Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by Jim, May 23, 2001.
This comment is listed in the EX status detail.
Barclaycard Arrival Plus® Credit Card
Earn 40,000 bonus miles after spending $3,000 in the first 90 days; that’s equivalent to a $400 statement credit!
CREDIT CARD WITH BONUS OFFERBarclaycard Arrival Plus
Credit One Bank®Cash Back Rewards
Credit card for people with bad credit! 0% intro *APR for 15 months on balance transfers. $0 intro balance transfer fee for transfers made in first 60 days.
BAD CREDIT CREDIT CARDCredit One Bank® Cash Back
Barclaycard Arrival Plus®
2X miles on each and every purchase. 5% miles back with each redemption!
primor® Secured VisaClassic Card
Credit lines available up to $5,000! Reports to three national credit bureaus; perfect card for reestablishing credit. Guaranteed approval*!
SECURED CARD FOR REBUILDING CREDITprimor Secured Visa Classic
Barclaycard Arrival Plus® World Elite Mastercard®
Pay 0% interest on balance transfers for 12 months*!
is that instead of or in addition to the bk listing on the tradeline?
In addition to:
I read it on the report and discussed it with an EX rep today. The Ex rep was again very slick on the topics we discussed and my intuition says dishonest.
Someone else might say well trained to defend their paymasters - the CRA's.
Well, if you were doing your own instead of letting someone else fool with it you'd have a way to do something about it.
As it is, you are stuck with it.
Again, no support from Bill Bauer.
No matter what happens in your credit situation, I support you. I also agree that the reps are sly as foxes and only skirt around the issue at hand.
Could you write a letter to Junum and ask them what that notation means, or better yet, how they can remove it?
Well, in the FCRA it states that an item in dispute must be marked as such.
Are you in the middle of the dispute??? If so, any item must noted. Normally they don't bother doing that.
Do you thinK??
That, or it's considered a consumer statement next to the tradeline... but I kindof doubt that.
So, Bill, you won't let go until he buys your product?
Jim, yes, please call junum and let us know what they say. They may be doing this, it occurred to me, as a step to having it permanently removed. I mean, I don't know why..but there might be a method to the madness.
Marie and all,
The rep said that the wording is a consumer comment next to the tradeline. Also, according to the rep it is permament. Do I believe this - not necessarily. Each of the 3 times I have reluctantly called Experian, I was impressed with how devious the reps are. I am a realist, so I know who pays the reps salary.
I started this thread to let the Junum members know one of the tactics Junum uses for better or worse. Similar to DaveLV letting us know about the "Suffer the consequesnces" Lexington letter.
First side issue - Experian uses an asterik to code their negative credit entries. The asterik is missing on this account apparently due to the dispute comment. I just hope the comment stays and the asterik is gone for good. When E-loan gave me a FICO score they specifically mentioned that they only picked up 2 negatives instead of 3. It appears they scan for "the asterik".
Second side issue - I have never regretted hiring Junum. I do not want to do my own credit disputing. Any further comment on this is a waste of my time and the readers of the thread.
I had a similar situation and it ended with the entire item being removed. It was a happy ending!
I have one of those items on my Experian report to. Its from IC systems, and has been on there, (without an asterisk and the "dispute" notation) for almost a year. It still appears in the beginning, with the other negatives, but no asterisk. I think it is permanent, unless I can get IC systens to remove it (yeah right
Nana - what exactly happened?
My item is one of 3 Bk realated discharged accounts on EX. My BK never made it into the public record on EX so in 4 1/2 years my credit will be completely clean. I am now in prime credit after using the board and am considering just dropping any further credit restoration. After all what is the point?
But I sure would like to hear your story. My opinions here change sometimes as I get educated. LOL
That is interesting. If you choose to check your EX report on e-loan count up how many negatives you have. My bet is that isn't counting the IC account as a negative. This is good news for you ( and me).
I hope you are right because IC Systems sure as heck isnt going to remove that entry! Im sure that if a mortgage person reviews my report, it will look bad, but for those instances where a score alone is pulled, it works for me!
I havent done e-loan yet, not sure how that works. I may take a look at that site tonite, if I can find it.
In this particular case, yes I will. Or at least to the best of my ability. One of the reasons I will do that is because it also relates to another thread that is just now developing on another part of this board.
I can only speak in generalities however for the very simple reason that what I am about to "reveal" will vary greatly from situation to situation and will have to be tailored to fit each and every situation that may come about.
Here it is, and the general principles I espouse here can and should be used in every possible situation even if it must be invented. If the specific situation is invented however, one must be very careful how one goea about it.
In this particular instance, I would use the right one is given by the FTC to have a 100 word statement added to their credit report. This right is supposed to be absolute and undeniable for any reason as far as I know. So instead of useing it to make sick excuses for not making the payments or paying the bill, which ever is called for, let us use it in a very unique way and to our bargaining benefit.
Let us assume that Credit Crunch Credit Bureau makes the claim that "consumer disputed and account has been verified consumer disagrees." That's a statement that is encountered fairly frequently.
Most of you will remember that I keep on insisting that one should never give a reason for the demand for validation. Te above illustrates the reason why pretty well.
My standard reply is as follows.
Dear Credit Crunch:
Your report on my file first of all states that I disputed the listing. That is utterly and completely false. If you will check my first communication with you about this matter on Januark 41, 2000 You will immediately see for yourself that I merely demanded that you validate the account but that I did not dispute the listing in any way, shape or form. Furthermore, you state that you verified and that I disagreed. If you will again check my correspondence with you, you will find that you will be totally and completely unable to find any statement made by me that I ever disagreed with anything.
As a result of your inaccurate reporting of the facts and your placing obviously false and misleading statements on my file in this matter, I must demand that you print the following 100 word or less statement on this report as is my right to make and have published under the FCRA and to have my 100 word or less statement distributed to all who have requested information about me for the period of time proscribed by the FCRA.
Please be advised that I neither disputed nor disagreed with anything on any of my credit reports, but rather asked that they be validated. In selling such false information to it's customers who may interested in doing business with me, Credit Crunch regularly and intentionally defrauds those who pay their money for the information.
In the event that you would be interested in resolving this issue in a more amicable manner, I will give you the option of compliance with my demand or deletion of the record in it's entirety. In the event you choose the latter course of action, there would, of course, be no requirement to publish my 100 word or less statement.If, however, you choose to do neither within 15 days, I will immediately refer the matter to my attorney with instruction to proceed with legal action against you for refuasl to comply with my legal right to have my statement attached to my report and published and distributed as required by law.
The choice is yours. What will you do?
Now then, the law says I have the right to publication of my 100 word statement and no matter how many of their shills see this post, it isn't going to change the law one bit, so there is not one #$%^ thing I can think of that they can do about it but live with it or quit telling lies.