in 12/03 obtained copy of my CR . a new acct hits my report I had no idea who it was so I disputed it, came back as remains. it was my understanding that a CA must first send you notices before they can report something on your bureau ? so I sent a letter to the ca requesting validation and the Ca sends me a copy of a bank statement that I was listed as a joint holder on from 4 yrs ago showing a neg bal, so i write another letter and provide the CA with copies of statements that show a deposit was made to this acct from my own personal acct , the Ca cks into it and says we agree there may be an error this debt may not be valid so they remove there TL from my CR. so im thinking no harm done right WRONG ! all of a sudden on 3/30 almost 2 months later I get a copy of my CR that shows a new hard pull from this same CA. I sent them a letter and asked their PP they said to ck to see if I had a fraud alert huh? why would that be a factor? then I get transferred to the CA manager who tells me the pull was to see if Im worth pursing a debt? nothing in writing just there verbal excuses I say what debt, last I heard there was no debt TO collect? 2 days later the CA send me the same paperwork minus my statemnts reflecting the deposit and tries to claim they never recieved it, I have 2 fax confirmation pages showing it went through and a letter after that confirming the details of our phone conversation BTW was also faxed. anyhow refaxed the same statement again on 3/31 to the Ca manager who is still looking into it, its been 3 weeks now and nothing from the CA so my question is how long can they keep this going? AND DO YOU SEE VIOLATIONS HERE ?? if there was no proof was the pull illegal?
Even though you were NOT inside the validation rights period, the DUMB ASS collection agency sent verification anyway Based on the verification info they sent, you found errors, and then confronted them with the errors. They admitted to the errors then deleted the tradline. THIS SHOWS KNOWLEDGE Then, once informed, they INQUIRE into your credit report, WITH KNOWLEDGE FUN4U2, see where I am going with this ? CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE 1785.31 FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT § 616. [15 U.S.C. § 1681n(b)
yes i see PP to sue wouldnt that fall under section 1692 e, f, or 15 usc 1666 a ? just want to make sure i have all my ducks in a row the PP is under investigation with the CRA now and should be completed in a few days I am anticpating an issue with them. since they still have not sent proof of the acct and its been almost another 30 days what would you suggest my next step be?
yup....I would agree that it is unfair and deceptive and over all shi**y LOL FDCPA and FCRA and CA Civil Code I see a $5000.00 suit in your future? (and not the kind you wear)
that would be a dress or skirt, and accessories 2 j/k thank you lol hiding what should be the next move? the CRA will respond about the pull within a week if its still on there should I send my most pleasant ITS letter to the CA ? since they are still" looking into it" after all these months should I say sorry times up . BTW SOL is a few months away if they do come up with anything.
It is always safer to wait until the SOL is out. BUT, personally, I take that as a challenge I personally do not like intent to sue letters, but must admit I just faxed one to a credit union today It all depends on what you want $$$ is always good LOL PRADA! Oops...forgot to add...REGARDLESS if the CRA removes the inquiry or not, you can still sue the CA for non permissible access. One does not hinge on the other Using the CRA's comment on Inquiries "Inquiries are record of fact" or whatever it is they say LOL I just drew a blank as I was typing that.
the thing that hurts is I only have 3 total hard inq on my report and this is one of them and this states PP collection to me that is like OOOUUCCCHHHH I feel blacklisted. so if I understand you right how do i prove they had no pp? since they tried to claim they had a valid acct when they already knew they didint and it was in dispute already. I have lots of notes of dates, times, people I talked to, and fax confirmation is that enough or do I need a CMRRR to back it all up?
Based on the verification info they sent, you found errors, and then confronted them with the errors. They admitted to the errors then deleted the tradline. THIS SHOWS KNOWLEDGE Then, once informed, they INQUIRE into your credit report, WITH KNOWLEDGE All the info you need. They KNEW it was not a valid debt BEFORE they inquired The same info you sent or told them..tell and show the judge
LOL Just got this from my attorney after I posed this: ""The permissible purpose for collection of a debt hinges upon the CA being able to proove that they even legally hold a debt that you owe. If that proof falls apart, the PP is no longer there. " Just wondering what you think of this statement?? The scenerio was a collection agency pulled a consumers report for a debt that was charged off in 1995. The arguement is that if a collection agency DOES NOT send validation, and instead stops collecting the debt, does this mean their inquiry "becomes" impermissible somehow? Also, does a debt which is "time barred" for suit, also make an inquiry impermissible if the debt collector is trying to collect the debt it cant legally sue on? " Disagree in practice and the way most judges would interpret permissible purpose, but I agree in theory. If they pull hiding90 credit report on a debt owed by Jane, no good. But if they pull report on HIDING901 for the debt of another HIDING90, I think that it is so close that the court will find a permissible purpose. You need to read the statute: in connection with collection of a debt. It does not say in connection with collection of a debt owed by the consumer whose credit they pulled. I laughed at first...then thought.......wait..he is right!! LOL
update.. the hard pull was recently deleted form my acct, havent heard back from the Ca about any verification they havent attempting to contact me either so I guess they are ciesing until they do find something, I would think in 4 months time they would have have some proof it the acct was ligit. maybe they gave the acct back to the OC? hmmm should I sue for the violations or just leave it alone ? any opinions?
