BMW Financial Dispute with Transunion

[Anonymous]

So I disputed a late payment with Transunion regarding a late payment on my auto loan through BMW FINANCIAL. Transunion is reporting it was late in January, BMW Financial is reporting it was late in December.

The payment was late in November (33 days late). But I received a letter in the mail from Transunion that my investigation was being processed and that since I had submitted additonal information, they now have 45 days instead of 30. Problem is, is that I did not submit any additional information to them.

1) Are they allowed to do that? Almost fraudulent sounding to me.

2) Does anyone think I have a chance at getting that Late removed?

[gdale6]

---

@Anonymouswrote:
So I disputed a late payment with Transunion regarding a late payment on my auto loan through BMW FINANCIAL. Transunion is reporting it was late in January, BMW Financial is reporting it was late in December.

The payment was late in November (33 days late). But I received a letter in the mail from Transunion that my investigation was being processed and that since I had submitted additonal information, they now have 45 days instead of 30. Problem is, is that I did not submit any additional information to them.

1) Are they allowed to do that? Almost fraudulent sounding to me.

2) Does anyone think I have a chance at getting that Late removed?

---

If you submitted a separate dispute on another TL while an investigation is open then yes they can extend to 45 days. If you didnt submit such or give them more info on the original dispute then I suggest you give em a call and get a supervisor to correct this. The OC is most likely going to correct the inaccurate info and it will remain. If you want to have it removed you are going to have to get a GW deletion of it directly from the creditor.

http://ficoforums.myfico.com/t5/Rebuilding-Your-Credit/GW-letter-Q-amp-A-Examples-and-GW-Success-Stories/td-p/1573680

[RobertEG]

FCRA 611(a)(1)(B) provides that the reinvestigation period can be extended by the CRA if it "receives information from the consumer during the 30-day period that is relevant to the reinvestigation."

Whether or not you submitted anything to them is a factual matter that you can contest either by way of administrative complaint to the CFPB or initiating civil action.  I would question the prudence of bringing such a complaint or civil action for only a   15 day extension, but that is a matter of personal choice.

As for the substance, it appears that the issue under dispute is not the accuracy of the delinquency per se, but only of its month/year of reported occurence.  Resolution of the dispute would not require deletion, it would only require either verification of the accuracy as reported, or correction of the accuracy in the manner you have asserted/documented.

It appears that the goal is to force deletion based on issues that do not relate to the accuracy of the delinquency per se.

Deletion is only mandated under the FCRA if the accuracy cannot be verified as reported, or corrected so as to overcome an agreed inaccuracy.  The CRA can, under its reinvestigation authority, simply correct if they agree with your asserted view of the date of the delinquency.