How to dispute a credit report error

Two sections of the Fair Credit Reporting Act get stapled together in template culture. They do different jobs. Section 609, codified at 15 U.S.C. §1681g, is about disclosure: what a consumer reporting agency must show you about your own file. Section 611, codified at 15 U.S.C. §1681i, is about accuracy: what the agency must do when you tell it an item is wrong. A letter that cites §609 and then demands that accounts disappear is asking the disclosure section to perform the reinvestigation section’s work. The statute does not work that way.

The letters on this page follow United States law for files at Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion. Other countries use different agencies and statutes. This is not a guide to deleting accurate debt, and it is not a prediction of a credit score. The samples further down use a fictional sender so the shape of the letter is visible. They are not filled with your information, and this site does not transmit them.

What §609 actually requires

Section 1681g gives a consumer the right to a disclosure of the information in the file, the sources of that information, and the identity of furnishers, among other items the section lists. “File” is a defined term in the Act. The disclosure is a look at what the agency has, not a ruling that a tradeline is inaccurate.

You can ask for that disclosure. People do, in writing and through the bureaus’ own channels. The request should say it is a disclosure request. It should not pretend that viewing the file is a procedural trick that obliges the bureau to delete unverified-looking accounts. If an item in the disclosure looks wrong, the accuracy process is §611, and it can be started with or without a separate §609 letter.

Sample Sender
1 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94105

October 11, 2026

Experian
P.O. Box 4500
Allen, TX 75013

Re: Request for disclosure of my credit file — FCRA §609 (15 U.S.C. §1681g)

To whom it may concern:

Please disclose the information in my credit file to me, as required by 15 U.S.C. §1681g. This request is for disclosure of the file. It is not a dispute under 15 U.S.C. §1681i, and it is not a request to delete tradelines.

Please include the information §1681g requires you to disclose to a consumer.

Sincerely,
Sample Sender

The sample above is a disclosure request. It cites §1681g and says it is not a deletion request. That sentence is there because the opposite sentence is the usual error.

What §611 requires the bureau to do

When you notify a consumer reporting agency that information in your file is inaccurate or incomplete, §1681i(a)(1) requires a free reinvestigation, finished in a reasonable time that is not to exceed 30 days. The agency has to consider the information you submitted. Within five business days of receiving the dispute, it generally must notify the furnisher and pass along the relevant information you provided. The furnisher then has its own duties under the Act. This page does not collapse the bureau and the furnisher into one actor. A bank can be right and a bureau wrong, or the reverse.

If the item is found inaccurate, incomplete, or cannot be verified, the agency must promptly delete or modify it, and it must notify the furnisher. “Cannot be verified” is a conclusion the process reaches. It is not a slogan you can print at the top of a letter to make the conclusion true. If the furnisher verifies the item and the bureau accepts that verification, an accurate item stays. You may then ask the bureau for a description of the reinvestigation procedure under §1681i(a)(7), and you may add a brief statement of the dispute to the file if the dispute is not resolved in your favor. A statement is not a deletion.

The agency also has a frivolous-or-irrelevant screen. It can decline to reinvestigate when it reasonably determines the dispute is frivolous or irrelevant, including when you do not give enough information to investigate. If it does that, it has to tell you why and identify what would make the dispute sufficient. A letter that says “delete everything under §609” and identifies no item is the kind of notice that screen is written for.

Sample Sender
1 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94105

October 11, 2026

Experian
P.O. Box 4500
Allen, TX 75013

Re: Request for reinvestigation of inaccurate information — FCRA §611 (15 U.S.C. §1681i)

To whom it may concern:

I dispute the accuracy of information in my credit file. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. §1681i, a consumer reporting agency must reinvestigate information a consumer reports as inaccurate, incomplete, or unverifiable.

Account name: Example Card
Account number (last 4): 1234
Reason: Inaccurate balance

What I believe is wrong:
The October statement shows $2,140. The file shows $2,540.

Please forward this dispute, including the information I supplied, to the furnisher, complete the reinvestigation, and send me the results in writing. If you need a description of the procedure you used, I request it under 15 U.S.C. §1681i(a)(7).

I am not asking you to remove information that is accurate and verifiable. I am asking you to follow the reinvestigation procedure the statute requires.

