The FCRA reinvestigation process requries a CRA to forward a non-frivolous dispute to the furnisher of the disputed information, the furnisher to conduct a reasonable investigation, and the furnisher to send their determination back to the CRA conducting the dispute.
If, in that investigation, the furnisher concers with the asserted inaccuracy, they are required to send any correction or deletion to all CRAs to which they have also reported the disputed information, and not just to the CRA that is conducting the dispute.
The purpose of that provision is to enable the consumer to pursue dispute with only one CRA, and if successful, place the burden on the furnisher to effect correction with all CRAs without the need for multiple disputes.
However, the obvious problem with that procedure is that most disputes do not result in the furnisher agreeing with the asserted inaccuracy and thus initiating their own correction or deletion. Any verification by the furnisher will go back to the CRA, who will usually concur and verify the dispute.
Thus, the furnisher is not required to make any reporting of anything to the other CRAs.
Most consumers, not knowing in advance the outcome of a dispute, will simply either dispute with all CRAs, or else send a direct dispute to the furnisher, and thus not dispute via any CRA,
