General Question Regarding Disputes

[tensegrity]

Hi guys,

I bought a book on Amazon about a year ago that got great reviews and the guy suggested disputing things on your report even if they're legit with the 30 day rule that they have to research your dispute. I also recently got a tax judgement vacated from my public record and have the paperwork to back it up.

My question is should I try to tackle the tax warrant (which I have the paperwork for) at the same time as disputing other items on my credit (which are technically legit) in the same letter at the same time?

Or would it be better to get the tax warrant taken care of since there's not much for them to say about it, and then try disputing other items later? Or would that look suspect in their eyes because I didn't mention everythign at once?

Just wondering if there's a smart way to go about doing this for the best possible result.

Appreciate any guidance in advance!

Cheers,

Mike

[polno1234]

i think you paid way to much for that book. it shoulda been free. disputing items with no basis doesnt work a whole lot. the will more than likely just come back validated and remain. they have systems in place for frivolous disputes. if the debt is yours it will not just simply dissappear. best thing would be just to post your baddies and wait for an appropriate response.

[tensegrity]

The book was like $9, so i'm not worried about it...and that was ony 1 section of the book. But my question was more regarding the order of disputing things....all at once, or sequentially at different times. If disputing things that may be considered frivolous would hurt my chances of getting my tax warrant removed for which I have actual paperwork from the state.

[polno1234]

doesnt matter when. it would be illegal to deny a legitimate dispute because you already had other frivolous disputes. as long as you have the proof you are fine to dispute in whatever order you chose.

[tensegrity]

gotcha, thanks for the input poino

[RobertEG]

A dispute that does not identify a specific assertted inaccuracy and provide adequate information to permit investigation of the asseted inaccuracy can be dismissed without any requirement to investigate as "frivoloous or irrlevant." 

Thus there is no "30-day rule" compelling the investigation of a dispute if adequate basis is not provided.  It may simply be dismissed.

It is only DV requests under the FDCPA that do not have a requirement of documentation on the part of the consumer.

[polno1234]

robert if they made tacks as smart as you nothing would ever fall off the wall. and sending good vibes to the op