cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

MCM 623 dispute *update:success!*

tag
guiness56
Epic Contributor

Re: MCM deleted!

Message 31 of 43
Gstew
Valued Member

Re: MCM deleted!

Yes this was in response to my 626 direct dispute. My letter is on the first or second page I think!

-edit I totally ment 623.... I've been watching too much lilo and stitch with my daughter.. Her favorite movie haha
Message 32 of 43
guiness56
Epic Contributor

Re: MCM deleted!

Message 33 of 43
madmann26
Valued Contributor

Re: MCM/ Midland installment *update: sent direct dispute*


@Gstew wrote:
Imagine flailing arms as I ran to my copier then grabbed my keys and flew out the door. Busted through the post office door and franticly pleading to get my letter back.
I'm pretty sure the lady thought I was off my rocker Smiley Tongue

I'm surprised that this did not garner other, more negative attention, mainly, that of an armed guard or police officer. 

 

Smiley Very Happy

 

Current FICO 9 Scores



Message 34 of 43
Gstew
Valued Member

Re: MCM 623 dispute *update:success!*

Haha! I think in a bigger town I would have been taken into custody. Smiley Tongue thankfully it's a town of like 5000 people at max and a very small post office and she remembers me.
Message 35 of 43
guiness56
Epic Contributor

Re: MCM 623 dispute *update:success!*


@Gstew wrote:
Haha! I think in a bigger town I would have been taken into custody. Smiley Tongue thankfully it's a town of like 5000 people at max and a very small post office and she remembers me.

Hopefully that isn't a bad thing later on Smiley LOL

Message 36 of 43
TuffT
New Member

Re: MCM/ Midland funding Reporting As installment. DV?

TY TY TY, for this info, ive been trying to figure out which statues were the best to use, and really appreciate this, sending this out today.

 

 

My Midlands saga, is about the same as the rest, but we have been going crazy trying to close up our home loan.  As I was in the mortgage industry for 20+ yrs previously, I figured I could handle this situation, but wow MIDLANDS is like a flesh eating disease!

 

We had gone around and around, with them trying to get them to remove outrite, since it was a debt to my husbands old cell bill.  This was for cancellation of three lines, but we moved out of state, so not supposed to be liable.  haha I guess Midlands didnt get the message.

 

Anyway after the 3 contract extension, I had finally lost my composer.  I was so angry with Equifax, as I told them what was wrong with the information on our report, well they kept saying that they physcially can't see what I was telling them was clearly wrong.  Not sure why or what that means, but when I sw them, made it sound like something was fishy, my honey went on this blog, and started seeing the posts about the FACTORING COMPANY.

 

And low and behold we saw that EX was showing this, and Equifax showing as an OPEN account, with a monthly payment.  Well original bill was a 1 mo acct, with no set payment, so from what i've now read, when they put it under open, or FACTORING, or monthly payment amount, they in essence are able to trick the credit bureaus into reading it wrong.

 

Also, with that said, they are able to make them also think we are 120 past due, and also in essence getting a new collection on our credit every single month, as new as 2/2014, even though opened was 2/2012.

 

So, unfortunately last time I s/w EQuifax, they put account, back in dispute, after we waited for the rescore to take it out for our mortage co.  THEN said, they cant remove the DISPUTE info again, until the investigation gets formally resolved, although we had to extend contract again, and pay for rate extension, after the 30 days, we were rewarded with one DELETE off from Equifax, so after 2 plus years of this, i felt it was worth it.

 

This was last Thur, now here we are two days, later, and get the same crap now added to our TU account, which the whole time was the only one that was correct.

 

I HAVE OFFICIALLY HAD IT WITH THESE PUNKS.  I went ahead and filed the FTC complaint, but originally CONVERGENCE was in the picture.  Was nice, got a response from Convergence, saying that they were going to close the account with them and return to Midlands, due to our complaint.

 

So, now i'm going to again file FTC complaint with midlands only, but the icing on the cake during this whole ordeal, is this.  

