To Experian 972-390-3838 From Gershom L. Avery SS# xxx-xx-xxxx Pages including this one: 5 The following pages are from my chapter 13 bankruptcy filed on 6/29/1998. Please note that both of my automobile loans from XYZ Credit Union are included in that bankruptcy. Please update the line items from XYZ on my account to reflect: Status : discharged through Chapter 13 bankruptcy Charge off amount: blank please Last Payment date June 1998 Date closed: June 1998 Balance blank or $0 This will be the third time that I have provided you with this information. Each time before, XYZ has followed up with bad information. According to the Fair Credit Reporting Act 605(d) Quote Any consumer reporting agency that furnishes a consumer report that contains information regarding any case involving the consumer that arises under title11, United States Code, shall include in the report an identification of the chapter of such title 11 under which such case arises End quote. Then in 607 (a) Quote Every consumer reporting agency shall maintain reasonable procedures designed to avoid violations of section 605 End quote Please fix the problems
Is it better that the accounts are listed as charge off accounts that the charge offs took place only a few months ago? These folks are posting that I have current ballances, delinquint payment history .. basically every negitive thing they could invent. With these folks listed as included in the bankruptcy, my wife and I were able to buy a house with a FHA loan about nine months ago. Now that they have started to mess things up, my providian credit line was lowered and Capital One refused another card (would have been my third). Cats already out of the bag about the chapter 13. A little less than 2 years to go and all of these accounts will drop off .. unless they keep reinventing history.
Look .. I currently have added up 79 seperate counts of where this credit union has violated the law. I've got the forms downloaded to file against them. I'm hoping that I'm able to get stuff filed on them Monday. I figure that 79 counts is enough of a pattern to qualify for punitive damages. At this point, I see no reason to settle. Anyway .. my question was about the responsibility of the CRAs to provide reasonable safeguards to prevent these violations. Under these conditions, they are deciding to ignore information they had already decided to accept before.
Gersh, You might want to edit your first post and take your name out of there. Sounds like you'll be having an upcoming suit against EX and you really don't want them to have a "heads up" kwim?
