Reasonableness for Dispute Procedures

4 months ago
4

The video highlights how the Metro 2 industry standard aids in disputing inaccuracies on credit reports under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), focusing on the "reasonableness" requirement for dispute procedures. The FCRA mandates that consumer reporting agencies (CRAs) not only maintain reasonable procedures for maximum possible accuracy (as seen in prior discussions) but also conduct reasonable reinvestigations when consumers dispute information. This is outlined in FCRA Section 1681i, the most commonly used dispute pathway, which requires CRAs to reasonably reinvestigate reported errors. The term "reasonable" appears four times in this section, emphasizing its importance.
Metro 2, as an industry standard created and adopted by the credit bureaus, provides a concrete framework for assessing accuracy and identifying errors in credit reports. When disputing inaccuracies, understanding Metro 2 allows consumers to pinpoint deviations from this standard and clearly notify CRAs of specific errors. The video advises against vague disputes or legal accusations (unless one is legally qualified) and instead recommends using Metro 2 to highlight discrepancies. If the CRA fails to correct or delete the erroneous data after being notified, it becomes easier to argue that their reinvestigation procedures were not reasonable, strengthening a case for noncompliance. This approach simplifies the process of reading credit reports, finding errors, and drafting effective dispute letters to CRAs.

Loading comments...