If they're not owned by Equifax, then they can't be held to the same standards that Equifax is held to as a "Consumer reporting agency that compiles and maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis" (http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra.htm#603). But if they want to play the game that way, so be it. The last time I checked, my state, county, and neighborhood was covered by anything described as "nationwide." But, since Equifax doesn't provide a toll-free telephone number to me (http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra.htm#609), then they can't claim to be a "Consumer reporting agency that compiles and maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis." They're just a powerless, no account, insignificant company (that collects billions) claiming to be THE "leading provider of consumer and commercial credit information worldwide" (http://www.equifax.com/about_efx/equifax_at_glance.html). Then again, they agreed to a $500,000 settlement with the FTC regarding answering that telephone number--so they must be nationwide. Gosh, Equifax-- which one is it?
I think that what I may want to do is to put one of my investigative reporter teams on this matter. These companies are almost always willing to talk to the press about their activities and what they do. I can do the one in Cincinnati easily although the one is Sherman, Tx will take just a bit more work because I don't have an office in that area.
In a sense, if they are not owned by Equifax they are somehow breaking the law, if they are owned by Equifax, then Equifax is breaking the law. If the owner of the C** company owns agencies nationwide, wouldnt he still fall under the same rules as the Big Three do?
I can't agree with the first part of your views because I fail to see how they might be breaking the laws. You and I and anyone else has the right to start a credit bureau and call it whatever we want. Right? Once they have met the requirements of the law, whatever they may be, they can operate a credit bureau. That includes Equifax too. They can open as many regional brances or offices and call them whatever they want and they are breaking no laws that I know of. And if they get a request to validate, they have the right to subcontract their work or send it to one of their branches for processing. They still have broken no laws that I know of. So you have to trap them into breaking the law and then slam the trap door shut on them. They will almost automatically break the law no matter what they do if you word your validation letter properly. That's part of the "trick". The second part of the "trick" is to treat the little one as an equal to the big one in every way. That subjects him to the same laws as the big brother. It sounds really complicated, but inststead it's really about as simple.as falling off a log. One thing that I think is extremely important is not to add a lot of huff, puff, bluff and bluster to your validation letters because doing that simply wastes a lot of very valuable space in your letter and gets it nowhere. You need short concise paragraphs and wording that says a lot but appears to say little at all. That way you slip it to them nice and easy and don't get them all aroused. They then treat it as at least a somewhat normal demand for validation which they are quite used to. They see no reason for alarm so they go at the process in a pretty normal way Of course, you have also sent the same validation letter to the creditor or the CA and they are then attempting to validate when the letter from the little CRA who has also received a request from Big Brother tries to get an answer out of them. They don't (can't), and if they claim they did, you have grounds to sue the whole ratpack of them. The way we are doing it now, we get nothing but a run around because Big Brother claims Little Brother verified. My way gives rise for grounds to sue if Little Brother even lets out a peep. This way, they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Think about it.
Bbauer I was implying that a law had already been broken in either direction, although I agree totally with your plan of action in the process of nailing them.
Good! Now then, about all we have to do is to identify all of them and begin to treat them for what they are. Should be no big deal
One of the worst Equifax affiliates is Northeast Texas Credit Bureau in Longview, Texas. They actually demand that you buy their report (inaddition to the Equifax report) before they will investigate disputes reported by Equifax. They are also a CA, so if you dispute a collection account you are asking them to verify themselves. Any competent investigative reporter would have a field day with them.
Called CBC today, I spoke with several different people. The most information was provided throught there attorney/legal dept. The woman I spoke to told me that CBC has offices all around the country and that they are only affiliated with Equifax, meaning that they share the same database. I called Equifax to see if this is true. I spoke with a woman in the consumer affairs office. She told me that they could not possibly do anything in regards to my personal credit report. I politely asked her why and she replied" They are only required to refer me to the local bureau that handles my accounts. I told her that they were not local and that they did not provide a toll free # for me to call(which is required by law). I then called back CBC, I was speaking to the Consumer affairs dept Manager. I was told that they were not required to give me a Toll Free if they provided me with a mailing address, to correspond with them. She told me that they used to have a toll free #, but it was disconnected. She then told me that CBC was local and didnt require a 800#. I told her that I lived in another city that requires a toll each time that I call CBC. This amazes me!
