Anybody ever tried this when disputing inquiries. You know the ones - the alphabetical gobbledygook that requires a Cneter to come here and say Sh Acq Co AG just pulled my report, does anyone know who that is? From 609: (B) An identification of a person under subparagraph (A) shall include (i) the name of the person or, if applicable, the trade name (written in full) under which such person conducts business; and
I've never tried it, but it sounds like it would be worth a shot. In my experience, getting inquiries to drop is harder than getting the pope to convert to buddism
Re: Re: Disputing Inquiries You always complain you can't get new credit, so why should this thread be any different? Psych "Dodging Tomatoes" Doc
Re: Re: Re: Disputing Inquiries Just don't make my F.I.C.O. go down today...I just got done making more than $5,000 in payments from my checking account... UYGF AND NO CREDIT TOO
Re: Re: Re: Disputing Inquiries So, before I get the blame for starting this highjacking, what say you on jlynn's idea? I have to get this back on track. jlynn lives close enough to through rocks at my house -- kind of
Re: Re: Re: Re: Disputing Inquiries i like the idea, i liked it when it was originally posted too... the one rub would be of course, would the cra try to play the 'we're technically unable" to display the complete names of companies with longer names excuse that they use to try to evade provisions that would require a teensy-tiny bit of work of reconfiguring their databases... imagine that technically if today a 50 character entry is allocated in the database for the reporting of the inquiries, tomorrow a CA with 55 characters in their name opens up their doors, and pulls a report, the CRA would technically have to re-configure their database to allocate up to 75 characters to handle this reporter, and to provide more room for expansion.
Could you also imagine the CRA trying to list a multi-headed beast... NCO's privacy policy takes 8 lines to name all the heads which collectively make up MARLIN INTEGRATED CAPITAL HOLDING CORPORATION Would they need to list the 8 lines of names to be sure that they are including the correct name?
This is an excellent idea for more reasons than only disputing inquiries. If someone was building a case against a CRA (with stronger violations), peppering the list with a couple more Section 609 violations drives home the idea that the CRA isn't paying close enough attention to the statute in many ways. Doc
