CRAs Manipulation of Data

[Yeliaba1]

Has anyone feel that there credit data is being manually manipulated by a CRA?  I had a 150 pt score drop on EQ when they reported my Patelco account that was IIB as an open account with numerous lates and a $7000 balance.  The EQ supervisor says Patelco re-reported this on 9/30, but Patelco says this is untrue.  They state the transmission has always reported a zero balance and IIB.  This also happened in early Aug and after getting the my fico alert I immediately called.  The EQ csr sounded nervous and apologize.  He entered a dispute and the correction happened within days.  How???  Patelco didn’t send a transmission that quick.  Also scary was the alert (for the drop) and history of the score disappeared from MYFICO (??).  I can still see the 139 pt increase for the correction.  Hope it’s not too complicated but any insight would be appreciated.

[Anonymous]

---

@Yeliaba1

Has anyone feel that there credit data is being manually manipulated by a CRA? 

---

Nope.  I see no reason that a CRA would manipulate data, as they would gain nothing by doing so.

[Yeliaba1]

Can’t understand it myself as to why it reports as an open account with a $7000 balance when it was IIB In 2014.  I spoke at length with a supervisor at Patelco who says it has always reflected a $0 balance on their records since 2014.

[zerofire]

I am going to go out on a limb and say that open vs closed is probably just a checkbox. Over time data does get corrupted and in this case maybe the record was messed up by either the CB or the lender. It really does not matter now since it has been corrected. A lender can do electronic paperwork to the CB. Doing things electronicly the turnaround can be as fast as 24hr in the right conditions. As a smaller lender I would guess that Patelco CU has very few accounts and even less that are flagged for dispute verification.

[Yeliaba1]

Update:  After hounding EQ about this for a day I received an alert of a score change and my EQ score shot back up 149 pts.  The alert made no reference to this account.  I personally doubt that Patelco sent a transmission to EQ so quickly to warrant this change.  I’ll be happy with the correction but feel even more comfortable with my initial assertion.  

[RobertEG]

Human inaccuracy is a fact of life.

Unless intent to willfully change reported information is shown, they are not liable for clear errors.

When a consumer files a formal dispute, ultimate resolution of that dispute is the responsibility of the CRA under their reinvestigation authority.

If, upon review of a consumer dispute, the CRA determines that they have erred, their is no need to then refer the dispute to the furnisher for their investigation and response back to the CRA.  The CRA can simply, under their reinvestiation authority, correct their own error.

Unless you can show that the CRA willfully changed their data to show inaccurate information, then there would be no issue of intentional manipulation of information.  

Yes, it might be frustrating, but human error is a fact of life, and a party is not subject to a finding of willful manipulation to produce erroneous information simply by having made an error.

[Yeliaba1]

I accept that errors happen. Not a problem.  Frustrated yes.  My issue is that it has happened twice in four months when Patelco shares with me that they have reported it the same way without change since 2014.  Now I’m not saying that they are intentionally hurting my score but I do believe they are making edits that led to these declines.  The account was included in BK so I don’t understand why they would be changing the information transmitted by this creditor.  I guess the initial post could be interpreted as they did this maliciously and that was not my intent.  I was more interested in knowing if anyone else had encountered a similar problem.