It is with great enthusiasm and confidence that I write to report my complete satisfaction with the client services of one of your paralegals (A.D.) at Lexington Law Firm (LLF). Since retaining LLF in November 2000, A.D. has consistently provided professional and pleasant service, particularly with prompt return of phone calls, patient and thorough explanations of seemingly arcane credit-related questions and dogged determination in challenging the Big 3â??s negative items. Of 50 negative items, 32 have been deleted thus far, a 64% decrease. By any standard, those results are superb and are still ongoing. Needless to say, I am very impressed with A.D.â??s extraordinary progress on my behalf. A.D.â??s friendly demeanor and easy-going personality has not only increased my confidence in the credit restoration process but likewise restored my faith in successful customer service. Moreover, with new information on FICO scoring becoming available to LLF, I am anticipating even more favorable results in this regard. In short, A.D. has permanently elevated the standard for customer-focused client contact and relationship development. I have been so pleased with A.D.'s excellent personal service that I am requesting that she continue to assist me until my November 2001 retention expires. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely,
I'm not on anyone's payroll nor have I accepted or received anything of value in exchange for my opinions. Quite simply, I am reporting the stellar results I have received from Lexington Law Firm (LLF). Skeptical at first, I retained them in the hopes that they could help me repair and restore my credit. I have found that LLF, particularly A.D., has worked with me, carefully attacking each and every negative item, and that the results thus far have been impressive. I cannot speak for anyone but myself nor would I mislead anyone about what can be achieved by retaining LLF. Results may vary from individual to individual but I would recommend them.
If you are that impressed with A.D., you should send a planetfeedback compliment letter to Lex about her. That way she might get comp'd or kudos or something.
Sorry, but I'm skeptical. This letter just doesn't sound genuine to me. Just had to throw in my $.02.
Phlaxman: Iâ??m glad you posted the positive news about Lex. Having seen a derogatory post here lately, which was later clarified as frustration, itâ??s good to see someone else singing praises. And to that extent, I agree with Pat. Perhaps a PF comment is appropriate?
Were accurate negative marks removed? What did the company do that the consumer cannot do for himself?
I think you could guess the answer to this one. And even so, why does it matter to you? Again, you know the answer. You could do the same yourself. I believe that you were asking rhetorically, but again why? I know I have as much right to ask you why as you do to ask the questions you did. I don't really care if you answer or not. I just don't understand your consistant, non-helpful posts. Are accumulating data for site 3?
Mr. Fisher, In regards to the former, yes. With respect to the latter, under the FRCA any "person" or "consumer" can obtain their credit reports and challenge negative items. FRCA is clear about this. This notwithstanding, it is a tedious and oftentimes daunting task. Inasmuch as a firm like LLF can lift that burden from my shoulders for a minimal costs, this is cost-effective. In short, while I could perform these tasks myself, having professionals like LLF using their expertise to reduce and eliminate negative items is smart.
Healthy skepticism is always a good thing. I am the same way and I applaud you for it. The proliferation of scam artists and fraudulent credit repair firms have fostered an unhealthy skepticism. With good reason, there is a tendency to lump all firms (whether legitimate or illegitimate) together based on the misconduct of a few. I do that with auto mechanics. Nevertheless, LLF is a law firm bound by ethical and legal constraints. In retaining LLF, I signed a lengthy retainer agreement with specific language relative to their products and services. I feel very comfortable dealing with LLF because I know that if there is a scintilla of fraud or even the slight appearance of fraud, the State Bar of Utah will accept my complaint, investigate it and prosecute the claim, if necessary. This gives me a lot of confidence.
