We'll call this letter the Doublespaces Strategy 
First of all, this is an email I sent to an original creditor last night late after 11pm and this morning at 10am the account is already deleted from Equifax. They were insistent that an agency could come in and audit the company and if they didn't have any information reported on my account yet had records pertaining to my account, then they wouldn't be reporting accurately and they would be in violation. They tried to trick me into giving them a credit report I'm assuming so that they could just fix the errors and avoid a full deletion of the tradeline. They were extremely difficult, I had to work very hard to get an email address from someone who could help me.I spoke with a woman on the phone and they said they would absolutely not delete a tradeline because its breaking the law. Interestingly enough, their reporting itsself was breaking the law if they didn't fix it. We'll see if they are smart and delete from my other two cra's as well.
I'm not a lawyer as you may be able to tell from my email, depending on your legal experience, I'm simply an ordinary 26 year old who wants to buy a house. I slapped this together and the results I achieved were immediate. Not 30 to 45 days!
Keep in mind that this email is a last resort. I had been much more cordial earlier but they didn't budge. I've sent Credit Protection Association and Portfolio Recovery Associates much nicer emails and they complied. Again, you must find an error!
The most important thing that everyone does is FIND AN ERROR! Do not tell them exactly where the error appears. If you've done this then they could just correct it. Explain that there is an error and you are worried about the rest of the tradeline containing errors and leverage the fact that your account is paid and closed. If the account is closed, they no longer have the ability to look at your report and see where the errors were made and if legal action is waved in their face they should delete.
Hello Ms. XXXXXXXXXX,
I greatly apologize for taking this long to get back to you however I've been very busy with my work and other personal obligations and I'm just now acquiring the opportunity to set aside my matters, sit down and fully explain the situation and the one and only acceptable solution.
The reason for my correspondence is regarding inaccurate marks on my credit file. Throughout this email I will provide you with internally verifiable as inaccurate data that is being reported which does not require any other data from myself to confirm. Based on what I have discovered, I likely have a number of errors beyond what I had immediately noticed on my credit report. I have noticed KD marks on my reports as well as other negative marks which I had verified through my credit card statements as inaccurate. I was never sent to collections on this account referenced at the bottom of my email as you would be able to verify through your own records so this is the basis of the inaccuracy but not limited to being my only concern of inaccuracy regarding my tradeline with XXXXXX as there are already others, though much less impacting, they exist.
According to the Fair Credit Reporting Act(FCRA):
§ 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies
[15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2]
(a) Duty of Furnishers of Information to Provide Accurate Information
(1) Prohibition
(A) Reporting information with actual knowledge of errors. A person shall not
furnish any information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting
agency if the person knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the
information is inaccurate.
(B) Reporting information after notice and confirmation of errors. A person shall not furnish information relating to a consumer to any consumer
reporting agency if
furnish any information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting
agency if the person knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the
information is inaccurate.
(B) Reporting information after notice and confirmation of errors. A person shall not furnish information relating to a consumer to any consumer
reporting agency if
(i) the person has been notified by the consumer, at the address specified by the person for such notices, that specific information is inaccurate; and
(ii) the information is, in fact, inaccurate.
(ii) the information is, in fact, inaccurate.
I am notifying you that the entire tradeline has lost its integrity, not just a single month or two. To update my credit file yet leave other inaccuracies, deliberately or not, could be considered the same as acknowledging them to be accurate which can be construed as reporting inaccurate information after being notified. For XXXXXX to continue updating or retaining corrupt tradeline information on my credit report with inaccuracies, which could be proven in court, would be a violation for each instance according to the above since it is prohibited to report inaccurate information once notified or having a reasonable cause to believe the information is inaccurate. For due process, I am notifying you and any necessary reasonable cause should exist with XXXXXX personnel after reading this correspondence. You have agreed to accept documents from me Via email and therefore XXXXXX should consider this email as notice that the information being furnished to the consumer reporting agencies to be inaccurate(If not and you wish to continue forward in noncompliance, a revised hard copy can be sent from my attorney including previous emails with timestamps from the current electronic correspondence if necessary) and it is now your responsibility to verify the KD as inaccurate in your own records, which should be quite easy considering we both know that there should not be any Key Derogatory marks on this tradeline. For me to pay additionally to obtain a copy of my credit report would be unnecessary nor should it be my responsibility at this point in order for XXXXXX to come to this conclusion since you can and should be able to verify the above marks are not accurate internally. The inability to verify internally within XXXXXX's own resources that a KD does not belong on my credit report would be an indicator of unwilling faculty or sub-standard record keeping/reporting practices and would be one of many instances that I've encountered involving non-compliance over the phone. My personal experience with yourself, Katie, you have been accommodating and professional thus far and I appreciate that unlike the others that have hung up on me and been outright rude with absolutely no regard to customer service. When going into these types of calls I typically have them recorded and the proper notification is always exercised. Any additional calls from here forward should be considered properly notified as being potentially recorded as well.
