Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry BTW - these footnotes guy's are often added well after the publication of the opinion. It clears up confusions created by the opinions themselves. Sometimes an opinion says one thing so later they add a footnote saying: "weeell ... that's not quite exactly what we meant". Always read those too. As far as Golf is concerned, just pursue your case and pretend I didn't point this out.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry Can you expand on this and point us to the applicable criminal codes? I would think that introducing the possibility of criminal penalties would really improve your leverage in negotiating a favorable settlement.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry I received a letter from Wells Fargo in the mail. It states: I received your correspondence addressed to Wells Fargo Home Mortgage requesting a credit correction to your account. You may initiate the credit review process by requesting a consumer investigation form from any of the credit repositories. Consumer disputes are submitted to Wells Fargo Home Mortgage electronically by the credit agencies. We respond to these agencies within a five-business day period. They then give me the 3 credit bureau address/phone numbers. What a load of crap! When I spoke to Experian and Equifax (CSC) on the phone, they said to dispute inquiries I needed to send a letter to the party that inquired disputing the inquiry. In reference to an earlier post about why it is $4,000 instead of $2,000 (because they had permission to run it the first time) is because they ran it on me AND my DH. 2 violations for each of us. What should my next step be?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry Ok, here's my thoughts. You need to bs them Dear Wells Fartgo: CRA's consider inquiries a statement of fact and will not investigate. Per the FCRA they have strict compliance guidelines to wit: (3)(A) Identification of each person (including each end-user identified under section 607(e)(1) [§ 1681e]) that procured a consumer report (i) for employment purposes, during the 2-year period preceding the date on which the request is made; or (ii) for any other purpose, during the 1-year period preceding the date on which the request is made. Therefore, I'm giving you the option. 1. Delete those inquiries or pay me $1,000 per inquiry, for my spouse and I, or I will be forced to sue you. (Ok this is rough - just some thoughts on how to handle the problem).
Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry I would have been happy with a deletion a few weeks ago. But after the attitude from Wells Fargo, I want them to pay. Guess what I got in the mail today besides the letter fromWells Fargo? I got a letter from TU telling me that my inquiries are a record of fact and will remain on my credit report for two years blah blah blah. It says "If you believe that an inquiry on your credit report was made without a permissible purpose, then you may wish to contact the creditor directly. OMG! This is what I did! Wells Fargo sent a letter (received same day as TU) telling me to dispute it with the CRA! And they wonder why we are pulling our hair and screaming! What an irony!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry This is what you posted in the beginning: The June 20 inq's were permissible purpose for the mortgage. That leaves the inq's from August 27 as without permissible purpose. 2 inq's, 1 for each of you = at most, 2 violations.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry I must not have posted what I was thinking. It is 2 violations each because on 8/27/02 they pulled on both uf us from 2 different CRAs. That would be 4 violations, correct?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry Ah, big difference there, LOL. I now see why you said 4, however, I don't think you can count the same violation each time as a separate violation. I think you may be stuck with one each. The big key to any lawsuit is whether or not you can show actual damages. § 616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance [15 U.S.C. § 1681n] (a) In general. Any person who willfully fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to the sum of (1)(A) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or damages of not less than $100 and not more than $1,000; or (B) in the case of liability of a natural person for obtaining a consumer report under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose, actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or $1,000, whichever is greater; (2) such amount of punitive damages as the court may allow; and (3) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry As the above indicates, a No PP inq. is a FLAT statutory fine of $1,000, no more, no less. Damages are not necessary in this case. Go for all 4, but be prepared for the judge to "go easy" on them and levy $1,000 only. Therefore, push for all 4 and settle outta court for 1.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry Gotcha. I'll fax them over a letter today. I have been reading Christine's posts from creditboards.com regarding wells fargo. She actually received $1000 from them. I'll base my letter on her second letter to them. I'll tell them I want $2000 for me and $2000 for DH and see where we go from them.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry Really? When and what for? Do you have copies of the correspondence?