a 611 dispute is that the df must respond otherwise face private right of action from the consumer.

I disputed a df twice using the 623 method. They did not respond either time. Now I'm going with the 611 method.

you can sue under the 623 method as long as you file a dispute of a trade line with the CRA first- wait the 30 days, and ask for the MOV.

I just do not understand why the article said to dispute with the 611 method first then the 623 method. From what I can read, the 623 method is toothless and a waste of a consumer's time. There is no private right of action under 623(a). 623( does, on the other hand, give a private right of action if the consumer disputes using the 611 method but there is no requirement, that I can see, to file a 623 dispute to invoke this private right of action.

If someone else has a different opinion I'd like to hear it. I just don't get why anyone would file a 623 dispute when the 611 seems to do so much more.

[bikeluver43]

Ok I follow,

Reason I ask is because I have a judgement on my TU report that belongs to my father (same first and last name, we may have been living at the same address at the time). I did an online disput in 2009 but it was never removed (I said it wasn't my judgement).

I'm going to dispute it again this time CMRRR, include copy of license, utility bill, and social card and pick another dispute to use so they investigate again. I have a good feeling they are going to "verify" it again as I spoke to the court and they said they don't take social #'s or DOB's when the cases are filed.

I want to get something out of this because its caused me issues throughout the years (higher interest rate loans, denied loans/ccard etc) simply because of the judgement.

[Downto0]

I had a problem with TU also. They just kept sending form letters. The first said that the information I disputed was not there. The second revealed that the information was there but they just sent a new cr...like that solved anything. I've turned the matter over to a NACA attorney and they are looking at suing TU and the df.

In your case, I would get court documentation that clearly distinguishes you from your father and send it along with the dispute. If they don't delete the derogatory informaton then I would not waste any more time and contact a NACA attorney.

I would guess that the data furnisher, in your case, is the county where the judgment was handed down against your father. I don't know how the CRA's get their public records but I would think that the county, or state, sends the info to the CRA's. I don't know if you could sue the county if they verified incorrect information. I have not read where you cannot.

The point is, you've tried amicable means to remove the inaccurate information. If that bad info is verified and remains on your cr then it is time to bring in a third party - the court.

[bikeluver43]

Thats my thinking as well.

When I called the court, they said to contact the lawyer to have it taken care of (the one who filed the case/got the judgement). I'm not sure if that means it was them who reported the judgement or what. The interesting part is that TU is the only one reporting it of the 3 bureau's.

I appreciate your help, hopefully I can get someone to pick up the info from the court.

[Downto0]

I don't know about public records (I don't have any on my cr) but for regular tl's the address of the df is right with the tl. The FCRA demands that the df give an address for the consumer to send disputes.

You should be able to access the court file at the clerk's office. This should have all the pertinent information. You could do a courts online search for your name/your father's name and see if you could draw up the right file.

I personally would avoid the attorney as attorneys never want to do anything for free. I would not see them as wanting to clear your cr up without a retainer. ymmv