"YOU CAN NOW REMOVE IT AND SEND ME A CASHIERS CHECK FOR $500...or I will see what the judge in SMALL CLAIMS COURT can get you for $1,000 minimum" INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO~~~ NO PERMISSABLE PURPOSE WILL-FULL NON-COMPLIENCE FAILURE TO PROPERLY INVESTIGATE AN INVALID INQUIRY Others may come up with more ideas...
George, you don't have your email on...is there any way I could get ahold of you? I just have a couple questions I'd like to ask you...
@@@@ Which letters? Don't take this the wrong way, but why would I do that? Just not sure of the purpose... And, I am not sure I am smart enough to do that, would have to ask the kids for assistance Thanks for replying!
Inquires appearing mysteriously may be a sign of several things. fraud starting: a: someone is getting your info and is about to become you b. someone has your info and is using it to apply for credit Errors: c. you have a file that's being confused with another d. the bureau is just making mistakes and has system glitches that's adding odd inquiries to your file if it's the first 2... you need to seriously consider a fraud alert on all 3 bureaus and NOW... id theft isn't fun. You can also try to add a consumer statement "do not confuse with consumers of similar identity... verify all identifying information".. those 2 actions make it difficult to impersonate you and it lets the bureaus know your file may have errors... This is my take on who's responsible for this. 1. Company xyz has a rogue employee who's in your file for no permissible purpose...guess the worst and go from there. Ask company xzy who accessed your file and why. they're supposed to have reasonable procedures and security so not every person can play in the credit files... only people with PP are supposed to be in the system... ask WHO accessed your file... and go after them personally... ask the bureau for the certification under which xyz pulled your file. Ask the bureau for an investigation... tell them you're concerned about fraud... if the same company pulls your report again (as in the case of the marketing stuff from companies you used to have a business relationship with but no longer do)... tell the bureau you want a block on your file from that specific creditor... the bureaus have contracts that contain clauses about companies pulling reports illegally... and it's my opinion that after you've put Credit bureau A on notice that their subscriber is violating their contract.. the bureau also becomes liable for dissiminating your info after notice... negligent and willful noncompliance... after all. Once they know it's a problem.. you could try for criminal prosecution of someone at the bureau as they're knowingly now giving out your file...perhaps asking for a criminal investigation of the supervisor who told you no.. or the CEO of a bureau might get this looked into... nobody wants jail time for "company" issues... they should either have a way to block you file from that creditor... or terminate their contract with that company... The latter will never happen... but the bureaus also don't have mechanisms in place to protect you from unauthorized access from a specific company... remedy? go after both in both a civil and criminal manner... after all, once you give notice, the bureaus are just enabling someone to have access to your info... there are criminal penalties and fines for individuals doing this... and some state laws are much better than the FCRA... use every law to your advantage... As to inquiries being fact... read fcra def: file "ALL INFO NO MATTER HOW REPORTED OR TRANSMITTED"... as to permissible purpose... look above it and catch the word "eligibility"... it's meaning is huge. Permissible purpose refers to eligibility for services... For any non current creditor then it's just a "business" relationship... they can pull you if you give them permission... or if you're applying for service and they're determining "eligibility for" service... but once they've determined to give you service... they can't be in your file to collect later.. after all, it's not ongoing credit... eg: doctor's offices, hospitals etc are NOT considered credit as per the fcra... they can see if they want to originally do business with you... but cannot use your info later for either collections or "processing of your claim"... FTC opinion letters to this and even Doctor's forms that say "we may pull credit" aren't specific enough. it's a "we're pulling your credit" or it's a violation... It's my hope that you all will soon hear about a situation in Atlanta that's being looked into by our AG.. for this very reason. They can't provide service then later say "we pulled your header info from Exp including score... just cause we wanted to in the processing of your current hospital account"... I'm hoping this will curtain not only adding ssns to files needlessly but will also curb id fraud originating in hospitals (if you knew HOW MANY people then have access to all your info nationwide... you'd pass out)... they'll add your dob and ssn even if you don't give them to the hospital.. 2. If you had an account once... (this is now credit) and you've paid it off and closed the account (as in the case of a revolving account) then they cannot mine for marketing info via your file.. No PP... NONE. the FTC is very clear on these. once the business relationship is terminated... seeya on PP for credit. 3. But... if you pay off a credit card but it's still open... they can go in every day of the year and it's permissible... but I dare say, improper as hard inq's connote an "application for NEW credit"... and not an AR... so while it's not technically a permissible purpose deal... I hope eventually case law will hammer hard inquiries for ar purposes... they tank your scores... 4. I'd say the same thing for PRMs that are supposed to be for "firm offers for credit" if you get denied based on credit... after all... what's so firm about that offer then? No PP Just my .02 on this thing. I think there are so many PP violations that the laws will eventually be changed to open it up more (eg: hospitals)... but for now... a lot of the inq are so illegal it's a joke.
