I disputed a late on an open visa account with a CRA. Next thing I know I get an alert from another CRA that this OC has pulled a hard with them. I called the OC to see what the PP was and they claimed they did not know, so I went up the chain and finally got this prick that told me he did not need a reason and could pull a hard inquiry anytime he wanted to and that was just tough $hit. As you might imagine, a brief heated argument ensued. I would like to go after these deadbeats but can't find any solid material in fcra-604, and the damn search is down!! I know this subject has been gone over and over again here recently with varying opinions. I would appreciate any direction to any fcra scripture, precedent or advice on this B.S. Thanks
Its the OC? If the account is still open and/or has a balance on it, then they have a PP. The Hard Inquiry stinks. You might try goodwilling (somebody besides the prick), and see if they will recode it to an AR.
Thanks, Jlynn thats what I was afraid of. But the account is, and has been 0 balance for over 90 days now and this is the 2nd hard pull in 90 days.... pisses me off!
As long as it is open, they can pull. I would right a letter to them, explaining the situation. They are not permitted to "poison" your files with multiple hard inquiries. BTW who is the OC? Maybe someone has a good contact within.
Re: Re: Another No Pp There is NOTHING different between a "HARD" and "SOFT" except you LOSE POINTS WITH A "HARD" THEY DID IT FOR SPITE!!!!!
Re: Re: Re: Another No Pp Absolutely, and it will be the last time they do it! I have not had ANY OC pull a hard inquiry on an open account in ten years, never ask for cl increases. If it was not one of my oldest accounts and I was not in a construction holding pattern on a mortgage, I would drop them like a bad habit. Between the interest rate spike and these guys lobbing hards at me, Im going to have a stroke!!
Re: Re: Re: Another No Pp Jlynn, where is the law that says the creditor isn't allowed to poison your file with multiple hard inquiries? I brought this up with a major credit card company, and they said they are allowed to pull as many hard inquiries as they want whenever the cardholder requests a credit limit increase.
Thats a prime example of my fingers moving faster than my brain. There is no law that specifically says they can't, (sorry to be misleading) but, here's my theory: From 602: (b) Reasonable procedures. It is the purpose of this title to require that consumer reporting agencies adopt reasonable procedures for meeting the needs of commerce for consumer credit, personnel, insurance, and other information in a manner which is fair and equitable to the consumer, with regard to the confidentiality, accuracy, relevancy, and proper utilization of such information in accordance with the requirements of this title. I know that by definition, a non-consumer initiated transaction does not include an AR, but is it fair and equitable to the consumer for a creditor to pull multiple hards (causing a score drop), when they can get the same information by pulling softs? Especially when they take the attitude "we can do what we want". Its not their file, its your file! IMHO, I don't think its a big stretch. 2. They have to certify the purpose of the inquiry. In most cases they are usually certifying it as a credit transaction. After the first pull, what ADDITIONAL credit transaction was there? In the case of an AR, they would be providing false certification if their intent is to review the file.
Their rationale was this: if their credit card customer is asking for additional credit, they feel it is their obligation to let other creditors know that the consumer is seeking an increase. With an AR, they said potential creditors would otherwise not be aware of this information. If it had been an automatic credit limit increase (in other words, initiated by the company) they said they would not do a hard inquiry, because it was not a customer-initiated request. They would have done an AR instead. So could this be some kind of secret code the major credit card companies are using to let each other know of potential problems? If a consumer has an account with Company B, and said consumer applies for credit with Company S, but Company S sees that there are not one, but TWO hard inquiries from Company B, Company S will be alerted that consumer is a potential credit risk? I should also mention that the higher up I spoke with at the credit card company was very well aware that pulling two hards had the potential for lowering the FICO. So, I could not agree more with you, Jlynn -- they are poisoning the credit file. There is no doubt they are stretching the definition of 'permissible purpose.' But what can be done about it when the cardholder gave them permission to access their credit report when signing (accepting) the terms in the initial disclosure agreement??
Yep, they are all in cahoots. But you only need ONE inquiry to determine approval for a consumer initiated credit line increase. Its not a secret...its "in your face" LOL. Thats my point, once they pull multiple hards then they are not acting in a fair and equitable manner to the consumer. Willful non-compliance. Somebody is going to have to brave enough to file suit against one of these companies pulling multiple hards in an attempt to further identify the spirit of the FCRA, and permissable purpose. Legal minds, in this an actionable section? § 602. Congressional findings and statement of purpose [15 U.S.C. § 1681]
