Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical Update! We're developing this thread so we can have ammo. to sue EQ. for this cause. Please post your case info. here if this matches your problem. .
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical Update! Butch...sorry there's my other thread going, so I'll only post to this one. I posted on the other thread my Equifax update....SST gave them the info to reinsert the tradeline on Feb 2...as of today, Feb 3, it is not on there and they are still unable to generate a FICO for me. The Amex account was closed by me in 2000, so I don't know if Amex will work to reinsert that. SST supervisor told me that they were having trouble with equifax "listing incorrect information or not listing at all" with accounts they'd been reporting to them since taking over the bankrupt Union Acceptance Corporation's accounts in May 2003. Now I have to wait and see if the old UAC tradeline goes on and if the new SST tradeline goes on. This is a good thread...thanks, Butch!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical Update! Are you working through one of the affiliates, or directly through EQ.? Also - Certainly may take a bit longer than 24 hours. Have just a little patience. I know it's hard. I am actually on to some stuff though. "When is a withholding of material/pertinant information, considered fraud"? Restatement (Second) of Torts § 529. http://www.gtla.org/public/amicus/briefs/Clark4.html Whether or not a partial disclosure of facts is a fraudulent misrepresentation depends upon whether the person making the statement knows or believes that the undisclosed facts might affect the recipientâ??s conduct in the transaction at hand. It is immaterial that the defendant believes that the undisclosed facts would not affect the value of the bargain which he is offering. The recipient is entitled to know the undisclosed facts and to form his own opinion of their effect. http://www.wfu.edu/users/palmitar/C...nes/IV-A.htm#§ 525. Liability for Fraudulent § 529. Representation Misleading Because Incomplete A representation stating the truth so far as it goes but which the maker knows or believes to be materially misleading because of his failure to state additional or qualifying matter is a fraudulent misrepresentation. http://www.wfu.edu/users/palmitar/C...ssOutlines/IV-A.htm#§ 159. Misrepresentation Restatement of Contracts: § 161. When Non-Disclosure Is Equivalent to an Assertion A personâ??s non-disclosure of a fact known to him is equivalent to an assertion that the fact does not exist in the following cases only: (a) where he knows that disclosure of the fact is necessary to prevent some previous assertion from being a misrepresentation or from being fraudulent or material. (b) where he knows that disclosure of the fact would correct a mistake of the other party as to a basic assumption on which that party is making the contract and if non-disclosure of the fact amounts to a failure to act in good faith and in accordance with reasonable standards of fair dealing. (c) where he knows that disclosure of the fact would correct a mistake of the other party as to the contents or effect of a writing, evidencing or embodying an agreement in whole or in part. (d) where the other person is entitled to know the fact because of a relation of trust and confidence between them. § 167. When a Misrepresentation Is an Inducing Cause A misrepresentation induces a partyâ??s manifestation of assent if it substantially contributes to his decision to manifest his assent.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical Update! If we can find an index of; "Restatement of Torts Law", or "Restatement of Contracts Law", please put it here. Thanks.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical Update! So let me get this straight? Are you guys saying that you disputed certain items on your credit reports with EQ and they deleted the entire TL? I noticed the last couple of weeks they have been deleting inquiries without verifying them. I was able to get 10 hard inquiries totally taken off my credit report. There are a few TL's I would love to fall off my report. Can anyone verify this?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical Update! Yeppers. Especially if the correction renders the TL positive. ("That'll teach em to send us a dispute letter".)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical Update! Ok, i wanna test this out and see what happens. I have one particular TL from a chargedoff student loan. It was originally an r9 but now is an r4. I want to dispute the payment history, but do you guys think that if they did validate it that they would re-update it back to r9 status? I dont wanna take chances like that but I would really like for them to remove it all together.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical Update! I've actually got one better . . . EQ has deleted FIVE positive older tradelines that I didn't dispute. They had the nerve to tell me that the creditor must have taken them off. I asked the CSR "Are you trying to tell me that five completely unrelated creditors all contacted EQ on the EXACT SAME DAY and requested removal?" Answer: "Yes"
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Critical Update! Merlin...same exact thing happened to me with my AMEX tradeline.. it was closed, but .positive and was deleted when they deleted the UAC tradelines whose balance I disputed. Blamed on the creditor. Just happened to fall off the same day the one I disputed vanished! Can't explain it, but the OC has to put it back on, so I was told. For ACX...it seems the tradelines they are deleting are POSITIVE ones, all they did delete a nasty charge off of mine several months back. It seems to me that they are "on to" people who know something about how credit and Fico scores work, but maybe I am just paranoid???
Re: Critical Update! I disputed a TL on EQ that read: Acct Type: Open Acct Status: open Mo Pymt: $0 Date Open: Mar, 2000 Balance: $0 Terms: N/A High Bal: $0 Limit: N/A Past Due: $0 Remarks: SETTLEMENT ACCEPTED ON THIS ACCOUNT Payment status: N/A I disputed this TL as "not mine" Today it reads Everything the same except: Remarks: N/A Payment status: Bad debt& placed for collection & skip. my fako score dropped form 631 to 615! I called today and asked about the dispute status and they said the the OC had not yet responded! They have obviously penalized me for disputing this TL.
I called today and asked about the dispute status and they said the the OC had not yet responded! leesa ><- <>- ><- <> Is their 30 days up yet? ><- <>- ><- <>
I had my oldest tradeline from FNANB "now Fleet" disapear, the tradeline was not disputed. Of course I am getting the same run around as everyone else. MAybe we should get a class action going. They blame the OC and the OC blames them...
Re: Re: EQ Deleting TL's In Masse! No the thirty days was not yet up. I just wondered how the remarks could change b4 the OC responded? It ended up verified with the additional negative remarks added. leesa
