Public Record - Civil Judgement Crap One

I was in the same position. I just disputed the Judgement on-line and it was deleted. Took longer on TU, but it left. I would dispute as from what I have read, sometimes the courts do not validate for the CRA's. I had mine showing on 2 CRA's as well.
Good luck.
BTW, I disputed on old CO and it was deleted. Now I'm dealing with the CA who's SOL is approaching for reporting.

 

Check at the courthouse to see if the judgment is filed there...

Rule #1, even if the plaintiff tells you that you do not have to appear... appear...
Rule #2, don't forget Rule #1.

Forgetting Rule #1 results in a default judgment.

Judgments are verified differently than trade lines, they *cough* Lexis/Nexis verifies the information at the courthouse. If they find any record of it, more than likely it will be verified.

There are reports that someone who worked for a company, and signed for the complaint when his employer was served; and the judgment got onto THEIR report, and LN verified it as being his, even when he provided a certified copy of the judgment from the courthouse to the CRAs to prove that their name wasn't on it.

 

I contacted my local Courthouse and asked if they verified to the CRA's, they said NO! I then disputed as "nm"! If your local CH says they do not verify, you "may" be able to get something from them if your Judgement is verified by the CRA. You would then send this to the CRA with proof from the original furnisher of information (CH) that they do/will not verify. Someone may disagree, it worked for me..........deleted.........

 

The COURTHOUSE doesn't verify; LEXIS/NEXIS goes to the courthouse to verify.

 

Here's a novel idea and I don't know just how nuts I am thinking like this but if Lexis/Nexis is receiving information from an entity such as a local court clerk, and they are reporting that information to a third party customer (EQ, EX, TU) couldn't a fairly decent attorney make the argument that they (Lexis/Nexis) are a consumer reporting agency and would fall under the FCRA and FACTA?

Just my strange thought process.

 

Remember, there are thousands of CRAs...

LN is a CRA; but LN doesn't ASK the clerk, they pull the courts public records to verify the information. Remember all cases are public information. ANYONE can go to the courthouse and ask to see what is on file for you.

LN is acting as a DF when they are contracted to do the searches. BUT here's the caveat, none of the CRAs will openly admit that LN is the DF.

 

If a party is a "Data Furnisher" (DF), then they are bound by the legal requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. This means they must complete full investigation for accuracy of reported information.

 

FYI: See below: a bit wordy, but it is a legal opinion letter fromt he FTC


UNITED STATE OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580


September 15, 1999

Sylvia Sum, Esq.
Saalfeld, Griggs, Gorsuch,
Alexander & Emerick, P.C.
P.O. Box 470
Salem, OR 97308-0470

Re: Section 603(d) and (f) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act

Dear Ms. Sum:

This is in response to your letter, and our subsequent telephone conversation, concerning the application of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) to a number of situations. Your questions are repeated below in italics. We then provide our views on these issues.

1. Is a commercial service that reports only "public record" information a consumer reporting agency (CRA)?

An entity that meets the definitional requirement for a "consumer reporting agency" (CRA) in Section 603(f) of the FCRA is covered by the law even if the only information it collects, maintains, and disseminates is obtained from "public record" sources.

Section 603(f) defines a "consumer reporting agency" as any person "which, for monetary fees, dues, or on a cooperative nonprofit basis, regularly engages in whole or in part in the practice of assembling or evaluating consumer credit information or other information ... for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports to third parties ...". In turn, Section 603(d) defines a "consumer report" as the communication of "any information" by a CRA that bears on a consumer's "credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living" that is "used or expected to be used or collected in whole or in part" for the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing eligibility for credit or insurance to be used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, employment purposes, or any other purpose authorized under Section 604.

If the commercial service you describe regularly provides information for the purposes set forth in the definition of consumer report in Section 603(d), the agency is a consumer reporting agency and the information it collects from public record sources and maintains in its computerized files is subject to the FCRA. The "public record" status of any of this information is irrelevant.(1) The application of the FCRA to services that collect "public record" information is discussed in more detail in the enclosed staff opinion letter (LeBlanc, June 9, 1998).

2. Is a law firm that researches the criminal records of job applicants for its clients a "consumer reporting agency" for FCRA purposes?

