Now I ask, was that so hard? Bravo Bill. Encore encore! clap clap clap clap. It didn't even cost John a buck for such wonderful advice...plus he can't demand his money back now. -Dave
That was just the easy part. The real problems will start when he needs that 100 word statement That's when he'll need some real help If he messes that one up, he will be right back where he started from, which is apparently nowhere.
There you go again Bill, giving out useful and free advice. What do you have to say for yourself? This might help someone. LOL
Bill I have thought about the 100 word statement that you brought up on past threads. Will the CRA actually submit a statement that states that they are reporting the information even thought they know it is false? I would love to see the look on the persons face that has the job of submitting consumer statements.. If they dont put it on they are breaking the law and if they do put it on they are going to look real silly. Has this tactic worked for you and what was their response to your request?
Well, it's a bit more involved than someone reading your post might be led to believe because you have to have 4 separate elements to make it work. You have ony mentioned two of them in your post, which might lead someone to believe, but you did get the start of it exactly right. Their reaction?? So far, it has worked like a charm. So far, it's been used to get rid of about 50 or so "undesireables" with no problem at all. It only works in certain situations, however, which means that tyring to use it as an "everyday" kind of hammer would lead to instant failure, I'm quite sure. At least I'd hate to try to use it improperly. That's another reason why I don't like to be posting some of the "trickier" or more advanced techniques in public forums. The problems start arising when someone who does not have all the facts at hand tries to use them and they end up ruining either their own credit reports or getting themselves out on a limb and then come back and holler about "crap don't work" or other put-downs and the credit bureaus also soon figure out how to combat them and pretty soon they don't work for anybody anymore. We have seen a lot of that in this forum when newbies tried to use the validation letters. First thing that happened was that the original validation letter suddenly got to be about 6 feet long and filled with garbage and then the untrained used them like firemen trying to put out an oil well blaze with water. Then when they came back claiming it didn't work and I tried to tell them why it didn't work, the result was flame wars and more confusion for the poor newbie. He simply didn't know who to believe. It's kind of funny though, because the more I get bashed, the more website traffic I get. And the more emails I get goes way up too. Most of them are very positive, and the flames are never mentioned, they just talk about their problems.
Thanks for all of your responses. I didn't mean to start World War 3 about the services that Bill and others offer. I don't purchase services for things that I can do myself but if others have been helped or find these types of services of value then that is fine. I have learned a lot just by reading these message boards and doing some of my own research for information over the internet. My frustration in writing my initial message was that it does seem like the CRA can and will do whatever it wants and is not held accountable for reporting inaccurate information. And why a utility company is allowed to report and damage someones credit history for such a trivial amount should be a crime. They reported the account as an Installement loan with a payment term, minimum monthly payment, etc. So now it looks like I applied for a loan and never made a paymnet on it. I agree that my first item will be easier to handle and a stronlgy worded letter will probably resolve that issue. Thanks for posting the letter and I will get that in the mail Monday. But the second problem of the $59.00 collection that I paid in full two months ago is a bigger problem. It is about two years old. Whether a collection is $59.00 or $5000 it seems like the negative impact to my credit score is the same. My Experian report is my best report and if I cen get rid of the collection I would only have a few very old 30 day lates left as negative items. My resulting credit score would go from 620 with the collection to 660-680 without. Of course these are just estimates of the results of removing this collection but I base this estimate on improvements I have seen on my Experian score when negative items are under dispute. I have already called the electric company and asked them to remove this information. They refuse saying it is accurate information and they have the right to report it. So I am to the point that I am ready to hire an attorney and file some sort of defamation or other type of suit for some ridiculous amount of money. All I want them to do is remove this information and I think when threatened with a law suit(regardless of my chances of winning) they would rather remove the information. Thanks again and if anyone has any information about getting things removed through the use of this type of tactic I'd be glad to here about it. Thanks, John.
Never mind World War 3. It isn't really any way at all, but just some silly comments made by some graduate of Looney Tunes University about shills or something. Hasn't got much else to write about so resorted to silliness. Just consider the source and we can move on. If they are reporting the utility thing as an installment loan, that should be attackable on that basis alone if you go at it right. It would mostly depend on the exact wording of the report. Again, attacking the source of the problem first is the way to go. They reported it as an installment loan and so making them prove that it is an installment loan is where I would start, not the amount nor the fact that you owed it or how you paid it. The credit bureau should also be vulnerable to the same attack The second one also appears to be at least somewhat inaccurate, so again, attack the source of the problem first, not the reporter of it
I sent a friend to your website about six weeks ago. He paid the $49.95 but never received anything. After his second email to you you replied: "You are on my mailing list and you should have been receiving emails from me about every week. Those emails should have led you to all of the credit wrrench information and if you are having troubles understanding or applying any part of it, you should be emailing me and asking me what you need to know or learn about." He has told you at least twice since then that he never got any of the "weekly emails", but you never responded. So far all you ever sent him for his $49.95 is the paragraph above.
John, I dont know the laws that refulate utilities in your state. In my state they cant report to the CRA. They can turn it over for collection and the CA can report it all day long. You never answered my question. Did you pay them or the ca. IS the utlity reporting or the collector??
GoDaddyo... Sorry GoDaddyo...I paid the utility directly. It never went to a collection agency. Thanks to all for your responses, John.
Re: GoDaddyo... I would call the utilities commision of your state. Tell them that this utility company is reporting false and misleading information about you. The utility company wont be able to prove that you ever had an account with them. This has worked for me. I did come up with a sudden case of amnesia in order to forgot that I had actually lived there. You have to do what you feel comfortable with. I am not the type to fight completely fair when it comes to repair. I am not a dishonest person, but I have waged a so called war on those who feel it is ok to send me to credit jail for 7 years, all in the name of fair credit reporting. What a farst!!!
