Consulta de leyes por estado › Errores de crédito › Ohio

Errores de crédito en Ohio: qué dice la ley

Hay un error en mi reporte de crédito

Ley estatal

Lo que dice la ley

Límite de reclamos menores

$6,000

Ohio Rev. Code §1925.02(A)(1), effective April 9, 2025 (SB 237, 135th General Assembly), sets the ceiling: "Except as provided in division (A)(2) of this section, a small claims division established under section 1925.01 of the Revised Code has jurisdiction in civil actions for the recovery of taxes and money only, for…

Ver la regla completa

amounts not exceeding six thousand dollars, exclusive of interest and costs." Because that grant runs to the recovery of taxes and money only, it does not on its face carry authority to order a credit bureau to delete or correct a tradeline (§1925.02(A)(1)).

§1925.02(A)(2)(a) then lists the matters a small claims division has no jurisdiction in. Libel, slander, replevin, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process actions are excluded (§1925.02(A)(2)(a)(i)). "Actions on any claim brought by an assignee or agent" are excluded, except a claim to recover taxes filed by an authorized employee of a political subdivision or an authorized officer or employee of the state, or a claim filed by a person designated under §1925.18 to act as the representative of a prosecuting attorney (§1925.02(A)(2)(a)(ii)). "Actions for the recovery of punitive or exemplary damages" are excluded (§1925.02(A)(2)(a)(iii)).

That last exclusion carries a written exception. §1925.02(A)(2)(b) provides that division (A)(2)(a) "does not exclude either of the following": actions for damages specifically authorized by R.C. §1345.09(B) or §1345.48(B) (§1925.02(A)(2)(b)(i)); and the filing or defense of an action by the holder of a security agreement or retail installment contract, purchased for the holder's portfolio of investments, provided the holder is not an assignee for the purpose of collection (§1925.02(A)(2)(b)(ii)). Because that exception names only those two categories, a willful-violation claim under 15 U.S.C. §1681n and a request for punitive damages under R.C. §1349.53(A)(2) fall outside it on the face of the text (§1925.02(A)(2)(b)).

Three things the statute does not settle. Whether the damages authorized by R.C. §1345.09(B) are themselves "punitive or exemplary damages" for purposes of the exclusion: §1925.02 does not say. Where a claim seeking punitive damages must instead be filed: on that question §1925.02 says only what the division lacks jurisdiction over, and the one transfer the section mentions is not a routing rule for plaintiffs — §1925.02(B) provides that if a counterclaim or cross-claim exceeds six thousand dollars "and if the case is transferred to the regular docket of the court," the court, if it finds that the counterclaim or cross-claim was without substantial grounds, "may award reasonable attorney's fees by special order to the party against whom the counterclaim or cross-claim is instituted, if that party prevails in the action on that claim." Nothing in the section routes a plaintiff's own punitive damages claim to a particular docket. And whether a plaintiff who drops the punitive request and asks only for actual and statutory damages may stay in the small claims division: the text does not address it.

What the text does settle is the ceiling. With or without a punitive request, a small claims division's money jurisdiction stops at six thousand dollars, exclusive of interest and costs (§1925.02(A)(1)).

Sección del código

The Ohio credit-reporting provisions described on this page are in Ohio Rev. Code ch. 1349, and they are narrower than the federal scheme.

Ver la regla completa

R.C. §1349.51 (effective September 23, 2004) bars a consumer reporting agency from selling or otherwise furnishing information about an individual's insurance coverage that was submitted in connection with an insurer's credit inquiry or consumer-report request (§1349.51(B)). That ban is qualified: §1349.51(C) and (D) each describe conduct it "does not prohibit," including furnishing the information back to the agent or producer that supplied it, and §1349.51(E) adds that nothing in the section is to be construed to prohibit an insurance company from obtaining a claims history or motor vehicle report.

R.C. §1349.52 (effective March 28, 2017) is the consumer security freeze section. §1349.52(C) requires an agency to place a freeze "not later than three business days" after a request. §1349.52(J) requires written confirmation within thirty days of a change to name, date of birth, social security number, or address while a freeze is in place. §1349.52(K) exempts a reseller that maintains no permanent database, "except that the reseller of credit information shall honor any security freeze placed on a credit report by another consumer credit reporting agency," and §1349.52(L) lists entities that "are not required to place a security freeze in a credit report."

