623 Dispute...

[creditfixhero]

Hello!!  So, I'm new to this site...   Does anyone here consider yourself an expert on 623?  I need to do a dispute directly to the Creditor (Not the CRA), and I'm trying to find the best methond.  Thanks!!

Scott

[Amerikaner83]

Have you looked around yet?  There are several good posts (including a few by yours truly) outlining the 623 process.  Check the "Primer on credit repair" sticky (link in my sig), I think you'll find a good place to start there.

 

Also, you are in Texas, so be aware you may have additional rights afforded you regarding credit and collections under Texas State law.

[fisthardcheese]

Yes I am an expert in knowing that the 623 Method does not work any more (if it ever did).  There are many things I would consider before ever contacting someone I owe a debt to that is within SOL and has been dormant just for the sake of removing it from my credit reports.

[BV80]

On 8/22/2019 at 5:39 PM, creditfixhero said:

Hello!!  So, I'm new to this site...   Does anyone here consider yourself an expert on 623?  I need to do a dispute directly to the Creditor (Not the CRA), and I'm trying to find the best methond.  Thanks!!

Scott

What is your goal?

[Neo9]

On 8/25/2019 at 12:56 PM, fisthardcheese said:

Yes I am an expert in knowing that the 623 Method does not work any more (if it ever did).  There are many things I would consider before ever contacting someone I owe a debt to that is within SOL and has been dormant just for the sake of removing it from my credit reports.

For the OP's benefit, which alternative courses of action would you recommend he consider?  It's also possible a 623 dispute is motivated in correcting inaccurate reporting across multiple bureaus.  OC's and CA's are fumble fingers when it comes to making sure trade lines are reporting accurately and consistently across all credit bureaus.  Violations of which can be utilized as leverage to eventually get things removed down the road.

As BV80 suggested, OP should provide additional details on what they are disputing, what's being reported at which bureaus, and what their ultimate motivations are.

[fisthardcheese]

5 hours ago, Neo9 said:

For the OP's benefit, which alternative courses of action would you recommend he consider?

Dispute inaccurate information with ample documentation. CMRRR and copies of everything you send the CRAs.  If inaccurate information remains as 'verified' by the collection agent or OC, then my next move is to file an arbitration case against them if arbitration is in the original card agreement.

[Neo9]

49 minutes ago, fisthardcheese said:

Dispute inaccurate information with ample documentation. CMRRR and copies of everything you send the CRAs.  If inaccurate information remains as 'verified' by the collection agent or OC, then my next move is to file an arbitration case against them if arbitration is in the original card agreement.

Thanks for sharing this additional insight.  Are you meaning to dispute the inaccurate information under FCRA 623, but while also including ample documentation to support the claim?  I'm wondering if inclusion of supporting documents under such a dispute are beneficial as they will actually be considered by the CRA or the CA/OC when investigating a dispute or because it shows good faith later down the road when pursuing a civil action or in arbitration.

Thanks again for your time and consideration in sharing your insights.  The comprehensive info you've put together on arbitration is incredible.  I've been trying to absorb all of the material.

[Neo9]

On 8/23/2019 at 9:44 AM, Amerikaner83 said:

Have you looked around yet?  There are several good posts (including a few by yours truly) outlining the 623 process.  Check the "Primer on credit repair" sticky (link in my sig), I think you'll find a good place to start there.

 

Also, you are in Texas, so be aware you may have additional rights afforded you regarding credit and collections under Texas State law.

Hey Amerikaner,

I noticed in your 623 Primer link in your signature it seems to indicate you prefer to send general 623 disputes without any specific information into the data points being disputed.  I wanted to know if I misunderstood this, as I am seeking to understand 623 better, and noticed in the statutes it indicates the consumer should "identify the specific information being disputed" and offer "basis for the dispute".

Does simply informing them the trade line is inaccurate satisfy the identification of specific information being disputed?

[fisthardcheese]

On 9/18/2019 at 12:50 AM, Neo9 said:

Thanks for sharing this additional insight.  Are you meaning to dispute the inaccurate information under FCRA 623, but while also including ample documentation to support the claim?  I'm wondering if inclusion of supporting documents under such a dispute are beneficial as they will actually be considered by the CRA or the CA/OC when investigating a dispute or because it shows good faith later down the road when pursuing a civil action or in arbitration.

Thanks again for your time and consideration in sharing your insights.  The comprehensive info you've put together on arbitration is incredible.  I've been trying to absorb all of the material.

No.  in my opinion 623 is pointless to the consumer.  That section is about the legal requirements of a furnisher of a tradeline only.  FCRA 611 is what gives consumers the legal standing to dispute inaccurate information with the CRAs.

Documentation of the inaccurate reporting does not need to be sent to the CRAs, but should be gathered and kept for the case of needing it in an arbitration or court case should the inaccuracies not be removed after a dispute.

[fisthardcheese]

14 hours ago, Neo9 said:

Hey Amerikaner,

I noticed in your 623 Primer link in your signature it seems to indicate you prefer to send general 623 disputes without any specific information into the data points being disputed.  I wanted to know if I misunderstood this, as I am seeking to understand 623 better, and noticed in the statutes it indicates the consumer should "identify the specific information being disputed" and offer "basis for the dispute".

Does simply informing them the trade line is inaccurate satisfy the identification of specific information being disputed?

Satisfy for what reason?  623 has no enforcement mechanism within it, which means they are free to ignore your direct dispute in any way they wish.  You still would need to dispute with the CRA in order to trigger liability and standing to sue.  Therefore, 623 is a big nothing burger to the consumer.

