10-12-2010 03:47 AM
10-12-2010 07:05 AM
AOnce the collection is removed your score should return, there's no "memory" in scoring, the score is based on the data in your CR at the time it's pulled. Don't let them try to show it as a piad collection or other derogatory.
You didn't get the fact it was their error in writing? That would have helped but they're probably reluctant to make such an admission in writing.
I would call them, tell them you are being harmed by their inaccurate reporting and ask why they cannot get this done today. It requires them to inform the CA that the collection was erroneous and get the CA to remove the TL today. They can do it (the OC and CA) if they are motivated.
Call the CA, if you took down names, titles etc. in your conversations with the OC (Windstream) tell the CA it's a Windstream error and if they haven't gotten that they need to., Follow up with a letter CMRRR.
Send written disputes CMRRR (don't dispute online) with the CRAs. Tell them not to "parrot" via eOscar but they must provide the supporting information to the furnisher (the CA). Include in your dispute letter the facts of who you spoke to at Windstream and when, who you spoke to at the CA and when, the cancelled check (cover up the account and routing number).
Here's a paragraph you can include in letters to the CRAs:
"I am aware that you are required to thoroughly investigate this dispute and precedent exists for me to recover damages if you merely parrot information or rely solely on eOscar, see Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 115 F.3d 220, 225 (3d Cir.1997) ("The 'grave responsibility' imposed by § 1681i(a) must consist of something more than merely parroting information received from other sources. Therefore, a 'reinvestigation' that merely shifts the burden back to the consumer and the credit grantor cannot fulfill the obligations contemplated by the statute."); see also Henson v. CSC Credit Servs., 29 F.3d 280, 286-87 (7th Cir.1994); Stevenson v. TRW, Inc., 987 F.2d 288, 293 (5th Cir.1993); McKeown v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 335 F.Supp.2d 917, 930 (W.D.Wis. 2004)."
10-12-2010 08:02 PM - edited 10-12-2010 08:21 PM
I would not even dispute through the CRA at all.
Your dispute is with the CA, and there is no reason to have to use the CRA as an intermediary in its resolution, including their use of their inane e-Oscar process.
That is what the new direct dispute process is all about. Send your dispute and supporting documentation directly to the CA who posted in your CR.
While I totally agree with the sentiments expressed in the language suggested by Chasmith regarding the overuse of e-Oscar and the need for the CRA to conduct their own "reinvestigation" under FCRA 611(a), this is on a case by case basis, and is not univerally established case law. The level of reliance on e-Oscar has never, to my knowlege, even been succienttly decided on this specfic legal poin at any fed appellant level. There is, as of July 1. 2010, simply no longer a need to get embroiled in such legal controversy.
Just byass the the CRA entorely, and e-Oscar is no longer an issue.
Suggested direct dispute letter
“This is a Notice of Direct Dispute with you, under the provisions of FCRA 623(a)(8)(D), of the accuracy of information you have posted to my credit file.
“In compliance with FCRA 623(a)(8)(D), and enacting regulations published at 16 CFR § 660.4, this Notice includes:
“Identification of the specific information being disputed:
(specify the account number, and the specific information that is being dipsuted)
“Basis for the dispute:
(how the reporting was inaccurate; based on any statutory or regulatory provisions?)
(all documents that support your dispute; make sure to include,
as part of your documentation, a copy of the portion of your
recent credit report showing their reporting of the
“Under the provisions of FCRA 623(a)(8)(E), you have the duty to review all of the information in this Notice of Dispute, to complete your investigation, and report back to me the results of your investigation, within 30-days of my Notice of Dispute.”
10-12-2010 08:26 PM
I would also send a DV letter to the CA. They cant refuse to consider it, since they apparently never send you the requried collection (dunning) notice within 5-days of posting to your CR. I would make sure they know that you are aware that they are in violation of FDCPA 809(a).
10-13-2010 07:02 PM
Hi, Just to let you all know, they still haven't taken this negative off my CR, they put it down as being paid. I did not pay the CA I paid Windstream, I am so angry over this I wish I could sue them. I am very stressed over this, even when my score was bad it was better than it is now. I am going to make another phone call tomorrow and if that doesn't work I will follow your advice. Thanks so much...I'll let you all know what happens.
10-14-2010 06:37 AM
Was on phone with Windstream for an hour, they are sending me a letter stating it was their error. Called collection agency, told them they were supposed to notify me 5 days before submitting this to my CR. The man was very rude to me and told me they didn't have to let me know about anything and hung up on me. Is there anything I can do? Both blamed one another for this happening.
myFICO is the consumer division of FICO. Since its introduction 20 years ago, the FICO® Score has become a global standard for measuring credit risk in the banking, mortgage, credit card, auto and retail industries. 90 of the top 100 largest U.S. financial institutions use the FICO Score to make consumer credit decisions.>> About myFICO