R.C. §1349.521 (effective March 28, 2017) carries the parallel freeze regime for protected consumers, with a thirty-day placement period rather than three business days.

R.C. §1349.53 (effective September 1, 2008) is the consumer's private right of action, and it is triggered only by a failure to comply with §1349.52(C) or (J). Under §1349.53(A), where an agency "willfully fails to comply with division (C) or (J) of section 1349.52" of the Revised Code, a consumer may recover actual damages or "damages of not less than one hundred dollars and not more than one thousand dollars, whichever is greater" (§1349.53(A)(1)), punitive damages (§1349.53(A)(2)), and court costs and reasonable attorney's fees (§1349.53(A)(3)). Under §1349.53(C), a negligent failure to comply with the same two divisions yields actual damages plus court costs and reasonable attorney's fees, with no punitive component. Three limits travel with that right. §1349.53(E) requires suit "not later than the earlier of" two years after the plaintiff discovers the violation or five years after the violation occurs. §1349.53(F) gives the agency an affirmative defense to damages claimed under division (A) for its placement of a security freeze in violation of §1349.52(C), where it establishes that it made a "good faith effort to comply with that division" and placed the freeze as a result of a misrepresentation of fact by another consumer. §1349.53(D) shifts reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party where the court finds the action was brought "in bad faith or for the purposes of harassment."

R.C. §1349.01(D) (effective December 13, 2002) is a narrow medical-debt reporting and removal rule that turns on the court-order requirements of §1349.01(B). R.C. §1349.19(G) separately requires a person whose breach disclosure under that section reaches more than one thousand Ohio residents in a single occurrence to notify the nationwide consumer reporting agencies "without unreasonable delay."

§1349.53(A) and (C) are therefore the structural counterparts of the federal willful and negligent damages provisions, 15 U.S.C. §1681n and §1681o, but only inside the security freeze context; they do not reach reporting accuracy generally. Within ch. 1349 there is no Ohio counterpart to 15 U.S.C. §1681j (free reports); the only shadow of §1681i (reinvestigation) is the removal duty in §1349.01(D)(4); and the only shadow of §1681s-2 (furnisher duties) is the medical-debt reporting rules in §1349.01(D)(1)(a), (2)(a), and (3)(a). Whether Ohio law carries credit-reporting provisions outside ch. 1349 is not answered by ch. 1349 itself, and this list is stated as complete only within that chapter.

Daños legales

No Ohio overlay for credit-report DISPUTE claims — federal 15 U.S.C. §1681n (willful: actual or $100–$1,000 statutory, punitive, fees) and §1681o (negligent: actual, fees) govern.

Ver la regla completa

The ONLY Ohio statutory damages are for SECURITY-FREEZE violations under §1349.53, and they reach only two duties — §1349.52(C) (freeze placement / confirmation / PIN timing) and §1349.52(J) (confirmation of identity-information changes while a freeze is in place): willful violation → "Actual damages sustained by the consumer ... or damages of not less than one hundred dollars and not more than one thousand dollars, whichever is greater", plus "Punitive damages" and "Court costs and reasonable attorney's fees" (§1349.53(A)); negligent violation → actual damages plus costs and fees, no statutory minimum (§1349.53(C)). No Ohio damages exist for violations of the fifteen-minute temporary-lift rule (§1349.52(E)) or the three-business-day removal rule (§1349.52(G)) — those are enforceable only by the Attorney General under §1349.52(N) (civil penalty "of up to two thousand five hundred dollars for each instance", payable to the state, not the consumer). Defeasible by: the §1349.53(F) good-faith affirmative defense (see defeasible_rules); the §1349.53(D) fee-shift against a consumer who sues "in bad faith or for the purposes of harassment"; and the §1681t(b)(1)(J) preemption argument (see federal_preemption_analysis).

Cuándo puede extenderse

No Ohio overlay — federal 15 U.S.C. §1681i(a)(1)(B) governs (15-day extension when the consumer supplies additional relevant information during the 30-day period). Ohio law contains no extension rule.

Obligación del buró

No Ohio overlay on reinvestigation, deletion, or dispute notices — federal 15 U.S.C. §1681i governs (30 days; 45 with a free-annual-report dispute).

