If the consumer did not leave the store how would the consumer know there was a hard inq on their file?
Re: Re: signing check authorizes hard inq.? I'm done - that's just silly. How do any of us ever know an inquiry was pulled at any given time? You buy something and its AFTER you get home and get a new report you see they pulled. PLEEEEZ. As I said before, we agree to disagree. Good luck.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: signing check authorizes hard inq.? YOU GOTTA' BE JOKIN' You got the $15,000 withdrawal skip from the bank~~they could call the bank to SEE IF THE CASH WILL CLEAR!!!!
LOL George, large sums of money are sending up whistles to the Feds now. We had a 10K wire come in from MX here recently. Was held up for a couple of days. Guy is now wiring us in smaller increments.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: signing check authorizes hard inq.? It's "shoot first, ask questions later" principle, George! "You" below does not personally mean George, it's a generic you ... But before they would check your cash withdrawal slip from the bank, and/or making calls to the bank, they will first arrest you. You may just have to save your explanations for later. Especially if you have a muslim sounding name.
Re: Re: signing check authorizes hard inq.? Hmm, I just reread this entire thread, and there were several that read opinion letters. Funny, they saw the same thing I did. Anyway, I'm pretty confident of my reading abilities, I've shared the letters, what do you see in these same letters I pointed out that I MUST be misinterpreting? This one post in the thread bears repeating: From JasonI come on folks.. it does not appear to need to be an extension of credit to be a PP. I pointed to FCRA and FTC opinion letters that seem to support this. It can be a "business transaction". And I would beg to differ that accepting a check is NOT extending you credit. I can see how it could be interpetted as extending credit, as your check is worth nothing until it is cashed. If I were to buy your car from you and pay you with a personal check, I bet you would feel you had just extended me credit until that check cleared. it is not the same as paying cash. I find it very troubling that this IS a PP, but my interpretation of what I've read seems to say it is regardless of my personal opinions or wishes. I've seen some very knowledgable and experienced folks here blindy state its not PP, but not give anything to support that opinion. Please, if I'm wrong in my interpretations, show me where. I for one HOPE I'm wrong, and want folks like LB59 to set me straight as it does nothing but increase my knowledge and empower me which is exactly why I am here. But if people don't explain WHY they have an opinion or offer anything to support that opinion then I don't feel I've been giving anything I can really use. I am not in anyway saying opinions counter to mine here are wrong, I am only asking that they show me where I went off course with my thinking. My goal isn't to be right, but to learn.
Re: Re: signing check authorizes hard inq.? A check is considered a.... § 3-104. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT. (a) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d), "negotiable instrument" means an unconditional promise or order to pay a fixed amount of money, with or without interest or other charges described in the promise or order, if it: (1) is payable to bearer or to order at the time it is issued or first comes into possession of a holder; (2) is payable on demand or at a definite time; and (3) does not state any other undertaking or instruction by the person promising or ordering payment to do any act in addition to the payment of money, but the promise or order may contain (i) an undertaking or power to give, maintain, or protect collateral to secure payment, (ii) an authorization or power to the holder to confess judgment or realize on or dispose of collateral, or (iii) a waiver of the benefit of any law intended for the advantage or protection of an obligor. (b) "Instrument" means a negotiable instrument. (c) An order that meets all of the requirements of subsection (a), except paragraph (1), and otherwise falls within the definition of "check" in subsection (f) is a negotiable instrument and a check. (d) A promise or order other than a check is not an instrument if, at the time it is issued or first comes into possession of a holder, it contains a conspicuous statement, however expressed, to the effect that the promise or order is not negotiable or is not an instrument governed by this Article. (e) An instrument is a "note" if it is a promise and is a "draft" if it is an order. If an instrument falls within the definition of both "note" and "draft," a person entitled to enforce the instrument may treat it as either. (f) "Check" means (i) a draft, other than a documentary draft, payable on demand and drawn on a bank or (ii) a cashier's check or teller's check. An instrument may be a check even though it is described on its face by another term, such as "money order." (g) "Cashier's check" means a draft with respect to which the drawer and drawee are the same bank or branches of the same bank. (h) "Teller's check" means a draft drawn by a bank (i) on another bank, or (ii) payable at or through a bank. (i) "Traveler's check" means an instrument that (i) is payable on demand, (ii) is drawn on or payable at or through a bank, (iii) is designated by the term "traveler's check" or by a substantially similar term, and (iv) requires, as a condition to payment, a countersignature by a person whose specimen signature appears on the instrument. (j) "Certificate of deposit" means an instrument containing an acknowledgment by a bank that a sum of money has been received by the bank and a promise by the bank to repay the sum of money. A certificate of deposit is a note of the bank. PolarisA3
Pretty soon everyone who may apply for credit legitimately may in fact be denied based on the fact of writing checks. Scary! klrobinson ================= While this is bad it's not really the scary part: The scary part is they will raise your insurance premiums and interest rates! The END ************************* LB 59 Like I said before they have now found a way to screw you for paying your bills using crooked FICO and credit reporting.
To answer the question on this thread of the amount, the check to Neiman Marcus was for goods that were in aggregate for about $600. The main point I am trying to get across is that, outside of the issue of a PP to pull the hard Inq., shouldn't Neimans have to POST NOTICE that they will pull a hard for writing a check. Again, this notice is not privided anywhere to the consumer. If it was, I am certain many consumers would opt to pay using a different method. Their 'pull' gives the impression that someone just opened a new credit line (seeing as same would take 90 days to appear on the file). Therefore, other credit lines can be declined based on the Neimans hard. This is ludicrous!!!!!!!!!
Re: Re: signing check authorizes hard inq.? I don't believe the scenerios discussed where this is PP state they need to provide the consumer with any notice.. Yes, I agree, it's BS, and I doubt their "REAL" reason for doing this was PP.. it was probably to to pre-qualify you for a credti card or something.
Re: Re: signing check authorizes hard inq.? This is ludicrous!!!!!!!!! kemcos =============There ain't much that ain't ludicrous abour Reports and scoring.
Re: Re: signing check authorizes hard inq.? Click here: CREDITNET | Straight Talk | | signing check authorizes hard inq.on which type of report?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: signing check authorizes hard inq.? Does it mention a store must post their policy of pulling a check so the consumer is aware?
