CRA Dispute

[JohnDoe12]

Does a CRA have to state the procedure(s) used to investigate the dispute?

[Anonymous]

Not that I'm aware of.  What did you have in mind?

[RobertEG]

Yes, but only as to the procedure they used, and not the determination as to verification of accuracy.

It is commonly referred to as a Method of Verification, or MOV, request.

It is not required to be included in their Notice of Results of Reinvestigation sent to the consumer, and must be separately requested after the Notice is received.

In brief summary, the FCRA permits a consumer to request from the CRA a disclosure of the procedure they used in determining the dispute result sent to the consumer.  It further defines the disclosure to include the name, address, and if available, the phone number of each party that was contacted in processing the dispute.  See FCRA 611(a)(6)(B)(iii) and FCRA 611(a)(7).

The courts have typically held that the CRA response to an MOV request needs only describe the admin procedure used to conduct the investigation, which involves the name and contact info of those that they forwarded the dispute to for their investigation and response back to the CRA.  They need not provide any substantive disclosure of how the decision of the forwarded party or of the CRA was substantively made, so a MOV request is usually of minimal value to the consumer.

It’s primary value is assurance that the CRA forwarded the dispute to the furnisher of the disputed information, and whether or not the furnisher then sent a response back to the CRA.

Thus, the answer to your question is yes, but not to the extent of providing any substance of the decision making process itself.

[JohnDoe12]

The purpose is to get who was contacted and use that to clamp down on the information furnisher, who is providing false information. LexisNexis is the CRA.The CLUE report contains incorrect information that should be deleted.

If the CRA responds that the info being reported is accurate then I will request an MOV. When the CRA responds with this information, I will send a dispute to the information furnisher, a request for their investigation procedures. I may or may not send my previous CRA dispute request/response and my MOV request/response. I'm not sure if that's a card I want to delay playing or if I should double-down on them.

They will then be in a bit of a jam. They will have no contract with my signature on it and they will have to explain how their investigation led to the reporting the CRA said was accurate.

* If they delete the information, I will try for statutory/punative damages for willful FCRA violations (they failed to perform a thorough enough investigation when the CRA dispute was filed).

* If they don't respond, I will do the same. (The information furnisher is not complying with FCRA dispute process and the above.)

* If they state the information is accurate, I plan to do the same. (I will have to prove that both their investigations failed to yield complete and accurate information. They instead chose to report inaccurate info to the CRA.)

Thoughts? Advice?

Thanks,

JD12

[RobertEG]

Yes, yours is a good example of one of the purposes of the MOV process under the FCRA;  to obtain the name and contact information of the furnisher of the information under dispute.

However, the CRA MOV process only applies to requests sent to a CRA, and does not include the right to obtain the method of verification used by a furnisher.  Thus, your next step is not to send a similar MOV request to the furnisher.  It can simply be ignored.

Armed with the name and contact info obtained from your MOV request with the CRA, you can then choose to file a direct dispute with the furnisher, seeking correction,verification, or deletion of the disputed information.  Direct disputes are covered under the separate dispute process set forth in FCRA 623(a)(8), with additional rules for the direct dispute process provided under 16 CFR 660.4..

However, similar to a dispute filed with a CRA, there is no requirement that the finding by the furnisher must include any documentation or supporting evidence that they relied upon in reaching their finding of verification.  They are required only to convey a finding that states the accuracy has been investigated and verified as accurate. 

Thus, while they may choose to provide some documentation, they are not compelled to do so,and thus you may not get the depth of evidence that you seek by use of an FCRA admin dispute process.

Compelling the disclosure of evidence is done by filing a civil action, and  getting a discovery order from the judge.

As a final comment, I would advise that if you do file a direct dispute, you dont make reference to your prior dispute filed with the CRA.

The implementing regulations governing direct disputes, set forth at 16 CFR 660.1 et seq, permits a furnisher to dismiss any direct dispute without any investigation if the dispute is substantially the same as a prior dispute completed by a CRA.  One issue, one mandated investigtion.

If they are aware of your prior dispute and of their right to summarily dismiss it under the direct dispute rules, you have already had your shot via your CRA dispute, and cannot now compel investigation via a direct dispute.

If you dont specifically make them aware of the prior dispute, they may overlook that dismissal right and still investgate and give you a second decision.  Dont give them that info......

[JohnDoe12]

They did not respond in the 30-day period. I would assume that I should send a follow-up letter to show good faith. Is there any specific advice on this?

I plan to send a letter that states:

I sent a dispute in February via certified mail.

It was recieved by the buereau's customer service address on 2/8/2021.

An investigation and response was due on 3/10/2021.

I have not received a response to the previous dispute.

Attach a copy of the previous letter.

Can I assert a deadline in this letter? E.g. Please conclude your investigation and send your response with any requested documents to me within 15 days.

Thanks,

DJ12

[RobertEG]

The 30-day CRA dispute period set under FCRA 611(a) applies to the period within which the CRA must complete its reinvestigation.

It does not set a period for receipt by the consumer of the results.

The CRA has an additional 5 business days after conclusion of the period for their reinvestigation within which to then send the Notice of Results of Reinvestigation to the consumer.  Add to that period the normal mailing time, and you arrive at the date of consumer receipt of the results.  That could be up to 40-45 days from filing date of the dispute.

Give it a bit more time.......

[JohnDoe12]

I have received a letter from LexisNexis stating that they need more information to process my request. They want me to fill out a form that they provide that requests the following information:

Full Name

Date of Birth

Gender

SS#

DL#/State

Prior DL#/State

Current Address

Mailing Address

Prior Address

Finally, it asks if you've been denied insurance due to them to list the insurance company name and the reference number of the case.

They mention in a cover sheet that this information is needed to verify who I am. I see this as a way to turn a dispute into information harvesting. I only gave my DL#/state and address to get my report in the first place. Furthermore, their instructions for disputes only mentioned:

Q: What do I need to provide you to correct information on my report?
A: When you contact the LexisNexis Consumer Center please provide the following information:

• The Consumer Number and the Reference Number listed at the top of the report.
• The claim or policy number and the insurance company name associated with the information you wish to correct.
• Whether you want to dispute the information or add a statement to explain the claim or policy record.
• If you are disputing information provide a brief description of the facts as you know them.
• If you are adding a statement to the information, in 100 words or less, what the statement should reflect.

How should I respond to this?

[JohnDoe12]

So I responded to Lexis Nexis (CRA) and they replied stating that they updated some records and deleted some records. However, they deleted the only correct information on the CLUE report and have introduced more incorrect information into the report.

Should I now follow up with the furnisher of the information?

Thanks in Advance!