Language teachers devote a lot of time and energy to provide corrective feedback (CF) to help student writers improve the accuracy of their writing. However, regardless of the CF approach adopted, similar types of errors usually appear in students' new pieces of writing. Thus, most teachers have some doubt about the impact of CF, and some see it as a waste of time and energy. Similarly, our personal experience as writing teachers has led us to the conclusion that CF is not beneficial to some learners' accuracy development, and we need new methods to make it more effective. In the present multiple case study, we aim to investigate whether collaborating with a peer in the editing process could have a positive impact on our students' uptake and retention. More specifically, the study compares the nature of eight learners' engagement with and utilization of comprehensive coded indirect CF (CCICF) they receive on the errors in their paragraphs under two different editing conditions: individually or with a peer. In addition, pair talks during the editing process are analyzed to gain a deeper understanding of the participants' response to CCICF. Lastly, their feedback about the process is explored through a questionnaire.