623 dispute

[mike828]

I had a credit card 4 years ago through First Bank of Delaware that went to collections. When I finally started looking at my report about 6 months ago they showed a high balance of $3,000 on a card with a $300 limit.

I sent them a letter quite clearly requesting an investigation because I believe that 3,000 to be wrong and they responded by telling me they don't have to 'validate' my debt or recognize my 'dispute' because I didn't send them

-name, address, and phone number (I sent name and address)
-info to i.d. account (I sent all info in tradeline plus copy of i.d. and s.s. card)
-a copy of credit report or police report

and that they're not required to provide validation of debt because they are not a debt collector.

I responded by citing 623 (a) (8) of FCRA and that as a furnisher of information they had to investigate and also included everything they asked for except my phone number and told them I wanted everything in writing, not by phone.

They received that letter 50+ days ago and I've gotten no response.

Did I screw up?

Do I just drop this or is there something else I can do?

[Lian]

First, did you clearly identify the letter as being a direct dispute under FCRA 623(8), as opposed to a request for debt validation under FDCPA 809(b)?

If it was a direct dispute, debt validation is not the issue. The issue is the accuracy of their credit reporting. If the amount of the debt is the item of information disputed as being inaccurate, that does not permit them to dismiss it because they are not a debt collector. They are the party who reported the inaccurate information, and thus obligated to investigate it under FCRA 623(a)(8) if your dispute contained the required content.

The implementing rule for the content of a direct dispute letter is 16 CFR 660.4(d). It requires only that you provide sufficient information to identify the account under which the disputed information arises. There is NO specific requirement for a phone number. Your information appears to more than reasonably be sufficient to identify the account.

Neither a copy of your credit report nor a police report is required.

While 16 CFR 660.4(d)(3) does offer the suggestion that a copy of the relevant portion only of your CR might comprise one form of documentation to support your dispute, it is not a requirement. If other information is provided that supports the dispute, the simple omission of a copy of the relevant portion of your CR is not, in and of itself, grounds for holding your dispute frivolous or irrelevant under 16 CFR 660.4(f) for failing to provide adequate support.

As for a police report, that would only be relevant if the issue under dispute involved an allegation of fraud or identity theft. That does not even appear remotely relevant to your dispute, and is way out of line by the creditor.

You now consider those "defects," even though improperly asseted by them, to have been fully rectified. That triggers their requirement to complete their investigation within 30-days of the date of your dispute, and provide the written results to you within 5 days thereafter, or to correct or delete the disputed information.

I would send them a followup letter stating that all required items of information under 16 CFR 660.4 have been provided to them, that you have adequately supported your dispute, and they have not notified you of the results, or that the dispute might still be considered "frivolous or irrelevant." Based on their failure to have provided written notice of their investigation or a holding that your dispute is "frivolous or irrelevant" back to you within the prescribed time period, they are in violation of FCRA 623(a)(8) and 16 CFR 660.4(e)(3), which is the period for their investigation and reporting the results to you.

That entitles you to demand immediate correction or deletion of the disputed information pursuant to 16 CFR 660.4(e)(4).