Permissible Purpose after Chap 7 ??

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by stenwick, Jul 11, 2002.

  1. stenwick

    stenwick Well-Known Member

    There is a major creditor that was included in my
    Chap. 7 that has pulled my credit reports ten different times for an Account Review.

    This includes the collection agency that last handled the account.

    They have done this over the past twelve months.

    I know that this is a Permissible Purpose violation and if I write to the original creditor they will delete the hard inquiries.

    Do creditors or collectors ever delete the account entirely because of such a mistake?

    Would this qualify as a good case for Small Claims?

    I don't care about getting any money, I just want the deletions.
     
  2. lbrown59

    lbrown59 Well-Known Member

    stenwick
    Go after the CA:
    Send them a Val.Letter.
    When they screw up sue them and make them take it off .

     
  3. Marie

    Marie Well-Known Member

    Yes... you can get money for the violation and normally a full delete of all trade lines associated with it.

    I had a company actually file a lawsuit against me post bk.. morons ;) but it cleaned my report of them ;)

    Yes, do a demand letter to both the oc and collection agency. Demand 1k per pull. Remind the oc it's liable for the collection agency's actions. This one is actually easier as everyone understands that after a bk a debt is gone... so why are they in your report?

    I would also mention that this is exactly how id fraud occurs.

    Send demand letters to both companies. send them certified rr... wait 31 days after receipt... and sue them. Yes, sue them. honestly, this is easy. There's NO reason they should be in your reports. Make them pay for this one ;) and enjoy it.

    Make sure to dispute it with the cra's that are affected too. You must do that to get the private right of action to sue... the cra disputes will "conclude" about the time the 31 days are up.

    If you get the "inquiries are a matter of fact" from the cra... sue them too. The point is that the cra is allowing a subscriber to access your file without a permissible purpose.. you can also sue the cra for it too (do it in a different lawsuit and you'll maximize your monies).
     
  4. christi523

    christi523 Well-Known Member

    Marie,

    After I filed bankruptcy, a bank had 3 had inquiries in one month. It was in 2001, but I just realized this. Is there a time frame that you can legally do anything about this?
     
  5. solzy

    solzy Well-Known Member

    after checking FCRA SOL, you might want to claim also this conduct violated your bk stay.
     

Share This Page