Pat, your mind-reading capability is flooring. After deciding to stop my search for UFOs, I came across this notion of changing my credit record to my liking-- regardless of reality. Yes, I could guess the answers, but since this is an open forum (notwithstanding your comments), I thought I'd ask with no presumption. Why does it matter to me? Because I'm a student of credit recording practices and am interested in the seemingly magical process of paying someone a fee to change a report. Perhaps you consider me dangerous-- that I may expose some secret. Then, again-- tough luck. Public forum. You sound rather intimidated by the truth. I'm not here to play pattycake, or rehash information over and over again. I want to know things I don't know so that I can participate in this dynamic economy and win more than I lose, so that I can make wise financial and social moves, and so that I die happy. Is that a good enough reason? Am I dismissed, now? So, I ask questions. And, I might ask them of someone else, too, because I'm not convinced by the statements of only one; a fool's game. Get used to it. No, actually, I'm not asking rhetorically. I'm chasing UFOs like Carl Sagan did to find out if these ghosts really exist. And if you're saying that I would be more helpful if I just stood by and led cheers and gave attaboys, you're wrong. Finally, yes, I'm always "accumulating data"-- for site III, and volume 2, and sites IV through M. You can't stop the world from spinning.
The FCRA is also clear about accuracy. If it is so easy and so righteous, I don't understand why every person who has credit so bad that it keeps them from getting the house, car or credit card they want, isn't flocking to credit repair shops and turning themselves into model credit risks simply by paying a fee. And, won't those who do that just blow it again, anyway? They weren't punished by the system because they found a way to escape it. You're a fan, so I wouldn't expect you to give their alleged secrets, but I'll ask here for anybody else who wants to tell us. I believe that the volume of the practice is so minute-- that it has such a miniscule effect on the integrity of credit reports-- that the legislators and regulators don't see it as a great enough threat to take serious action. The stories may be true, but they are few and far between. I believe that Washington is so in awe of the sheer magnitude and relevance of credit report data to daily lives, that they are loathe to open such a Pandora's box for intense scrutiny. But, they put credit scoring secrecy on trial-- and I was surprised (but pleased) that it got a hearing so soon. In fact, it happened so soon that I found myself without a hot issue to write about much sooner than I thought. But get ready for some new fireworks (but don't worry, they're not about credit repair-- as I said, its small potatoes). How is it possible to have an accurate negative entry removed permanently-- say with a large credit card lender over whose eyes you can't pull the wool? The creditors are within their rights under the FCRA to change it back to what is contained in their records-- even though they had to delete the negative, originally, because they couldn't meet the 30-day verificaton deadline. It's intriguing. And how does one rationalize taking part in a process that undermines the validity of the system? Won't foreclosures and losses rise? Taking it to the ultimate extreme, if everybody did it, wouldn't the lending system collapse? Doesn't anybody feel sorry for the honest people?
Re: Lexington Law Firm Shines Brigh Greg, I admire you for writing out your feelings about this so simply, so clearly, and with kindness as well. Your last sentence -- about anyone feeling sorry for those who actually take pains to maintain a good credit rating from the beginning -- was actually poetic and right on target. Look, now you've revealed yourself to be more than just that guy who weighs in with a provocative question every so often. You impart a sense of fairness, what Freud termed the "superego," a conscience to the proceedings here. Bottom line is that I'm "repairing" my credit reports, although that's really not what I'm doing. True repair work would ensure that every entry was correct and accurate -- both good tradelines and bad. Of course, that's not what I'm after. So perhaps I should say that I'm working to "alter" my credit reports. Should I feel guilty? Some would argue yes, and some would argue no. After all, I'm entitled to dispute anything that's even inconsequentially inaccurate. ("WHAT? I was NEVER late in June. NEVER. Of course, I was late every other month, BUT NEVER IN JUNE. STRIKE THAT FROM THE RECORD!") On the other hand, I might be entitled to dispute every picayune thing, but that doesn't mean that I'm playing fair with the truly honest people, as you stated so eloquently. This is very complex. Even though I disagree with some of what you say, I am developing a serious appreciation for your presence here. The world is a better place when we have people who aren't afraid to stand up and post signposts marking right from wrong. If I choose to engage an activity that is marginally right, yet marginally wrong, I must be man enough to acknowledge that marginality in myself as well. Randy
Greg: I appreciate your perspective yet the realities paint a different picture, as the probabilities of reinsertion are predicated on situational issues. For example, if the debt is sold the creditor would (speaking from experience) care less about reinserting. Nonetheless I hear where youâ??re coming from, and donâ??t disagree. It is possible to reinsert accurate information, but the odds are still very much in the consumerâ??s favor of such not happening. Perhaps thatâ??s why so many â??credit repairâ? firms are springing up (seemingly) everywhere? Again, I agree with your sentiment. No one should be allowed to have factual info removed, albeit happens more often than it should. Still, (speaking only for myself) I refrain from making value judgments relating to those who engage disputes of accurate info. Thatâ??s not why Iâ??m here.
