I am ready to talk to an attorney about a lawsuit against the CRA's for their refusal to verify inquiries and for their participation in allowing any and everybody to inquire into our credit and then turn around and have it show as a hard inquiry. I am also ready to lobby against the FCRA about inquiries. I think these inquiries that are not authorized are single-handedly causing FICO scores to decrease. The CRA's and FTC need to restructure this portion of credit reporting. We should not be penalized for inquiries into our credit that we don't authorize. So, I am asking all those with problems in this area to keep careful and detailed correspondence with CRA's and creditors regarding inquiry removal. I read a lot of complaints in this area. I personally have had CRA's and debtors refuse to remove them and they do so through correspondence, which of course, I keep! Any feedback? I read over the class action lawsuit website and I think it might be an interesting place to start, especially if I know I have a lot of supporters. Let's see how we can get this changed because us consumers are getting screwed over. SM
Count me in too!!! Lately I've had problems w/ collection agencies pulling my CR. I think that to pull someone's credit file, you must have their authorization first. It bothers me that anyone under the sun w/ an account at the big 3 can pull your report no problem!
Re: Count me in too!!! MP$40.. I am having the same problem. What makes it so bad... I have a fraud alert on my account!!! Even without an alert... NO ONE should be able to obtain something as personal as a credit file w/out authorization. My 2 Cents ....... we all know that most people who work for the CA are crooks at heart...!!!! I am already a victim of credit fraud and I damn sure do not want anyone working for a CA obtaining my personal information..!!
This is interesting; would you elaborate? What is verifying an inquiry? What is an example of the type of inquiry to your file you're talking about? For marketing? Collection? What does your contract with that company say about inquiries?
<This is interesting; would you elaborate? What is verifying an inquiry? What is an example of the type of inquiry to your file you're talking about? For marketing? Collection? What does your contract with that company say about inquiries?> G.Fisher Just to answer a few of your questions. Verifying an inquiry is showing proof that we gave authoriztion to pull our credit report. Be it a CA or creditor (ex. Capitol One) An Inquiry = any company, creditor, or CA that asks to see you credit file. They are usually listed at the end of your credit report. Some are Hard and some of Soft. Hard hurts your fico score. We are debating with the CRA's b/c we have no contract with these companies allowing them to pull are file...!! The pull are file when they feel like it. This hurts your/our fico which causes finicial stress in the long term. I hope this has helped you some..!!
Just so I'm sure of what you're talking about, they're making inquiries that affect credit scores with NO authorization whatsoever? Not even a contract in force (perhaps a credit card account with a balance) that allows them to do so? I'm looking at an Experian file. In the section that states, "Please note that the following information is part of your credit history and is included in our reports to others," there is an inquiry for "Collection purpose." That makes it appear as if Experian allows it. Yet, in another section, they state, "We offer credit information abouut you to those with a permissible purpose, for example, to:... you current creditors to monitor your accounts." Why wouldn't the collection inquiry belong there? Odd. Should this be disputed?
SM, As I've said before, a class-action is probably the only way to address this problem. The FCRA's language is very clear about it. I'll help you any way I can. Saar
Are you referring to http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra.htm#604 ? If so, what is the violation? Why is a class-action the only way? Why wouldn't an individual's legal case have any effect?
Re: Count me in too!!! Collection agencies, for the most part, are collecting for debts that you incurred under another contract, such as a defaulted credit card, defaulted loan or other unpaid debt that you are/were contractually obligated to repay. If you read the fine print on most every one of those contracts (before you sign it), you'll notice that it states that they retain the right to do many things, include accessing your credit histories (either by the company or an "agent", which includes collection agencies, and also to anyone that the company assigns or sells the account and/or debt to) at ANY TIME that you have any type of balance remaining. Technically, you HAVE given them permission to inquire against your credit histories -- you just probably didn't read the fine print when you signed on the line. This is the case 99% of the time.
