01-09-2010 07:20 PM
A collection randomly appeared on my transunion report in June 2009. It is for a $60 "debt". Why the quotations? Well, it isn't my debt. I guess that's one of the downfalls of having such a common name. I disputed the account with Transunion and the result was positive. It was found not to be mine or unverifiable is probably more likely since I'm quite sure they just randomly selected people with my name out of a hat and I got picked.
It was removed in July. Then it showed up again in September (I didn't realize it until checking my score now). I'm disputing again of course, but I can already tell this is probably going to be a repeated cycle. Most likely resulting in me having to plan a dispute every time I need credit approval, just to get it off there temporarily.
What are my options at this point? It was already verified as not mine, so how can I make that a permanent state?
I've worked hard over the last 4 years to clean up my credit. No lates period, no over limits, good CL's with optimal debt ratios for credit scoring, reduced inquiries, lengthening credit history, etc. etc. It makes me angry that a debt I don't own is dragging down my score by 50 points (the increase I saw when the collection was last removed).
Thanks in advance for the help!
01-10-2010 06:58 AM
You need to deal with the collection agency to get this to stop reporting. TU will report what is reported to them. You will struggle with this for as long as the CA chooses to report it.
I have a wrong address reporting that I know is coming from Discover. I get it deleted...it shows up again next month...I get it deleted again...it shows up again. I have to go back at Discover and try again.
I'm hoping someone will come along who can tell you exactly what your next step should be with the CA. Maybe you DV them at this point?
01-10-2010 11:27 AM
I thought about sending a DV, but I'm under the impression that it has to be within 30 days of notice of the actual debt. The problem is, I've never received a single phone call, piece of mail, email, or any other form of contact from this CA. And to be clear, I've never received any other form of attempted debt collection from the original creditor. I actually don't know who the OC is. I just know I haven't had any bills for $60 come my way or even anything close to that.
The good news is that the CA is local to me, so it wouldn't be difficult to sue for violation of the FCRA. I just don't know how to get there from here.
So I'm at a loss for what to do and thinking of using that Lexington company.
01-10-2010 12:07 PM
And talk about quick. TU already deleted it off my report. I just filed the dispute yesterday. Now I'm wondering how they verified it (or if they did at all).
07-08-2012 08:43 PM
As a forum reader I feel there is a lack of resolution for many threads started. The OP's just seem to dissapear for many with no update.
So, even though this is old as dirt, I'm doing my civic duty.
After I disputed to TU, the collection dissapeared. It then appeared again two months later. I disputed again. It went away and never came back (at least up til now).
After some research, I believe this is a parking ticket received on an auto that I sold to a friend. Clearly she didn't transfer title immediately and I was too young/naive to know I should accompany her to the DOL.
07-09-2012 03:11 AM - edited 07-09-2012 03:23 AM
The situation should not result in a need for a continued series of new disputes over each reporting. The re-reporting should have been addressed, before the fact, by pre-verification to the CRA.
The information was deleted as a result of failure to verify its accuracy in a prior dispute.
In that situation, the CRA is NOT authorized, simply on re-reporting of the information, to reinsert the information. Any requested reinsertion by any party must, as a pre-condition, be accompanied by a certification of its accuracy. The CRA must review and accept that pre-certification, and if accepted, they must notify the consumer within 5 days. FCRA 611(a)(6)(B).
If, within 5 days of the reinsertion of the collection, the consumer did not receive the required notification of having verified the accuracy before reinsertion, the reinsertion was in violation of FCRA 611(a)(5)(B). I would send a complaint to the CRA.
I would also, in absence of the notification from the CRA, send a direct dispute to the debt collector, asserting inaccuracy in reporting based on their failure to have provided the required pre-certification of accuracy to the CRA along with its request for reinsertion. Such a dispute would not go to the verification of accuracy of the information itself as response to the current dispute, but rather to their separate, pre-certification to the CRA when requesting its reinsertion.
Both the furnisher and the CRA have apparently not complied with section 611(a)(5)(B).