Getting info in the first place Refrain from judgment? Hell, Anthony, its difficult to even GET any information from which to make a judgment. I ask a question and I get the response that I'm supposed to know the answer. I have an open mind, but when somebody presents me with late-night infomercial-type information touting products that work like magic, I get interested. That's what I'm supposed to do, right? Can you blame me? And then, the people trying to shut down the conversation makes me even more interested. A few years ago, I noticed a slew of web sites that made some pretty incredible statements about the mechanics of credit scoring. So, I compiled them all on one page-- along with a bunch of other information I could find on the topic-- and off we went. Many of those foolish statements about snake oil no longer exist-- because if its too good to be true, it probably isn't. All they needed was a little light on them; they scurried into the dark. "Keep the Faith" reminds me of religious dogma that says you must believe even if there's no evidence. I admit that I'm not exactly rooting around the credit repair totem pole and hooting at the heavens to the gods of ignorance and BS-- and if that's what I'm supposed to do, you've got another thing coming. But, what's up with your web site? We have to wait another 18 months for your site launch and patent pending system? What's the patent number?
Re: Getting info in the first place Originally posted by G. Fisher Pat, your mind-reading capability is flooring. After deciding to stop my search for UFOs, I came across this notion of changing my credit record to my liking-- regardless of reality. Greg, thats funny Yes, I could guess the answers, but since this is an open forum (notwithstanding your comments), I thought I'd ask with no presumption. Why does it matter to me? Because I'm a student of credit recording practices and am interested in the seemingly magical process of paying someone a fee to change a report. I was curious, thanks for answering. Perhaps you consider me dangerous-- that I may expose some secret. Then, again-- tough luck. Public forum. You sound rather intimidated by the truth. Your answers and half your posts are so antagonistic. I don't care who exposes what. I believe that the CRA's are already on to the game, and again I don't care. Intimidated? No! Wondering if you like to harass people for your own pleasure? Yes! I'm not here to play pattycake, or rehash information over and over again. I want to know things I don't know so that I can participate in this dynamic economy and win more than I lose, so that I can make wise financial and social moves, and so that I die happy. Is that a good enough reason? Am I dismissed, now? That's a wonderful answer. And if knowing the answer to "Were accurate negative marks removed?" helps you to die happy, far be it from me to question your motives. Dismissed So, I ask questions. And, I might ask them of someone else, too, because I'm not convinced by the statements of only one; a fool's game. Get used to it. Hey, I was curious too, shoot me. I apparently touched a nerve, as most everyone here seem to do, when they disagree or question you. And if you're saying that I would be more helpful if I just stood by and led cheers and gave attaboys, you're wrong. If I implied that, I apologize. But since you bring it up. Sometimes you imply that if given more info you will help and then when given that info you berate the poster with it. Hey Greg, to each his own. I don't want to be at each others throats. I honestly was curious why you ask some of the questions you do. On the other hand, I couldn't figure out why you are so "mean" about it sometimes. Like you said, It's an open forum.
Re: Getting info in the first place That's a wonderful answer. And if knowing the answer to "Were accurate negative marks removed?" helps you to die happy, far be it from me to question your motives. Dismissed Previously, though, in this thread, you asked why I'm asking. So, which is it: Do you, or don't you want my motive? If I implied that, I apologize. But since you bring it up. Sometimes you imply that if given more info you will help and then when given that info you berate the poster with it. No, I don't. How long have you been kicking your dog? I, do, however, use actual instances I can quote (like the above).
Re: Getting info in the first place Exactly. You and Squawk are absolutely correct re some misanthropic delight in dissing other people. It's unreal, and sad coming from an otherwise bright individual.
