I've got a letter from transunion stating they do not dispute inquiries and that I have to take it up with the creditor who made the inquiry
I have the same letter along with a list of addresses for the creditors. I disputed inquiries from a car dealer who "shopped" the financing-big time. Radi8
Unbelievable! They wouldn't even investigate inquiries related to identity theft! So the victim has to "take it up" himself with the thief's lenders! This is just too much. They are going to pay for their crap. Dearly. Now, "inquiries are a factual record of file access" is the biggest lie in the history of consumer credit. Soft INQs are indeed a record of file access; BUT INQUIRIES CODED AS HARD ARE INDICATING A CREDIT APPLICATION RESULTING FROM PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE UNDER FCRA, NOT JUST OF "file access". Did I say they are going to pay for their crap dearly? Saar
Maybe we should try a plan of attack, and put together one more letter, send to all three, and boom evidence out the nose? Sort of a Chod thing?
I have mine from TU at home in my credit folder. I also have one from them where they did delete 8 inquiries that I disputed from when I went car shopping 2 years ago. PolarisA3
Saar, that's NOTHING, what about when they won't investgate inqs. when they are factual but on the wrong report? I.E.; My report was SWITCHED, the other person applied for credit the creditors pulled the report, so it is factual. The problem is, I was not applying for credit my brother in law was so the companies are not in the wrong, why should they remove? It was Efx fault for SWITCHING our reports. Why should I have to take a dump on scores b/c they F**ked up? They told me, 'sorry, inq's are a matter of fact, you need to cantact the creditors' Well, what are the creditors going to do? They did not pull the wrong report. Does this make sense?
Jlynn, I agree, but the letter should be written by a professional, ie Atty. the letter should specifically state that inquiry dated XXXX is hereby disputed because there was no pp, you are hereby asked,demanded of, required, etc. to investigate the above mentioned inquiry etc. Enclosed is my most recent file number etc. along with 222 types of different I.D.s. Leave them NO LOOPHOLES to squeez thru. Your failure to investigate will result in legal action etc.Even go so far as to state in the letter that your not asking them the question if its factual or not, that you are asking for a Investigation and they best prove they have investigated.Even include in the letter that we want the Name , Address, Phonenumber, Date, Person Contacted, Biz Contacted etc. Then send them all CMRRR, because you know when they first open the letter and see something about disputing inquirys, that they will trash can the damn letter and click sent on there little computers and send us the same damn letters we have been getting lol. Might be we could contact the lawyers that are doing the Class Action Bk thing with the CRAs and ask for there help?? Nail them to the walls! and let them be so stupid to send out these damn letters again. Set em up, knock em down!!
Thinking further on the subject,If you had 4 inquirys you were disputing, and sent 3 letters to each CRA, one regmail to the CRA addy, one CMRR to the CRA addy and one regmail to the Legal Dept of the CRA, and asked for the same thing in each letter, If they send you back 3 different responses, wouldnt that constitute fraud? Never mind, forget this thread, it could result in the next class action after the class action over inquirys lol
BTW, as the Lottery Says, Think Big, Think Really Really Big. The BK suit is asking for 1.6billion,, chump change Look at all the money the Tobbaco companys paid out, it hasnt hurt them a bit.After all, how else to legally sale a product that KILLS, pay off folks to look the other way.
my letter had no addresses, and neither does my report. It has addresses for tradelines, but not inquiries. So I've got to find out the address of which "ALLSTATE" or "FINL COLL AGENCY" pulled my report and mail them....YA RIGHT!
Not that this helps much but I got a veral response as to why many of us got hard inquiries as opposed to AR inquires by Umbrella on Experian - Experian made a mistake and TOLD Umbrella that they are unable to fix it. So, basically, Experian is unable to fix it's own mistakes. Unfortunately I don't have that in writing though. Ozzy.
I have quite a few letters where Eq refused to investigate inquires. I had a spilt file and they sent back the standard matter of fact you need contact the business reply
We = Saar, Nave and myself. Atty = 1 we've been talking with and another we are trying to get. Must remain nameless for now.
Count me in too... I have the form letter from TU, as well as a classic from Equifax stating: "Equifax does not dispute inquiries. If you wish to have inquiries removed you may contact the companies directly to do so."
I just asked CSC to investigate some hards that should've/could've been AR's. I got this: The (Company's Name) account is currently appearing on your credit file. Regular credit inquiries remain on file for two years. Well duh! The currently appear in my file, so why aren't they softs?
I've got a letter from TU around here somewhere saying that inquiries are a matter of fact, blah blah blah. Keep us posted, I'm in.
I listed 7 specific hard inquiries to Equifax and requested an investigation. I was very explicit and requested that if any of the inquiries were verified to ", please provide your verification procedure: WHO verified, HOW, and WHEN." I just got my responce: " We have reviewed your concerns and our conclusions are: PRM, AR, and AM inquiries remain on the credit file for 12 months and are not shared with potential credit grantors. Regular credit inquiries remain on file for two years" None of the inquiries I requested to be investigated are of the type "PRM, AR, or AM". They totally blew off any investigation on this. How do you proceed with this? I sent my CHOD in a bot late on 12/18/02 and I got the letter on 1/07/03.
