Anyone ever threaten a lawsuit to get a late removed?

[ilzhoefer]

I am curious to know if anyone has ever threatened a lawsuit to see if a bank/ credit company would remove a late payment on a credit report, even thought the late is legitimate.

If one could get a lawyer who knew about the credit law, etc. And have them send a GW letter asking/demanding that a late be removed, would that work?

Banks have tons of lawyers that have better things to do than to mess with something like this, so would they be more willing to delete a late?

Anyone ever write a GW to a banks legal dept?

I know, crazy questions, but I thought I would ask.

[guiness56]

I doubt any attorney would even try to take someone to court for a legitimate late payment.

A GW letter is asking for an act of goodwill so demanding isn't going to get anyone anywhere.  They would probably throw it away.

[llecs]

Just be willing to go forward beyond threats, and certainly seek legal counsel first. Some might come back at you for abuse of process. Doing this would burn any future bridge for GW success.

[Jaxavier]

Straight up threatening litigation for late pays reported, especially if they are valid is extremely risky.

Now if the consumer disputed the account for another reason that they believed to be legitimate (wrong open date, late pay reported in wrong month, incorrect CL or high balance, wrong closed date) and creditor verified without proper procedure, [let's say failure of 623(a)(3)] THEN a threat to file a lawsuit might be beneficial to the consumer (need to include a settlement offer to the creditor in your ITS) in getting what they want.

People have threatened (and carried out, if need be) litigation against a creditor for violating the FCRA and could find success in that the creditor would rather delete than go through litigation.

GW's and threatening a lawsuit are two completely different animals though. One will just about void the other.

[RobertEG]

If the delinquency is legitimate, the reporting is accurate.

Thus, there would not even be basis for a dispute under the FCRA, let alone legal action for violation of the statute.

Even if the consumer had a basis for asseting inaccuracy, the furnisher always has, as part of the determination of a dispute, the option to simply correct their reporting.

It is never a violation per se of the FCRA to have simply reported inaccurately.  It must be shown to have reported with knowledge of its inaccuracy to become a violation.

There is no provision of the FCRA that makes it a violation per se to even report inaccurate information to a CRA, and certainly no possible issue of violation for reporting accurate information

The defendant would simply move for, and most likely be granted, diismissal based on a pre-trial response to the action.  It would most likely never see the light of day in a courtroom unless you become the defendant.  They are not likely to simply ignore their period to respond to the action.

[koky]

It's not worth trying, cause it might burn your bridges... I for one I know my bridges have been burnt with Cap One... So Won't even try GW them...