Been trying to get a late payment removed from my reports. It's the only account reporting negative. Ended up filing a dispute with TU and EQ. Both came back un-updated, no changes.
Filed the same dispute with EX and got a notification this morning that the offending late was removed! My USAA EX score jumped 20 points (yes, I know it's not the real FICO, but it's all I have for EX). I'm really appreciative of the change from them as now my EX report is spotless. However, pulled my EQ from MyFICO this morning and no changes even though this morning's USAA refresh shows no lates for EQ/TU. Though my USAA scores did NOT go up for EQ or TU, only EX.
Question: Will the creditor update TU/EQ for me on its own? Do I need to file another dispute w/ TU and EQ? What's the best way to go about this? Not really sure why the creditor changed EX but not the others in the first place...
EQ/TU won't update on their own. The CRAs don't talk to each other at all, and most likely the creditor isn't going to automatically update the other two.
I'd try to re-dispute, if the reason for disputing is accurate. But keep in mind that if you dispute the same account for the same reason, EQ and TU might not even do a proper investigation. YMMV.
Was the late payment incorrect?
Best of luck! In my experience, EQ is the tough one.
Check the status of the EQ dispute, and in the "estimated completion" column, see if they gave you a proper 30 day window, or a 1 day window like they did to me when I redisputed.
In such a situation, there should be no need to file a new dispute with each CRA if the furnisher had followed the requirements of the FCRA.
The CRAs arent required to share dispute results. Rather, the FCRA places the burden on the furnisher of the disputed information to provide any correction or deletion to ALL of the CRAs they have reported the disputed information to, and not just the CRA that handled the dispute. FCRA 623(b((1)(D).
The fault is with the creditor for not having fulfilled their obligation to report the results to all the CRAs.
I would contact the creditor and remind them of their statutory obligation. If informal requests do not work, then I would file a direct dispute with the furnisher for their failure to have complied with section 623(b)(1)(D). Keep the CRAs out of it.
Well I guess that was incorrect. I disputed with EQ and did nothing with TU. Just got dispute results from EQ today and all lates were removed. No changes on TU . Just initiated a TU dispute to get the last of it removed.
The breakdown in the process occurs when the furnisher, upon receiving a copy of the dispute from the CRA, ignores it or fails to repond back to the CRA.
The statutory process is as follows:
1. The CRA is required, within 5 days of receiving the dispute, to forward it to the furnisher of the disputed information for their investigation. FCRA 611(a)(2).
2. The furnisher is then required, under FCRA 623(b), to conduct their investigation of the dispute information, and report their results back to the CRA before the expiration of the CRA reinvestigation period, which is usually 30 days.
3. If the furnisher agrees that the information is inaccurate, they can either report a correction to the CRA or leave the information as unverified by them, which requiires they report its deletion to the CRA who is handling the dispute, and to any other CRA to which they have reported the information.. FCRA 623(b)(1)(D) and (E).
4. The CRA, using the (hopefull provided) response from the furnisher and any other information available to them, conducts their "reinvestigation" of the disputed information, makes a determination, and sends notification of their finding to the consumer.
While the furnisher does have a statutory obligation to report back to the CRA and, if they either decide to correct or cannot verify the accuracy, report that fact to the CRAs, that does not ensure that they will do so. If the CRA does not receive verification or correction from the furnisher, they will most likely conclude their reinvestigation with the determination that they cannot verify, and thus are compelled to delete. But that is done only by the CRA handling the dispute. The other CRAs remain clueless.
Not having responded to the CRA with respect to the dispute itself, the furnisher is highly unlikely to comply with the section 623(b)(1)(E) requirement to report any correction or deletion to each of the CRAs. So they have a double-failure to comply with the statute.
The FCRA does not specify a procedure for dealing with lack of furnisher compliance with either their obligation to respond back to the CRA or to report any correction or deletion to each CRA. So the consumer sits in limbo with unverified information remaining with the other CRAs that did not handle the dispute itself.
My answer is a little shorter. No