The statutory requirement when verifying accuracy of prior reporting is that they conduct a reasonable investigation, and based on that investigation, have basis for concluding that their reporting of collection on the debt was accurate. Their reporting was of their collection activity, so the issue under dispute would be whether they had legitimate collection authority, not the issue of validity of the debt.
They could, in my opinion, based on the fact that the consumer paid the debt, reasonably conclude that their collection activities were accurate. They may have other records, apart from what was requested, that also establish the legitimacy of their collection on the debt.
The furnisher of disputed information is not required to provide supporting documentation for their determination, or prove that their determination was proper. If a consumer contests the basis for their determination, then they can compel the debt collector to produce the factual basis in court, and have a judge review and rule on its sufficiency. The consumer does not, at this point, have access to all the information that might serve as their basis for a verification, so it is just an assertion that their verification would be improper.
Since the primary purpose of credit reporting by debt collectors is as a tool in their collection of the debt, and the debt is now paid, they may very well just delete rather than verify. So worth sending a dispute, but in my opinion, if they verify, it would require civil action in order to contest.
Starting Score: EQ: 383 2/2011