topic Re: Is there a violation in here? in Rebuilding Your Credit

Is there a violation in here?

abadfish66 — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 01:57:41 GMT

I see 2 verified violations on this account. One being the balance is higher than the high balance, and second, this collection account is showing as an open account...Correct me if I'm wrong... here is the letter I got today from Equifax.

This creditor has verified to
Equifax that the high credit/credit limit is being reported correctly. This creditor/agency has verified to Equifax that the
date of last activity is being reported correctly. Equifax has verified that the last payment date is reporting correctly.
Additional information has been provided from the original source regarding this item. If you have additional questions
about this item please contact: Midland Credit Management,

Midland Credit Management

Date of Last Paymnt 02/2007 I did not make a payment in 2007
ScheduledPaymnt Amount$0
ActualPaymnt Amount$0
AmountPast Due $818
BalanceAmount $818
Items As ofDate Reported
DateClosed N/A
Terms Duration N/A

Terms Frequency N/A
Credit Limit $0
Date Opened

High Credit $764
Charge OffAmount $0
Date Maj.Del. 1st Rptd N/A
Date ofLast Activity N/A
Months Revd 21
Date of 1stDelinquency 09/2003

Current Status - Collection Account; Type of Account - Open; Type of Loan - Factoring Company Account; Whose Account - Individual Account; ADDITIONAL INFORMATION -

Re: Is there a violation in here?

Anonymous — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 02:07:49 GMT

Certainly IF there is an incorrect information that is being reported, then yes there is a violation. However, as to what you can do about it other than dispute it, you could try to contact the OC and get them to correct this and let them that you have disputed it and the incorrect information is being verified as valid and this is a violation of the FCRA. They have 30 days to investigate, correct and get back to you. Then go from there.

Re: Is there a violation in here?

abadfish66 — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 02:19:44 GMT

Sorry, don't quite follow you. Are you saying there is no violations? and why would I contact the OC when this is reported by the CA. By the letter I showed from EQ, It says the CA has verified with EQ. Do I now ask for EQ to provide their method of investigation?

Re: Is there a violation in here?

Anonymous — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 02:27:01 GMT

@abadfish66 wrote:
Sorry, don't quite follow you. Are you saying there is no violations? and why would I contact the OC when this is reported by the CA. By the letter I showed from EQ, It says the CA has verified with EQ. Do I now ask for EQ to provide their method of investigation?

No, I am not saying that. I am saying that if there is incorrect information being reported, then there IS a violation indeed. Remember that when a CRA "verifies" information, they don't always contact the creditor like alot of people think. Sometimes they use electronic systems like eOSCAR to verify the information. Now this system is inherently flawed as it casts a wide net because the "problem" code is subjectively reduced by the CRA's agents into a 2 digit code that is sent to the creditor and gets a yes/no response. So depending on HOW it was coded and as what, the wrong information will come back as verified and it might not even be yours if your name is common enough to be mistaken with someone else. You can deman that the CRA do a proper verification in your request but they don't have to and often don't listen and ignore you and do it their way, especially Experian. So in these cases, it is sometimes easier to get the OC to correct the information and submit it correctly to the CRA and that will relieve your headache of going in circles with the CRA and ultimately being labeled as frivilous even. Hope that clears it up for you. Good luck.

Re: Is there a violation in here?

abadfish66 — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 02:42:01 GMT

Ok, it makes sense that it more than likely is just one computer talking to another to verify information, still confused on one thing though, you say it is sometimes easier to get the OC to correct the information and submit it correctly to the CR. You do mean the CA and not the OC right?

Re: Is there a violation in here?

Anonymous — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 03:22:32 GMT

@abadfish66 wrote:
Ok, it makes sense that it more than likely is just one computer talking to another to verify information, still confused on one thing though, you say it is sometimes easier to get the OC to correct the information and submit it correctly to the CR. You do mean the CA and not the OC right?

No I mean the original creditor (as long as it is not in collection) if its in collection then yeah the CA (collection agency). I assumed this was the original creditor as I didn't recognize the name, if its a collection agency then I apologize, it would be the CA that you would contact.