Incorrect reporting

[Anonymous]

I have a collection listing on both Ex and Tu- and it’s listing as an open negative trade line on EQ, but not as a collection account. Is this something that can be disputed with EQ for inaccurate info? I’ve gone after this CA before for something and they pretty much ignored my evidence.

[Medic981]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
I have a collection listing on both Ex and Tu- and it’s listing as an open negative trade line on EQ, but not as a collection account. Is this something that can be disputed with EQ for inaccurate info? I’ve gone after this CA before for something and they pretty much ignored my evidence.

---

Who ignored your evidence? The CA or CRA?

[Anonymous]

CA. They are know for things like this. I disputed a while back and they sent me a ton of things NOT related to the dispute.

[Medic981]

I am not an expert on disputing, however, you are better with disputing with the CRA as the OC and the CA have to validate the debt with the CRA or the CRA can't continue to report negative items. I am still a little unclear as to how an OC or CA "proves" a debt is valid. From what I have read so far the OC or CA says "yeap it's valid" and the CRA continues to report. I am sure someone else more knowledgeable about this will be able to give you better advice and we will both learn something.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the input! Yeah, I’m thinking that I’m going to try the CRA this time around. Hoping that info is an error that will help me out .

[RobertEG]

How, exactly, is he debt collector reporting as an "open negative trade line, but not as a collection account"?

A debt collector is defined under the FDCPA, and certain reporting codes are required when a debt collector reports to a CRA.

Those include, for example, the name of the original creditor.

To simply state that a debt collector is reporting as an open negative trade line and not as a collection implies that they are reporting that the original account/debt was established with them, and not another.

Is that the reporting which is considered inaccurate, or is it some other item?

You can always file a dispute with a CRA of any item of information in your credit file that is considered inaccurate, which would require you to identify the specific item that would be the subject of your dispute, and thus investigation by the furnisher, and reinvestigation by the CRA.

The subsequent determination of the outcome of the dispute is limited to the specific item(s) of information that have been asserted to be inaccurate, with the furnisher required to conduct a reasonable investigation of the accuracy, report their finding of verification, correction, or if neither can currently be done, deletion of the identified informaiton until it can be verified or corrected.

Can you post or explain what specific reporting is considered inaccurate, and how that reporting then constitutes an assertion by the debt collector that the consumer established a "trade line" directly with them?