Question about deletions for paymen

Yes, there is something else at work. Many of them have agreements with the CRAs that they WILL NOT delete for payment because it compromises the integrity of the whole credit reporting system.

Think about it - if every CA or creditor deleted negative info in exchange for deletion, credit reports would no longer reflect a person's true credit HISTORY.

 

They don't anyhow - So what else is new?

 

Why would a CA care what interest rates you pay to another creditor? It's a fact - and others have stated this before - many CAs have clauses in their contracts with the CRAs that they will not delete in exchange for payment.

 

If you can't get them to delete the entry see if they will agree to "de-rate" it. Have the item say Paid, 0 balance. In Equifax have the item reported as simply "R". That a lot better than "R9".

 

I believe you tmitchell.

And it does make sense for most creditors to care about the validity of the data. But please somebody tell my why a bankrupt utility in Calif laughed when I wanted payment for deletion. The rep said "95-99% of people calling me want it deleted." The utility is reporting to all 3 (which muct cost money), they are broke (the number 1 creditor listed in the filing was owed $2 billion!), they don't pull credit reports when establishing a new account (I think anyway) and yet feel I need to have the blemish on my report for 7 years!

Hypocrites. Their bankruptcy filing isnt going to be held against them that long.

Needed to vent - LOL!

 

The worse your credit is, the more inquiries it will take to get you financed, get a credit card, etc.

Each inquiry=more money in the CRA's pockets.

That's enought motivation for the CRAs to put a clause in their contract with a CA that they cannot delete valid information.

 

I don't totally buy the conspiracy theory. Remember, the 3 CRAs ARE COMPETITORS. Each wants to be more accurate than the other. When you think about it, wouldn't any one of the big three LOVE to be able to layoff people (save money) by NOT having to answer so many disputes?

Maybe I'm naive, but I really think the CRAs would rather the reports be accurate than not. I think the reason they blow off so many disputes is becasue they simply don't have the manpower to handle them all - hence, the "no-deletion for payment" clauses.

 

That's a good theory too.

 

even those CA's that have agreements with the CRA's can always say "the account was put in error" they dont have to admit i payed them, besides an unpaid collection account is the same as a paid one,right? so dont give in tell them if they want their money the will delete it completely or NO DICE! good luck.

 

That hardline tactic works sometimes for small debts but with larger debts, the CA can alsway sue and get judgement so the problem becomes larger.

 

one thing that has not been mentioned here, has a validation letter been sent? if so how did they respond?

 

So this is why the CRA (EXP) has disregarded my letter from a CA telling me they deleted the OC from my file, EXP won't take this, they have to contact the OC directly to what spank their hand and remind them of their agreement/contract? I assume I can't be a victim of "Double Jeopardy" here? I'm still awaiting a response from EX on the same matter..

 

And this is what scores are set by.
.
What a con.

You are not wrong.

 

Right on !

 

YEP!

Hay: Wait a Minute!
I'm the only one allowed to have theories on here !!

 

You don't have to make excuses like this for them.
They come up with enough of them on their own.

 

You offered to pay:
They turned it down.
Makes them look good doesn't it?

 

Lbrown...

I'm not saying I agree with much of what I posted. I'm just looking at it from the other side of the fence. Sometimes you gotta look at it from the other side in order to mount a good fight. Looking at it from the enemy's perspective allows you to maybe see their weaknesses.