Re: Equifax is full of B.S. ...!!!!!! So.... What Should I do...????? Any other strategic plan of how I should attack?? I will try anything !!!!!!!!!
Re: Count me in too!!! lb, I have stated many times on this board and others that I do not agree with that policy. If consumers would refuse to purchase their insurance from these companies, they would have to stop. "Hit 'em in the bank account" "vote with your feet" etc. Most consumers would rather save a nickel a year than give their business to the companies that do not pull CR's, so I am forced to represent those companies in order to earn a living. I do not, however, deal with those companies re my personal insurance. regards, breeze ps: most agents do not like the policy of pulling credit reports. What on earth would make you think we like it??? lb said: Say ,Breeze After your seeing what a messy screwed up credit reporting system we have what are your feelings concerning insurance compaines pulling credit reports in order for you to qualify for auto or home insurance??
Re: Count me in too!!! So, Breeze, you're saying that there are insurance companies out there that do NOT pull CR's?? Examples? confused...sorta
Re: Count me in too!!! Breeze,do you mind telling us which insurance companies you deal with and other larger ones that do not pull hard inquiries? VJ
Re: Count me in too!!! ------------ 1- I agree with you here. ========2=I never thought you did or didn't. I was just asking for your take on it>thanks,59
Re: Count me in too!!! VJ.... Are you still thinking of taking this to a Civil Level?? And if so... Is there any way I can help?? MartysGirl
Like someone mentioned above...read the fine print and you'll see what he/she is talking about. People have to be clear what's on their reports. PROMOTIONAL inquiries can be made without your knowledge. The only way to stop promotional inquires is to write to all 3 CRA'S and tell them that you do not want your file to be sold in their info services. Why I mentioned Promotional is for the many people out here who skip over the codes before each inquiry. Now if you're talking about hard inquires from companies you do not recognize then look into it...if you owe money to a debt collector from which you had a contract with, they can pull your reports and so can a collection company who has been assigned your contract/account. If you remove yourself from your position for a moment and think about the facts, you may see this issue in a different way. Inquires are a matter of fact in that anyone (whether they have the legal right or NOT) did in fact receive your credit file. In other words itâ??s truth even if they didnâ??t have the right, they still got and have a copy of your report. Now for those of you who might say lets sue the CRAâ??s because they allowed someone to pull my report without my permission then think about thisâ?¦when you apply for instant credit over the phone or internet you donâ??t sign anything and give them permission now do you? So in other words the only proof they have is that the creditor has all your correct personal info and then pulls your reports. This is the same with collection companies who pull your reports with the info supplied to them by your original creditor. And again itâ??s in there! If you owe money from one of the standard contracts that every creditor uses, then they can assign your debt, which gives a 3rd, party the right to use our reports for the purpose of debt collection. I have threatened to sue the companies who pulled my reports with no legal reason to do so. And many inquires have been removed this way. Even though the fact that these companies pulled my reports is a matter of fact and really should still be on my reports and I should be suing them and having their CRA subscriptions revoked as stated in the CRAâ??s contracts with them. My point is we all want inquires removed but they are in almost all cases a matter of FACT that someone has a copy of your report and you canâ??t really argue that point here on this board now can you?
I sure can, because that is the biggest lie in the credit reporting industry. Inquiries are no more a matter of record than any other item on your report. They are not subject to special immunity from dispute under FCRA. An inquiry coded as hard, obtained for no permissible purpose, is no more a "matter of record" than a tradeline obtained by an imposter using your name. Soft inquiries appearing as hard are not a matter of record. They are a matter of fraud, abuse of privacy provisions, violation of the FCRA, and usually all of the above. Furthermore, the purpose of a credit report is not to list items that are just a "matter of record". The purpose is to list items that affect one's objective credit worthiness. An inquiry made in violation of FCRA and placed as hard with no permissible purpose whatsoever, has nothing to do with credit worthiness any more than a fraudulent tradeline obtained by such imposter. Saar