Ver la regla completa

Ohio's only statutory duties on a consumer credit reporting agency concern SECURITY FREEZES: place a freeze within three business days of a written request (§1349.52(C)); send written confirmation and a PIN/password within five business days (§1349.52(C)); temporarily lift a freeze within fifteen minutes of an electronic/telephone request or three business days of a certified-mail request (§1349.52(E)); remove a freeze within three business days (§1349.52(G)); and, while a freeze is in place, send written confirmation within thirty days of any change to name, date of birth, Social Security number, or address (§1349.52(J)). Every one of these duties is subject to the federal preemption argument under 15 U.S.C. §1681t(b)(1)(J) described in federal_preemption_analysis; the federal freeze rule in §1681c-1(i) is in most respects stricter than Ohio's (1 business day placement by phone/electronic, 1 hour removal, free of charge), so a letter should cite the federal rule first.

§1349.52(C) verbatim: "A consumer credit reporting agency shall place a security freeze on a credit report not later than three business days after receiving a request pursuant to division (B) of this section.

Ver la regla completa

The consumer credit reporting agency shall send a written confirmation of the security freeze to the consumer within five business days of placing the security freeze and, at the same time, shall provide the consumer with a unique personal identification number or password." The duty runs only to a "consumer credit reporting agency" as defined in §1349.52(A)(2) ("any person that, for monetary fees, dues, or on a cooperative nonprofit basis, regularly engages in whole or in part in the practice of maintaining consumers' credit information for the purpose of furnishing credit reports to third parties"). §1349.52(K) EXCLUDES resellers ("do not apply to a consumer credit reporting agency that acts only as a reseller of credit information"), and §1349.52(L) excludes check-services/fraud-prevention companies, demand-deposit account information services, and databases used solely for criminal records, personal loss history, fraud prevention, employment screening, or tenant screening. The consumer must request by "certified mail or other comparable service or by any secured electronic method authorized by the consumer credit reporting agency" (§1349.52(B)(1)). Nothing in ch. 1349 imposes any reinvestigation, accuracy, or dispute-handling duty on a CRA.

Obligación del proveedor de datos

No Ohio overlay — federal 15 U.S.C. §1681s-2(b) governs furnisher duties after a dispute. Ohio has no statute imposing accuracy, investigation, or dispute duties on furnishers (creditors, collectors, lenders), and 15 U.S.C.

Ver la regla completa

§1681t(b)(1)(F) preempts any state law "relating to the responsibilities of persons who furnish information to consumer reporting agencies" except the two saved provisions (Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93 §54A(a) and Cal. Civ. Code §1785.25(a)) — Ohio is not one of them. The single Ohio furnisher-side rule, §1349.01(D)(1)(a) (no medical provider or collection agency may report to a CRA a former spouse's unpaid medical bill caused by the other party's court-ordered failure to carry health insurance, once the former spouse has supplied the court order and location assistance), is a furnisher-responsibility rule with no grandfather clause and therefore faces a direct §1681t(b)(1)(F) preemption argument. A demand letter to a furnisher in Ohio should rely on §1681s-2(b) only.

Derecho a reportes gratis

No Ohio overlay — federal 15 U.S.C. §1681j governs (one free report per 12 months from each nationwide CRA, plus free reports after adverse action, fraud alerts, etc.). Ohio has no state free-report statute.

Ver la regla completa

On freeze FEES: the Ohio text still permits "a reasonable fee not to exceed five dollars" to place, lift, or remove a freeze or reissue a PIN (§1349.52(I)(1)–(3)), waived only for identity-fraud victims (R.C. §2913.49) who send a police report; the Ohio version read (effective March 28, 2017) predates the 2018 federal amendment, and federal 15 U.S.C. §1681c-1(i)(2)(A) and (i)(3)(C) now require nationwide CRAs to place and remove freezes "free of charge". A letter must NOT tell an Ohio consumer a fee may be charged; cite the federal free-of-charge rule.

Ley aplicable

Ohio has NO comprehensive consumer credit reporting act (nothing comparable to California's CCRAA, New York GBL Art. 25, Texas Bus. & Com. Code ch. 20, or Washington RCW 19.182). Ohio's only credit-report-specific statutes are a security-freeze scheme — Ohio Rev.

