Upon filing of dispute, the CRA is required to forward the dispute to the furnisher of the disputed information, and the furnisher is required to conduct a reasonable investigation, and report their finding back to the CRA. That was apparently done.
If the investigation by the furnisher finds the reporting to be accurate, they can simply verify. They are not required to document the basis for that verification.
That verification goes back to the CRA, who then makes their own final determination under their reinvestigation of the dispute.
If the furnisher verifies, the CRA will almost always accept that statement of accuracy as their final determination of the outcome ("reinvestigation") of the dispute. To make a finding contrary to the verification provided by the furnisher would require their independent finding of inaccuracy.
Therein lies the rub in a CRA dispute, as the CRA does not have the authority to compel both sides to produce all relevant documentation, and thus does not have the ability to conduct a legal fact finding that would support a contrary finding in their reinvestigation. They are not a court, and have no administrative law judges with such authority.
If the consumer still disagrees with the verification of accuracy of the information, they can always take one of two steps.
First, if they feel the current facts of the situation clearly show the information to be inaccurate, they can file a formal complaint with the CFPB/FTC.
If the CFPB/FTC determines the facts are sufficient in an of themselves, they can issue a finding of lack of compliance with the FCRA verification.
That is rarely the case.
Second, if the facts are contested and further consideration of documentation is necessary to resolve the difference, the issue can then be put before a court, who has authority to compel both sides to produce all evidence, and make a legal finding of facts.
You can always submit additional evidence to the CRA in the form of a renewed dispute, but unless that evidence clearly shows the information to be inaccurate (i.e., the facts speak for themselves), verification is likely to simply be affirmed. If new evidence is not provided, a renewed dispute can be dismissed without any investigation as "frivolous or irrelevant."
Simply stated, one cannot expect the administrative dispute process to result in a ruling on contested views of the accuracy.
You can always bring your own civil action, and provide your "proofs."
