In light of the discussions ongoing concerning AU accounts, CPN Numbers, etc., etc., I did want to make a few points. These "companies" or persons popping up since the whole FICO 08' issue raised its head in June are offering illegal services. Many companies before then were doing so as well. However, there is a common distinction between valid credit repair organizations and the scammers and that is that it seems the legitimate organizations are attorneys or affiliated with attorneys. That might be a good thing to look for when shopping the market. Despite popular opinion, many people simply don't have the time, or desire, to do this themselves. There is nothing wrong with that and these people should not be degraded nor should the legitimate companies which assist them. In any event, if I were a person such as the above, I would look for attorney based services. You don't nearly hear as much bad things about these companies. Yes, Lexington Law has had a few legal issues but, it is still far better than Joe Smoe on the block who takes the money and runs. I suppose the main difference between attorney based companies and those that aren't is that they are bound by the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. In other words, we cannot even contemplate doing what non-attorney based companies can. We stand to lose licensure should we do it. Of course, it goes without saying that any companu engaged should be licensed, registered and preferrably bonded and a member of the Better Busines Bureau. Just some food for thought and perhaps a way to help more people from getting duped.
Since everything they do is illegal (btw, very much so,) what's stopping them from simply saying that they ARE an attorney based firm. All it takes is a keyboard. I think there are many more factors to look for in the search for a legitimate company. Starting with small things such as the overall look and feel of their website to verifiable membership in professional associations and many many more things that are beyond the scope of this post. I suggest we use this thread to gather "things to look for in a good CR company" and then compile a sticky.
Not EVERYTHING that is done by EVERY credit repair company is illegal. I think that Apex was trying to point out that true legal firms, such as Lex Law and Apex's company, comply with the law. Apex says that Lexington has had some problems. I haven't kept up with it the past few years, so I don't know. But I do know that they are licensed attorneys and therefore do need to adhere to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. As to your statement that they can say they are lawyers, that's what Apex was getting at. You need to do some due dilegence when choosing a credit repair firm. It's easy enough to check with the state bar association and find out if the firm and/or the attorneys are licensed.
Good advice Apex, In short, the bottom line is common sense and prudence. Just as anyone who would use a contractor to work on thier home, do the homework of checking validity, credentials and references. There is nothing wrong with using a professional service to address credit report problems, just be sure it is a true professional..
The best advice is caveat emptor. If there is a claim of attorney status, then make sure that you get their Bar Number and check them out. What is said here is true. There are legitimate credit repair firms. But there are enough scam outfits around that The Congress passed the CROA to protect consumers. That should make everyone considering turning to a CRO for help look carefully at what is being offered.
Attorney status You should always be able to ask an outfit whether they are attorneys or not. If they say they are a law firm, ask for the name of the senior partner or partner in charge. Then you can check with either the state bar or the state supreme court to see whether that person is in fact an attorney. (In some states, the supreme court keeps track of who is admitted to practice law. In other states, like Michigan, you are admitted by the Supreme Court but the State Bar of Michigan actually tracks your membership. If in doubt, search for a state bar, call and ask). If the person is a lawyer, you can usually access online whether he or she has ever been disciplined by the state bar for ethics violations. If so, stay away. If the person is not a lawyer but claims to be, or has been suspended or disbarred, let the state bar know that he or she is claiming to be a licensed lawyer when he or she is not. The state bar will take it from there and will take it very seriously. (I am a member of the Michigan bar for almost 30 years).
Anyone can claim to be a lawyer so long as they don't give legal advice or perform any services reserved to members of the bar. Anyone can claim to be a medical doctor too as long as they don't give any medical advice or perform any medical procedure.
Yes, indeed they can. But you take their "advice" at your own risk. What do you think of people claiming to be something that they are not? On boards such as this, the appropriateness is at least in question.
When you "need" this type of service making a good sound decision is difficult.The reason you need it varies,but the pressure from multiple collectors,and lack of information needed to fight them would seem to leave you no options. The incredible weight they put on you makes you try anything to break free. No money and collections arent pretty. .Thank you for this board..
Making a "sound decision" is as easy as showing some diligence on the part of the consumer. Any reputable company will be registered and licensed with the Secretary of State where they are incorporated. That can be ascertained with a five minute phone call. Moreover, they should be bonded. Again, a five minute call to the Secretary of State. They should also be a member of the Better Business Bureau AND have an acceptable record therewith. That information should be prominently displayed on a webpage or in the office. Let's not blame this all on the companies. Sure, there are some bad apples but, there are a considerable amount of lazy people that simply don't want to take the time to research or read.
Huh? Not blame all on the companies? Then why in the world did Congress enact the CROA? They seemed to have pointed the finger of blame fairly succinctly. Seems to me that the "companies" have a fairly high degree of complicity. As I noted previously, caveat emptor is always good advice as is due dilligence. But the consumer should have the reasonable expectation of fair, ethical and LEGAL treatment in his dealings.
I phrased that incorrectly. I meant to say "lets not blame this on all of the companies." I agree that there are many unscrupulous entities on the periphery but, not all companies are culpable in this proverbial witch hunt.
It takes an awfully big "periphery" for Congress to act as they did, wouldn't you think? BTW, Apex, what is your horse in this race?
I see that we are playing semantics here. What I do think, however, is that Congress found a field open for exploitation and implemented regulations which made conducting business more stringent. That is a good thing by and large. I also think that this should not pronounce each and every credit service organization some fashion of criminal organization. In other words, not every credit service organization is disreputable simply because there is legislation which governs the industry. My horse in this race initially was to give consumers a list of tale-tale signs to look for when soliciting a credit service organization insofar as we operate one ourselves (by definition). I suppose it evolved into a further suggestion that consumers adopt a more proactive posture when looking for such services.
Not semantics at all. Just that there seems a steady drumbeat in favor of CROs when there is ample evidence that the CRO industry has some serious issues involving exploitation, even some of those CROs with sterling reputations. No one has suggested criminal behavior or intent, certainly not I. Please don't read something in that hasn't been written. So, you are proprietor of a CRO? But that sort of makes this whole thread somewhat of a marketing exercise, wouldn't you agree? I have no doubt that you try to operate according to the guidelines that have been set or that you espouse. They are clear, concise and ethical. A more open presentation of your interest, though, would have been appreciated.
No, I wouldn't necessarily agree that anything in this thread is meant as a marketing exercise. Frankly, it would be much more feasible to simply purchase Google Ad Words and the like. If you would look at some of our posts you could easily discern that they are of substance and value. We do not profit from our membership in this forum. If anything, our time spent here would account for a loss of profit however, I feel that sharing good information is important in a specialized field of law that most folks have no clue about. Again, I thought it a solid notion to set forth a few demonstrative differences between reputable CSO's as opposed to those of lesser standards in light of the whole glut of companies which have arisen by virtue of the FICO 08' farce. Yes, I am a managing member in a CSO. Our company is comprised of licensed attorney's in WV & TN and those who soon will be but, have yet to take the applicable Bar Exams. As you seem to think that there is a steady drumbeat in favor of CSO's, we feel that the contrary is true. While some companies are simply scam artists or at the least, very ill-trained, not all are. It seems to matter little moreover, whether an agency is governed by the Model Rules of Professional Conduct insofar as most persons try to cast all companies in the same light. In light of that, again, we were just attempting to assist those with thoughts of approaching credit service organizations.
Perception is a funny thing. I'll agree it appears that way to you and leave it at that insofar as we are so far off point now this thread is rendered moot.
