Do CRA report info to each other? I need help

[09Lexie]

---

@WillCredit1 wrote:

Let me ask a more direct question. I've disputed one public record and 3 collections with all 3 bureaus. Transunion and Equifax have deleted them but Experian has not. What can I do?

---

If Ex is reporting the debts as verified and you state they are not your debts, file a complaint with CFPB.  Be prepared to upload whatever documentation you have to show the accounts are not yours.  

[RobertEG]

That would not be my recommended first step.

You need to first know why the deletions occured, and the outcome of each dispute to clearly show any violation by the CRA.

When you file a dispute with a CRA, they are required, except for public record information, to forward a copy of the dispute to the party who furnished them the disputed information.  That party must then conduct a reasonable investigation of the accuracy, and respond back to the CRA.

The CRA then makes the final determination, and must send a Notice of Results of Reinvestigation to the consumer within 5 business days after the conclusion of their 30-day reinvestigation period.

It is quite possible that the furnishher verified the accuracy with the CRAs still reporting, and decided to not verify with only the deleting CRA.

Or they could have simply deleted their reporting as conclusion of the dispute with that CRA.

You can tell how the CRA reinvestigation was concluded by reviewing their Notice of Results of Reinvestigation, which must have been provided at the conclusion of each dispute.

Did that notice say they deleted after finding the information to not be verifiable, or did they verify and the furnisher delleted on their own?

Until the reason for the deletion is known, a dispute based on assertion of violation by the CRA is premature.

[09Lexie]

---

@RobertEG wrote:

That would not be my recommended first step.

You need to first know why the deletions occured, and the outcome of each dispute to clearly show any violation by the CRA.

When you file a dispute with a CRA, they are required, except for public record information, to forward a copy of the dispute to the party who furnished them the disputed information.  That party must then conduct a reasonable investigation of the accuracy, and respond back to the CRA.

The CRA then makes the final determination, and must send a Notice of Results of Reinvestigation to the consumer within 5 business days after the conclusion of their 30-day reinvestigation period.

It is quite possible that the furnishher verified the accuracy with the CRAs still reporting, and decided to not verify with only the deleting CRA.

Or they could have simply deleted their reporting as conclusion of the dispute with that CRA.

You can tell how the CRA reinvestigation was concluded by reviewing their Notice of Results of Reinvestigation, which must have been provided at the conclusion of each dispute.

Did that notice say they deleted after finding the information to not be verifiable, or did they verify and the furnisher delleted on their own?

Until the reason for the deletion is known, a dispute based on assertion of violation by the CRA is premature.

---

I would agree. I am assuming that these debts have been verified as erroneous by 2 out of 3 CRAs. Based on that assumption, any investigation by EX should have turned up the same results. 

Each CRA has their own process but if the public record was proven to be incorrect most bureaus pull from the same verifying sources. 

[WillCredit1]

I used Lexington law and they  were successful in removing the public record and the 3 collections off transunion and equifax. But experian haven't removed them. I'd like to do this on my own.

[RobertEG]

Public record information is an entirely differtent species, which normally results in a different reinvestigation procedure by the CRA.

Public record information usually does not get into your credit report by was of reporting by a "furnihser" who is a party to the accoung or collection of a debt.

The CRAs hire their own internal searches of public record information, and supplement their files based on what is found in the public record.

Thus, their reason for being exempted from the direct dispute process, as their is usually to classical "furnisher" to direct a dispute.

I have no idea for the basis of deletion of the public record information by two of the CRAs, and not the third.

Perhaps the two CRAs simply did not take the time to research the current public record information.

If the remaining CRA checked the public record and found it to still reflect the current reporting, they will verify on their own, with no involvement of anyone else.

So the issue is whether the public record information is still accurate.

What is the status of the currrent public record?   If it has been vacated or deleted, then you would have support for a dispute.

However, if the currrent public record is still reporting, then there would be no basis for contesting that its inclusion in your credit report is inaccurate.

The CRA would have no basis to check with the reporter of the public record information and require them to verify.  They take the currrent reproting as accurate.

[09Lexie]

---

@WillCredit1 wrote:

I used Lexington law and they  were successful in removing the public record and the 3 collections off transunion and equifax. But experian haven't removed them. I'd like to do this on my own.

---

Although they have been removed, they can be re-inserted if the CA updates the CRs.   

[WillCredit1]

I don't think they were ever removed.  Experian has always been a pain in the rear for me when it comes to removing stuff. Is it legal to re-insert a negative entry after it's been removed?

[RobertEG]

Yes, it is proper provided the reinsertion procedure set forth in FCRA 611(a)(5)(B) is followed.

If information is deleted based on lack of verification in a dispute, the information can be reinserted if the lacking verification is later provided.

Any party requesting to reinsert information that was deleted based on lack of prior verification must submit, along with their reporting, a certification that they have inveestigaged and found the information to be accurate.  If the CRA receives that formerly missing verification, they can reinsert, and must send notice to the consumer that they have done so.

A furnisher may simply not have had the time to provide verification within the 30 day period imposed on a CRA to conclude their reinvestigation and convey their results to the consumer.  The goal of the system is not to block accurate information from consumer files, but rather to ensure its accuracy.