 

AFTER WE unDISPUTED the tradeline for our mortgage co, we got the info about equifax being stuff till the investigation was over.  Both TU AND EXP, were also again disputed, which we had never even spoken with TU, so NO WAY could have been us, or a mistake.

 

So my honey called them both, TU said not sure why, but MIDLAND could report it this way, because the account, was formerly disputed, as was their rite.  And to check back next day, it may be resolved on its own.  Weird, but surprisingly it was not disputed.

 

But the weirdest was this, He called and spoke with Exp, and in sw them, they said this, after we removed our disputed line, on Fed 4,2014, "someone" a third party" , had put in dispute again on 2/29/14.  And on had sent a fax on 3/24/14, taking it out of dispute.  THEN IMMEDIATELY AFTER, and I mean rite after, within 10-15 m, MIDLANDS THEMSELVES had again put a dispute on our file.

 

 

When Husband pressed them, they asked us if we had hired someone?  or a third party, and he said well maybe, but not sure.  He had thought they had a fax from "lexington", but wouldn't tell him who had done this supposedly.  The weird thing is the guy from EXP was acting a bit weird, like he thought it strange too, THAT MIDLAND, had put in dispute so soon after "SUPPOSEDLY SOMEONE-3RD PARTY" taking it out.

 

We actually believe that MIDLANDS has been changing the status on at least EXP for the trade line, AND PRETENDING TO ME EITHER MY HUSBAND OR LEXINGTON, or both.  We are working on trying to get copies of the documentation that they have regarding this, becuase I would think if we could document that type of stuff, or showing that they are editing documents from our old 3RD PARTY, they may be in trouble with the FCRA or maybe even the feds for pretending to be a consumer and changing his credit.

 

 

WELL MAYBE we will be lucky and have MIDLANDS pay for our new home lol.

 

Anyone else hear of anything this outrageous?  I just can't believe the gall of this company.  At this point I wouldn't put anything past these guys, they are dirty, and mean, but this goes beyond anything ive ever heard of.

 

Thanks for reading this book, and sorry if long, really tired was up till 330 with honey in the hospital.  

Message 37 of 43
MysticcalFX
Valued Member

Re: MCM/ Midland funding Reporting As installment. DV?

I had nearly the exact same situation that you did on one of my midland tradelines. Gonna try this. Thanks.

Message 38 of 43
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: MCM/ Midland funding Reporting As installment. *updated: critique my DD letter please*

Bringing this old thread back to life..@RobertEG I see what you're saying about pick one method and stick with it BUT a possible way around this would be start with 623 method and if that doesnt pan out to get your desired outcome then disput TL with CRA, if they go through standard e-oscar channels  and get the generic answer back you can then do an MOV request under Section 611 of the FCRA and they have 15 days to give you a more complete picture of how. Chances are this wont happen or it will be generic yet again. You then have cause of action under FCRA against the CRA fo failure to describe MOV. Just a name address and code won't fit the bill. 

Message 39 of 43
RobertEG
Legendary Contributor

Re: MCM 623 dispute *update:success!*

Sounds like game-playing to me.  I would not advocate filing a second dispute that is substantially the same as a prior dispute, and asserting a requirement that they must conduct a new investigation and then dislcose their method of verification.

 

The purpose of the dispute processes is to permit the consumer to present their assertion of inaccurate reporting, and thus require that the furnisher conduct a reasonable investigation and provide their determination either that the disputed information is accurate as reported, that they correct the asserted inaccuracy, or delete if they cannot either verify or correct.  There are no appeals or requirements for multimple investigations.

 

Whether or not you compel their investigation directly via a direct dispute, or via referreal to them by a CRA, they are only compelled to conduct one investigation.

A second dispute filed via a CRA on substantially the same info can be dismissed without any need for reinvestigation, and thus there will be no method of verification to request. The second dispute is dismissed without investigation.

 

See 16 CFR 660.4(f) for definition of a frivolous or irrelevant dispute that is substantially the same as a prior dispute, regardless of whether the prior dispute was a direct dispute or filed with a CRA,

 

 

Message 40 of 43
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.