Re:They give me a headache everytime. My situation is probably different than yours.I have disputed everything on my file that is not correct and have reached a point where it just comes back verified by someone in that company.Example #1 When I call that person the CRA says they called, they say they had no contact about this verification and I 've got 3 letters back from these people saying they've never been contacted by them on this matter.I then asked to speak to the contact person at their company that is responsible for reporting to the CRAs and requested the correct info be sent and have received copies of 3 notorized letters that were sent with acct corrections to the CRAs.Still no action and when disputed again its like,what letters are you talking about,we didn't receive any letters. Every company that reports to a CRA has only one person accepted by the CRA that can change an acct.It doesn't matter if its like citi with 74 million accts.ONLY 1 person who has gone through the security checks and been approved. Now what there saying is this person is wrong or lying if she says she requested changes in my file.(but she's honest enough to be trusted to update 74 million credit card accts every month)If she calls in sick the 74 million accts don't get updated that day (or week) They just don't realize I have the 3 letters back from the people they did not verify with and 3 different letters that were notorized by their contact person saying the info is wrong and this is what it should be and that it was transmitted to the CRA dept that handles corrections as such. So here it is . Dispute 9 other line accts that are incorrect in some way,not including example #1. File against the CRas for FCRA violations of Ex #1 and include the new disputes in the listing. Put everthing in the same mailing,disputes and filling and sent RR . Put the court date off untill verified,or 51 days. If where going to court lets talk about everything, it won't cost me any more. I know I am filing without giving them their thirty days to verify the new items, but my feelings are they have already been verified incorrectly before and its real important they do it right this time as it shows another pattern of willfull abuse(negligent/willful noncompliance).If they correct, I will drop everything but Ex #1.(About 6 violations just there) I think I just like the idea of sending the disputed item with a court case number already included to show they can't laugh this one off. Just need some more paperwork on the other disputes. Wish me well, I need it. I only dispute what is truely incorrect. I understand about the consumer being the sworn enemy of the CRa,but what they fail to understand is "When you have more than 1 enemy, your outnumbered." VJ
Re: Re:They give me a headache everytime. Saar: I read and except your point of view and just remember that Iâ??m a consumer whoâ??s fighting the same fight as you or anyone else with the inquiry problem. I have excellent credit and would like to keep it this wayâ?¦inquiries are my only future threat since I also run a business and my personal credit is pulled often for business credit. Iâ??ll go back to my original statement once againâ?¦As explained to meâ?¦an inquiry is to serve one purpose and one purpose onlyâ?¦itâ??s to show that someone has pulled your reportâ?¦someone other than the CRA. If an account is opened under your name and is in fact a fraudulent account then reporting it to your CR would be stating that it is your account that which you opened right? Well only you can open an account under your name and if someone else were to do so then it would be fraud and should be removed because a trade line on your report is something you have applied for. How is this the same thing as an inquiry? Debt collectors (as I stated above) and law enforcement for the purpose of collecting on a debt or other legal matters, can pull your credit report without you even knowingâ?¦trade lines canâ??t be opened without you knowing (legally). Remember I stated that an inquiry is a matter of fact that someone has a copy of your report. You canâ??t take that back once itâ??s done right? Once your report has been pulled then how can it be taken back? Someone has viewed your report and that is the matter of fact that the CRAâ??s report. Remember there is no other reason to report an inquiry to your reports other than to show that someone out there has viewed your reports. Understanding that this is whatâ??s in the minds of all the CRAâ??s I have taken a different approach than most do, and have been successful in removing 60% of inquires on all 3 of my reportsâ?¦thatâ??s also a matter of fact. The major blame is on the creditors unless you really do owe on a bad debt which has been turned over to a collection company.
Re: Re:They give me a headache everytime. You are obviously in left field with your back turned to the "big game". The point is that FICO and other scoring models take into account the number of permissible (hard) inquiries, and this can substantially alter your credit score. This has absolutely nothing to do with being fact or a matter of record that someone viewed your credit report. The FCRA is there for a reason. ALL INFORMATION IN YOUR CREDIT FILE MUST BE 100% ACCURATE. Period. In no part of the FCRA does it exclude inquiries. If someone applies for a loan at ONE lender, and that lender "shops" around for other financing without your consent, those inquiries were not "permissible" and should be removed because they can and will lower your score.
Re: Re:They give me a headache everytime. MikeB: Iâ??m missing the â??big gameâ? and thatâ??s why Iâ??m spending some of my time here on a credit board? Did you skip over the part where I mentioned that Iâ??ve been working at removing inquiresâ?¦or how about when I mentioned that what I stated was the POINT OF VIEW that the CRAâ??s take. Know what the enemy believes in and youâ??ll be better prepared to plan your attack. Iâ??m 26 years old and hitting OVER 750 and am willing to do whatever it takes to protect my score. BTW, just last month I almost signed a lease agreement with a lease broker which in the fine print, gave him the right to show around to different banks to try and find me the best ratesâ?¦had I signed I would have given him the right to extend that contract to each and every bank that may have wanted to fund my company. Also keep in mind that Iâ??m speaking in response to those people out there who owe on bad debts and are wondering why and if itâ??s legal for a collection company to pull a report.
