Late Response by Credit Bureau

[Chala]

I disputed a collection with TransUnion, they took 80 days from the time they received my round 1 letter (certified mail) to respond which was a stall letter. I understand due to Covid-19 it would take a while but 80 days? Before the stall letter arrived i sent off a second letter demanding they remove the collection for (failure to respond) FCRA violation. 

 

13 days after i received the stall letter i received a verified letter, so this is their response is "verified" after 93 days. I pulled my report today the collection is still there. Now they are clearly in violation but nothing in the FCRA says they must remove it. I would love to get this collection deleted how should i proceed? Thanks in advance.

[BV80]

1 hour ago, Chala said:

 

I disputed a collection with TransUnion, they took 80 days from the time they received my round 1 letter (certified mail) to respond which was a stall letter. I understand due to Covid-19 it would take a while but 80 days? Before the stall letter arrived i sent off a second letter demanding they remove the collection for (failure to respond) FCRA violation. 

 

13 days after i received the stall letter i received a verified letter, so this is their response is "verified" after 93 days. I pulled my report today the collection is still there. Now they are clearly in violation but nothing in the FCRA says they must remove it. I would love to get this collection deleted how should i proceed? Thanks in advance.

The CFPB issued the following statement:

”The Bureau indicated that in evaluating compliance with these dispute investigations timeframes, the Bureau will consider the individual circumstances that consumer reporting agencies and furnishers face as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Statement makes clear, however, that the Bureau expects furnishers and consumer reporting agencies to make good faith efforts to investigate disputes as quickly as possible, and that absent impediments due to COVID-19, disputes should be resolved under FCRA requirements.”

What reason did you provide to the CRAs for your dispute?  Did you dispute as “not mine” or was it based upon a specific item of information within the entry such as the balance, date of first delinquency, etc.?

[Chala]

22 minutes ago, BV80 said:

The CFPB issued the following statement:

”The Bureau indicated that in evaluating compliance with these dispute investigations timeframes, the Bureau will consider the individual circumstances that consumer reporting agencies and furnishers face as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Statement makes clear, however, that the Bureau expects furnishers and consumer reporting agencies to make good faith efforts to investigate disputes as quickly as possible, and that absent impediments due to COVID-19, disputes should be resolved under FCRA requirements.”

What reason did you provide to the CRAs for your dispute?  Did you dispute as “not mine” or was it based upon a specific item of information within the entry such as the balance, date of first delinquency, etc.?

I am familiar with the CFPB statement which is vague at best. The first round was a generic asking for a basic verification that it, nothing factual yet. We are talking three months here though its a violation. Thanks for responding.

[BV80]

15 minutes ago, Chala said:

I am familiar with the CFPB statement which is vague at best. The first round was a generic asking for a basic verification that it, nothing factual yet. We are talking three months here though its a violation. Thanks for responding.

While it may be a violation, it has nothing to do with removing the collection account unless the account is invalid and should not be reported.  You wou”d have to show that the CRA did not perform a reasonable investigation.

Is the account valid?

[Chala]

8 minutes ago, BV80 said:

 

While it may be a violation, it has nothing to do with removing the collection account unless the account is invalid and should not be reported.  You wou”d have to show that the CRA did not perform a reasonable investigation.

Is the account valid?

Understood sir, as stated in my original post nowhere in the FCRA states that it should be removed, but it is a violation nonetheless. Respectfully i am asking for advice how to proceed? Is it valid? Not sure its back from 2015.

[BV80]

1 hour ago, Chala said:

Understood sir, as stated in my original post nowhere in the FCRA states that it should be removed, but it is a violation nonetheless. Respectfully i am asking for advice how to proceed? Is it valid? Not sure its back from 2015.

Any dispute must be specific.  For instance, you might dispute the accuracy of the balance.  Did the account become delinquent in 2015?  The 7-year reporting period is based upon the date of first delinquency.  That is the date the account became delinquent and was never again brought back to a current status.  

In the event the accuracy of information is verified, you could sue for the CRA’s delay in responding, but be prepared to prove that you have standing to sue.  In other words, you would have to show how the delayed response injured you.  Without proof of an injury, a technical violation can be deemed insufficient to show standing, and the lawsuit would be dismissed.

Proving an injury could be especially difficult if the information in the entry is accurate.  You would bear the burden of proving the CRA’s delayed response was a result of negligence or willful delay.  

Note that if you proceeded, the only way you could receive statutory damages is if you prove the CRA willfully delayed its response.  If you can  only prove negligence, you would be required to have actual damages. 
 

 

 

[Chala]

13 hours ago, BV80 said:

 

 

Any dispute must be specific.  For instance, you might dispute the accuracy of the balance.  Did the account become delinquent in 2015?  The 7-year reporting period is based upon the date of first delinquency.  That is the date the account became delinquent and was never again brought back to a current status.  

In the event the accuracy of information is verified, you could sue for the CRA’s delay in responding, but be prepared to prove that you have standing to sue.  In other words, you would have to show how the delayed response injured you.  Without proof of an injury, a technical violation can be deemed insufficient to show standing, and the lawsuit would be dismissed.

Proving an injury could be especially difficult if the information in the entry is accurate.  You would bear the burden of proving the CRA’s delayed response was a result of negligence or willful delay.  

Note that if you proceeded, the only way you could receive statutory damages is if you prove the CRA willfully delayed its response.  If you can  only prove negligence, you would be required to have actual damages. 
 

 

 

Ok thanks again for your reply i appreciate your help!