Ver la regla completa

Code §1349.52 (security freeze on consumer credit report), §1349.521 (security freeze for protected consumers), §1349.53 (civil action for noncompliance with security freeze) — plus one narrow medical-debt content rule in §1349.01(D) that applies only to unpaid medical bills caused by a divorced/separated party's court-ordered failure to carry health insurance. For credit-report DISPUTES (inaccurate items, reinvestigation, furnisher duties) there is no Ohio statute at all; the federal FCRA governs alone.

Honorarios de abogado

For credit-report disputes: No Ohio overlay — federal §1681n(a)(3)/§1681o(a)(2) govern. For the Ohio security-freeze action only: §1349.53(A)(3) and (C)(2) award "Court costs and reasonable attorney's fees" to a prevailing consumer for willful or negligent violations of §1349.52(C) or (J).

Ver la regla completa

Two-way risk: §1349.53(D) — "If the court finds that a civil action under division (A) or (C) of this section was brought in bad faith or for the purposes of harassment, the court shall award to the prevailing party reasonable attorney's fees in relation to the work expended in responding to the civil action."

Plazo para demandar

2 años

The 2-year figure applies ONLY to the Ohio security-freeze civil action under §1349.53 and runs from discovery: "A person shall bring a civil action under division (A) or (C) of this section not later than the earlier of the following: (1) Two years after the date of discovery by the plaintiff of a violation of division (C) or (J) of section 1349.52 of the Revised Code; (2) Five years after the date a violation of division (C) or (J) of section 1349.52 of the Revised Code occurs." (§1349.53(E)).

Ver la regla completa

For every credit-report DISPUTE claim there is no Ohio overlay — federal 15 U.S.C. §1681p governs (2 years from discovery / 5 years from violation, whichever is earlier), which happens to mirror the Ohio freeze structure. Do not describe the Ohio period as a general credit-reporting limitations period.

Límite máximo

5 años

Quién atiende quejas

Ohio Attorney General, Consumer Protection Section (the Attorney General is the only enforcement agency named in §1349.52(M)–(O); there is no Ohio agency that adjudicates individual credit-report disputes — those go to the CRA under the federal FCRA, then to the CFPB or court).

Scope limits

(a) Ohio's private damages remedy (§1349.53) covers only §1349.52(C) and (J); violations of the temporary-lift rule (E), the removal rule (G), the fee caps (I), and the protected-consumer rules in §1349.521 carry no private remedy and are enforceable only by the Attorney General (§1349.52(N); applied to protected-consumer freezes by §1349.521(J)).

Ver la regla completa

(b) The freeze statutes apply only to "consumer credit reporting agencies" as defined in §1349.52(A)(2), minus the exclusions in (K) and (L). (c) Protected-consumer freezes (§1349.521) are available only for a "minor protected consumer" ("an individual who is under sixteen years of age", §1349.52(A)(5)) or "a person for whom a guardian of the estate or conservator has been appointed" (§1349.52(A)(6)(b)), and the representative must supply "sufficient proof of authority" and "sufficient proof of identity" (§1349.521(A)(2)); the placement and removal deadline for protected consumers is thirty days, not three business days (§1349.521(B)(1), (E)). (d) The medical-debt rule in §1349.01(D) applies only where a court in a divorce/dissolution/legal-separation/child-support case ordered a party to carry health insurance for a former spouse or children, that party failed to, and the former spouse or responsible person gave the provider or collection agency a copy of the court order and "Reasonable assistance in locating the party" (§1349.01(B)(1)–(2)); it does not cover any other medical debt, any dollar threshold, or any paid-collection rule. (e) The $6,000 small-claims ceiling (§1925.02(A)(1)) is "exclusive of interest and costs" and excludes claims brought by assignees or agents (§1925.02(A)(2)(a)(ii)). (f) Every Ohio freeze provision is subject to the §1681t(b)(1)(J) preemption argument; every Ohio furnisher-side provision to §1681t(b)(1)(F).

