Background: Between 2014 and 2015, two loans were on medical/hardship forbearance. However, these loans were reported as late for a 2-3 month period depending the CRA. A dispute was filed 2+ years later but the CRAs stated that the lender verified. No further action was taken until this week. We called the loan servicer and the agent confirmed the accounts reflected the forbearance for full period in their system; however, the change was done after the forbearance request was processed. The rep did not understand why the CRAs were not updated. Ultimately, the agent was able to send a summary which detailed the status and shows evidence of forbearance in the periods the lates were reported on the CRA. The agent recommending filing a dispute since they would not be able to change the reporting status since the loans are paid-off and closed.
Question: Now that we have evidence that those periods are covered by forbearance, what is the best way to dispute (snail mail, online or phone)? Any tips on language to use?
Snail mail it with copy of the proof.
I used the online/uploading tools for my initial dispute, and it didn't work, plus I used tracking just to make sure it got there.
I don't think there are any trigger words, but keep it as concise as you can.
I would also make a digital copy and keep it in google drive/dropbox, btw, so if you need to call them for some reason, during the dispute, you can get it to them asap (I ended up needing that with TU, oddly enough - the other two were cake).
@Sabii- I appreciate the feedback and understand your points; however, it seems odd for delinquent reporting to be the right answer in period where payments were not required.
Before disputing with the CRAs, we may escalate the matter with the Servicer to see if someone with more authority will oblige the request to correct the CB reporting since they acknowledge no payments were due in the period that was reported delinquent.
They did not apply the forbearance that they had already processed in a timely manner (i.e., meaning it was their error). This occurred at two different times on the account. The correction to the earlier period was handled properly internally and with the CRAs; however, the second correction was procssed internally but not with the CRAs.