Hopefully this is a good discussion starter... The question is basically, if a consumer has optted out of PRM disclosures with the CRA, can a company which would have a PP be able to obtain a PRM? Example. December I opened a K-Mart MC account through C1, my CRA files have been PRM Blocked, in February, I received a C1 offer; I presumed that even though it said that the info was obtained through a CRA, that that was probably just the standard disclaimer on all their mailings, and that it was probably received because of the account that I already had. Well, I glance over the copy of my recent CRA file which has in big print at the top of the file "FILE BLOCKED FOR PROMOTIONAL PURPOSES" and in the non-reported disclosures are monthly AR-C1 listings (which would be PP'ed) and a PRM-C1 for February listing.
I think a PRM block is just that - a PRM block. If Cap1 wanted to do an AR, they're entitled to do that based on your existing relationship. If Cap1 wants to mail you offers based on your existing relationship, they can do that. But a PRM block should not have anything to do w/their PP. Supposed to you have existing accounts with a dozen card companies. Does that mean your promo block means nothing for those dozen companies? Again, if they got your mailing address from their own internal list, that's one thing. But whatever CRA did that was clearly not supposed to.
That would be an issue to take up with the CRA. They have the responsibility to not sell your information for promotional purposes once you opt out. It sounds like the cc company did the right thing by stating it was a promotional pull, but the CRA dropped the ball.
Well, i just put in the mail 4 reminders that I wanted to be permanately PRM BLOCKED. Apparently TU had decided to change their company policy to make the 'fraud alert' PRM BLOCK only SIX MONTHS without providing any notice that it was being changed. (They included a new copy of their standard fraud handout when they placed an alert because of my one pending dispute.) jlynn; The fun part is since the company's don't include who they obtained the prescreening report from in the unsolicited solicitiation, you have to fight them tooth and nail to get them to disclose that to. (I have one that I had to turn over to the BBB, because no sooner they received the letter complaining about the first unsolicited solicitation, they sent another one. So you have to put pressure on the company to find out which of the CRA's you need to put the pressure on. (Unless you happen to get a copy of your credit report showing the PRM. This is the only example that I actually *know* who provided the information.)
Hmmm... Company 1 (of 2 that I don't know which CRA allegedly provided them a PRM) responded, you have to contact (list of all big 3). So much for providing on request the source of the information. The best part of this response, none of the three reports within the last month-month and a half (even after I got the second mailing from their company), lists their company. Hmmm, so apparently they don't even know who sold them my information. And *gasp* are telling a dis-truth to myself and the BBB. Company 2 responded in writing, listing one of the big 3, and saying that when they got my letter they called them were told (the recent date, when the CRA re-applied my Fraud Alert) was when I *CALLED* to request the PRM BLOCK, hmmm... I pick up my report from a month after the date they claim that they mailed the solicitation, and no PRM listed for that company. Hmmmm, so curiouser, and curiouser, I call the CRA and ask whether they provided my information to company 2 for a PRM inquiry. "No, I don't see any PRM inquiries on your file." "Hmmm, well, I am looking at a copy of my credit report dated XX/XX/XXXX, and it clearly shows 6 PRM inquiries, the latest of which was 03/2004. And a letter that I received from Company 2, states that sometime before XX/XX/XXXX, your company provided them with my information in response to a PRM inquiry." "The last inquiry I am showing was in February, and that was a regular inquiry." Hmmm, I think my generic letter has at least one CRA in CYA mode... I should see in a few days - a week whether or not there are any PRMS listed on the updated copy of their report, or if they miraculously disappeared when they received my letter.
Removing the record of inquiries, including PRMs, visible to the consumer, would put the CRA in violation of FCRA 609(a)(3)(A) and (5).
Well, from my nieve and upset letter, lil ole me doesn't know anything, except that I had told them previoualy that I didn't want to be sold. *cough* *cough* *cough* No big words, *yes, it is possible* - well, the only exception was using PRM BLOCKED instead of opt-out; and I mentioned Fair Credit Reporting Act (but that's in any unsolicited ads disclosure statements; in the same paragraph as where they list the CRA addresses). So I played dumb for myself...
