I've been reviewing your comments for the last couple days, and wonder if you would give me some advice. My situation is not so different from Lizardking's before suing the CRAs--collections, charge offs, judgements, all totalling over $20k. I've used cleanup services, but my credit score is still about 50 to 75 points too low to qualify for an FHA mortgage (ironically, they are credit scoring government loans nowadays). I am going to sue all three CRAs next week, on the basis that 1. several items that Experian, Trans Union, and Equifax have refused to properly reinvestigate on my report have disappeared from the other two repositories. I think this is called negligence in following due process; if they are only using the say-so of a $7/hr clerk at a terminal to determine my credit future, this is insufficient basis for concluding that an item is valid. Their refusal to provide more detailed description of their reinvestigation process makes it seem like, well, they're hiding something. 2. Due to the apparent negligence and incompetency of the CAs that have received my correspondances regarding verification of validity of these debts, most of them have been unable to produce sufficient proof that they are indeed valid. Therefore, another negligence case exists here: how are CRA's (especially Experian) plausibly verifying my debts? 3. The FCRA states in Title 611 that an automated process shall enable one CRA to notify the other CRAs that inaccurately reported items have been removed from a person's credit report. If this is the case, then why is there no evidence that all three of my reports have been updated when inaccurate information has been removed from one or two of the CRAs? As the FCRA is purposed to protect the consumer, this type of negligence of expediency (or lack thereof) to set the record straight is unacceptable. I'm sure there are other arguments that should be considered. I'd like to hear some success stories out there, as well as a critique of my arguments. Lizardking, where are you????
I see...you had only the one provocative argument. A good one that is concrete and stays away from the ethers of interpretation that lawyers probably love. It almost seems too easy, once you get your ducks in a row with documentation. I think I can sue successfully on this. After I submitted my thread, I also found the letter you sent with your small claims suits. Very effective. Which brings me to another question: why did you choose small claims instead of a district court? One final question: Is there an advantage to sending your summons to a local CRA affiliate, instead of to the "official" addresses? Thanks for your help, DTG
