Another excellent one, thanks Breeze. I knew reviving this thread would get some new and interesting ideas. I will have to periodicaly bump it up before I meet with him to get the CreditNet voices heard. Power to the People! -Peace, Dave
I'm in too. I have kept my letters stating that they don't investigate inq. as they are a record of fact. How about the "form letters" they send when you ask for the procedure used to verify? I have them too. Also when you dispute something and they "update" it, the date of last activity gets bumped up too. Anyone had that problem? Candi
How did we forget this one? Although it pertains only to TU. Their failure to mark items being disputed as "consumer disputes - investigation in progress".
Maybe its just me but I believe this thread has taken a severe turn for the worse. It is better to keep your meeting and any potential lawsuit focused (ie, on inqs). These other matters might be appropriate as separate lawsuits but just confuse the issues for the meeting and any potential litigation. A clear, simple class action for wilful noncompliance by the CRAs for failure to investigate INQs is far more elegant, and lethal. And candidly it is fairly clear none of the other issues raised are related. Nor are they proper for a class action lawsuit (the reasons for this are specific to the class action certification process which requires, for eg, commonality of interest in the questions of law and fact).
I understand what you are saying Solzy. Though, I think it is an excellent turn for this thread. I want to bring to the attorney any possible items and let them decide if they are applicable for a class action suit. You are correct though, if and only when, the attorney thinks we may have a case with a particular area (such as not verifying inquiries and claiming they are fact), then we will buckle down to one topic...right now it is not even known if there is a potential for a case, and no need to raise hopes there would be one...only that I will be taking the ideas I get here to the attorney I met, and see if there may be one. -Peace, Dave
For the most part I agree with you, but, I think the issue of TU not marking disputed items as currently in dispute, as per FCRA rules, is ripe for a class acion.
Dave, Marie's threads on TU automatic violations based on their system being outdated is great too, especially her points about the fraud alert and all personal info. and full account numbers being disclosed. Sassy
Count me in too! Matter of record is a joke I pulled my Experian report on 05/15/02 and there was an inquiry (soft) dated 05/20/02.
Dave- I'm in! I've been wanting to visit the DC/NYC area. BTW How about how TU never marks an intem in dispute, like Marie said their system is ancient. Or when TU puts a Collection item on all it has is the "placed" date and not the chargeoff date. I have one now that was charge-off 11/00 but it was placed 3/02, and the funny part is, it just showed up 5/02.
I've been pondering this and can't figure out whether I agree or disagree. The beauty of INQs in a class action suit is certification is pretty straightforward because there in't much variation in actual damages. I can't really figure out variability of actual damages in the TU violation.
The possbily unlawful and unreasonable requests for documentation that 1) should be public record or 2) should be their duty to discover, not ours to disclose.
How about allowing CRA's to indicate bogus response like "Checked" "Unable to locate Consumer" "Not Rated" as verification.... class action i down like to flat tires....
Count me in--I have maintained documentation of all my disputes and replies, including info. from creditors showing that EQ has purposely chosen to ignore info from creditors that should have been updated. cariba
Do we know if the system can't handle it, or if it just isn't in the consumer view. Does anyone know if creditors see the "in dispute" notation? Violation would be pretty straight forward, no?. $1000 per. -Peace, Dave
I'm in too, Dave. As far as documentation, look no further! I have kept every single "inquiries are a matter of record" form letter I (or my husbandJ) as ever gotten. I bet I have 40 total. Good luck on this!
Reluctantly, I have to agree. The only two issues that have a high chance for certification are hard inquiries and, to a lesser extent, TU's problem. Saar
and I too agree Saar, my point is that if I bring all the apparent ideas to the table, they can decide which are worth looking into. I am just gonna bring in a list...who know what they will like or dislike as far as items worthy of a class action suit. I think we have some pretty good ideas so far. -Peace, Dave