[Neo9]

7 hours ago, fisthardcheese said:

No.  in my opinion 623 is pointless to the consumer.  That section is about the legal requirements of a furnisher of a tradeline only.  FCRA 611 is what gives consumers the legal standing to dispute inaccurate information with the CRAs.

Documentation of the inaccurate reporting does not need to be sent to the CRAs, but should be gathered and kept for the case of needing it in an arbitration or court case should the inaccuracies not be removed after a dispute.

Thanks for taking the time to provide this info.  It's helpful to me because I am exploring the FCRA right now.  Currently, I have a data furnisher that made a complete mess of my payment history.  At one particular bureau, they are misreporting balance figures, payment amounts, and payment status in a dozen separate instances.  This is the reason why I was looking toward FCRA disputes and quoting 623.  When you mention it's about useless for consumers, is it really because people tend to just dispute things that are totally accurate?

I'm really curious about your insight on that point because it seems people do use FCRA 623 successfully when data furnishers are not reporting correctly and continue to mis-report after being notified.

FCRA 611 isn't something I see discussed much at all.  I will read it.

[Neo9]

10 hours ago, fisthardcheese said:

Satisfy for what reason?  623 has no enforcement mechanism within it, which means they are free to ignore your direct dispute in any way they wish.  You still would need to dispute with the CRA in order to trigger liability and standing to sue.  Therefore, 623 is a big nothing burger to the consumer.

Let me take a step back here in case I'm on the wrong path:

Which law(s) require a data furnisher to provide accurate information to the credit bureaus?
What happens if they refuse to correct inaccurate information and what can be done about it?

When I reference "623 dispute" I am referring to having disputed accuracy of trade line data with the CRAs, having it come back verified, and then submitting a subsequent dispute letter to the data furnisher.  My question to Amerikaner, regarding his "623 Primer" sticky, was specific to the dispute letter being sent to a data furnisher after having already completed the dispute process with the CRA.

My question as to whether generic dispute letters, without offering specifics about the inaccuracy, when disputing to the data furnisher under 623 satisfied the statutory guidelines for complying with the clauses governing a dispute with the furnisher.  (after having disputed with the CRA).

[fisthardcheese]

You should just take the time to read the entire FCRA law as written.  That will answer everything.

It seems you want to make things much more complicated than needed. 

1. Dispute errors with the CRA

2.  If errors are not corrected, then sue.

That's all there is to it.

[Neo9]

On 11/13/2019 at 1:20 PM, fisthardcheese said:

You should just take the time to read the entire FCRA law as written.  That will answer everything.

It seems you want to make things much more complicated than needed. 

1. Dispute errors with the CRA

2.  If errors are not corrected, then sue.

That's all there is to it.

I see.  Very unusual that all of the info on this forum espouses a process which includes writing dispute letters to the data furnishers.  As such, I wasn't "trying to make" anything "much more complicated", but rather, was following the instructions provided by this site itself and members who represent themselves as an authority on the subjects.  I've spoken to a few attorneys who have also provided advice consistent with those instructions.

Which is why I took the time to ask you those very specific questions, to which you did not respond.  

FCRA 623 requires you to notify a data furnisher that they are publishing inaccurate information, and I've spoken to attorneys over the years who have told me this must be done, in order to establish a private right to action.    This is not accurate?

 

[BV80]

14 hours ago, Neo9 said:

I see.  Very unusual that all of the info on this forum espouses a process which includes writing dispute letters to the data furnishers.  As such, I wasn't "trying to make" anything "much more complicated", but rather, was following the instructions provided by this site itself and members who represent themselves as an authority on the subjects.  I've spoken to a few attorneys who have also provided advice consistent with those instructions.

Which is why I took the time to ask you those very specific questions, to which you did not respond.  

FCRA 623 requires you to notify a data furnisher that they are publishing inaccurate information, and I've spoken to attorneys over the years who have told me this must be done, in order to establish a private right to action.    This is not accurate?

 

The dispute process is outlined in 623(a) and (b).  This is also 15 U.S. Code 1681s-2(a) and (b).   You can dispute with furnishers if you choose, but nothing in (a) states that one is required to dispute with a furnisher.  What is required is a dispute to the CRAs.  Here is 623(b) (which is 15 U.S. Code 1681s-2(b)).

(b)Duties of furnishers of information upon notice of dispute

(1)In general. After receiving notice pursuant to section 611(a)(2) of this title 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—

Now, for 611(c) 

((c) Limitation on liability. Except as provided in section 621(c)(1)(B), sections 616 and 617 do not apply to any violation of –
(1) subsection (a) of this section, including any regulations issued thereunder;)
 

That  says that there is no private right of action for violations of 623(a) (aka 15 U.S. Code 1681s-2(a)).   In other words, it does no good to dispute with the furnishers.   The only way a furnisher can be held liable for inaccurate information that is not corrected or deleted  is if you follow 623(b) and dispute through the CRAs.  
 
From the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals:

Further, there is no private right of action under 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(a) for any of USB's actions because that section is solely enforced by Federal agencies, officials, and State officials, thus private enforcement is excluded. Nelson v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corp., 282 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir.2002).

I don’t know where the attorneys you spoke to got their information, but they need to do their homework. 

[fisthardcheese]

Those attorneys are simple letter writing attorneys.  They want a hundred bucks or so to send letters on your behalf to the furnishers which will correct reporting errors.  Because they are attorneys, their letters hold a bit more weight and probably get a correction.  For people who just want a corrected credit report, this is fine for them. But it is not the way the law is written to enforce your FCRA rights.  They are two different things.  This is all I am trying to say.