When you say that the DOFD is "missing," on what are you basing that conclusion?   Most commercial credit reports do not provide the reported DOFD, even if it has been provided to the CRA. Have you checked annualcreditreport.com, which usually provides the most comprehensive information?   ... View more

Did you receive a formal Notice of Results of Reinvestigation from any of the CRAs? That is the document that formally concludes the dispute and provides you the results. ... View more

Expiration of state statute of limitations on debt governs whether or not the creditor can file a civil action seeking a court judgement on the debt.  It is NOT basis for exclusion of credit reporting. There is thus no inaccuracy in reporting based on expiration of s state SOL on the debt.1   A dispute asserting excusion based on expiration of SOL can be dismissed without any need for investigation by the furnisher, and thus would not be appropriate. ... View more

There are two types of "disputes" that can be filed with a debt collector, with each having very different response requirments.   The first is a dispute under FDCPA 809(b), which is commonly called a debt validation request. and as no set period for response, and the second is a direct dispute filed under FCRA 623(a)(8), which has an explicit 30-day from filing response time.   What was the stated basis provided in your dispute? ... View more

The furnisher of the informaton that is being reinserted after deletion by way of a dispute is only required to certiy that the information is complete and accurate.  FCRA 611(a)(5(B).1   The is only a statenent that they have found the information to be accurate and complete.  It does not require accompanying ducumentation or "proofs." ... View more

Yes, on both main points..... ... View more

While a debt for a traffic citation can be pursued by the issuer of the citation or by their assigned debt collector, it cannot be included in any credit report issued any any of the big-3 CRAs.   As part of the settlement agreement reached between the offices of the AG of multiple states and the big-3 CRAs, it was stipulated and agreed that debts that are not based on any contract/agreement entered into by the consumer cannot be included in any credit report issued by the big-3 CRAs.   That specifically includes government fines and ticket violations.     ... View more

To answer your basic question, no, a CRA cannot initiate a dispute without a notice from the consumer that they assert incomplete or inaccurate information in their credit file. More specifically, FCRA 611(a) specifies that "if the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumer’s file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly, or indirectly through a reseller, of such dispute, the agency shall, free of charge, conduct a reasonable reinvestigation."   However, that does not fully address the issue as stated in the post. The additional issue is whether the consumer, in contacting the CRA, asserted an incompleteness or inaccuracy in any item of information in their file.  If so, then the initiation of a dispute by the CRA would be mandated by the statute. The internal issue of how the CRA then handles the dispute, such as including referral to the furnisher of the information, is separate. ... View more

The offical policy of each of the big-3 CRAs, as stated at numerous places in their common credit reporting manual, is that creditors and debt collectors should not delete reporting based on payment of the debt. PFDs and getting involved in compliance with such agreements is thus contrary to the reporting policy of the CRAs. It is not, in their view, a disputabel matter.   Non-compliance with a PFD agreement by a furnisher is a breach of contract matter that would be enforceable, should it come to that, by the courts, and is not something the CRAs recognize or should be asked to get involved in compliance. ... View more

No.   Collections are not trade lines of the consumer/ They are the reporting by a debt collector of their authority/attempt to collect on a delinquent debt. They are not included in lenght of credit history, period. ... View more

Each updating reporting of a creditor provides for them to report the current consumer address. Before escalating to a CFPB complaint, I would contact each reporting creditor to ensure that their account reporting reflects the correct current address. ... View more

A cease communication letter under FDCPA 809(c) does not require any statement of reason for your request, and does not establih any admission to the debt.   The request may simply state: "This is a request under the provisions of FDCPA 809(c) that you cease all communications with me regarding the alleged debt." ... View more

The FDCPA permits a consumer, at any time of their choosing, to send a cease communications notice to a debt collector, instructing them not to initiate futher calls of letters attempting to collect on a debt.  See FDCPA 809(c).   Thus, there is something else you can do to end their calls and letters.  Simply send a cease communications letter to them under the provisions of FDCPA 805(c), and it will thereafter be a violation of the FDCPA for them to contine to send letters or make calls. ... View more

Being an open or closed reidt card  refers only to whether the consumer is permitted to make additional charges on the account. it does not affect whether the debt balance continues to be included in the calculation of percent util of credit.   Almost invariably, an account that has reached the major stage of dellinquency that has resulted in its charge-off have been closed to further use by the creditor in order to prevent further increase in the delinquent debt. If it is reporting as still open yet is not available for new charges, it should be updated to closed. However, that wont affect scoring. ... View more

