While I was looking over DH's TU report to try and decide what to dispute during CHOD......... I glanced down into an area I rarely look at.... the INQUIRY section. We each only have 2 on there, and I have bigger fish to fry, usually. BUT......... I noticed that Sears pulled an AR on 5/2002. DH *did* have an account with Sears, and we settled with them and paid that off in 11/1997. WTF? They can't do an AR 5 years after the fact, can they? BTW, I tried searching for permissible purpose, and even Marie, and I swear the search function laughed at me right before it locked up IE. So should I send them a "please tell me why you looked at my credit report, and if you don't have permissible purpose, go ahead and deposit $1000 into my account now or I will see you in court?" TIA
have a friend who has same thing going on with cap1 except they have been doing an AR every month. DOLA was 01/01 It has been paid off for awhile now. What does she need to do ? I have tried using search but it won't work and not sure what more information is needed.Her report is covered with cap1 AR's Thanks for any response!
When she paid off the card, did she actually call and close the account? Does she have any paperwork showing the account is closed? If she only paid off the account and didn't close it, then they can pull AR's, I would think, because as far as they know, there's still an existing relationship.
It is a very clear subject. If the accont is paid and closed then itt is a violation of your rights for them to pull an AR. The FTC is very clear on its opinion letters for these types of issues. it's a § 604(3)(e) violation. You no longer have an existing credit obligation. you can call their attention to the matter via a demand letter and you certainly can sue. Here: read for yourselves: § 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: (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. (2) In accordance with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates. (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 (B) intends to use the information for employment purposes; or (C) intends to use the information in connection with the underwriting of insurance involving the consumer; or (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 (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 (F) otherwise has a legitimate business need for the information (i) in connection with a business transaction that is initiated by the consumer; or (ii) to review an account to determine whether the consumer continues to meet the terms of the account.
Here's a copy of what I faxed them last night: November 11, 2002 Mr. Scott Nash Director, National Customer Relations Sears Roebuck & Co. 3333 Beverly Road E5-377A Hoffman Estates, IL 60179 SENT VIA FAX TO (847)286-1004 During a standard review of my credit files from the three major credit reporting agencies I was dismayed to find an inquiry posted by Sears in May 2002. As you are probably aware, the credit reporting agencies regard inquiries as a statement of fact and will not allow a consumer to dispute them. They maintain that if the inquiry is on file then the company listed did in fact view the consumerâ??s record. Since it is unlawful under the Fair Credit Reporting Act for a person to view a consumer report without a â??permissible purposeâ?? I am writing this letter. I don't recall applying for credit or employment with Sears. From the FCRA § 616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance [15 U.S.C. § 1681n] "(b) Civil liability for knowing noncompliance. Any person who obtains a consumer report from a consumer reporting agency under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose shall be liable to the consumer reporting agency for actual damages sustained by the consumer reporting agency or $1,000, whichever is greater." From the 1998 FTC opinion letter Greenblatt at http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/greenblt.htm: "Any person who procures a consumer report under false pretenses, or knowingly without a permissible purpose, is liable for $1000 or actual damages (whichever is greater) to both the consumer and to the consumer reporting agency from which the report is procured." Please explain your permissible purpose for your obtaining my credit file. Should you not have a permissible purpose, please arrange for payment of $1,000 by November 22, 2002 to the name at the address listed at the top of this page. Please respond via fax to (123)456-7890 Sincerely, DH ******************** I guess we'll see what happens. Thanks for answering, Marie
So should I send them a "please tell me why you looked at my credit report, and if you don't have permissible purpose, go ahead and deposit $1000 into my account now or I will see you in court?" waalien Why Not ? LB 59
I am checking about that,thanks for pointing that out. Thing is in looking at her report it shows R1 in the box marked cs. But in line under cap1 name she has this line: 30(02) 60(01) 90+(03) 11/00~R5 10/00~R5 9/00~R4 I am new at all this and wonder what all this means. Thanks for your help and sorry I startrd this in this thread... thanks again!
