topic Re: Goodwill vs. Dispute in Rebuilding Your Credit

Goodwill vs. Dispute

MakingProgress — Mon, 07 Aug 2017 14:45:03 GMT

I sent aGW request to Heights Finance with whom I had a car loan that was PIF in 2/2014. There were 3 120 day and 1 30 day late payments from 2011 and 2012 on that loan. My GW letter asked if they would bewilling to remove the late payments from the account. In the letter I acknowleged that the late payments were reported correctly.

This was my third attempt at sending them a GW letter. I sent one in May, one in June, and the third in July. I recieved no response at all to the first two requests. I did recieve a response to my third request. In that replay they said that this was the third time I had disputed the payment history and since no new information was provided they would not investigate any additional disputes of this matter, and if new information was found I should submitt a dispute through the CRA.

Do most places consider a GW request to be a dispute? Does it really make any difference that that they are calling it a dispute? Should I contact them and tell them I was not disputing the payments, or just forget about it and wait for them to drop off. The 120 days drop off in 9/18 and the 30 day in 2/19.

Re: Goodwill vs. Dispute

DollyLama — Mon, 07 Aug 2017 17:33:17 GMT

Let them age off, they are just reviewing it as a dispute, as normally most dispute erroneous information through the credit bureaus. You admitted in letter the lates were indeed yours, but ask for removal. At least you gave it a try.

Re: Goodwill vs. Dispute

Anonymous — Mon, 07 Aug 2017 19:03:58 GMT

I can only tell you that when I called to ask for the address to send a goodwill lender for my auto loan, it was suggested by the lender that I initiate a dispute with the credit bureau that had the late pays which was Equifax and stated in the goodwill letter that a dispute was initiated to the CRA per lenders instructions. That way they would look at the tradeline and do whatever they do. I did the dispute over the phone with CRA with an explanation and then ended up faxing the goodwill letter to a department that handles credit bureau inquiries so they knew what to expect. I did this at the same time. Just remember that the creditor doesn't have to do anything if the lates are indeed accurate so you will want to be very regretful what happened and find a reason they would benefit from removing lates. Since it was pointed out to you that you keep giving the same reason you want them removed, I would first go online with the CRA's and find out what some of the reasons are to dispute and see if you can find one you haven't used for each credit bureau, as all 3 bureaus have different reason codes. Then, get completely out of the dispute section and call all 3 bureaus and give them the best activity code you picked for each bureau and give them some additional narrative that they will input to be supplied to lender. This will prevent frivolous disputes and prevent it from being automatically rejected by E-Oscar. Although you could probably do this online I prefer over the phone with a live rep. Also, you are probably going to get a CRA representative from overseas, so when they pick up and I hear an Indian dialect, I ask for a U.S. representative please and they happily forward me to a U.S. Rep. I've done this with all 3 bureaus. If they ask the reason don't say dispute or they may not transfer you. I find in my experience that the U.S. reps were more cooperative and tended to be supervisors when transferred. In my situation, I had gone through a loan mod. and also had another loan where I have been making payments for 17 months for that lender. They removed the status notation history on the account, which is what you want to get rid of the lates. As far as the goodwill letter is concerned, be contrite and limit the goodwill letter to one page or less. Put yourself in their place and use words like member if it is a credit union, steady employment, making payments, etc. Make sure you make your request and get your point across in the first paragraph as we all know how attention spans go when reading letters. Also, if the lates are only on 1 or 2 credit bureaus make sure your letter says change only those bureaus or you might find they change or add the entry when you don't want it. Good luck!

Re: Goodwill vs. Dispute

Anonymous — Mon, 07 Aug 2017 22:08:44 GMT

Just curious @crandall10
What reason would "benefit" a lender to fib about a late payment that indeed occurred?

I find that to be an interesting statement....

The truth of matter is a GW letter and even a PFD really are requesting for a little white lie

The talk of accurate information, honestly only matters in one favor, we the public will ask for a lie to be told in a hot minute, we don't want the 'truth' told if it hurts us accuracy be da mned...

Wipe that ugly stuff, if at all possible
Please help fool the next guy into thinking my blemishes never happening, let's delete it from the record, change the facts, hide info from the next evaluator...

Just having fun
It sounds different, when you explain what's going on in slightly alternative words😊

Re: Goodwill vs. Dispute

Anonymous — Mon, 07 Aug 2017 23:11:17 GMT

Fib is your word, not mine. Everybodies situation is different and you are trying to use a cookie cutter mentality in giving your view. For instance, if a borrower was going to participate in a hardship program with the lender, the lender may not want payments that doesn't catch up to the total in arrears. That has started a period of rollling 6's or 4's depending on what bureau is reporting and then there will be a trial payment period of 3 months where they will collect payments to prove borrower can handle payments and apply those funds to the new modification. Lenders might find it in their hearts to give borrower a break for those 3 months. Also, there might be a housing program that helps borrowers keep their homes for a set amount which might equate to 3 - 5 months of payments which borrower wouldn't have been able to pay, but again might feel that they could delete some of the lates. The benefit for the lender might have been that the existing mortgage was upside down when they did the modification or they see that since the modification borrower has had a stellar payment period. Lenders are left with their discretion and will do what they will do. I don't mind giving advice from what I have experienced or read in forum's such as this one. I find your comment not beneficial to anyone but yourself. (slightly alternative words.)

Re: Goodwill vs. Dispute

RobertEG — Tue, 08 Aug 2017 01:17:22 GMT

There are two alternate dispute processes under the FCRA.

The most common is to file the dispute with the CRA and let them handle the referral to the furnisher of the information and provide the results to the consumer.

The second route permits the consumer to file their dispute directly with the furnisher, thus avoiding any involvement of the CRA.

When a furnisher receives a communication from the consumer, they must determine whether it is a direct dispute or involves some other issue, such as a GW request.

If the communication includes any statements that can be construed as a contest of the reporting, they might interpret it as a direct dispute.

It is prudent not to include statements arguing the accuracy of the information.

If they interpret a communication as a direct dispute, they can dismiss it is "frivolous or irrelevant" if it does not substantiate any specific inaccuracy in their reporting or it is substantially the same as a prior dispute.

A dismissed dispute is not required to be investigated, and should not be reported to any CRA as a pending dispute.

Thus, since they dismissed the "dispute," it would not be reportable to the CRAs, and thus would have no effect on scoring.

A direct dispute would only be reported to the CRAs if they are investigating the dispute.

The affect on scoring is that certain account information is temporarily removed from scoring while a dispute is pending.