Re: Re:They give me a headache everytime. Permissible purpose needs clearification.If it was pulled for a non permissible purposes, should it still be listed and counted against your score?...and was it a violation of FCRAs to be pulled for a non permissible purpose? VJ
Re: Re:They give me a headache ever Suppose someone pretended to be you and applied for credit with Cross Country. Are you saying the tradeline is fraudulent, while the preceding CCB inquiry is a "matter of record"? Sorry, I don't see the difference between a fraudulent tradeline and a fraudulent inquiry. Why would one not be legit and the other a "matter of record". The credit file is not a means to accumulate matters of record. Your height is also a matter of record, yet entirely irrelevant for determining your credit worthiness. Same are inquiries coded as hard while not done for permissible purpose under FCRA. Therefore claiming that the CCB inquiry on your report is a matter of record is the same as claiming that the resulting CCB tradeline is a matter of record. Both are based on credit fraud and have nothing to do with credit history. The FCRA mandates that only permissible purpose (or otherwise legal) inquiries appear on your file. I did not say it necessarily requires a written authorization. But refusing to investigate it on the grounds that it's a matter of record is illegal and should be subject to class action litigation. Saar
Re: Re:They give me a headache ever Don't waste your time twisting or putting words in my mouth to try and get me to see things your way. Remember I'm on the same team as you to begin with. Fraud is fraud and the cases I have mentioned above are in regards to CRA subscribers having a right to pull reports and those inquires that follow. Have I not made it clear which type of inquires I'm commenting on. Please read my posts again and see that I'm only talking about two specific situations that seem to come up often on this board. You can't blanket everything and everyone and through it all in there and hope we all get what we want. Just in case I didnâ??t make it clearâ?¦inquires that have a permissible reason such as for debt collection are within the laws and are a matter of record. Saar a good example would have been what if someone got credit in your name and of course there would also be inquires placed on your reports for that same fraudulent activityâ?¦well that falls into fraud so of course the consumer has the right to have all that removed. However a collection company pulling your credit after they have a debt assigned to them is not fraud. If I as a person or through my company pull your credit report because I have a judgment against you, which I won, in small claims court, then that also is not fraud. Now since I may not be a subscriber to the 3 CRAâ??s how do you think I would go about pulling your credit report? I wouldnâ??t get too far if I called you and asked you to pull it or give me signed permission to do so now would I? You owe me money and you havenâ??t paid up so Iâ??m doing research in an attempt to collect a debt (a judgment)â?¦so I get on the phone and I order your report through a 3rd party subscriber who charges me a bit more than if I had my own accounts with the CRAâ??s Now when you see your reports one day, youâ??ll notice a inquiry from a company you have never heard ofâ?¦this example is a true story and I was able to collect the debt based on the work info I obtained on the personâ??s credit report.
Re: Re:They give me a headache everytime. There appears to be two concerns: 1) Whether the inquiry is allowed, at all, and 2) Whether it will appear to someone other than the consumer, and affect the score For VJ: "Permissible purposes": http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra.htm#604 It says "(a) In general. Subject to subsection (c), any consumer reporting agency may furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances and no other:... (2) In accordance with the written instructions of the consumer to whom it relates. " So, if the financing contract stated that the lender or their assigns (collectors) may review the credit file at will, then that is a permissible purpose. However, if the inquiry is entered as one that will be seen by other reviewers of the report, then there's a problem. It seems as if-- as I stated above about the Experian file-- the collectors and the CRAs have an obligation to make collectors' inquiries (the account review type) invisible to others and not affect the score, but they are not doing so in some cases. The law is not specific in that regard. Greg Fisher http://creditscoring.com http://creditaccuracy.com
Re: Re:They give me a headache everytime. Since you are on the same side and have such an elaborate plan that has removed 60% of your inquires! Why don't you tell the board how to remove them rather than starting a FLAME ??? I would LOVE to hear what you have to say. I am not running from Collectors nor have I ran up any debts and refused to pay. I am honest, 24, who has been a victim of identity theft. I feel that EQUIFAX gives me NO RESPECT...!!!! Sure with a strugle and several police reports they have deleted what is fraudlent (WHICH TOOK FOREVER)!! But... not the inquires to go along with it!!! And yes.... EQUIFAX knows it hurts my credit score!! Is this my fault that thisI am a vicitm?? It sounds like "matter of fact" is just saying tuff shit for me!! WHY?? Don't I deserve to have my credit back to normal??
Re: Count me in too!!! You missed my entire point, which was READ THE CONTRACT. Yes, 95% of the time, it states that they retain the right to pull your credit, as well as anyone they assign and/or sell the account to if/when/while you owe. YOUR SIGNATURE ON THAT CONTRACT is PERMISSABLE PURPOSE throughout the life of the debt. Understand?
Re: Count me in too!!! IF YOU SIGN YOUR NAME, agreeing that any future inquiries are PERMISSABLE, they do NOT violate the law (in this particular type of situation).
