hello all, For those of you not up to speed, this is the tale of how my former college pulled my report 3 times total on two different CRA's in response to a lateness dispute. I faxed them an ITS letter yesterday an this is the best portion of the letter from the college's attorney's office. The letter just goes on about how the college was justified by section 604(3)(a) of the good ol' FCRA. The money paragraph below, however, made me have a near orgasm. "...It received notification that you had disputed the account. Based upon that notification, it had a right to determine how your account was being listed with the credit reporting agencies. Thus, it made a legitimate request." Even the sun shines on a dog's bottom some days....
I wish, my loan still has a balance. Never late, but not paid off. Damn College Degree. Actually, after i faxed a fairly harsh settlement letter to the lawyer asking for $2800, they kicked me back to the college to 'work it out'. In Washington state small claims allows for monetary damages of $4k, which is what I would seek if I went to court. If it was a small claims action, it would be WAYYY more. So I did the charitable thing and offered to drop the suit for 30% off. He offered to buy me a burger and told me that there is no way that they are going to forgive my loan to the tune of 2k. I will be speaking with him again in a couple of hours. But I have clear and provable violations and negligence on their part, and I want to get paid. My only 3 demands were for 1. $2,800. 2. Deletion of the inquiries. 3. A letter stating that they will review and alter their illegal handling of CR. So far I have two out of three. But the burger offer steamed me. As always, thoughts? Comments? Questions?
Re: Re: inquiry shenanigans update If I remember correctly, you had 3 questionable inquiries...How do you come up with WAYY more than $4K?
Re: Re: Re: inquiry shenanigans update You are correct. There were 3 inquiries. My rookie math went as follows. I just multiplied the number of students who received loans from the college and also had reports pulled in the same illegitimate manner by the reasonable amount of damages to be sought. Since the number of students who have had this happen to them is the last 2 years is probably in the thousands, that adds up to a financial liability in excess of my paltry $4k. I did not mean that in a Class Action I would receive more than that, just that the financial hit on the college would be greater. But this is just my rookie 'perry mason' legal mind working. Sorry I wasn't more clear. does that make more sense?
Re: Re: Re: inquiry shenanigans update Just got my fax from WWC. "To: TransUnion On or about July 3, 2003 and May, 27, 2003, WWC ran a credit report on [Me]. These two credit reports were run to review his account because we had received a Customer Dispute Verification. These credit reports were not run for credit granting purposes. Please either reclassify these reports as "account reviews" or delete them from his record, whichever you feel is appropriate. Sincerely, XXXX Student Financial Services" I will enjoy showing that to the judge!! How awesome is that?
Re: Re: Re: inquiry shenanigans update Remember me? I'm the one in your first thread who informed you of the violations of FCRA and gave you the ammo to go after them. First, to the schmuck who offered to buy you a hamburger to go away, my counteroffer would be to buy him a nice dinner out of the $4000 judgement proceeds. Second, why haven't you filed suit yet? You only have a 1 year Statute of Limitations. Negotiate on the Courthouse steps. That way, if he offers to buy you a hamburger again, just tell him to drop dead and walk into the court room. Thirdly, you might want to inform the college that, after you get a judgement against them and you have cashed your check, you will use the money to inform their OTHER aggrieved students that they, too, are owed money by their Alma Mater and all they have to do to collect is invest $9 for a Credit Report and about $20 to start a lawsuit.
Re: Re: Re: Re: inquiry shenanigans update Of course I remember, it was only Butch and yourself who contributed in a thoughtful manner, offering relevant info, and only being a teeeeensy bit combative . I have the small claims form on my desk, i just wanted to give them an opportunity to settle. I said I would file on Monday if the terms weren't met. I will stick to that. I have spend the last two days in a benevolent manner, edumicating WWC as to why their actions were illegal. Thanks in part to the local yokel TU rep in WA, they believe their are on safe, legal ground. Interestingly enough, in my 30 min conversation with TU this morning, she refuted EVERY single point that the local rep made. They have ZERO concern about litigation because they have been led down the primrose path by their legal counsel(see letter above) as well as their TU rep. they think a dispute can reasonably be viewed as a credit transaction, and thusly, fully permissible purpose, REGARDLESS of how the inq is notated. Like lambs to the slaughter. P.S. just a funny aside, they could not comprehend how I would be able to find if this had ever happened prior. thought I MADE UP pretrial discovery.
Re: Re: Re: Re: inquiry shenanigans update Judging by the stupidity of your Alam Mater one has to wonder about the value of your degree. Wonder of you could also sue hem for false advertising - after all, they bill themselves as a place of Higher Education, but they are acting like complete idiots. Maybe it's time you took them to the "School of Creditor Education".
Re: Re: Re: Re: inquiry shenanigans update Hey now! Just because my Alma Matter is clueless doesnt mean I am! However, even if you are right, and my degree is only fit for wiping, at least i have the helpful folks from here to help me, right?? Will you all guide my travels from from town of so-so FICO to the $$$ Redress promised land? <charlton heston voice> Let my people GO!</end voice>
olivse's inquiry shenanigans update Ok all. I know you are probably either not reading, or just sick of my saga, but here goes. Just got a voice mail from the director of Financial Services at the college. Basically, his story is that Account Review and Apps for Credit appear in the same section. That Address Checks and Marketing Responses appear as soft. This being the case, they didnt violate the law, and I am not entitled to any monetary redress. I swear, their TU Sales Lackey, Darcy Mclintock, is the most UNINFORMED rep I have ever encountered. The $8.00 hr call center jockeys that I have been talking to are so well versed, it blows my mind that this gal is going to cost them so much. She is just constantly affirming that they are legal and legit. Arrrgh!! I file my SC Wed. Wish me luck!!
Congratulations! Have they re-coded yet? I have to say - I stopped responding to your posts because I think you're chasing windmills. There have been other contributors who have made good points, but I disagree with the grounds of your lawsuit. You have an existing account. You disagreed with their reporting. They reviewed it. It's pretty well defined in the PP sections of the FCRA. You have a couple of FTC opinion letters that bring the permissibility into question. Maybe they're applicable...maybe not. Each letter closes with: This is an informal staff opinion and is not binding on the Commission. While the FCRA is law, the opinions are not. And as neither represents your situation, I think their use is questionable. Maybe you've found some examples of these letters being used to support someone's PP case. If you have, we would all benefit from the reference. I don't think you'll like this, but I think you've done what you needed to do - that is, get the inquiries deleted / recoded. And you've corrected the original error with the lates.