Re: Count me in too!!! These are not collection agency inquiries on my credit report - these are mortgage companies, credit card companies, insurance offers. Here is my complaint: The FCRA allows just about anyone to pull your report, technically, without permission. The FCRA is worded in very loose terms. However, why are we penalized in our FICO scores? The CRA's say we aren't, but we are. They say they don't show certain inquiries to potential creditors, but they do. I have proof of that from a lender who showed me my credit report. The CRA lets just about anyone pull the report and then they take points off of our FICO in the process. I have no complaints about current creditors pulling my report because I did sign an agreement of miniscule print that stated they could do it whenever they want. I have a big problem with the fact that in the last 4 months I have given ONE company permission to pull my report yet 5 inquiries are on my report. None of these inquiries are existing creditors. The CRA says only I see them, yet when the lender I granted permission to pulled my report they were on the report for him to see. Now how is that for a lie from the CRA? How will it ever change? I will be contacting an attorney and will need all the help I can get. Thanks to those who have already told me they would be happy to be involved. These backwards laws and flat-out lies need to change. Hey, I'm one little person, but together we can make a difference!
Re: Count me in too!!! jshimmer: That may or may not be the case as far as the fine print on the contract goes. You state that they have the permission under these contracts, but where's the "permissable purpose"? Just having an account w/ someone does NOT give them full permission to examine your entire credit file. If you owe me $10, does that give me the right to examine your history? Maybe BEFORE I loan you the $10, but after, it doesn't really matter...the debt is the debt. BUT, I think the big issue at hand here revolves around the fact that the CRA's are refusing to investigate/verify that these inquiries were preformed for a "permissable purpose". It annoys everyone (and it's probably against the FCRA) that these inquiries have damaging effects on your score, as does account information (i.e. collections/charge offs). The CRA's investigate these, but why not the inquiries?
Re: Count me in too!!! Interesting discussion! I, too, believe that reform is necessary. The fact that hard inquiries affect our ability to get credit (via scoring models) makes it imperative. A couple of examples of wierd stuff: 1) I am an insurance agent. I contracted as an independent agent for Jackson National Life Ins Co in 1992. I am sure I signed the "authorization to obtain information" form at that time, however, JNL never did do a criminal background or credit check on me. Then, in 1999, when I no longer, to my knowledge represented them; and while they were the object of a class action lawsuit, I got a hard inquiry on Equifax from them - designated as "employment purposes." This is 7 years after the signed authorization, 4 years after I stopped representing them!!! I wrote EFX asking why they allowed the the inquiry, and requesting a copy of the signed authorization. They referred me back to JNL. I wrote them, with the same request, and they never complied. I am sure that this inquiry was a "CYA" move by JNL, since they were being sued for the actions of their agents. 2) I have never done any business with Bank of America except to use their ATM's when I am out of town. About a year ago, I got an "account review" inquiry on Equifax from them. What account????? 3) I have my auto and homeowner's insurance with USAA Casualty. They do not required a credit check as part of their application process. Periodically, USAA Federal Savings Bank puts either a hard inquiry or an "account review" inquiry on my Equifax report. To my knowledge, I have never signed any kind of authorization for any USAA company to check my credit. When you add to this, the fact that as an agent, I have hard inquiries from insurance companies on a regular basis (and I understand why they have to check on me) my Equifax report is loaded with inquiries that have nothing to do with my applying for credit, insurance, or employment. My credit has improved to the point that I really really care about how this is affecting me, and I would gladly join with anyone who wants to take legal action in order to reform the system. It appears that an individual consumer gets stonewalled to the point that they cannot take all the time necessary to pursue each unauthorized inquiry, and if we did, we still would not get any results. Perhaps together we could make a difference. breeze
No, I'm referring to the bureaus' refusal to investigate disputes concerning inquiries. If they're part of your credit file, you have a right to dispute them DIRECTLY WITH THE CRA, without getting their "take it w/ the creditor" BS. Not on their general everyday practise, no. An individual case would only benefit the individual plaintiff, and that's why they've so far seen no reason to change their illegal policies. Saar
