"609 Letters" -- what's the deal?

Anonymous · ‎03-28-2018

I keep reading about these "609 Letters".. and I have some questions.

Sample letter:

To whom it may concern,

I am writing a letter of dispute. I have included a copy of my drivers license and social security card to validate my identity. In accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Section 609 (a) (1) (A) your credit reporting agency is required by Federal Law to verify physical records on file of the original signed account or contract from any accounts you post my credit report.

I am formally requesting to see verifiable proof of the original consumer contract with my personal signature on the record. I have listed the accounts blow, in which I am requesting said verification of. Failure to verify account records in compliance with the FCRA will damage my ability to obtain credit. Under FCRA unverifiable accounts must be promptly removed.

I formally demand the follow negative account records to be verified, and/or removed immediately.
I then wrote out each account name, the account number (whatever is listed on the report is fine) and the dispute reason (unverified account record) by hand.

I have some questions about this.

#1. 609(a)(1)(A) reads:

§ 609. Disclosures to consumers [15 U.S.C. § 1681g]
(a) Information on file; sources; report recipients. Every consumer reporting agency shall, upon request, and subject to 610(a)(1) [§ 1681h], clearly and accurately disclose to the consumer:
(1) All information in the consumer’s file at the time of the request except that--
(A) if the consumer to whom the file relates requests that the first 5 digits of the social security number (or similar identification number) of the consumer not be included in the disclosure and § 609 - 15 U.S.C. § 1681g 37 the consumer reporting agency has received appropriate proof of the identity of the requester, the consumer reporting agency shall so truncate such number in such disclosure; and

Are these "609 Letters" some kind of mistake? Because the closest thing I can find to the content of that letter is here:

§ 611. Procedure in case of disputed accuracy [15 U.S.C. § 1681i]
(a) Reinvestigations of Disputed Information
(1) Reinvestigation Required
(A) In general. Subject to subsection (f), if the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumer’s file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly, or indirectly through a reseller, of such dispute, the agency shall, free of charge, conduct a reasonable reinvestigation to determine whether the disputed information is inaccurate and record the current status of the disputed information, or delete the item from the file in accordance with paragraph (5), before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the agency receives the notice of the dispute from the consumer or reseller

Did the first person to ever draft a "609 Letter" make a mistake and accidentally reference 609 instead of 611? Have all of these people really been using these letters with success all these years despite this mistake and erroneous reference to 609(a)(1)(A)? Or is it some kind of coincidence that the CRA just dropped the account(s)/inquir(y/ies) with alleged inaccuracies because the letter, albeit its blatent inaccuracy, invoked an otherwise normal dispute?

RobertEG · ‎03-29-2018

Yes, there are letters floating around the net, and even some in this forum, that advocate using FCRA 609 as a dispute process, and even asserting that section 609(a) imposes a requirement on CRAs to verify information contained in the files of creditors.

Section 609(a) only provides basis for a consumer to request a CRA to provide information of record in the files of the CRA.

It is usually used when information is not provided in normal credit reports, such as the DOFD, and mandates that a consumer can request the CRA to provide any identified information in their files.

It does NOT impose any requirment regarding investigation of information contained in a creditor's files.

It is NOT a dispute process that provides for verification, correction, or deletion of information based on a dispute of accuracy of the information. As stated in the post, that process is covered under FCRA 611(a).

You will find those who advocate use of "609 lettters" as a dispute process, but they provide no reference to any specific subsections or language under section 609 that imposes any dispute investigation requirement or CRA involvement in verification of any information that is not contained in their (the CRA's) files.

I cannot speak to why some read requirements into section 609 that are not there.

I can only opine that if you wish to dispute via a CRA, the proper section of the statute is FCRA 611(a).

Anonymous · ‎03-29-2018

@RobertEGwrote:
Yes, there are letters floating around the net, and even some in this forum, that advocate using FCRA 609 as a dispute process, and even asserting that section 609(a) imposes a requirement on CRAs to verify information contained in the files of creditors.

Section 609(a) only provides basis for a consumer to request a CRA to provide information of record in the files of the CRA.
It is usually used when information is not provided in normal credit reports, such as the DOFD, and mandates that a consumer can request the CRA to provide any identified information in their files.

It does NOT impose any requirment regarding investigation of information contained in a creditor's files.
It is NOT a dispute process that provides for verification, correction, or deletion of information based on a dispute of accuracy of the information. As stated in the post, that process is covered under FCRA 611(a).

You will find those who advocate use of "609 lettters" as a dispute process, but they provide no reference to any specific subsections or language under section 609 that imposes any dispute investigation requirement or CRA involvement in verification of any information that is not contained in their (the CRA's) files.

I cannot speak to why some read requirements into section 609 that are not there.
I can only opine that if you wish to dispute via a CRA, the proper section of the statute is FCRA 611(a).

We are in agreement then, RobertEG.. hence my post. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't crazy when I looked up what they were attempting to reference and found something totally irrelevant. Thank you for your prompt and insightful reply.

Anonymous · ‎06-02-2018

I've read elsewhere the 609 letters seek to attack the phrasing "unless the information ... cannot be verified." From a blog post (that has sample letters and a plan of attack) quoting FCRA section 609: "... a statement that a consumer reporting agency is not required to remove accurate derogatory information from the file of a consumer, unless the information is outdated under section 605 or cannot be verified."

I sent out round one letters 10 days ago and today's TU already shows 5 medical COs removed. No change on the other two CRA as yet, but EX sent me a letter saying they are looking into it.

gdale6 · ‎06-02-2018

This thread is being closed to further comments. On myFico the only errors that can be discussed are real errors and no discussion of removing valid information by a dispute process can be discussed in any detail. I am not calling anyone out on this as there is no evidence anyone here is posting about or attempting to remove accurate info.