Defeasible rules

(1) §1349.53(F) affirmative defense: a CRA "is not liable in damages in a civil action brought pursuant to division (A) of this section for any damages a consumer allegedly sustains as a result of the consumer credit reporting agency's placement of a security freeze in violation of division (C) of section 1349.52 of…

Ver la regla completa

the Revised Code on the consumer's credit report if the consumer credit reporting agency establishes as an affirmative defense that the consumer credit reporting agency made a good faith effort to comply with that division and the consumer credit reporting agency placed a security freeze on the consumer's credit report as a result of a misrepresentation of fact by another consumer." (2) §1349.53(D): fees shift TO the defendant if the consumer's action "was brought in bad faith or for the purposes of harassment". (3) §1349.52(E)(2)(a)–(b): the fifteen-minute temporary-lift duty is excused where the consumer fails to supply the identifying information and PIN required by division (D), or where the CRA is prevented by "an act of God", third-party unauthorized acts, "operational interruption", governmental action, or scheduled/commercially reasonable maintenance. (4) §1349.52(E)(3)(b) and §1349.521(D)(1): a CRA may remove a freeze on its own where it "was frozen due to a material misrepresentation of fact by the consumer" (or the representative), after five business days' written notice. (5) §1349.52(I)(1): the freeze-fee waiver for identity-fraud victims requires the consumer to "send a copy of the police report related to the violation of section 2913.49 of the Revised Code" (superseded in practice by the federal free-of-charge rule for nationwide CRAs). (6) §1349.01(D)(4): the CRA's duty to remove the insurance-caused medical item arises only after the consumer supplies the court order and locating assistance, and the CRA must act "within a reasonable time" (no fixed number of days); for the responsible party's own file the burden is on that party to prove non-responsibility. (7) §1349.53(E): 2-year-from-discovery / 5-year-from-violation filing deadline, whichever is earlier. (8) Federal preemption under §1681t(b)(1)(J), (F), and (E) as set out in federal_preemption_analysis.

Enforcement agency

Ohio Attorney General, Consumer Protection Section — complaint portal https://filecomplaint.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/ (landing page https://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Individuals-and-Families/Consumers/File-a-Complaint).

Ver la regla completa

Under §1349.52(M) the Attorney General "may conduct an investigation if the attorney general, based on complaints or the attorney general's own inquiries, has reason to believe that a consumer credit reporting agency has failed or is failing to comply with this section", and under §1349.52(N)(1) may sue in common pleas for injunctive relief and a civil penalty "of up to two thousand five hundred dollars for each instance" of intentional or reckless noncompliance (penalties go to the state consumer protection enforcement fund, §1349.52(N)(2)). The Attorney General has no statutory role in credit-report disputes; for those the federal route (CRA dispute → CFPB complaint → court) applies.

Medical debt rules

No general Ohio medical-debt credit-reporting ban is in force. The only enacted rule is Ohio Rev. Code §1349.01(D) (effective December 13, 2002), which applies solely where a domestic-relations court ordered a party to obtain health insurance for a former spouse or children and the party failed to: once the former…

Ver la regla completa

spouse or responsible person gives the provider or collection agency the court order and locating assistance (§1349.01(B)(1)–(2)), "No collection agency or provider of hospital, surgical, or medical services may report to a consumer reporting agency" the resulting nonpayment (§1349.01(D)(1)(a)) and "No consumer reporting agency shall include in the credit file or credit report of the former spouse or person responsible for the children" that nonpayment (§1349.01(D)(1)(b)); a CRA that has already included it "shall remove the information" and, if it fails to do so "within a reasonable time", the former spouse "may initiate an action to require the agency to remove the information" (§1349.01(D)(4)) — no damages are specified. Both halves face federal preemption arguments (§1681t(b)(1)(F) for the furnisher rule; §1681t(b)(1)(E) for the CRA rule unless a pre-September-30-1996 version existed, which was not verified). PENDING, NOT LAW: House Bill 257 of the 136th General Assembly ("Ohio Medical Debt Fairness Act"), which would "prohibit reporting medical debt to a consumer reporting agency" and cap medical-debt interest, showed "Current Version As Introduced" and was in the House Health Committee on the legislature.ohio.gov page fetched 2026-09-05; it must not be cited as Ohio law.

Relationship to fcra

Supplementary and narrow. §1349.52(P): "The rights and remedies that are provided under this section are in addition to any other rights or remedies that are provided by law." Ohio expressly borrows the FCRA definition of consumer reporting agency in §1349.01(A)(1) ("has the same meaning as in the 'Fair Credit Reporting Act,' 84 Stat.

