[rubyruby27]

From my understanding you must directly dispute with the DF to ensure they have been put on notice and not just a dispute with the CRA's.

Question: would defending yourself in a lawsuit be considered notice that you dispute.

From the time I appeared and denied the debt to the time I won-the DF updated thier TL on 3 occasions, then 3 more times after I won and they put in dispute on my CR.

That would be 18 more violations possibly 24. The more the merrier since it doesn't seem like this will end unless I file suit.

[jlynn]

Originally Posted by rubyruby27

From my understanding you must directly dispute with the DF to ensure they have been put on notice and not just a dispute with the CRA's.

Disputing with the data furnisher is not a requirement for an FCRA lawsuit, however, its a good paper trail to show that you have exhausted all attempts to resolve the issue without going to court.

[neil5623]

For clarity, as this may be 2 different situations. PR posted on another thread about disputing with a furnisher, then following up by quoting TFC 392. I know this is TX law, and really has nothing to do with Fed law. I assume then that if you are NOT in TX then disputing with the furnisher does not matter?

[rubyruby27]

no it only shows a good paper trail that they violated on numerous times. I have read case law that says the first time they report its a freebie for errors when you dispute and they continue its a violation. I have read case law also where the DF got off because no one could prove they were notified of the errors, basically they were depending on the dispute with the CRA's but it couldn't be proved they notified the DF.

While it might not be a requirement to file suit, it does show they knew and continued to violate.

Would denying this in court be technically correct saying they were put on notice.

[centex]

Originally Posted by rubyruby27

From my understanding you must directly dispute with the DF to ensure they have been put on notice and not just a dispute with the CRA's.

Question: would defending yourself in a lawsuit be considered notice that you dispute.

Strictly speaking, no. The simple reality is that even when people are guilty as hell, there are still arguments that address liability. An Answer in civil court should not be considered as constructive notice of a dispute of the specific tradeline. Let's face simple reality...most Answers in civil court are about attempting to minimize liability for damages. And an even simpler reality in a majority of the debt cases is that the defendant DID owe an amount associated with the underlying claim. Just how much is owed is often what is the material fact at issue...

Don't try and cut steps. Build the papertrail. Too many people try and follow the steps of those who profess the easy way out is the best...whereas if they would take the time to do things properly, they would have been in a much more solid position come game time.

[rubyruby27]

Thanks Centx, I actually didn't think it did or could be argued with success but I was still hoping that it could or someone knew of a case this had occured and they won.