Very interesting. I'm getting some reports now from CSC in Houston. Two so far. Each one has been to report a new deletion from my credit history for one reason or another. That's a lot better (faster) progress than I ever had out of Equifax itself. One last week and so far one this week. Looks like my idea of hitting both at the same time with the same dispute is going to work like a dream.
Bbauer, It seems that even thought Equifax passes the buck to their little buddy, they can still be incriminated for not holding up to the FCRA. They admit that they share the same database, is that crazy or what!? I mean how can you share the same data and not be responsible to maintain data? OH well, you better believe that I am going to raise a lot of hell over this.
It seems that even thought Equifax passes the buck to their little buddy, they can still be incriminated for not holding up to the FCRA. They admit that they share the same database, is that crazy or what!? I mean how can you share the same data and not be responsible to maintain data? OH well, you better believe that I am going to raise a lot of hell over this. *********************************** Of course! All of the above is absolutely correct. Go for it.
Thanks Folks living in that area will need to be aware of it and send them a CRA type validation letter at the same time they send to Equifax and the CA/Creditor.
http://www.cbc-companies.com Click on about us. You will find that there are about 70 locations nationwide...Very concentrated in Ohio.
OK. So that further confirms what I thought. Thoy are out there buying up all the little credit bureaus just about everywhere they can. And all 70 of those used to be just that. little local credit bureaus. And one big one is over all of them. Transunion is also doing a lot of that. They bought out the one here in Oklahoma City about a year ago. Once they get all the little credit bureaus bought out, they will likely start into the collection agency business with the same fervor. Sheesh! I heard a rumor they were going to hire Adolph Schickelgruber to be their new CEO too. They used to call that guy Hitler. That's probably just a rumor somebody started though.
"Hire Adolph Schickelgruber" Are you serious? Is that a real name? No disrespect intended but you usually dont here names like Adolph Schickelgruber. That is much better than the ceo of Trans Union, Phillip Mcgroin, a lot of people call him Phil Mcgroin for short. lol
Adolph Schikelgruber was Adolph Hitler's real name before he adopted that name Adolph Hitler. Maybe you knew that.
Many of the worlds greats, both famous and infamous have used false names. Most especially if their true names were not all that glamorous. Hitler probably figured that few would be willing to follow Adolph Schickelgruger. So he picked another name which he felt would be more appealing to the populace. He touched on that a bit in Mein Kampf, his world famous book which is now very difficult to obtain. It's more or less a collector's book now and very few original copies are available. Hitler was actually a fairly prolific writer and although few of his works were ever published, he kept volumnous dairies and other notes. His political theories were quite well known back in the 1930's and early 1940's due to his writings. He was also quite often known as "The Little Corporal." but he hated any reference to that because he felt that it was so derogatory. He had good reason to hate the reference to his brief military career since his service with the German military was anything but exemplary. He was courtmartialed and kicked out of the German military after only a couple of years in service. They gave him a dishonorable discharge for his political views which were considered extremely critical and derogatory of the German high command at the time. The only reason he was able to come to power so quickly and easily was that he took advantage of the terrible inflation that occurred in Germany and it's accompanying unemployment rates which were nearing disasterous proportions. He realized that if he could give the German people something to fight against he could become very popular quickly. So he started to speak out publicly against the Jews who were, according to him, the reason for the woes of the German people. And they ate it up like ice cream. Of course, the Jews were not the cause of the inflation and the unemployment. He could not have cared less. They were his ticket to "stardom" and political power. Stalin followed much the same path as have many other dictators. Historically, the famous have used whatever ploy or excuse they could find to rise to power no matter how wrong they were nor who nor how many they hurt in the process. I guess we still find the same thing going strong today. Look at the credit bureaus and the collection agencies for just a small example of that. All three of the big credit bureaus started out small and have risen to become multi-national corporations with lots of political power and vast sums of money in just about all the countries of the world in which they operate. And they did it on the backs of those they hurt the most.
