You have attacked me without cause, IMO, now I just want to clarify something for you, friend. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by The Kid Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but absent judicial error, I can't see why a judge or clerk would vacate a judgment. You should call the court clerk and ask what has to be done to have a judgment vacated. See, the CRAs go through the court files and look at judgments, so the reporting of the judgment is not being done by the OC necessarily. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Kid is both right and wrong. The judgement is now a public record, so that has little to do with the OC. However, you are incorrect in your ASSUMPTION about vacating the judgement. A judgement can be vacated for any number of reasons. _____________ humblemarc- I have not assumed anything, rather I stated my opinion. When someone says "I can't see..." that indicates that they are stating their opinion. If you disagree, then I ask that you do so respectfully. You mentioned that a judgment can be vacated for "any number of reasons," yet you fail to state even a single reason. Lack of notice, failure to properly serve, is positively cause to vacate a judgment. I did not think of that reason, and I am glad that another poster mentioned it. If you wanted to help the poster, then I imagine that you would suggest a means to have the judgment vacacted. Instead, you misrepresent the intent of my post ("ASSUMPTION") and tell us who is "right" and "wrong". Now, I ask that you go ahead and indicate which of my other posts are misleading or incorrect.
I believe he/she is talking about CreditWatch. . . No offense, Kid, but after reading several of your posts, i think you need to reread the first three threads and the all the links in those threads. I feel like you are giving out misleading and sometimes wrong info. . . humblemarc _____________ ..and I think that you are taking a cheap pot shot at a new poster, although not a "newbie" to credit repair or the laws surrounding credit. I have been successfully repairing my credit for a bit over a year, and in the process became the CLASS REPRESENTATIVE for over 80,000 consumers in a NATIONWIDE CLASS ACTION FDCPA LAWSUIT. I blew the WHISTLE on a HUGE company that had been violating the FDCPA since its inception. No offense to you, humblemarc, but now that you have read the first 3 threads and all of the associated links, maybe you should try to be POSITIVE and quit judging people by the number of posts that they have. Sorry to expose you, but I don't respect someone who judges me by # of posts. You really do "feel" like I am giving out misleading and incorrect info? Well please tell me why you "feel" this way, because I would love to learn. I am a student.
I don't know who the Mods are here, and I apologize in advance if this thread is inappropriate in this Forum or any Forum. I just don't like a guy who takes shots at a new poster, just because he is a new poster. The deal about creditwatch vs. creditexpert--it is plain to see that marc is taking shots. Just as easily, he could point out that creditwatch is a free access point, and so is creditexpert. Instead, he takes a shot without offering anything positive. I have respect for other posters, particularly consumers who are fighting credit. Again, I apologize if this thread is in the wrong Forum. If it is just entirely inappropriate, then I ask that you apply equal respect to the "newbie" as you do to the veteran, marc, and ask him not to take pot shots. Don't really mind if you delete and ban, your call.
And if you are a Mod, humblemarc, shame on you for taking a shot at a new poster. I have been reading Doc for over a year, and if you look at his thread at the top, you will see that I remarked to him in that thread and thanked him for sharing. You are taking a shot, now back it up if you can.
....and it looks like she is a Mod, lol. You know the rules, if a Mod takes a shot at you, then you had better back down or else get deleted and banned. What is this crap about I "feel" like you are offering wrong advice, blah blah blah..that is such a cheap shot. If you got something to correct, marc, then do it, but spare me with this crap about what you "feel". Tell me what you think and correct my misinformation. If I misinformed someone, then I assume that you would not only call me on it (as you have), but you would also provide the CORRECT information (which you have failed to do).
not gonna jump in the drama... Only mod is pbm aka psychdoc aka lkh aka lizardking aka breeze aka nave (miss anyone?).. na there only one mod and its PBM(unless its changed recently)...
Marc- You are the one who told me that I am offering wrong information, so I ask that YOU post the links to those threads so that we can find out what YOUR statement is all about: Quote from humblemarc: "I believe he/she is talking about CreditWatch. . . No offense, Kid, but after reading several of your posts, i think you need to reread the first three threads and the all the links in those threads. I feel like you are giving out misleading and sometimes wrong info. . ." I would appreciate it if you would be so kind to back up your statement, while teaching me something about credit. Thanks
Unfortunately, it seems by your FIVE PART POST, that you have a problem taking constuctive criticism for what it is. . .Constructive. Irregardless, of the number of post you have, you have given out wrong and/or misleading information to people who may not know better. I would do the same thing to a vet as a newbie. I was trying to be nice by phrasing it the way i did, but . . . Fine. In my opinion, it is far WORSE, to give out misleading and false info, than no info. at all. I don't claim to know everything, nor do i post opinions as fact or as opinions, to subjects i know nothing about. In the above mentioned post, i DID correct your statements and i did it in such a way as for you to "save face" or whatever "harm" your ego might have took. If you like, the next time you post info. or opinions, that is not based on facts or experience, i will spare you the niceties, and tell you you are wrong and to shut up on the matter. Again, for the record, i will state: 1.) there are many ways to vacate a judgement aside from "clerical error" 2.) the poster was speaking of CreditWatch, the Equifax product, not Creditexpert, the experian product.
