Continued from Part 3 of Account Number Morphing…

After the account is deleted and then reinserted, the CRA fails to notify Consumer A within 5 business days that they are re-inserting the account information. The ironic twist to all this is that the CRA then argues that the “reinsertion” of the account was not their fault because it had a different account number, and how are they supposed to know that it was the same account?

How, indeed! It was the CRA’s own regulations, or lack thereof, that allowed the reinsertion to occur. The CRA argued that if they had known it was the same account, then they wouldn’t have reinserted it, and yet the CRA is the one who allowed Pit Bull, and Viper, Inc., and whichever entities came afterwards, to keep changing the account number on the same account; in short, in effectively disguising it from the CRA’s computer which only matches identities, not similarities or differences.

It is bad enough that the CRAs frequently take the word of disreputable or highly questionable collection entities over that of disputing consumers (See earlier article, The Seamier Side of the Credit Reporting Business) it is unconscionable that the CRAs allow collection entities to in effect cloak the identity of accounts even from themselves, the CRAs, and then blame it on the same system that they helped create! This bungling would be laughable if it didn’t happen to cause consumers so much frustration and pain. Besides identity theft, account number morphing is another reason to monitor your credit reports.

Robert F. Brennan, Esq. is a principal with Brennan, Wiener & Associates, an AV-rated law firm in La Crescenta, CA.  His firm specializes in consumer protection litigation, including false credit reporting and abusive debt collection.  He can be reached at: http://socalcreditdamage.com Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/finance-articles/account-number-morphing-still-another-barrier-to-accurate-consumer-credit-reporting-866848.html