Hey, I have a question/comment. Does anyone think that maybe skipping right to the top of the chain (in this case, vice president of the CRA's consumer affairs office) can have any backlash. What if they decide to look at the reports and determine that the individual has been meticously attempting "credit cleaning"...what if after contacting them..all negatives reappear? I'm a little skeptical about jumping that high in the "chain". What do you guys think?, but again, I'm in the military...it is a "no no" to skip up like that.
I think if you have *special circumstances* ie: CA not responding to validation request, but verifying, then maybe its not a bad idea. Or if you have trade lines that are *re-appearing*. But I would not send *normal* disputes to them. I believe you do bring attention to yourself by contacting them. For instance, i'm on TU's priority list! I guess I trying to say, use your own judgement.
I agree. I emailed Ms. Holland and as soon as I had hit the "send" button, a little regret followed. Although, my report is "being investigated"...I'm worried as hell now. I'm worried that I've "flagged" myself.
Just found out 2 days ago! I can't call the normal 800 number to request an investigation, they take down your phone# and call you back within 24hours. That's about all I know right now.
Taken out of priority status and able to perform disputes, etc. like normal. (The situation was corrected but my point is that it was temporary in my case)
Well, personally, I prefer not to be in "priority" status. ..who the hell knows how long they will be secretly monitoring your files from now on. Your files can be flagged internally by them and you'll never know. I think I'm going to stick to the "chain" and dispute normally from now on....use dispute/validation and attorneys if necessary. The vice presidents of these companies didn't get to vice president for nothing..their main concern is still the "company".
Example: TU's Email Response Erica | 2060 posts since Apr 2000 24.93.8.183 | 07.11.2002 @ 17:07 UPDATE!!!!!!! Got a reply from Don Richman today... Here's his reply in full, and my letter in full.... quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Erica, Sorry for the delay. I have been out of the office. TransUnion replied to your investigation request. We sent you a letter advising our position on inquiries and sent you a modified report reflecting the results of the accounts you questioned. At this time, I am not deleting the inquiries. These are statements of fact and therefore, accurate. These companies received your report on that date. Questioning why it was done should be entertained by the company that did the inquiry. Thank you for the opportunity to clarify your concern. >>> "Erica"07/03/02 18:25 PM >>> To Whom it May Concern: On 5/28/02, I completed an online investigation at your website, using your provided "dispute online wizard". The dispute included a request to correct personal information, to reinvestigate three accounts which are erroneously reporting on my report, and to delete six unauthorized inquiries. I have attached a copy of the dispute which clearly shows the date of the dispute. The FCRA allows you thirty (30) days to complete your investigation. Since I have not received notification of the completion of your investigation, I am left to assume that you cannot verify the inaccurate and incomplete information in question. Therefore you MUST delete the information, as required by law. I would like for you to send me an updated and complete credit report, and anyone else who has requested it in the last six (6) months. Thank you for your prompt attention to this very serious matter. Sincerely, Erica -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Did he skirt the issue at hand???? What do you think? Erica __________________________________________________________ Member of the 600 club since 1/2002
Well I can say that I had a $10,000 Federal Tax Lien and a $14,000 judgement REMOVED while in *priority status*. Don't know if it's good or bad.
So what does it have to do with anything??? I followed the normal chain of command. I sent TU an online dispute. They failed to respond to me. I'm tired of them jerking me around, because they can't figure out who I need to send my disputes to. First it's the local affiliate, then it's TU in PA...I wish they would make up their minds. The only thing I want is my report to reflect accurate information....IMO, I don't think my request via email was unsubstantiated.
I agree. If the drones in c/s cannot make things right, then you need to go over their head. Most of us know when we ask to speak to a supervisor (because reg. c/s cannot or will not comply), we are told they're not available, and that they'll call, when they almost never do. Funny how every time I have called any of the CRA's and in the same call asked to speak to a supervisor, one is never around. I'd sure like to get paid for never being at work. What kind of customer service is that?
I may not be their customer, but I, and every other consumer out there deserve better than the robots that are rude to consumers, and that are so uninformed about laws that govern what they are to do when 'x' occurs. Sometimes I wonder if the CRA's beat their employees every morning just so they'll be nasty and uncooperative with us. LOL
Mindcrime - George I totally agree with you. I've spoken with three different reps about an account on my report and got three totally different answers. How about a plaque with "The Most Creative Lie Of The Month?" LOL!
MindCrime, George and B-Down - you people are making me cry. That is SOOOOOO funny!!!!! Instead of having "pep" meetings or excercises in the morning they have a flogging to get the day started.
