Repo reporting twice (NMAC)

[blk8]

I'm having issues trying to get the correct answer to my problem. Back in September of 2012, my vehicle with Nissan was repo'd. My credit report is showing 2 accounts with NMAC when I only financed 1 vehicle.

The 1st tradeline shows my account all the way to the repo status (showing as charged off)

The 2nd tradeline shows the same thing post charge off (showing as charged off).

Both accounts have almost idential account numbers with the exception of the 2nd account starts with "01". I contacted Nissan and they told me this is how it should reflect ... the original account prior to charge off, and the "new account number" post charge off. I explained that it appears  I had to charge offs with Nissan and it wasnt correct. They claim it is the right and normal procedure for them.

I have disputed the accounts with all 3 bureaus to no avail. They all come back verified. PLEASE HELP!!!

[Anonymous]

No, they cannot add another TL after the CO to show a CO.  It makes no sense and I don't believe that is legal reporting.

It was one account and now with the addition of the second one appears to be two separate TLs.

I would send a direct dispute under FCRA 623(a)(8).  They must investigate, make corrections and notify you of the outcome within 30 days.  If they do not it is a violation of the FCRA.  If they will not remove the second there are other routes you can take.

“This is a Notice of Direct Dispute with you, under the provisions of FCRA §623(a)(8)(D), of the accuracy of information you have reported to my credit file.

“In compliance with FCRA §623(a)(8)(D), and enacting regulations published at  16 CFR § 660.4, this Notice of Direct dispute includes:

 “Identification of the specific information being disputed:

           (specify the account number, and the specific information that is disputed under that identifying account)

“Basis for the dispute:

            (how the reporting was inaccurate;    was any reporting in violation of any statutory or regulatory provisions?  account or express agreements?  CRA reporting gudelines? Account not yours? etc.)

“Supporting documentation:

            (all documents that support your dispute; it is recommened to also include, as part of your documentation, at least a copy of the portion only of your recent credit report showing their reporting of the disputed information was actually reported to your credit flle.  The implementing rule suggests a  showing  that it appeared in your credit report)

[blk8]

I now have a new issue. I spoke with the manager who agreed to have it corrected but they did a hard pull on my Transunion report to look. Is this permissible since they have sold the account to a CA? Shouldnt they have just done a normal soft inquiry? Do they lose their rights once they sell it to a CA?

Please help. THanks.

[Anonymous]

No, they do not have PP for a HP.