Cant dispute through EX?

Anonymous · ‎06-17-2008

So I ordered a 3 in 1 report from Equifax and found two things from Experian I would like to dispute. The thing is, I cant seem to dispute anything with Experian unless I have ordered my report directly through them? So they will make me purchase a new report just to dispute the info..

Experians homepage gives you no mailing address, phone number or anyway of disputing (that I could find) unless its online with a report number from a report received directly through them. So I went here and from the myFico homepage I clicked on dispute items, and was taken to the page that provides dispute options for all three CBs. The EX one is an online option I clicked that and was thrilled when I was taken to a section of the site that doesn't require a report number.. but then, I fill out all the information, go to step two which has you verify random questions about accounts on your report, and then after you click next it just pops up with a page displaying your rights to obtain a credit report. Theres no way to continue past that or anything without purchasing a report.

This seems really like really shady business practices to me. I keep thinking I have to be wrong here, has anyone had similar problems?

llecs · ‎06-17-2008

Disputing is not recommended, but if you were, the best way to do it is via mail CMRRR. If you had to do it online, then the best option is to go directly through EX, rather than a re-seller. You may have to order a new report (you need the report #) and is only about $10 or so. You can also get it for free via annualcreditreport.com or for free if you were denied for credit by EX in the past 60 days.

MichiganMommy · ‎06-17-2008

Why is disputing NOT recommended?

THanks

Updates scores...inching along. Waiting for 7 recent medical collections to fall off!! (seriously working since END of May): EX 519 TU 576 EQ 449
8-02-08 EX 644 TU 647 EQ 575...650s here I come....700club, get ready!!!

Anonymous · ‎06-17-2008

I wonder why its not recommended either. Also (and im not trying to be argumentative I swear) I know I can just buy another for 10 but I just purchased the 3 in 1 for 40 and its not the cost that bothers me but the fact that they are requiring me to pay them for a second report I dont need just to file a dispute. Even though they cannot legally charge you to file a dispute.. seems like a sneaky way of getting around that.

llecs · ‎06-17-2008

MichiganMommy wrote:
Why is disputing NOT recommended?

THanks

Based on others' comments, here's a few side-effects from disputing:

1) Disputing as "not mine" could cause a fraud alert to be placed on your CR by the CRAs.

2) Disputing could lead to a split file.

3) Disputing a few relatively minor things on a CR (e.g. lates, old CO status, etc) could cause the account to be deleted, when the age was helping more than the baddie was hurting.

4) Disputing an account more than once could lead to a "frivilous" charge making it near impossible to dispute it in the future.

5) Disputing could cause an OC or CA, if verified or updated, to add lates to an account where there were none before.

6) Disputing can cause a score drop if OC/CA updates the baddie. FICO may read that account as new.

7) Disputing any baddie account with balances will increase collection activity.

..................

Seems like there were a couple other reasons. There's a similar list here somewhere. These Forums frown on disputing per the T&C of this site, mainly due to these side-effects. Now, there is always a time and place to dispute. For example, an account that isn't yours due to ID theft, illegal re-aging, or multiple accounts of the same debt all reporting the same balance. There's other steps that usually can be done before disputing. BTW, all of these, with the exception of the split file, happened to either DW or myself. Some of this is irrepairable.

Anonymous · ‎06-17-2008

Ok, thanks for the info. So in my case I see that an account which was previously set as last delinquent in 2002 has suddenly been changed to OPENED in 2007 and delinquent 2007. The other one I wanted to dispute was with the same collection agency and the dates looked a little off to me but nothing as noticeable as this one.. however since it was the same creditor it raised my suspicions. Would these then be considered better to report through the CRA or should I handle it with the collection agency (RJM Acq) myself? Or.. should I dispute the definite re-aging (is that what this is?) to the CRA and handle the one in question with the credit agency?

If the CRA does find that they did that and just fixes it for me, what does the collection agency get, a slap on the wrist?

Message Edited by ceruleansoul on 06-17-2008 11:00 PM

Message Edited by ceruleansoul on 06-17-2008 11:02 PM

llecs · ‎06-18-2008

ceruleansoul wrote:
Ok, thanks for the info. So in my case I see that an account which was previously set as last delinquent in 2002 has suddenly been changed to OPENED in 2007 and delinquent 2007. The other one I wanted to dispute was with the same collection agency and the dates looked a little off to me but nothing as noticeable as this one.. however since it was the same creditor it raised my suspicions. Would these then be considered better to report through the CRA or should I handle it with the collection agency (RJM Acq) myself? Or.. should I dispute the definite re-aging (is that what this is?) to the CRA and handle the one in question with the credit agency?

If the CRA does find that they did that and just fixes it for me, what does the collection agency get, a slap on the wrist?

Message Edited by ceruleansoul on 06-17-2008 11:00 PM

Message Edited by ceruleansoul on 06-17-2008 11:02 PM

On the surface it looks re-aged. And certainly if it was it would be easier to remove. Try this: pull TU and EX CRs directly through each CRA (not here, and EQ doesn't have this). On both of those reports you will see a line item at each non-CC baddie that says "estimated date for removal". If your acct went south in 2002, then the drop off date should be in 2009. If it reads 2014, then it definitely was re-aged.

I don't trust the dates on the CR. I had an account that listed DOFD as 2005. Well, it was removed this year because of CRTP. The dates on my CR were all off, however, the CRA knew what the true DOFD was.

If it was re-aged, then contact the CRA to ask about disputing this. They may ask you to include a copy of an older report. I have read in here that they don't always request that, though.

Also, RJM, from what I read, is relatively easy to get a PFD with.