My views.
This is not a simple issue.
First, there is no provision I am aware of in either the FCRA or the FDCPA that prohibits the inclusion in your credit report of more than one debt collector with prior debt collection status/activities on the same debt, so I don’t see that fact alone if two inclusions in your CR as being basis for a dispute of inaccurate credit reporting under the FCRA.
Second, a DV letter can just be ignored, providing they are willing to cease further collection activities until they choose to validate. I would send the DV letters to each, but I would not stop there.
Since both of these debt collectors have posted to your credit report, that allows you to dispute their accuracy of reporting under the FCRA. I would NOT dispute through the CRAs, but rather file a direct dispute with each. Again, I would not use as the basis for the dispute the single fact that two debt collectors are reporting. What I would use is the fact that both are reporting the same exact current information. That may be inaccurate.
Both report the same debt of opening of credit reporting to the CRA (4/2010), and the same current debt owed to them ($542).
There is a possible explanation why both could now be accurately reporting the aame debt. IF the OC sold the debt to WCI, then WCI can report it as theirs. If WCI then retained ownership of the debt, but then assigned collection activities to ER, then both could possibly be reporting the debt, one as the owner, and the other as an authorized debt collector.
Where that would seem to fall apart is the fact that both are reporting the same date of their collection activity under their collection reporting. Not very likely. However, even that is not impossible. They dont have to report to the CRAs on the date they received ownereship of the debt, or received assigned collection authoriity.
WCI could have purchaed the debt, assigned it to ER, and later both reported these facts on the same date. Since you say that there are coporate connections between the two, that couild be the case. Why would they not then just use one name? Because each has its own corporate books.
FDCPA 803(6) defines the term "debt collector" as a party who collects debt owed to another party, and and includes a party who owns the debt to secure a debt collector that is their own internal agent, and give them debt collection authority, as long as the names of the parties do not imply that they are the same party. Thus, WCI and ER.
I certainly suggest you send DV letters and direct dispute letters under FCRA 623(a)(a) to each, but I do see a possible, though unlikely, scenario, where this all could be totally accurate on their part.
Make them provide a plausible, and legtimate explanation.
One thing IS certain. You only have the one debt. So if you pay either one or the other, both must update the balance to $0.
