Counter-Arguments for FCRA & CCRAA Disputes
Credit bureaus often respond to disputes with generic "verified as accurate" letters without conducting a real investigation. Under federal law (FCRA) and California law (CCRAA), you have additional rights and remedies when this happens.
Key Insight: Many bureau "investigations" are actually just automated systems that parrot back whatever the furnisher says. Courts have found this inadequate under the FCRA's requirement for a "reasonable investigation."
The bureau claims they contacted the furnisher (creditor, collector, etc.) who "verified" the information is accurate. This is the most common response and often represents a failure to conduct a real investigation.
Demand written explanation of exactly how they verified the information
Send a new dispute with additional documentation
Send dispute directly to the company reporting the data
Regulatory complaint often prompts better investigation
Consider lawsuit - attorney fees are recoverable
"Your response that the information was 'verified' is inadequate. Under FCRA § 611, you are required to conduct a 'reasonable reinvestigation,' not merely parrot back what the furnisher tells you. I provided [specific evidence] demonstrating the error, which you appear to have ignored. Pursuant to FCRA § 611(a)(6)(B)(iii), I demand you provide the method of verification used, including the name and contact information of anyone you spoke with and any documents reviewed. Your failure to conduct a reasonable investigation violates the FCRA and exposes you to statutory damages of $100-$1,000 per violation, actual damages, and attorney fees."
The bureau refused to investigate, claiming your dispute is "frivolous" or "irrelevant." This is often used as an excuse to avoid investigating legitimate disputes.
Under FCRA § 611(a)(3), a bureau may terminate an investigation only if:
"Your determination that my dispute is 'frivolous' is improper and violates FCRA § 611(a)(3). This is my first dispute regarding this account, so it cannot be 'substantially the same' as a prior dispute. I provided specific information about the account and the error. I am an individual consumer, not a credit repair organization. There is no lawful basis for refusing to investigate. Your improper rejection is itself a violation of the FCRA. I demand that you immediately conduct the required investigation. If you persist in refusing, I will file a CFPB complaint and pursue legal action for your willful noncompliance."
The bureau tries to pass the buck, saying it's the furnisher's (creditor's) information and you should take it up with them directly.
"Your suggestion that I contact the creditor does not relieve you of your obligations under the FCRA. Section 611 requires YOU to investigate disputes. Section 607(b) requires YOU to follow reasonable procedures to assure accuracy. Your duty is independent of the furnisher's duty. I am disputing to you, and you must investigate. Whether I also dispute to the furnisher is irrelevant to your obligations. Please conduct the investigation required by law."
The bureau claims the account is so old it can no longer be disputed, or that because it's near the 7-year reporting limit, they won't investigate.
"There is no provision in the FCRA that limits dispute rights based on account age. If the account is being reported on my credit file, you have an obligation to investigate disputes about its accuracy. The age of the account is irrelevant to your duty under § 611. Please investigate my dispute immediately. If you believe the account should no longer be reported due to age, please delete it - otherwise, investigate its accuracy as required by law."
If you're threatening legal action, the bureau may argue that you haven't suffered any actual damages from the error, so you can't sue.
The bureau claims they cannot investigate because you didn't provide enough information to identify the dispute.
"I provided my full name, address, Social Security number, and identified the specific account in dispute. This is sufficient information to investigate. You already have my complete credit file, including all details about this account. Please specify exactly what additional information you claim to need. Under FCRA § 611, the requirement is that I provide 'sufficient information' - which I have done. Please proceed with the investigation immediately."
You disputed a hard inquiry, and the bureau claims they cannot remove it because it accurately reflects a credit application you made.
"I did not authorize this inquiry. I never applied for credit with [Company Name] and they had no permissible purpose under FCRA § 604 to access my credit report. This unauthorized access of my credit report violates the FCRA. Please remove this inquiry immediately and provide me with the contact information for the party that made the unauthorized inquiry so I can pursue my claims against them."
File complaints against credit bureaus and furnishers.
consumerfinance.gov/complaintFind an FCRA attorney in your area. Most take cases on contingency.
consumeradvocates.orgFederal Trade Commission guidance on credit disputes.
consumer.ftc.govDisclaimer: This information is provided for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Credit reporting law is complex and constantly evolving. For advice about your specific situation, consult with an attorney who specializes in FCRA cases. Many FCRA attorneys take cases on contingency because the law allows recovery of attorney fees from violators.
Generate a professional demand letter, CA court complaint, or arbitration demand