Hi, I am currently suing a CA, we had a hearing scheduled and I noticed that they made a hard inquiry on my report. They have some collection accounts that they never provided validation. After talking with their attorney he contends that they provided validation and when asked about the hard pull and PP he stated that the pull was due to the lawsuit. I told him a lawsuit did not constitute PP, he then changed story and said that they have collection accounts and that is why they pulled it. In this case do they have PP?
You're right that there is no PP if the reason was "because of the lawsuit". However, since they do have claim they have a collection account I'm really not sure that this could be handled. If they did not provide validation, then they would not have a permissble purpose. It might help to know who is suing who and what for. Regardless, I would make them prove that they sent you validation of the debt by reproducing the documents they sent you in court (specifically a signed contract from the OC)--if they can not produce this information amend your suit (or countersuit if you are the defendent) to include the violation of the FCRA for no PP.
I do not want to amend because i am suing small claims and only 1k limit. I should be able to sue the seperatelly for that or not? Also this is more interesting, they are not bonded in my state and in ecense unable to collect untill they get bonded, they should know that so if they are pulling with the excuse that they where triying to collect then i should be able to turn their as to the attorney general for triying to collect without a bond?
http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/2user.htm heres the link for PP thought you might want to see they can review for the purposes of collection acct. what is the reason for review it can be argued I suppose. is this acct past the SOL for them to file suit & has the CA validate the debt ? did you dispute anything with the CRA ?