I totally agree with you George. They get the PRM after it's filtered based on the OCs criteria... unless the file changes dramatically for the neg...you should get the offer or have all sign of them removed from your file on request. Never will happen... even less likely is the idea that the bureaus will stop intentionally violating pp.. they give out these contracts to hospitals knowing the info is being used to process accounts and not to determine eligibility for services (you have bad credit... no stitches today) and yet the bureaus make so much money from these illegal pulls that I'd bet they'll pay for (and get) the fcra changes to fix it (unless they just don't get sued over it enough for it to matter... then they'll just keep breaking the laws and laughing all the way to the bank)...
All letters. There's lots of ranting and raving (not by you, of course) about unfair things happening to people that they talk about on message boards, but not a lot of hard evidence. In fairness to the companies knocked, I believe the actual evidence deserves to see the light of day. The Internet is growing-- not only in numbers of people who use it-- but in its capabilities. Just as you don't know about scanning now, you didn't know about email a while back, either. I'm considering publishing some audio files of my tape-recorded conversations-- if you're into comedy. I-- as well as anyone-- know the silly games companies play. But they do it in the darkness of obscurity, and when the lights come on (the world sees the goofy documents), the real fun begins. Don't let them hide.
Hi Butch, Could you email that letter to me too? I have so many inquiries on my TU report and STILL can't figure out how they got there! Thanks in advance! mysti_summer
The inquiries on my report didn't show up mysteriously; I know where they came from. It is my contention that these companies did not have a permissible purpose to pull my credit. In an effort to make the post short and sweet, I didn't give details of what happened; I guess I should have just spilled my guts I bought a car last year, and the dealer shopped my loan all over town. They were somewhat inept and inefficient, so the inquiries were spread over a period of almost two months. I searched for case law on this and couldn't find anything, but I did find an FTC opinion letter (Throne) that backs up my claim. It states, in pertinent part: "However, in order for the additional creditors to whom your client forwards the loan application to have a permissible purpose to obtain a consumer report, the potential credit transaction must be initiated by the consumer. For this reason, the Commentary notes that a lender may forward a loan application to another lender at the consumer's request. Accordingly, your client must obtain the consumer's consent prior to forwarding such information to additional lenders." I did not request the dealer to forward my application, nor did they have my permission to do so. I have written three letters (CMRRR) to each of the companies that inquired, and have had no response. I filed complaints with the BBB, and still have had no direct response (one company did reply to the BBB [who sent me a copy] with a load of insincere BS that basically boiled down to they weren't going to remove the inquiry). At the same time, I have disputed the inquiries with the CRAs, who have been, shall I say, most unhelpful. My question to the members of the board is this: do you think I have a cause of action against the companies who pulled my credit (because they did not have a permissible purpose), and against the CRAs (for failure to investigate disputed items, and also for reporting a record of inquiries in connection with a transaction not initiated by me)?
Hello (hello hello) Is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me Is there anyone home? Maybe there's a Pink Floyd fan out there that can give me a hand
Look upstairs. Post #32, in blue. I just got the green card today. We shall see. They WILL pay me or I'll lose in court. This deceptive telemarketing crap they pull is a whole nuther scam.
I'm with Greg on this one. I think Dani should post pics of her underthingybobs. Afterall we need proof. ~
Now that we have finished disussing Dani's underthingamabobbies (at least, I hope we have), can someone please, please, please help me?
herauntis, I read your last post prior to the underthingamabobbies (I just hope they are clean)! Most of the time when you sign papers at a car dealership, unless you state or write on the form otherwise, you are giving them a blanket authorization, and their affiliates, or anyone else that they think may finance you, permission to run a report. You would have to request a copy of the form you signed with the dealership to know for sure. Sassy
I searched through the entire GLOSSARY thread and could not find "underthingyabobs" anywhere. Maybe I am confusing things a bit, but - Dani, is your husband named BOB? or would that then make it "underthingyabob's"? This Internet LINGO stuff has me terribly confused ) -Peace, Dave
LOL No, not Bob. Actually our names are very similar... I didn't know what to call them except underthingyabob's, without being crass. Oh well, I don't want to take away from the thread. Sorry, herauntis. (Blushing profusely) Dani
How about the old-fashioned "unmentionables"? I read the contract I signed at the dealership, and I didn't give them permission to do anything except sell me a car (have you really ever read one of those things? You have to promise everything including the kitchen sink and your firstborn male child, and they don't promise anything except to sell you the car and take the money). I realize that my first mistake was not securing my own financing before I bought the car -- I will never do THAT again. Now that I have learned my lesson, I would like to get the eleven inquiries generated by the dealership the hell off my damn reports!
