jimmy1611

623 Dispute Method Step 1 (criticism requested)

Recommended Posts

@cinnamngrl

 

§ 623 - 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2 8 E.iii says that they are required to respond

 

 

1681s-2 is divided into 2 subsections.  There's 1681s-2(a) and 1681s-2(b). 

 

Under which subsection does the information you're referencing fall under...s-2(a) or s-2(b)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@cinnamngrl

 

 

1681s-2 is divided into 2 subsections.  There's 1681s-2(a) and 1681s-2(b). 

 

Under which subsection does the information you're referencing fall under...s-2(a) or s-2(b)?

a

Is that what you care about here? Whether I am quoting the law incorrectly? For the price of 2 or 3 cmrrr, I think this could help you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@cinnamngrl

 

You don't think that quoting the law correctly is important?  

 

You said:

 

If you start by disputing with the CRA and then dispute with credit furnisher, and that furnisher does not respond with evidence to support/agree with what that credit furnisher is telling the CRA then that company is liable.

 

 

Under which section of the FCRA does it say that you can hold "that company liable" if they do not respond with evidence after disputing directly with that company?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@cinnamngrl

 

You don't think that quoting the law correctly is important?

No, not as important as improving your credit score. Prove me wrong in a way that's actually meaningful. Try this method, by fully following directions as given, and see what happens. This exchange isn't accomplishing anything for me or the original poster. Playing Gotcha doesn't help anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@cinnamngrl

 

This is not "gotcha".  You have made incorrect claims.  You stated.

 

If you dispute first with the CRA, then directly with credit furnisher. The furnisher is subject to 1k penalty per violation for sending information to the CRA that they can't or won't conduct a reasonable investigation.

 

 

That is untrue.  You do not have to directly dispute with the furnisher in order to have a violation.  If you dispute ONLY with the CRAs and the furnisher verifies incorrect information, you have a violation.

 

You also stated:

 

If you had contacted the credit furnisher directly, you would be able to prove whether the information was correct.

1. The data that the furnisher sends you must equal the information they send the CRA.

 

 

You have provided NOTHING from the FCRA that says a furnisher must send you the information it sent the CRA.

 

 

Then you said:

 

that furnisher does not respond with evidence to support/agree with what that credit furnisher is telling the CRA then that company is liable

 

 

Liable under what?  AGAIN, disputing directly with the furnisher falls under 1681s-2(a).     1681s-2© specifically says that there is no private right of action under subsection s-2(a).

 

 To prevent the glut of cases in the federal courts that would result if every consumer could sue anytime he or she disputed the accuracy of furnished information, Congress wisely limited enforcement of this section [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a)] to government agencies. Islam v. Option One Mortgage Corp., 432 F.Supp.2d 181, 190 (D.Mass.2006).

From Chiang v. Verizon New England Inc. - 1st Circuit Court of Appeals 2010:

Congress expressly limited furnishers' liability under § 1681s-2(a) by prohibiting private suits for violations of that portion of the statute. § 1681s-2©(1).

 Although a consumer may dispute credit information directly to a furnisher, as Chiang has done, the consumer has no private right of action if the furnisher does not reasonably investigate the consumer's claim after direct notification.


These provisions, however, cannot be used by a private individual to assert a claim for a violation of § 1681s-2(a), as such claims are available only to the Government.  SimmsParris v. Countrywide Fin. Corp., 652 F.3d 355, 358 (3d Cir.2011) .

Moreover, to the extent that the claim is based on violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a), there is no private right of action.  See Gorman v. Wolpoff & Abramson, LLP, 584 F.3d 1154, 1162 (9th Cir. 2009).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.uclalawreview.org/fighting-unfair-credit-reports-a-proposal-to-give-consumers-more-power-to-enforce-the-fair-credit-reporting-act-2/

You'll enjoy this article. It Identifies all the weaknesses that you're, however the private right of action does exist.

would you be willing to try to do things a little bit differently and see what happens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@cinnamngrl

 

I've read that article before.  Which part of it supports your claims?  Which parts show weaknesses in my claims?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@cinnamngrl

 

I've read that article before.  Which part of it supports your claims?  Which parts show weaknesses in my claims?

IIb

I am not arguing with you, I am trying make suggestions to help the OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@cinnamngrl

 

Your suggestions worked for you, and that's great, but you made some claims that were incorrect.   I agree that you can dispute directly with the furnisher, and it certainly doesn't hurt.  However, it's not necessary to do so in order to have a violation under the FCRA.  And if a furnisher does not respond to your dispute, you cannot sue them under the FCRA for not responding due to the fact that disputing with furnisher is under subsection 1681s-2(a).  I've posted the sections from the FCRA  and court precedent to support it.  This is from the article you provided:

 

"however, the private right of action does not apply to the duty to provide accurate information discussed in § 1681s-2(a)"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The suggestions I've made actually work. I think you should try it before you knock it. How about a wager for the cost of the postage.

 

No, I refuse to wager that I may get lucky like you did.  I would rather use my method that is backed up by the law and has allowed me to multiple times get a check from OCs and JDBs while they were removing TLs.  That means it didn't even cost me anything, but espesially the extra CMRRR postage you are wasting, because THEY paid ME due to the fact that I used the proper statutes and knew what I was doing.

 

I think this discussion is complete, as it should be clear to anyone else looking for help what their options are and they can choose which method to go with.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Old but goodie. Just wanted to chime in. 
 

I have won 3/4 lawsuits in Small Claims against OC using 623 method. This includes other 2 deletions after ITS were sent for another 2 OC tradelines. 3/4 OC actually paid me. This was back in 2008. 
 

I have gotten 1 deletion using the MOV on a CA. This was 2018. 
 

Both methods work, but you have to be able to follow through with legal action. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KevinErrbenn said:

I have won 3/4 lawsuits in Small Claims against OC using 623 method. This includes other 2 deletions after ITS were sent for another 2 OC tradelines. 3/4 OC actually paid me. This was back in 2008.

This I can believe in 2008.  A LOT has changed in the past 12 years.  In 2008 the use of digital records was scarce. It was far easier to defeat a case because hard copy records were too expensive to maintain and even OCs did not have the records to support their claims.  Today in the digital era it is rare to defeat an OC.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Clydesmom said:

This I can believe in 2008.  A LOT has changed in the past 12 years.  In 2008 the use of digital records was scarce. It was far easier to defeat a case because hard copy records were too expensive to maintain and even OCs did not have the records to support their claims.  Today in the digital era it is rare to defeat an OC.

 

Hard? Yes. But I’ve come to realize most OC are not willing to spend thousands of dollars defending a credit reporting lawsuit. Most cave in, delete and move on. Only Express through WFFNB challenged me And escalated to Federal court. 
 

I won as recent as last year, again, creditor didn’t challenge and deleted and settled. 
 

These were all charge offs with $0 balance. Your mileage may hugely vary nowadays but if you have proper documentation of violations and your paperwork in order I’ve seen a willingness to quickly settle and move on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.