CFNA refusing a 623 request. Violation?

[Anonymous]

I filed disputes with all 3 bureaus challenging the accuracy of part of my record with CFNA. CFNA verified with all three. I sent a 623 request to CFNA and they sent back a generic form letter saying they have already determined their records are correct and they won't comply with my request. They have provided me with no documentation, just their word. Is this a violation? What are my next steps? 

[RobertEG]

There is no violation.  A furnisher can dismiss a direct dispute without any need for investigation as "fivolous or irrelevant" if it is substantially the same as a prior dispute filed with the CRA.

When you dispute via a CRA, the CRA is required to send a copy of the dispute to the party who furnished the information.  The furnisher is requried to conduct an investigation and respond back to the CRA with their results.  Thus, the furnisher has already investigated, and is not required to repeat.  The lack of requirment to investigate a direct dispute when it has previously been dispute via a CRA is set forth in the implementing rules for the direct dispute process, as shown below:

"16 CFR 660.4(f) Frivolous or irrelevant disputes.

(1) A furnisher is not required to investigate a direct dispute if the furnisher has reasonably determined that the dispute is frivolous or irrelevant. A dispute qualifies as frivolous or irrelevant if:

(i) The consumer did not provide sufficient information to investigate the disputed information as required by paragraph (d) of this section;

(ii) The direct dispute is substantially the same as a dispute previously submitted by or on behalf of the consumer, either directly to the furnisher or through a consumer reporting agency, with respect to which the furnisher has already satisfied the applicable requirements of the Act or this section; provided, however, that a direct dispute is not substantially the same as a dispute previously submitted if the dispute includes information listed in paragraph (d) of this section that had not previously been provided to the furnisher"

[Anonymous]

Ugh. I need a way to nuke this account off my reports. I'm going to move forward with a CFPB complaint and a State Attorney complaint and see if I can get them to delete just to shut me up lol

[Anonymous]

In the prior dispute the OP provided no proof of satisfaction of the dispute. How can it be frivolous? What did the creditor claim as proof? I've seen these so called proofs. Usually a letter stating we conducted an investigation and you owe the money. No receipts. No contracts. No copies of statements. No proof of collection attempts. How is a letter stating "You owe the money, so pay proof"? Where is the investigation? Anyone can send a letter stating you owe so pay. IMO, the 30 days to provide proof is up and the creditor did not!

[Anonymous]

I'm gonna let the CFPB and my State Attorney's office figure out if they're in compliance with the FCRA or not. That's what we pay taxes for. 

[RobertEG]

What was the specific inaccuracy that was asserted in the prior dispute with the CRA?

How did you document that dispute?

The filing of a dispute limits the investigation only to the specific inaccuracy that is asserted.

Deletion of an entire account would only be at issue in a dispute if the asserted inaccuracy was that there is no debt in fact, and thus the reporting of any account per se is the asserted inaccuracy.

As an aside, it is unlikely, in my opinion, that a CFPB or state AG complaint will prevail on the basis that the furnisher did not document or "prove" their verification.  FCRA 623(b) requires only that they report the results of their investigation back to the CRA.

Proofs are subjective, and are not mandated as part of an administrative dispute process.

There is no case law interpretation of the dispute process that mandates documantation/proofs of a verification of accuracy in response to a dispute.

FCRA 623(c) explicitly provides remedy regarding the investigation of a dispute by way of civil action and review by the courts.

[Anonymous]

If there was just one mistake in the reporting or attempt to collect that was sent via the USPS, the collector has broken federal law.

[RobertEG]

Reporting of inaccurate information is not per se a violation of either the FCRA or postal laws.

Statutes cannot mandate human accuracy, they can only mandate that reporting or information cannot be provided which is knowingly inaccurate.  

Incorrect reporting could occur simply by a clerical typing error, or of having provided the best information available with no intent to willfully deceive, with later facts showing the prior reporting to have factual inaccuracies.

The requirement of FCRA 623(a)(1), which refers to the accuracy of reporting, states that it is a violation to report knowingly inaccurate information, and not that it is a violation to have reported information that later is determined to have been inaccurate.