Re: ROFLMAOPIMP Re: Lizard boy Author: CYA (spider-tj082.proxy.aol.com) Date: 04-14-01 12:45 I suppose that predatory lending and profiting greatly from those with a bad credit mark is OK? And purposely harming somebodies credit? Is that not evil? Somebody should not not have to pay for a mistake for 7 years, while subprime lenders make big money. The system is set up, that if you do pay, even in full on a once late account, your credit score will still suffer up to 7 years afterward. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` This is just another example of the middle class getting the shaft and someone who has never had a problem in life who does not understand. ====C O M M E N T - Maybe lmao is working under cover for the credit Ind.The post talks more like that than a consumer: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Reply To Message ======This screw the consumer scam is a rip off racket run by a consumer gouging credit industry: Contrary to what L M A O feels or thinks - I'll be the one who decides what I think about getting the shaft!
Re: ROFLMAOPIMP Re: Lizard boy Author: lizardking (dt031nb9.tampabay.rr.com) Date: 04-14-01 12:59 LMAO, so what is your brilliant solution for fighting the reporting system? I frankly don't have time to screw around with 2 years of disputes. My way works. It works great. It works fast. If you have a moral problem with using my methods, then you don't have to use them. Live in sub-prime credit hell for your appointed 7 years. I hope you enjoy the time spent there. Reply To Message == WELL said!
It's not a felony to lie? First of all, let me state that I really appreciate the comments of those who disagree with me on any point because it gives me the opportunity to review my work and be certain that anything I say is truthful and correct. As to whether or not it is a felony to lie to a credit bureau, let me refer you to http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/croa/croa.htm Where you will find the following: SEC. 404. PROHIBITED PRACTICES.(7) (a) In General.--No person may-- (1) make any statement, or counsel or advise any consumer to make any statement, which is untrue or misleading (or which, upon the exercise of reasonable care, should be known by the credit repair organization, officer, employee, agent, or other person to be untrue or misleading) with respect to any consumer's credit worthiness, credit standing, or credit capacity to-- Additionally, as I often point out, it's not necessary to make any statement that might be false, and in any event, it is morally unacceptable to prevaricate under any conditions. I can't speak for anyone else, but I personally don't want to knowingly provide false information for any purpose whatsoever. Others may, of course, do as they please. Bill Bauer
Copyright violations are felon Kinda hate to bring this up, but I did notice that "dispute" letter and the creditor demand notice which has been posted in this forum where it has been plainly stated that it came from dueprocess.org. That's owned/operated by John Gliha, a man whom I know. I've bought his book and I paid him hard cash for it. In fact, I have it right here in front of me. I have never used any part of his work for any reason, and I probably never will, but I do like to keep up with what others are doing so I buy an awful lot of books and material from others. I want to be sure that my work is as original and correct as possible and is always in compliance with the letter and intent of the law to the greatest extent possible. In the front of John's book, he makes the following statement: All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any scanning, storage or retrieval system without permission from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages in a review. Since it has been openly stated in another post that the material referenced did come from John and dueprocess.org, then it must be true. I've emailed John a copy of those posts, so we shall see what he has to say. So lying to credit bureaus is acceptable to some, stealing copyrighted material is acceptable to some, what else is also acceptable to some in order to accomplish their personal ends? Robbing banks, little old ladies, 7-11 stores? Who knows? Personally, I want my work to be as original as possible. Those who maintain that since banks and other creditors mistreat consumers so it's OK to do whatever is necessary to fight back might want to reconsider their positions. Bill Bauer
Of course it's weak! Also, Bill Bauer seems to place a high degree of confidence in the Federal US Attorney filing a civil rights complaint against a credit bureau for not investigating his disputes. Frankly, that seems pretty weak to me. Yep! You are exactly right! It is pretty weak.But they might if you go at it properly. The refusal of a credit bureau to investigate a matter on grounds that it is frivolous may be and is allowable under the FCRA, but it is not allowable to do so on the grounds that you failed to state a reason for your request. Forcing you to state a reason does violate your 5th amendment rights, and is a felonious action, i.e. violation of your civil right to refuse to make any statement that MIGHT incriminate you. Now then, on to the enforcement of those protections. Once complaint has been made to any prosecutorial officer and demand for prosecution made by the injured party, it is a violation of that officer's oath of office to refuse to prosecute so long as the demand has merit. He may not refuse to prosecute. In the event that he does, he then becomes himself prosecutable for violation of his oath of office by higher prosecutorial authority, whatever that may be.So if he refuses to prosecute, you can file criminal charges against that prosecutor. And if the next higher prosecutor also refuses, then he becomes criminally liable for failure to perform the duties of his office. It's like the famous old tarbaby. Once they have knowledge, they are stuck to the "tarbaby." You can just keep on going on up the ladder. Of course, the next question is that of practicability. Would it be practicable to go through all that hassle? Would a reasonable person go to all that hassle? Not likely, but while you can theaten with impunity, you cannot lie with impunity and get away with it forever. If you demand prosection and your reasons are wrong, someone will tell you very quickly and you can just go home and forget it with no pain or strain and a clear conscience. But if you have lied, then you cannot do that. Yep, it's weak alright because most people would not actually go to all that trouble. Bill Bauer
Filing suits in small claims I had far more success just filing my own small claims lawsuit in local county court for: 1) Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act 2) Defamation of Character 3) Negligent Enablement of Identity Fraud Would you plese provide us with the case number(s), state and county of filing and all proper references to the case(s) you have filed? While you may very well have filied and even won on count 1) I would sure like to see how you successfully argued count 2) defamation of character. That is probably the single most difficult complaint to prove because you must first of all establish that you had any character in the first place to be damanged. Any person having a bad credit history would have an awful time tring to prove that he had any character to be impuned, now wouldn't he? Next, you must also prove to what extent your good character had been damaged by the defendant in order to collect damages even if you won the first point. Defamation of character lawsuits are almost never accepted by practicing attorneys unless the potential plaintiff has an awful lot of money and it is a commercial character that has been damaged, such as in the case of an actor or famous movie star. They do have an acting career to maintain and their character is of utmost importance. Another case might be that of a public official having a public image that he must maintain. Defamation of Credit is a much more likely avenue of approach, and is one that is much more easily proveable and sustainable. It would make no difference how bad your credit might be, what would matter is how much further damange the defendant might have caused. 3) Negligent enablement of Identity Fraud?? What did they do to you, post your name, address, social security number, phone number and mother's maiden name as well as the hospital you were born in and date of birth on a public billboard or other public forum? Did they provide all that information on the outside of the envelopes they mailed their demands for payment in? Seems to me that would have to be an awful hard one to prove in a court of law too. Let's see some case numbers here. Bill Bauer
Identity theft enablement I have looke at the applicable identity theft deterrence act of 1998 and I see no mention of the term "enablement" I am providing you with the website address, but it is terribly long and you may very well not be able to copy and paste it. I used www.lawdog.com in my search for relevant information about the charges you complained about. Could you please be just a bit more specific as to the law that you referenced in your pleadings? I am certain that at least some people would like a little bit more verification of your claims. Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998 Title 18 United States Code - Section 1028 Fraud and Related Activity in Connection with Identification Documents and Information. http://navigation.helper.realnames.com/framer/1/0/default.asp?realname=Identity+Theft+Prevention+and+Survival+Washington+DC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eidentitytheft%2Eorg&frameid=1&providerid=0&uid=17479496 Bill Bauer