A section 609(e) request pertains to the ability  of a consumer to file a request diretly with the creditor or business with whom the transactions were made by one using the consumer's identity with the abililty to obtain "a copy of application and business transaction records in the control of the business entity, whether maintained by the business entity or by another person on behalf of the business entity, evidencing any transaction alleged to be a result of identity theft."   The request must, per FCRA 609(e)(2), be (1) in writing, (2) accompanied by a copy of a government issued ID from the consumer,  (3) a copy of a police report, and (4) an approved identity theft declaration, such as the one provided by the FTC on its web page. ... View more

I would substitute the term "permitted" for the term "required."   Federal regs defining when bad debts are to be moved from accounts receivable assets to non-aset, bad debts in creditor accounting ledgers do not set a rigid period, but rather provide examples of periods that are normally considered to be adequate basis to support the assumption tht the debt is unlikely to be paid, and thus should be charged to profit and loss. ... View more

It was likely deleted from one or more CRAs but not all three due to a reporting decision made by the creditor, and NOT based on a decision by the CRAs.   It is common for a furnisher (creditor or debt collector) to choose to delete their reporting to all but one CRA for internal business reasons, such as to simplify future update requirements or to avoid possibility of having to deal with any disputes than might later be filed by the consumer.  CRAs normally do not delete independently, but only on direction of the furnisher.   In fact, it is clear and published internal policy of all of the big-3 CRAs not to delete based on payment of a delinquent debt, and they also advise furnishers not to make such deletions. It is thus highly unlikely that the lack of deletion with EX was due to a determination by that CRA. If you seek deletion with EX, the course is to send the creditor a request that they report deletion of the CO with that additional CRA. ... View more

Do you have someone with a U.S. computer/address, such as a ttrusted family member, who you can rely upon to order from within the U.S?   ... View more

The ability to include complete/unlimited supporting documentation and arguments in an online dispute is limited. If you file your dispute by snail mail, you have no such limitations.   If your dispute relies heavily on supporting documetation and/or detailed arguments, you can ensure their attachement and inclusion by using a snail mail dispute rather than an online dispute under which your content may be limited.   As an additional observation, filing a dispute via a CRA requires the CRA to then forward a copy to the furnisher of the disputed information, such as a creditor or debt collector, for their review, investigation, and response back to the CRA.  The CRAs usually dont provide a full copy of your dispute, be it online or snail mail, using their automated  eOscar dispute process, and thus regardless of what and how you provide your dspute, it may be subject to lack of complete content when referred. You can ensure that the furnisher has ALL of your supporting documentation and arguments if you file a direct dispute with the furnisher rather than a dispute via the CRA. The drawback in using a direct dispute rather than filing via a CRA is that it does not, once decided, trigger ability of the consumer to then bring civil action should they disagree with the dispute finding.  Only disputes filed via a CRA establish subsequent ability to then bring private civil action pertaining to accuracy of reported information.  See FCRA 623(c).   Thus, how you file your dispute involves consideration of how much reliance you may have on supporting documentation and arguments, and uppn liklihood of future need to bring civil action if the outcome is adverse. It is not a one-type fits all consideration...... ... View more

DOFD is defined under FCRA 605(c), which specifies that it is the date that the account with the original creditor first became delinquent, and thereafter remained delinquent until occurance of either the reported charge-off or collection. The CRA is then required to have excluded that collection or charge-off no later than 7 years plus 180 days from that factual date. However, they usually exclude a bit earlier, at approx 7 years from DOFD, and may additionally choose to exclude a few months more,and thus the statement of their expected exclusion date has variability.   DOFD is not the date that a collection was either opened or was repoted to a CRA. ... View more

Yes, it is possible to have consecutive late payments, as discussed by others.   However, having reportable consecutive late payments is a separate issue. Once an account that was delinquent by not paying at least the billed minimum payment by the payment due date, it can be returned to good-standing by paying the min amount billed   If it is followd by another late payment based on the new billing due date, that constitutes a new DOFD.  As clearly stated in the common credit reporting manual used by the big-3 CRAS, it does not, however, become reportable as a new 30-late until it becomes 30 or more days past the new billing due date.   Thus, one should not technically have two consecutive reportable 30-lates in payment history profile, as the second payment, while late under the account agreement, would not be 30-59 days past the billing due date until the next month. ... View more