Sincerely,
Sample Sender

Thirty days, and the fifteen-day extension

The base period in §1681i(a)(1)(A) is 30 days from the agency’s receipt of the notice. Subparagraph (B) allows an extension of not more than 15 additional days if the agency receives further information from you during that 30-day period that is relevant to the reinvestigation. That is the statutory source of the “45 days” figure. It is not a second, automatic 45-day track for every letter.

The extension has limits. Subparagraph (C) says the extra 15 days do not apply if, during the original 30 days, the agency already found the information inaccurate or incomplete, or determined that the dispute is frivolous or irrelevant. Mailing more paper does not buy 15 days when the statute has already cut the extension off.

Results have their own timing. After the reinvestigation, the agency must send you the results in writing, generally within five business days of finishing, including a notice of your right to add a statement if the item remains. If you asked, the notice also covers the procedure description. None of those clocks is a promise that the item will be gone when the letter arrives.

Sample Sender
1 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94105

October 11, 2026

Experian
P.O. Box 4500
Allen, TX 75013

Re: Follow-up on reinvestigation requested September 1, 2026 — FCRA §611 (15 U.S.C. §1681i)

To whom it may concern:

On September 1, 2026 I asked you to reinvestigate the item below under 15 U.S.C. §1681i. Please send the written results of that reinvestigation if you have not already done so.

Account name: Example Card
Account number (last 4): 1234
Reason: Inaccurate balance

The October statement shows $2,140. The file shows $2,540.

If the furnisher did not verify the item, 15 U.S.C. §1681i(a)(5) requires you to delete or modify it. If you verified it, please include the notice of my right to add a statement of dispute to the file, and provide the description of your procedure that §1681i(a)(7) makes available on request.

Sincerely,
Sample Sender

A follow-up is appropriate when the result did not come, or when you want the procedure description, or when an item that was not verified is still being reported. It is still a §611 letter. It still does not guarantee a deletion.

What a dispute can and cannot do

A dispute can correct a balance, a status, a date, or an account that is not yours, when the record supports that correction or when the item cannot be verified. It can cause an item to be updated rather than removed. It can put your statement of dispute next to an item the furnisher stands behind.

It cannot repeal a debt you owe and that the furnisher can verify. It cannot turn a seven-year reporting period into an earlier deletion because a template said so. Most adverse information is excluded after seven years under §1681c, measured from the commencement of the delinquency, not from the date you disputed. Bankruptcies have a longer period. That reporting period is not the statute of limitations for a lawsuit. States set collection lawsuits on their own clocks. A ledger that prints “STATUTE: 7YRS” is mixing those two clocks. On this site the reporting field is the reporting period, and the lawsuit field is marked as state-specific.

How the samples are meant to be used

The three drawers on this page are generated from the same letter functions as the dispute tool, with a fictional name and a last-four of 1234. Copy them as structure. Replace the sender, the bureau, and the facts. The credit report dispute letter does that replacement in the browser and does not store the result. Mailing addresses for the three nationwide bureaus are kept in one file on this site and should be checked against the bureau’s current dispute page before you pay for postage. Addresses move. The statute does not.

Send copies, not originals. Keep a copy of what you sent. Certified mail with return receipt is evidence of delivery, which matters because the 30 days run from receipt. It is not evidence that the bureau will agree with you. If you dispute online or by phone instead, the same section still governs the reinvestigation; the bureau’s own channel is not a waiver of §1681i. Use whichever channel lets you keep a record.

A dispute is also not a substitute for talking to the furnisher. The CFPB notes that going to the company that reported the item can fix account-level errors. You may do both. Doing both does not double the legal effect. It gives two parties with different duties a chance to look at the same documents.

If the result says the item was verified, read what was verified. A balance that is now correct, a past-due flag that was removed, or a “consumer disagrees” statement are all possible outcomes short of deletion. If the result says the dispute was frivolous, the notice should say what was missing. Supply that, if you have it, in a new dispute that actually identifies the item. Do not send the same empty demand and expect the screen to open.

Nothing on this page tells you that a score will rise. Scoring models use the file they are given, and a deleted collection is not the same event inside every model. If someone quotes a point change as the product of a letter, they are not quoting §1681i.