That statement, n and of itself is not, in my opinion, a clear statement of resolution of the dispute.
More specifically, it does not tell you whehter the account was deleted by the furnisher (presumably a creditor) or was deleted by the CRA as a result of their finding of lack of verifiability of whatever was disputed.
The distinction is important, as the first is actually a deletion reported by the creditor upon receipt of the dispute,and thus obviates the need for the CRA to complete any reinvestitgation. The information is gone, and thus the dispute is moot. The CRA should, in such cases, dismiss the dispute as moot.
It is not their reinvestigation and finding that led to the deletion.
The second situation is where the CRA either hears back from the furnishr that they cannot verify the accuracy, or the furnisher does not provide any veriifcation or correction back to the CRA. Absent any other basis, the CRA will make a finding that the information cannot be verified, which then requires them under the FCRA to delete the disputed information. It is thus a concluded dispute with a finding of lack of verication, and deltion by the CRA, not the furnisher.
Under the concluded dispute scenario, the CRA is required to include a copy of a revised credit report along with their Notice of Results of REinvestigation, showing tthat the changes have actually been made. That is relevant to the posted scenariom as if the CRA had been the party who resolved the disptue and thus deleted, they would hve provided a copy of a cred;it report documenting that they have made the changes. They did not make the changes or provide a copy of the creidit report, indicating that they did not delete as a result of the dispute, but rather that the creditor deleted. They then referred you to the creditor, for information regarding the delteion.
The second situation then triggers the resinsertion limitations of GCRA 611(a)(5)(B) shoyld any party attempt to resinsert the information at a later time.
The first situation does not trigger any specific reinsertion provisions.
The CRA has created a huge amount of confusion by not clearly sendiing a formal NOtice of Results of REinvestigation stating that they found the disputed information to be unverified, and thus they deleted, which required that they enclose a copy of a revised credit report.
It is a confusing statement of results on their part...........
