Thought somebody might like to know this Learby More States Permit Freezing Credit Reports (August 3, 2004) -- Louisiana and Vermont are following in the footsteps of California and Texas by allowing consumers to freeze their credit reports to guard against identity theft. The action prevents creditors from performing credit checks unless the consumer has given his or her PIN number to the three major credit bureaus to either permit checks from particular creditors or to temporarily unfreeze their data. The cost of freezing and unfreezing reports ranges from $8 to $12 per credit bureau. The credit-reporting industry opposes the trend because it delays credit approvals for mortgages and other loans; moreover, insiders insist, sufficient safeguards already are in place under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act. Source: Miami Herald (08/03/04); Bergstein, Brian
This is totally different than a PRM. If it is legal in your state, then you just ask the CRA to freeze your report. They'll probably send a form along with the request for the fee, and the freeze would go through as soon as they get the form and the payment. Then any inquiries are refused, unless you've provided your PIN to the CRA to authorize that company to receive your report. I love how the industry relys on FACTA, despite the fact that it isn't fully in effect, yet; as a reason why these laws are totally unneccessary... WRONG!
Thanks you for the response---- Is it in my best interest to freeze the reports ? I have three CA's coming after me at this time and I am still in SOL. Learby
Would it even freeze reports requested by CAs? Does the freeze depend on the certified PP given by the requestor? For example, would inquiries alleged to be initiated by the consumer for extension of credit be frozen, but existing account review inquiries, and CA inquiries to collect an existing debt not be frozen? If the purpose is to prevent accounts being opened with stolen identity information, it may only be the former.
Herein lies the question... It would depend on how the state law is phrased, whether it would apply to all inquiries, or only to new creditor inquiries...
This is for Texas only Click here for the whole article 20.038. Exemption From Security Freeze A security freeze does not apply to a consumer report provided to: (1) a state or local governmental entity, including a law enforcement agency or court or private collection agency, if the entity, agency, or court is acting under a court order, warrant, subpoena, or administrative subpoena; (2) a child support agency as defined by Section 101.004, Family Code, acting to investigate or collect child support payments or acting under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. Section 651 et seq.); (3) the Health and Human Services Commission acting under Section 531.102, Government Code; (4) the comptroller acting to investigate or collect delinquent sales or franchise taxes; (5) a tax assessor-collector acting to investigate or collect delinquent ad valorem taxes; (6) a person for the purposes of prescreening as provided by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. Section 1681 et seq.), as amended; (7) a person with whom the consumer has an account or contract or to whom the consumer has issued a negotiable instrument, or the person's subsidiary, affiliate, agent, assignee, prospective assignee, or private collection agency, for purposes related to that account, contract, or instrument; (8) a subsidiary, affiliate, agent, assignee, or prospective assignee of a person to whom access has been granted under Section 20.037(b); (9) a person who administers a credit file monitoring subscription service to which the consumer has subscribed; (10) a person for the purpose of providing a consumer with a copy of the consumer's report on the consumer's request; (11) a check service or fraud prevention service company that issues consumer reports: (A) to prevent or investigate fraud; or (B) for purposes of approving or processing negotiable instruments, electronic funds transfers, or similar methods of payment; (12) a deposit account information service company that issues consumer reports related to account closures caused by fraud, substantial overdrafts, automated teller machine abuses, or similar negative information regarding a consumer to an inquiring financial institution for use by the financial institution only in reviewing a consumer request for a deposit account with that institution; or (13) a consumer reporting agency that: (A) acts only to resell credit information by assembling and merging information contained in a database of another consumer reporting agency or multiple consumer reporting agencies; and (B) does not maintain a permanent database of credit information from which new consumer reports are produced. So it looks like the OC's can bypass this, and the way I read it so could a CA Learby