If the poster was talking about Creditwatch, great, then he/she is now aware of Creditexpert, another FREE SERVICE, which is exactly what the poster was asking for. Did you offer the poster any leads to free services? Of course not! I did! There is nothing WRONG or MISLEADING about that post at all. As for vacating judgments, did you even mention a SINGLE reason for why a judgment could be vacated? NO, of course not! I DID. JUDICIAL ERROR IS IN FACT A REASON TO VACATE, why don't you put yourself on the line and suggest a SINGLE reason to vacate, given that there are "many" that you are aware of? Now what other posts of mine do you find wrong or misleading? Any others? BTW- "irregardless" is not a word. Now what other posts of mine do you find wrong or misleading? Waiting......
my goodness. . . ok, fine. . you win, l lose. . you are 100% right and i am 100% wrong. Are you happy now . . . for all the other creditnetters. . . if kid and I ever disagree with anything on this board, please follow Kid's advice or statements of fact and ignore mine. . .
marc- I don't see the positivity that you added to either of the threads cited above. First, you bashed me for mentioning creditexpert, another free site, which is precisely what the poster was looking for. Granted, I was not aware of creditwatch, but so what? Does it really matter? Is that really "wrong" that I mentioned creditexpert? Is that misleading? I didn't see you offer any other free sites. Second, I have not heard you offer a SINGLE reason for vacating a judgment. Instead, you say that there are many reasons to vacate a judgment. Is that helpful? I offered one reason to vacate, and you bash me. lol. Maybe we should just respond to every single thread and every situation by saying "There are many ways to repair credit..." and just leave it at that. LOL I invite substantive criticism and advice, but I resent faceless attacks that are made solely because someone appears to be a "newbie" by virtue of their # of posts. So we have covered everything that prompted this statement by you? "No offense, Kid, but after reading several of your posts, i think you need to reread the first three threads and the all the links in those threads. I feel like you are giving out misleading and sometimes wrong info. . . " That's it? I told a poster about creditexpert being a free 30 day trial, and that was wrong and misleading. I told a poster what I know about vacating judgments, and that is wrong or misleading? Certainly you must have more to substantiate your attack, marc. Please tell me that you do. I want to learn from you.
I asked, not Humble, and I am asking again. Please post the links to the threads you are complaining about. It shouldn't be very difficult.
http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=271959#post271959 Here's another.
The Kid, Kid, Why are you harping on this, hmarc already replied to you. Now youâ??re putting it into other threads. Why is this "sticking in your craw" so bad? Take it as the constructive criticism that it was meant to be and leave it be. We're all here to repair our credit, not get in pissing matches. Take the criticism for what it is, constructive. All newbies, including me, have needed thicker skin from time to time. This is not an attack, it's a suggestion that will get you much further and gain respect from the other members.
Here you go http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&pgnum=1&postid=272561#post272561 http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&pgnum=1&postid=272622#post272622 Kid - gotta back Marc up on this one. The poster in the 2nd thread specifically said CreditWatch and you *corrected* him/her by saying they meant to say CreditExpert. In the first thread, you confidently say that there is no way to vacate a judgment outside of a clerical error. That's just completely wrong! Then the advice you give is to write a letter to the judge or a clerk. How is this person supposed which judge to addres his/her letter to? And, how in the world can a clerk assist with vacating a judgment? Although these posts of yours may be your opinion, which you are entitled to, you are clearly pointing these individuals in the wrong direction. All Marc and I are/were doing is re-directing these people in the right direction. I think you should follow Marc's advice and (re)read the first three posts at the top of the board. There's no way you would have offered the same advice if you had done this already!
Wrong. From Merriam-Websters Dictionary online: Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s Function: adverb Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless Date: circa 1912 nonstandard : REGARDLESS usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word , however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
humble it looks like you just got spanked by another know everything newbie. Don't ya just hate always being 100% wrong??? Obviously, you, not Kid need to reread the first three posts. Maybe we should let Kid take over as our all knowing guru? What do you think??? *************sarcasm mode off*************** RFLMAO.........Kid you are a riot fla-tan
LKH Kid can't be wrong............say it ain't so!!!!!!!!!!! Kid knows all and is omnitient... fla-tan