The fact that the errors on my credit report occur more than once could ruin the perceived and possibly the actual integrity of XXXXXX's record keeping and reporting abilities or the faculty that physically do the reporting through E-Oscar or equivalent and would compromise any and all tradelines that I have with XXXXXX. When XXXXXX reports to the Consumer Reporting Agencies, you are responsible for representing my credit history not only accurately but additionally, in a form of accuracy which does not depict a poorer credit history than what is actual which would induce damage to my credit character. In the best interests of avoiding future litigation regarding other inaccuracies on my tradeline from XXXXXX I am again requesting that the entire reporting history to be deleted, not updated, to reflect a more conservative and more accurate reporting history. When there is uncertainty it may have legal implications to report anything excessively negative. I've included an Adverse Action notice that I have received after being denied credit which mentions a collection account as reason for denial of credit. I do not have any other accounts in collections on my credit report and the cause of this adverse action could only rest on XXXXXX. The Adverse Action that I have already suffered from Discover Financial Services and others in the future will continue to satisfy the required proof for the following below in the event that I present existing and further errors. Via FCRA:
§ 616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance [15 U.S.C. § 1681n]
(a) In general. Any person who willfully fails to comply with any requirement imposedunder this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amountequal to the sum of(1) (A) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or
damages of not less than $100 and not more than $1,000; or
(B) in the case of liability of a natural person for obtaining a consumer report
under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose, actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or $1,000, whichever is greater;
(2) such amount of punitive damages as the court may allow; and
(3) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court.
The definition of Willful Noncompliance in reference to the FCRA has been determined many times and in the specific case "Jennifer Cushman v. Trans Union Corp" which is explained below:
Addressing the standard for a willful violation of the FCRA, the Ninth Circuit agreed with the Third Circuit that a defendant acts “willfully” if it acts with either a conscious disregard of consumers’ known rights under the FCRA or “reckless disregard of whether the policy [or action] contravened those rights. (quoting Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 115 F.3d 220, 227 (3d Cir. 1997)).
It doesn't require recklessness, simply knowing that my rights are being disregarded to constitute willful violation even if the wrong doing is an accident unless it is rectified. Now that you have an understanding of the damages that XXXXXX has caused regardless if this is corrected or not and the future implications if not corrected, I am requesting that the entire reporting history not to be updated, since XXXXXX has shown the inability to do that properly, but deleted from Equifax, Experian and TransUnion within 5 days from the date of this e-mail; I would like to receive a written and signed notice via e-mail with letterhead including any UDF that may be available with a hard copy of the same via US Mail to the address below stating that you have taken care of this matter and a confirmation that the account or reporting history has been indeed deleted from all three reporting agencies. Any further communication that is not compliant with my request or otherwise could be interpreted as a lack of acknowledgement will be forwarded and handled by my attorney and I will be forced to consider taking legal action and pursuing damages, although I don't think it should come to that for a debt that I have paid. I have worked hard for my credit and to pay off my debts. Additionally with continued non-compliance a complaint to the Better Business Bureau, Federal Trade Commission and Attorney General will be made to ensure my credit stature is repaired. It would be beneficial to everyone if XXXXXX supported the people that have brought business their direction, not hindered. As your company says, customer service is your first priority, not dis-service and I hope that would ring true in this delicate situation.
Thank you for the attention this matter deserves. I look forward to hearing from you soon.
SSN: XXX-XX-XXXX
Account #: XXXXXXXXX
Recoveries Department
Reserve Line of Credit
YOURNAMEHERE
PO BOX 11111
Beverly Hills CA, 90210
@RobertEG wrote:In my opinion, your strategy seems to lack focus.
The process for disputing the accuracy of information is to file a dispute under FCRA 611(a) through the CRA, or to file a direct dispute with the creditor under FCRA 623(a)(8).
Your letter is not specifically identified as a direct dispute under FCRA 623(a)(8), and as such technically does not invoke the time periods and investigation requirements of the direct dispute process.
I would send a direct dispute, clearly labeled as such, to the creditor. Their investigation requirements extend only to the identified items in the dispute that are asserted to have been inaccurately reported, based on the supporting documentation provided. YOur email seems to be all over the place, raising vague assertions of numerous inaccuracies, and threatened legal action. Those cannot be addressed specifically in the dispute process.
I would advise to send a very specific dispute under FCRA 623(a)(8), clearly identifying each individual item of information asserted to be inaccurate, along with any supporting documentation. Items not specifically identified do not provide their ability to conduct a reasonable investigation. Additionally, any requirements placed on them to correct or delete information only pertains to the items specifically identified in the dispute.
If I were the creditor, such a letter would create much confusion as to exactly what is being disputed. You may receive a simple dismissal without investigation based on the lack of specificity of the disputed information, and/or lack of documentary support. Such dismissals are provided for under FCRA 623(a)(8)(F), Dont open the door for them to take such action.
+1. If you had success with this, I think you got lucky. You got someone who basically said, to heck with it, I don't know what they're talking about and don't care. Deleted. I wouldn't count on that as a consistenly winning strategy.
Starting Score: ~500 (12/01/2008)