In the situation that you describe -- an attorney checks criminal records of consumers who apply for jobs with a client -- the attorney's activities appear to meet the definition of a CRA so long as records checks are a "regular" course of action on the part of the attorney and the attorney directly or indirectly charges for this service. The information relates, at the very least, to the "character" and "general reputation" of applicants for employment, and thus qualifies as consumer report information since it is provided for one of the purposes specified in the definition of "consumer report" in Section 603(d) of the FCRA. The fact that the information is "public record" information makes no difference. By collecting this information from public record sources the attorney is, at the very least, "assembling" the information and therefore meets the definitional requirements of a consumer reporting agency in Section 603(f) of the FCRA. In effect, the attorney is functioning as an employment screening agency. Accordingly, the attorney should ensure that his or her activities comply with the FCRA.(2)

3. If a commercial service provides a consumer report containing information that is more than seven years old, may the employer receiving the information take action based on the information.

Except for records of criminal convictions, which may now be reported without any time limitation,(3) Section 605 of the FCRA prohibits consumer reporting agencies from providing adverse information that is more than seven years old (ten years in the case of bankruptcies) for employment purposes where the annual salary is less than $75,000. There are no restrictions upon reporting adverse information for jobs involving salaries of more than $75,000.

A consumer reporting agency which provides adverse information that antedates the report by more than seven years for positions covered by the Section 605 reporting prohibition may violate the FCRA. In addition, the agency may be liable to the consumer for damages if the release of the information is negligent or wilful. There is, however, no FCRA prohibition upon the use of information that is more than seven years old. Accordingly, an employer may rely upon adverse information that is more than seven years old.(4) Although the employer may take adverse action based upon the information, we note that the employer must comply with the provisions of the FCRA that apply to the "use" of information from consumer reporting agencies, such as Sections 604(b) and 615(a).

I hope that this information is useful. The views that are expressed above are views of the Commission's staff and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission or of any individual Commissioner.

Sincerely,

William Haynes
Attorney
Division of Financial Practices

Endnotes:

1. The FCRA is concerned with, inter alia, the accuracy of information being reported by consumer reporting agencies. Public-record source information may be inaccurate, or errors may occur in the transcription of the information by a CRA. In either case, it is important for the consumer to know that inaccurate information is being disseminating by a CRA so that he or she may take steps to correct the information.

2. An attorney may, of course, assist a client by accompanying the client's employees to the courthouse and showing the employees how to research court records. In this situation, the actual search is done by the client's employees and, consequently, is exempt from coverage by the FCRA.

3. The recently enacted "Consumer Reporting Employment Clarification Act of 1998," Pub. L. No. 105-347, amended Section 605 of the FCRA to eliminate any restrictions on the reporting of criminal convictions.

4. Comment 605-5 of the Commission's Commentary on the FCRA, 16 C.F.R. § 600 App., 55 Fed. Reg. 18804, 18817 (May 4, 1990)

 

No...

When they run a report of a persons judgments through themselves, they are a CRA.

When they are contracted to verify the judgment with the courthouse for the CRAs, they are acting as a data furnisher; who they are requesting to verify the original data being reported.

DFs include anyone who reports to a CRA... OC, CA, etc...

Let me see if this gets it clearer...

Public records are just that...

Anyone can walk to the courthouse and look up who as judgments against anyone else, for any reason, at any time. The courthouse isn't a CRA.

The CRAs harvests the information published by the courthouses to add to their public records database tables. They are a CRA, because they re-sell this information only (supposedly) for permissible purposes.

LN is a company which provides many services, some of the most known is their legal research libraries, which allows anyone to search caselaw. These are public records, and can be searched by anyone for any reason.

However, they also provide "Risk Management" services; which include 2 skip tracing solutions (which only provide contact information, not "CRA"s by their disclaimers, and their TOSs 'prohibit' their use for approving credit or insurance); a collection account scoring program (which again, they disclaim isn't a CRA - this could be disputable since their documentation says that the scoring is in fact based, in part, on 'historical account-specific data' - the question would be what sources did they mine that 'historical account-specific data' from); and a placement tool to sort accounts to place accounts to various agencies depending upon their legal status (again, they disclaim isn't a CRA).

However, they also provide tools to update subscribers on BK case changes; and employment screening. These they admit are CRA's based on the FCRA's definitions.

There are a whole lot of company's which have different divisions which each provide their own compartmentalized services.

 

When a judgment is renewed, does LN report this as new to the CRA's and start a whole new reporting period?