ICS response to 'gimme $$$'

:-( I had similar luck with my letter to Allstate. They keep asking me for information I had already given them twice! Hopefully someone will have some advice for you...good luck (and I hope you get your $$$!)

 

It looks like they've provided ample rope with which to hang themselves. They have deluded themselves into thinking that the FCRA has bestowed them with a permissible purpose to pull your credit report.

"Is it possible that a bankruptcy filing is associated with your social security number? If so, this would explain the ICS inquiry on your credit report. The FCRA requires that ICS verify an active relationship between an issuer and a consumer before releasing consumer information to the issuer."

They're asking You if you've filed bankruptcy? And if you did, there, there, don't worry -- that explains everything.

Firstly, I would not provide them with anything more than what you have already given them. Why would anyone send their social security number to a total stranger with whom they have no relationship whatsoever?

I may be wrong, but I don't think the FCRA gives a third party who is admittedly Not a debt collector, permission to rifle through your credit file for its customers who they say are the credit card companies.

If the mastercard and visa folks are so keen on knowing if their respective customers have filed bankruptcy, then let them do regular account reviews. Which, of course, they do, more frequently than their customers like. Capital One does an AR every month on a member of my family. A lot of people think AR's are benign, just checking to see if we can offer you a higher credit limit. But I think the main purpose is to see how you're handling the rest of your debt, even if you are current on your account with them. But I am straying from the subject, which is...
SUE THE SON-OF-A-GUNS

 

Holy cow! This is scary! So every time we apply for a credit card, that application info is going into a database somewhere so the next time we apply, that issuer can pull up a history of each place we have applied to and apparently the information we've put on the application. There is a lot to digest in that letter, but it sure sounds like an entirely different type of consumer reporting agency!!!


Yikes! Will have to think about this one.


L

 

Oh...also does this include bankruptcies that were filed more than 10 years ago? Sure sounded like it.


L

 

It did sound like it. But if they are, then per the FCRA, they will have big problems with that.

 

I get a letter every once-in-a-while telling me they have a free credit report I can get from them...

I TRASHED IT...

As far as I know, they are NOT connected to EQUIFAX, EXPERIAN, or TRANS UNION

 

I understand the business model that ICS claims to be using:

1. They have a list of clients.

2. Their clients want to know when any of their customers declares BK.

3. ICS pulls BK information from the courts, which is perfectly legitimate.

4. ICS is not permitted to release information to their clients unless their clients have a permissable purpose to see the information (true), so ICS claims that they need to prove that their clients have an ongoing business relationship with the BK individual.

5. They pull the CR of the BK individual from one or more of the other CRAs.

6. They look to see whether one of their clients is listed as an active account. If so, they notify them.

Now, that sounds nice and efficient. The problem is that, while ICS' CLIENTS may have a permissable purpose to pull my credit report when I file BK, ICS ITSELF has no reason to pull my report at all other than profit-driven nosiness.

They could accomplish the same result by obtaining a list of their client's customers from their client and cross matching. They do NOT have to pull my CR from three other CRAs to determine whether or not I had an account with their client.

Further, since this is a company that appears to take the cheap, easy, lazy and palpably illegal route, I am not at ALL confident that they aren't pulling my CR to make a list of NEW clients. E.g., "gee, he had MBNA and we don't service MBNA, let's offer to sell his name to MBNA for ten bucks". Trolling my CR to build a client list to send derogatory info to is NOT a permissable purpose.

Take a look at permissable purposes:


S 604. Permissible purposes of consumer reports [15 U.S.C. § 1681b]

(a) In general. Subject to subsection (c), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other:

THE CRA THAT ICS IS REQUESTING THIS FROM HAS NO PERMISSABLE PURPOSE TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION TO ICS, AND ICS HAS NO PERMISSABLE PURPOSE TO REQUEST THE INFORMATION, UNLESS ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA IS MET:

(1) In response to the order of a court having jurisdiction to issue such an order, or a subpoena issued in connection with proceedings before a Federal grand jury.

NOPE.

(2) In accordance with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates.

NOPE.

(3) To a person which it has reason to believe

(A) intends to use the information in connection with a credit transaction involving the consumer on whom the information is to be furnished and involving the extension of credit to, or review or collection of an account of, the consumer; or

NOPE. ICS IS A CRA. THEY ARE NOT USING THE INFORMATION FOR A CREDIT TRANSACTION WITH THE CONSUMER, NOR DO THEY HAVE AN ACCOUNT WITH THE CONSUMER THAT PERMITS REVIEW.

(B) intends to use the information for employment purposes; or

NOPE.

(C) intends to use the information in connection with the underwriting of insurance involving the consumer; or

NOPE.

(D) intends to use the information in connection with a determination of the consumer's eligibility for a license or other benefit granted by a governmental instrumentality required by law to consider an applicant's financial responsibility or status; or

NOPE.

(E) intends to use the information, as a potential investor or servicer, or current insurer, in connection with a valuation of, or an assessment of the credit or prepayment risks associated with, an existing credit obligation; or

THEY ARE NOT A POTENTIAL INVESTOR OR SERVICER OF A FUTURE ACCOUNT WITH THE CONSUMER, NOR DO THEY HAVE AN EXISTING CREDIT OBLIGATION TO REVIEW.

(F) otherwise has a legitimate business need for the information

(i) in connection with a business transaction that is initiated by the consumer; or

NOPE, NOT INITIATED BY THE CONSUMER.

(ii) to review an account to determine whether the consumer continues to meet the terms of the account.

NOPE, THEY DON'T HAVE AN ACCOUNT WITH THE CONSUMER.

(4) In response to a request by the head of a State or local child support enforcement agency (or a State or local government official authorized by the head of such an agency), if the person making the request certifies to the consumer reporting agency that

... YADA YADA, NOPE.

(5) To an agency administering a State plan under Section 454 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. § 654) for use to set an initial or modified child support award.

NOPE.


Their entire business model is based on an illegal abuse of the CRA system. I'd sue them. In fact, now that you bring this to my attention, I think that *I* just might sue them. I could use a quick $3Gs.