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry Direct Merchants. Called me to market their CC. I was promised no pull but they did it anyway. $1,000 paid within 20 days. And of course I do. About 30% down on: http://consumers.creditnet.com/stra....php?s=&threadid=32681&highlight=astonishment In blue.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry Actual damages are not necessary, but, as the statute reads: That is what precipitated my comment about damages being important. So, if there were actual damages, it would be possible to be awarded more than $1,000.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Lawsuite for Inquiry I faxed off my letter yesterday to Wells Fargo. I pointed out their ignorance on disputing. They told me to dispute an inquiry to go to the CRA and gave me their addresses. I forwarded TU letter to me telling me to dispute an inquiry to send a letter to the creditor disputing it. Here is my letter to them: March 5, 2003 Wells Fargo Legal Department Attn: Alyce Nall, Written Research Department I am writing in reference to your letter dated Feb. 28, 2003 to myself and my husband. This letter was sent via US Mail, even though I provided you with a fax number to expedite things. Please correspond via fax number xxdxd-xxx-xxxx in the future. You are incorrect in stating that to dispute an inquiry I need to go through the CRA directly and dispute. I spoke with Equifax and Experian and they both told me to send you a letter directly. I also am enclosing a letter I received from Trans Union telling me to dispute directly with you. I guess you need to brush up on the applicable laws and procedures. Once again, I am informing you that you are in willful violation of the FCRA by running my credit report on August 27, 2002 from 2 CRAs and running my husbandâ??s on August 27, 2002 from 2 CRAs. I am referring you to http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/gowen.htm. This is an FTC opinion letter in regards to closed-ended accounts. They are not subject to account reviews because you can not alter any of the terms of the mortgage after it is signed. Therefore you did NOT have permissible purpose to run our credit and are in willful violation. This is subject to $1,000.00 per violation. You have committed two violations against me and two violations against my husband. We will either settle this with you outside of court before March 12, 2003 for $4,000.00 plus deletion of the inquiries from our credit reports or we will win this settlement in court, plus damages. We are purchasing another home and our credit scores have suffered because of the unlawful inquiry. We are entitled to damages on top of this. For grounds please see: FCRA § 616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance [15 U.S.C. § 1681n] "(b) Civil liability for knowing noncompliance. Any person who obtains a consumer report from a consumer reporting agency under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose shall be liable to the consumer reporting agency for actual damages sustained by the consumer reporting agency or $1,000, whichever is greater." Please also see: 1998 FTC opinion letter Greenblatt at http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/greenblt.htm: "Any person who procures a consumer report under false pretenses, or knowingly without a permissible purpose, is liable for $1000 or actual damages (whichever is greater) to both the consumer and to the consumer reporting agency from which the report is procured." We can and will subpoena all Wells Fargo employees to Lewistown, Illinois, who had anything to do with this and any employee that discussed this with us. This includes yourself and the erroneous letter that you mailed to us dated February 28, 2003. I believe that you should call the CRA agencies yourself and get educated on how inquiry disputes are handled. Please fax a response to the number indicated above.
Um, have you already sent this? What you quoted from the FCRA is the penalty to the CRA, it says nothing about the penalty to the consumer.
Yes, I already sent it. I was letting them know they could end up paying me AND the CRA. It mentions damages to me here: 1998 FTC opinion letter Greenblatt at http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/greenblt.htm: "Any person who procures a consumer report under false pretenses, or knowingly without a permissible purpose, is liable for $1000 or actual damages (whichever is greater) to both the consumer and to the consumer reporting agency from which the report is procured." If they give me trouble, I could let the CRAs onto this, and they could fine them also. This is correct, isn't it?
Ok, whats done is done, but from what I understand, if this goes too far, staff opinion letters do not necessarily hold the weight of law. Here is what you needed to quote them: (B) in the case of liability of a natural person for obtaining a consumer report under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose, actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or $1,000, whichever is greater; The FCRA doesn't define a "natural person", and I think only uses that term one other time in the Act. I used the Greenblatt letter to back that clause up, because he omitted the word natural. I'm sure everything will work out, maybe at least the letter you sent will get their attention, if I recall that has been your biggest problem! Good luck!
