cleaning up the last few issues

[Anonymous]

---

ByrdMan wrote:
Joe, here is an oxymoron alert. You did mention common sense and TU in the same context. Of course, common sense should prevail, but it doesn't. Yes, it's frustrating, but you have to do what you have to do, in order to clear the inaccuracies. In this instance, it is send the schedules with the items highlighted that clearly show that the items weren't included. Escalate this up the ladder.

If that doesn't work, there is the ITS letter.

---

What's the ITS letter?

Now it's Experian doing the same thing.

They sent back some stuff that one of the two Citifinancial accounts, not IIB, were updated correctly, and the other "verified the info as correct."

Bullsh*t they did, it's NOT CORRECT.

[Anonymous]

How do you handle this situation:

All three bureaus mark this account IIB.  It never was, it was closed three years prior.  I've already sent BK schedules, and have disputed since then, and they all say the creditor confirmed that it was correct.  That's impossible, unless, because another account I had with that creditor WAS in the BK and their internal system marked all accts. under my name as IIB.

When I call the creditor, they say that the account is too old to pull up any information.

How do I fix this?