A dispute under the FCRA requires them to investigate the asserted inaccuracy, and either correct to overcome the inaccuracy, verify that the reporting is correct as it stands, or delete the information. They could reinsert if they later provide verification.
You have laready disputed and obtained resolution, so a new dispute is not a current option.
Most likely, they were unablet to obtain adequate verification within the required 30-day period set in a dspute.
That does not mean they are conceding that they cannot later obtain verification, and then proceed as normal.
Dunning notice is a legal requriement once they have initiated a communication with the consumer, so they are complying with the FDCPA.
If you send a DV within 30 days of the notice, it will impose a cease collection bar on them until they have first provided the requested validation.
Thus, you can impose an additional requirement that they not report reinsertion of their collection until the first validate.
A DV would, in this case, be essentially duplicative of your current imposition of the requirement under the FCRA that they must first present pre-certifcation of the accuracy before they can reinsert their reporting of the deleted collection. I also establishes a similar prohibition agaisnt reporting prior to validation udner the FDCPA.
You can double-impose a prohbition agaisnt reporting by filing a timely DV, providing you are not planning to negotiate payment of the debt with them before they provide verification. However, if your next step is to negotiate payment, such as by offering a PFD, then you may not want a total cease collection bar in place via sending a DV.