Ver la regla completa

1128, 15 U.S.C.A. 1681a") and ties its freeze notices to the FCRA summary-of-rights duty in 15 U.S.C. §1681g(c) (§1349.52(F), §1349.521(F)). Ohio adds nothing on reinvestigation, furnisher duties, free reports, or general damages; where it overlaps (security freezes) the federal rule is stricter and, under §1681t(b)(1)(J), likely controlling.

Security freeze rules

Ohio Rev. Code §1349.52 (consumers) and §1349.521 (protected consumers), both effective March 28, 2017. Request: in writing "by certified mail or other comparable service or by any secured electronic method authorized by the consumer credit reporting agency" (§1349.52(B)(1)); "Other comparable service" means "a service for which a receipt of delivery is provided" (§1349.52(A)(11)).

Ver la regla completa

Placement: "not later than three business days after receiving a request", written confirmation and PIN "within five business days" (§1349.52(C)); protected consumers: "not later than thirty days" (§1349.521(B)(1)). Temporary lift: fifteen minutes by electronic/telephone, three business days by certified mail (§1349.52(E)(1)–(2)). Removal: three business days (§1349.52(G)); protected consumer: thirty days (§1349.521(E)); a minor protected consumer may remove the freeze on reaching sixteen (§1349.521(D)(3)). Permitted disclosures despite a freeze: existing-account review and collection, prescreening, law enforcement under court order, government agencies, child-support enforcement, credit-monitoring subscriptions, the consumer's own report, insurance underwriting, fraud/tax/court-order investigation (§1349.52(H)(1)–(10)). Fees: statute allows up to $5 for each placement, lift, removal, or PIN reissue (§1349.52(I)), waived for R.C. §2913.49 identity-fraud victims with a police report; no fee for foster-child representatives or minors who already have a file (§1349.521(H)(2)). CAUTION: federal 15 U.S.C. §1681c-1(i) (nationwide CRAs) requires placement within 1 business day (phone/electronic) or 3 business days (mail), removal within 1 hour (phone/electronic) or 3 business days (mail), all "free of charge", and §1681t(b)(1)(J) preempts state law on that subject matter — cite the federal rule as primary. Private remedy: §1349.53, limited to violations of §1349.52(C) and (J).

Identity theft statute

Ohio Rev. Code §2913.49 (identity fraud; current version effective March 20, 2019, SB 158, 132nd GA) is a criminal statute; §1349.52(I)(1) and §1349.521(H)(1)(a) reference it only to waive freeze fees for victims who send a police report. It creates no civil credit-reporting remedy.

Reinvestigation days note

Ohio Rev. Code ch. 1349 sets no general deadline for reinvestigating a disputed credit item; the chapter carries no reinvestigation provision at all. The commonly cited reinvestigation periods — generally 30 days, and 45 days where the dispute follows a free annual report — come from federal law, 15 U.S.C.

Ver la regla completa

§1681i and §1681j, whose text was not among the sources read for this page and is therefore not verified here. Nothing in ch. 1349 restates, shortens, or lengthens them; other chapters of the Revised Code were not read, so that is a statement about ch. 1349 and not about Ohio law as a whole.

Ohio is not, though, without any removal duty. R.C. §1349.01(D) creates a narrow one, and it presupposes the determination described in §1349.01(B): a court, in an action for divorce, annulment, dissolution of marriage, or legal separation, must have determined "that a party who is a resident of this state is responsible for obtaining health insurance coverage for the party's former spouse or children," or, under a child support order issued in accordance with R.C. §§3119.29 to 3119.56, a court must have required a party who is a resident of this state to obtain that coverage for "the children who are the subject of the child support order" — and in either case the party must have failed to obtain it.

On that footing, §1349.01(D)(4) supplies two removal rules, neither expressed in days, and each with its own trigger.

The first applies where the medical nonpayment information sits in the credit file of the former spouse or the person responsible for the children. That is information §1349.01(D)(2) permits to be reported precisely because the copy of the court order (§1349.01(B)(1)) and "Reasonable assistance in locating the party and obtaining information about the party's health insurance coverage." (§1349.01(B)(2)) had not been supplied. Supplying them to the agency is what triggers removal: "the consumer reporting agency shall remove the information from the credit file and credit report if the former spouse or person responsible for the children provides the agency with the information required in divisions (B)(1) and (2) of this section." If the agency fails to remove it, pursuant to the terms of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, "within a reasonable time after receiving the information required by divisions (B)(1) and (2) of this section, the former spouse may initiate an action to require the agency to remove the information" (§1349.01(D)(4)).