30(02) 60(01) 90+(03)~~ 30days late twice;60 days late 0nce & 9O days late 3 times. 11/00~R5 10/00~R5 9/00~R4 The rating of the account as per (dates shown)The higher the N0.the worse you look.
thanks..thought that was what that line meant,,,what about R1 rating under box named "cs"..does that mean current status? thanks again
[what about R1 rating] The ratings run 1-9 1 is the highest and 9 is the lowest LB 59QUOTE]Originally posted by callippso thanks..thought that was what that line meant,,,what about R1 rating under box named "cs"..does that mean current status? thanks again [/QUOTE]
If you do sue them.. .sue them under 1681 N and O... willful noncompliance and negligent noncompliance put all the violations under each heading and let the judge sort out if it's willful or negligent. a lot of times it drops into the negligent bucket.. § 617. Civil liability for negligent noncompliance [15 U.S.C. § 1681o] (a) In general. Any person who is negligent in failing to comply with any requirement imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to the sum of (1) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure; (2) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court. (b) Attorney's fees. On a finding by the court that an unsuccessful pleading, motion, or other paper filed in connection with an action under this section was filed in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the court shall award to the prevailing party attorney's fees reasonable in relation to the work expended in responding to the pleading, motion, or other paper.
Are AR inqueries considered hard inquires or soft? Under the 'Regular Inquery Section' on my TU CR it does not show any AR inquries and on my EQ CR they are listed but it states that AM and AR inquires are not reported to businesses. The reason I ask is if they are considered 'hard' and do effect the FICO score, how could I stop them from doing them? I have several accounts that do an AR every month. TIA, Darin
That's right. But in the case of PP Inqs the whole point is predicated upon their not being able to see your credit information unless they have permission. In other words don't confuse hard vs. soft when it come to no PP inqs. This distinction is irrelevent. The fact is they viewed your credit file in BOTH cases WITHOUT PERMISSION and that's the violation. The statute provides a strict statutory penalty of a flat $1,000. Case closed.
Not necessarily true. An R5 is actually and usually worse than an R9. This is true because an R5 says that you are presently 120+ days past due, this means in the present. An R9 means that the account is a charge off, which could have been 6 1/2 years ago. However, once you reach R5 it would seem that the account is usually closed, even if you pay it completely off promptly after (this is my past experience only). So my question now is how does one get rid of an R5? Say you have an account that did get closed at an R5 rating. You pay it off one month later. What rating should it get? I don't know! Does anyone else know? I hope I haven't robbed your thread. If so, sorry. Sirrowan
Re: A/R for an account closed in '9 One quick question. Can the creditor report $0 balance for almost a year after the account had been closed and paid off?
Re: A/R for an account closed in '9 I was just thinking about the above post and I remembered nobody had answered it. Anyone?
Re: A/R for an account closed in '9 I guess I'm unclear on why reporting a $0 balance after it's paid off is a bad thing? I'm assuming you don't want them to be reporting a $200 balance after you've paid it off, right? Are they reporting it as still being open? If it's a credit card, it may actually be helping your balance to limit ratio. But you need to provide more specific information before anyone can help you, that may be why no one answered.
Re: A/R for an account closed in '9 Well, it is a long story. I'm not going to dig into it because there is already a lot of different threads about it I have filed a law suit against Citi and you know .. keep thinking what else they might be doing wrong. This account was closed by them and report late payments (different dates/unknown on different reports - violation of FCRA) but they also keep reporting/updating my account EVERY months since the account was paid of and closed in 11/2001!!! Just thinking ... Searched the board but could not find anything.
Re: A/R for an account closed in '9 They can keep reporting until the 7 years runs out, unfortunately. Sears still reports about DH's account, and it should fall off in April. I fully expect them to continue to report up until March 31, lol. Some creditors just do that, mainly because it's all done electronically.
