[rubyruby27]

Just recieved TR's results. Nothing is changed other than my employment and addresses are gone.

On the first page it says Our investigation is completed.

Investigation Result:

Cavarly Port---Verified.

Thats it--Nothing about the others I disputed.

Now they did place customer disputes somel of them.

Arrow was updated-I sent proof of the letters I sent asking for validation and the green cards however this update is 8/2007--I disputed in 09/2007

I disputed BOA info: it says date updated 9/2006-doesn't say account in dispute-I didn't dispute the account just some info on it.

If they verified shouldn't they have indicated date updated to be this month?

Cap One disputed date open-and requested a statement to be placed on my file---Nothing changed they did update 9/07

Cavarly: Updated 8/2007 they didn't recieve this dispute until 09/07-I believe Cavarly is updating every 6 months last update prior to this was 2/07

Did TR do anything?

The OC that JDB is trying to collect for: last updated 12/2005- no change in my dispute. All info is the same. no mention of in dispute.

Does this appear correct and what do I do know call the attorney for TR or call and ask them to delete?

Thanks for any reply's

[neil5623]

Happy happy joy joy, welcome to the wonderful world of Trans Union. I have two documented cases of the OC saying that they never heard from TU. Waiting on more confirmations of my suspicions. In TU's little world, they are correct. My suggestion is to write to the OCs that you disputed and ask "have any of the CRAs contacted you in reference to this account, and if so, who and when." Then contact TU's corporate counsel. That is my plan.

[rubyruby27]

On your CR's if they actually did anything with the TL you are disputing would it not say Date verified to be the month and year it was verified.

On 2 of them the last dates verified are 2003 and 2005.

It seems to me they totally disregarded my dispute. Even Cavarly has last verified in 8/2007 my dispute was dated 9/07 the CRA's agency signed for it 9/12/07.

[neil5623]

Yes, I have seen that often with TU. Earlier this year (this is on another thread) I disputed something, they verified, NOTHING changed, except now there are TWO identical TLs listed. They verified that OC said this was perfectly OK. I contacted the OC, they had not heard from TU regarding this account. EVER. Actually on the second dispute they changed the date on one of the duplicated entries. Kinda makes you go Hmmmmm....

[rubyruby27]

HMMMMM is right.

My question is can they say they verified something with the OC/JDB if the dates verified or updated are unchanged. Is this legal.

[rubyruby27]

While my questions might have been stupid I called TU and got thier answers.

They reduced my dispute to a 2 letter computer dispute and thier computer verified the information and they only report what the creditor states.

As to the verified dates being the month before on my credit report again they only report what the creditor reports therefore if they didn't update this information the date doesn't change. Cavarly verified this information on 9/27/07 the same date they sent the letter.

They also said they send out a new letter and credit report per dispute and they do not have the information to date on anything else and they have until Oct 12, 2007 to comply.

They totally disregarded all the documentation I sent as they can't use anything I send them only what the creditor says.

[stargazer0725]

Ruby,

Don't back down. When the reinvestigation deadline passes (35 or 50 days depending on the type of report), send TU a PR request. They are required by the FCRA to provide you with the procedures used to conduct the reinvestigation. Of course, they won't send it to you, but it will make your case stronger when you take them to court (along with the data-furnishers). You'll have to sue them to find out who's not doing their job during discovery. Unless the data-furnishers decide to settle first.

[rubyruby27]

Its 35 days and I have prepared the letter.

However my letter is a little different, I am documenting the conversation we had that they stated they reduced this dispute to computer codes, and that all evidence I provided was not usable according to them (naming all 5 people I spoke with) as the only person that can change a TL is the information provider.

I am requesting in writing a description of how the investigation was conducted along with the name, address and telephone number of anyone they contacted regarding this dispute.

I confirmed it over the phone they reduced it to a computer code and yes they admitted there was more than one dispute regarding this information that has been unchanged.

While others disagree with me on this issue I believe I can show enough documents that demonstate they re aged this account.

I found 3 other CR's that all state to be removed 3/08 by the OC as late as 10/06 at which time they deleted thier TL. While Cavarly is reporting 10/09 which is 7 yrs from the last partial payment that did not cure.

[Hedwig]

It's been known for several years that all disputes are reduced to a 2-character code and put in a computer. That's how they track them.

That's one reason we always say to keep disputes simple, and only dispute a few at at time. Otherwise it's all lost in the code conversion.