The second applies where the information sits in the credit file of the party who was supposed to obtain coverage — information covered by §1349.01(D)(3), which is not conditioned on the divisions (B)(1) and (2) submission. There, that party first carries "the burden of proving that the party is not responsible for obtaining the health insurance coverage or, if responsible, that the expenses incurred are not covered expenses." Once that is done, "If the party meets that burden, the agency shall remove the information from the party's credit file and credit report immediately." (§1349.01(D)(4)). If the agency does not remove it immediately after the burden is met, that party "may initiate an action to require the agency to remove the information" (§1349.01(D)(4)).

How long "a reasonable time" runs is not settled by the statute. Section 1349.01 never puts it in days, supplies no formula for measuring it, and ties the removal duty to the terms of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act rather than to any period of its own; and no Ohio case law was read for this page, so nothing here reports how a court has applied the phrase. Sections 1349.52 and 1349.521 do set deadlines of their own — among them three business days, five business days, fifteen minutes and thirty days — but those belong to the security freeze provisions and do not govern a dispute reinvestigation.

Who is liable scope limit

Under Ohio's freeze statutes only a "consumer credit reporting agency" (§1349.52(A)(2)) can be liable, and only for willful or negligent violation of §1349.52(C) or (J) (§1349.53(A), (C)).

Ver la regla completa

EXCLUDED: resellers that do not maintain their own permanent database (§1349.52(K), though a reseller "shall honor any security freeze placed on a credit report by another consumer credit reporting agency"); check-services and fraud-prevention companies; demand-deposit account information services; and criminal-record, loss-history, fraud-detection, employment-screening, and tenant-screening databases (§1349.52(L)). Furnishers (creditors, debt collectors, lenders) are NOT liable under any Ohio credit-reporting statute; their only exposure is federal §1681s-2(b) via §1681n/§1681o. Users of reports face Ohio liability only to the CRA, not the consumer (§1349.53(B): a person who obtains a report "under false pretenses or knowingly without the permission of the consumer is liable to the consumer credit reporting agency").

Federal preemption analysis

15 U.S.C. §1681t(a) saves state law generally ("this subchapter does not annul, alter, affect, or exempt any person ... from complying with the laws of any State with respect to the collection, distribution, or use of any information on consumers ...

Ver la regla completa

except to the extent that those laws are inconsistent with any provision of this subchapter, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency"), but §1681t(b) then provides that "No requirement or prohibition may be imposed under the laws of any State ... with respect to any subject matter regulated under" the listed federal sections. Applied to each Ohio provision: (1) SECURITY FREEZES, §§1349.52, 1349.521, 1349.53 — §1681t(b)(1)(J) preempts state law on the subject matter of "subsections (i) and (j) of section 1681c–1 of this title relating to security freezes", with NO September-30-1996 grandfather. Ohio's freeze timing (three business days to place; fifteen minutes / three business days to lift; three business days to remove), its $5 fees, its PIN/confirmation mechanics, and the §1349.53 private damages that enforce §1349.52(C) all sit squarely inside the subject matter of §1681c-1(i)–(j). A defendant has a REAL and strong preemption argument against any letter demand that rests on Ohio freeze law rather than federal law, at least as to consumer reporting agencies "described in section 1681a(p)" (the nationwide CRAs) that §1681c-1(i)(1)(A) covers. The safest letter cites §1681c-1(i) (1 business day placement by phone/electronic, 3 by mail; 1 hour removal by phone/electronic; "free of charge") as the operative rule and mentions §1349.52/§1349.53 only as an additional state remedy "to the extent not preempted by 15 U.S.C. §1681t(b)(1)(J)". Whether §1349.52(J) (written confirmation of identity-information changes while frozen) is within the preempted subject matter is untested; treat as uncertain. (2) DISPUTE TIMING — Ohio has none; §1681t(b)(1)(B) would preempt any new one (no Ohio law in effect September 30, 1996). (3) FURNISHER DUTIES — Ohio has none except §1349.01(D)(1)(a) (medical provider / collection agency may not report the specified insurance-caused medical debt); §1681t(b)(1)(F) preempts state furnisher-responsibility law except Massachusetts ch. 93 §54A(a) and Cal. Civ. Code §1785.25(a), so the Ohio furnisher-side rule has a direct preemption problem. (4) CONTENT OF REPORTS — §1349.01(D)(1)(b) and (D)(4) forbid a CRA to include, and require it to remove, the same narrow medical-debt item; §1681t(b)(1)(E) preempts state law on the subject matter of §1681c "relating to information contained in consumer reports, except that this subparagraph shall not apply to any State law in effect on September 30, 1996". The current §1349.01 version is effective December 13, 2002; whether an earlier version was in effect on September 30, 1996 was NOT verified from the official text, so the grandfather cannot be asserted. Real preemption argument; do not rely on it in a letter. (5) DAMAGES — Ohio has no general credit-reporting damages statute; §1681n/§1681o govern. Net: for a credit-report dispute letter in Ohio the operative law is exclusively federal.

