No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
Where did you get the report? Is it directly from EX or a 3rd party? Either way, it's a collection account, no matter what they may try to say. Does it say "factoring company" anywhere?
When they acquired the debt, was the account delinquent?
That would determine whether or not they are a debt collector, which in turn determines whether or not any violation is only of credit reproting, or additionally one of a debT collection practices violation under the FDCPA.
I assume that since the OC was Cap1, the debt was revolving, not installment.
Even if they purchased the debt in good-staniding, and thus are heir to the debt rather than a debt collector, they could not unilaterally alter the terms of the agreement creating the debt, and thus could not convert the account to an instamment loan.
Before considering any legal action, I would send them a direct dispute, asserting inaccuracy iin reporting of the type of account/credit.
Violation of the FCRA does not occur simply by reporting inaccurate information. Statues dont hold violation for simple, inevitable, and correctible human error or good faith acts. Accordingly, the FCRA requires that information must not knowlilgy be inaccurate, not that it must always be accurate.
Any violation of the FCRA requires a showing of willful or negligent noncompliance before any damages can be awarded. Simple reporting of an inaccurcy is not enough.
Thus, you want to first create a record showing that they investgated the matter and were aware of your position that their reporitng is inaccurate.
That begins to support a case of willful noncompliance on their part.
I would not jump the gun. Run it through the normal administrative dispute process before asserting a violation on their part.
@Gstew wrote:
Thank you for your help! I won't jump the gun.
Yes this was a cap1 credit card so it was revolving not installment.
Do I direct Dispute via letter to all three agencies? Tu, ex and EQ while also sending a
Direct dispute to midland? I thought I read somewhere that you has to DD to the CRA's first. The copy and paste letter that's stickied to the forum should be good enough right? Cmrr ? Sorry for all the questions I just want to get this right the first time.
Direct Dispute letter would go Midland. I would send it CMRRR. Keep us posted.
Community Leader,
DaBears
Looks like it hits all the points...
To clarify the direct dispute process as it relates to also disputing with the CRAs, whatever you read about first disputing with a CRA is inaccurate.
A bit of history will explain...
The direct dispute process was incorporated into the FCRA a decade ago, but with the proviso the actual implementation was left to the federal agencies to implement.
That implementation did not occur until 2010, with the publication of the final rules..
The rulemakers conducted hearings on their proposed rules, part of which was a their recept of a recommendation by crediit industry representatives that a consumer first be required to dispute with a CRA before they could send a direct diispute to the furnisher of the disputed information. It was their attempt to "water down" the process.
What you read was most likely based on that obsolete proposal.
The rulemakers, in their final rules, rejected that proposal, and took just the opposite approach. In recognition of the fact that sending dual disputes would require the furnisher to ultimately make two investigations on the same issue, the final rules, published at 16 CFR 660.4 et seq., provided that any direct dispute could be dismissed without any investigation by the furnisher if it related to substantially the same information as was previously disputed through a CRA.
Bottom line.... one issue, one requirement to investigate.
Unless your renewed dispute involves new issues or additional documentation, you pick one process or the other.
If you do one followed by the other, it can be summarily dismissed as "frivoloous or irrelevant."