[rubyruby27]

Yes, I am aware of that theory, however I followed Engima's advice to be specific so they can't reduce it to a simple code if they do then you have a paper trail that shows they violated the statutes and they didn't do a manual investigation as would be required to ensure maximum accuracy.

I don't think they have a code for I WON IN COURT HERE'S THE ORDER. When I talked to them they said; you said it wasn't yours. I said just a moment, got my dispute and read it to them and then said where did I ever say its not mine. So how could you reduce this to a computer digit its not mine, so you didn't reinvestigate, yes we did and they verfied its your account.

So the copies of what I sent you was not considered since you can't use it, yes, only the furnisher of the TL can make changes.

Now I know this isn't true as my roomate sent them stuff they used and also sent her a letter saying the one piece of paper they can't use, as the account number is different but they would notify the furnisher.

While I was told they send a new report for each TL disputed, she hasn't gotten one yet and TU is almost through with her dispute and yes her FICO score rose by 75 points on TU.

She didn't get a fraud alert put on her and the verbage in her dispute and mine are the same, since I wrote both of them.

Its not what you write, what evidence you provide, its who got the dispute.

[Hedwig]

I realize that you have a nice trail for court, I was just commenting that I'm not surprised they reduced it to a two-letter code.

Maybe they'd better make up some more codes to cover situations like this!!

[rubyruby27]

Sorry I sounded short or non appreciative. I was ventilating my frustration.

I was surprized they didn't investigate, it took me awhile to write these to ensure I said nothing that could be construed as anything they could reduce to a code-its not mine or, it was never late.

However, they did mention after I said how could you reduce this to not mine, the supervisor said we investigated the dates to be removed. Which is true I stated the dates are inaccurate. I guess its not mine qualifies as the dates are wrong, if verified then the dates are correct.

I am stupid thought for sure they would delete arrow and cavarly.

Oh well, I have 15 days left counting mailing so I will have to wait and see what else they do. I meant don't do.

TU is the only CRA that did't let them use factoring.

Has anyone ever heard of recieving a seperate report for each disputed TL?

[stargazer0725]

Ruby, sometimes when I've disputed several items at the same time, I've gotten the reinvestigation results broken up into a couple of reports. It does happen.

[rubyruby27]

Thanks for the info, never heard of anyone getting a report for each dispute and it has never hapen to me before.

[centex]

If you choose to litigate the not mine issue, then be aware that their likely position in defense will be that "the consumer claims that since they prevailed in court that it served as an indication that the debt did not belong to them, which is the essence of the 'not mine' coded dispute."

[rubyruby27]

Thanks for the insight, that would be the likely response, didn't think of that. This is not a priority for me, I am at the hospital most of the time and I can't really pursue anything at this time. If a quick letter doesn't work at this time I am in a holding pattern.

I am angry and frustrated with my familyl situation and this is just the icing on the cake. At least I can ventilate here.

[rubyruby27]

Have all my reports back-not true remember TU hasn't sent anymore but I pulled a CR and its done.

Cavarly has updated and continues to state I am paying under a partial payment plan--time to sue---CRA decline to use a copy of the Final Order

Arrow deleted on all reports---I think they might come back or they sold the accounts.

The account that I was not joint on was deleted.

My FICO score is (drum rolling and rolling and rolling DROPPED MORE THAN 50 points all all 3 CR's.

Eliminated over $40,000 debt, eliminated 2 charge offs (OC) and 2 Collection accounts and my score drops.

I just re-read the results it says Arrow is not currently reporting for one account and for another it is deleted---What does that mean?

Moral to the story: Bad credit is better than good credit.

[Hedwig]

Did the accounts that were deleted have a long history? If so, that may be what is hurting your score.

The law of unintended consequences seems to rear its ugly head a lot.

[rubyruby27]

No, they were no more than 8 yrs old.

It really doesn't make sense. According to FICO the reason my scores are low is collection accounts and debt ratio is high.

I had 2 OC accounts that were 5,000 and then the JDB that had the accounts at 11,000 each that's 32,000 and one for 7.00 yep I said 7.00---I know I should have paid it but it wasn't mine and I wasn't paying it.

If I ask EQ which I did in my last dispute for the dates to go positive or be removed are they suppose to supply them. They didn't and I am re disputing.

I think someone is up with the Arrow account so its a wait and see-they deleted on mine but not my roommates.

[jlynn]

Originally Posted by rubyruby27

No, they were no more than 8 yrs old.

Yes, but how old is your oldest active acc