Reinvestigation days detail

Ohio has no statute setting any deadline for a consumer reporting agency to reinvestigate or respond to a dispute; Ohio Rev. Code ch. 1349 was read in full and contains no such provision. Even if the General Assembly enacted one now it would be preempted: 15 U.S.C.

Ver la regla completa

§1681t(b)(1)(B) bars state law on "the time by which a consumer reporting agency must take any action, including the provision of notification to a consumer or other person, in any procedure related to the disputed accuracy of information in a consumer's file, except that this subparagraph shall not apply to any State law in effect on September 30, 1996" — Ohio had no such law on that date. The only Ohio timing rules are the security-freeze timings in §1349.52(C), (E), (G) and §1349.521(B), (E) (three business days / fifteen minutes / thirty days for protected consumers), which are not dispute deadlines.

Lee esto antes de confiar en los datos de arriba

Ohio statutory text quoted on this page is taken from the Ohio Revised Code as published by the Ohio Legislative Service Commission at codes.ohio.gov, and was checked against that text on September 5, 2026. The sections read in full were R.C. §1925.02 (small claims jurisdiction, effective April 9, 2025) and the whole of R.C. ch. 1349, in which Ohio's credit-reporting sections appear: §1349.01, §1349.19, §1349.51, §1349.52, §1349.521 and §1349.53.

Several points are not settled by that text and are given here as boundaries rather than as findings. The small claims statute does not say where a claim seeking punitive damages must be filed instead, and it does not say whether a plaintiff who waives punitive damages may remain in small claims. It also does not say whether the damages authorized by R.C. §1345.09(B) count as punitive or exemplary damages for purposes of the small claims exclusion; R.C. ch. 1345, Ohio's Consumer Sales Practices Act, is outside the text read for this page and is not relied on. The 30-day and 45-day reinvestigation periods come from the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. §1681i and §1681j, whose text is outside the Ohio material read here; Ohio law neither restates nor modifies them. R.C. §1349.01(D)(4) requires removal "within a reasonable time" in one situation and "immediately" in the other, without putting either in days.

Two statements here are scoped to a single chapter. That Ohio has no general reinvestigation deadline, and the list of Ohio credit-reporting sections given above, hold as to ch. 1349; other chapters of the Revised Code are outside the text read for this page, so credit-reporting provisions elsewhere in Ohio law are not ruled out. No Ohio case law was consulted, so nothing here reflects how an Ohio court has applied these sections.

Léelo tú mismo

Fuentes oficiales. Si algún dato de abajo importa en tu caso, abre la ley y léela — las leyes se reforman y muchas ciudades agregan reglas locales más estrictas.

Última verificación: 2026-09-07

Envía esto como carta certificada

Jab redacta la carta, un abogado con licencia la revisa, y la enviamos por correo certificado USPS con acuse de recibo firmado. $29 fijo. También puedes escribirla tú — esta página tiene lo necesario.

Empezar mi carta →

Jab Today no es un bufete y esto no es asesoría legal. Esta página describe cómo está redactada la ley, que es distinto de lo que pasará en tu caso. Las leyes se reforman y las ordenanzas locales suelen ser más estrictas. Para tu situación, consulta a un abogado con licencia en tu estado.