How do unresponsive creditors keep their items on credit reports?

[kdeproto]

I've been working on my own credit repair for at least the last 4 years.  A few years ago, I hired Lexington Law to represent me to clean up several items on my credit reports to accelerate the process of rebuilding my credit AND have done a great deal of my own correspondence work with the same goal.  I've done a great deal of research into how to go about doing so and have learned a lot about how credit, credit reporting and credit repair WORK.  I've managed to get my scores up well over 200 point in the last 3 years and actually sit in the so-called "Good" range (at about 670).

One thing I haven't figured out is HOW items that should be removed from credit reports due to lack of response from the Creditor or Debt holder (and/or Age) STAY on your Credit Reports.

If neither Lexington Law or I could get any kind of response from a Creditor, how do the Bureaus during validation?  If the debts were legitamately 'Validated' by the Bureaus, HOW did THEY do it?

Because I don't have the time right now and need results pretty fast, I've hired CreditRepair.com to help me on this round of remaining debts.  What do I do if I can't get the last few things off my reports?

BTW, Lexington Law did help me a little.  I saw a pretty good return from their efforts but it was costly and I probably could have done most of the work myself if I'd invested the time but they most definitely sped the process up by doing their mail bombardment.  I'm hoping CreditRepair.com muscles some additional results out too, but that remains to be seen.

[Anonymous]

Please do some research on the use of credit repair service providers.

[Shogun]

Because the creditors will respond to them, not necessarily to you.  Lexington Law does not represent themselves as a law firm, cause really,their name is misleading.  They send disputes in that look like they come from you.  So you aren't getting responded to,  not the CRAs.

[RobertEG]

If you send a dispute via a CRA, the CRA must send notice of the dispute to the furnisher, and he furnisher must respond to the CRA.

The CRA then makes their determination under their reinvestigation authority, and sends the Notice of Results of Reinvestigation to you.

You dont hear from the furnisher. 

If the furnisher does not respond to the CRA, the CRA must still conclude its reinvestigation within 30 days, and mail its Notice of Results witin 5 days thereater.

While it is theorectically possible that the CRA could verify the accuracy based on some other information, in practice, they almost always rubber stamp the findings of the furntisher, and usually have no independent way to verify.

If they do not correct or verify the accuracy, the CRA is required to delete the disputed information.

If you send a direct dispute to the furnisher, they are required to respond directly to you within the same period as provided to CRAs if your dispute was sent to them.

If you dispute via a CRA and have suspicions that the furnisher did not respond to the CRA, you can send a request to the CRA that they describe the method and procedure they used to verify the dispute, which includes who they sent the dispute to, and what response they received.

[kdeproto]

Thanks for the responses (although some are more helpful than others).

One thing I neglected to mention is that several of the 'lack of responses' I got were actually certified letters that were returned as "Undeliverable". Since this all began, I think most of those have actually dropped off as a result of time but it was frustrating to not be able to communicate with some of those pesky creditors.

RobertEG, you mentioned that sending a request to the CRA descibing the method and proceedure they used to verify the entries. Do you mean to write letters to the Bureaus or are there forms to complete? Either way, can you recommend a source for the forms or that offer tips in the process?

[RobertEG]

"This is a request under the provisions of FCRA 611(a)(7) for description by the credit reporting agency of the procedure you used to determine the accuracy and completeness if the information that was subject of my prior dispute filed on __________. 

Your Notice of Resutls of Reinvestigation of that prior dispute verified the accuracy of the information under dispute (copy attached).

This request is what is commonly referred to as a request for your Mehtod of Verification (MOV) of my prior dispute.

This is NOT a renewed dispute.

"In particular, I request the business name and address of any furnsiher of information that you contacted in connection with the presiously disputed information, and the telephone number of such furnisher, if reasonably available.  I also request the name and address of each furnisher to responded to you regarding the indentified dispute.  See FCRA 611(a)(6)(B)(iii) for basis for this request.."

[Shogun]

---

@kdeproto wrote:

Thanks for the responses (although some are more helpful than others).

One thing I neglected to mention is that several of the 'lack of responses' I got were actually certified letters that were returned as "Undeliverable". Since this all began, I think most of those have actually dropped off as a result of time but it was frustrating to not be able to communicate with some of those pesky creditors.

RobertEG, you mentioned that sending a request to the CRA descibing the method and proceedure they used to verify the entries. Do you mean to write letters to the Bureaus or are there forms to complete? Either way, can you recommend a source for the forms or that offer tips in the process?

---

Do a forum search for MOV, Method of Validation.

[Anonymous]

I hope I understand your question, the creditor respond to disputes electronically through an system called e-Oscar.  They don't recieve calls or letter from the reprorting agencies.

[Anonymous]

How much did Lexington Law help you?

[kdeproto]

CN1982 - Lex Law was moderately helpful in the short run.  Their efforts quickly got about 2-3 items removed off each of my CRs in the 1st 2-3 months.  After that, they became essentially useless.  They openly admitted that their role is to just simply keep sending the same verify/validate letters on your behalf, so they are only truely effective at getting the easy stuff off.  Their letters never changed (in my case) and they didn't offer any guidance as to how to handle the more challenging items NOR did they ever assist in any direct action with Collections and such, and I mean in terms of even providing info as to how to help yourself.  Almost everything they did, I could have done myself but it would have required a good deal of time and leg-work.  So if you need quick results on simple items, they might be worth a couple months of payments (if you can afford it).  If you venture their services, keep an eye on their effectiveness and terminate the contract if the results stop.  I imagine creditrepair.com will come to the same thing but I've just started working with them, so the jury is out.   I used Lex Law several years ago.  Hope this helps.

As for the other responses, thank for the info.  I'll do some research on MOVs, and thanks again Robert